Brexit Wars 3



But that is taken into account when the sentencing is done, JD. If someone is a repeat violent offender, the sentencing will (should) reflect that and a minimum of time to be served is often stated.

You can’t ‘good-behave’ your way out of that. You can serve longer than the minimum with bad behaviour, but you can’t reduce your real sentence through good behaviour. It just doesn’t happen.

In such a case if the repeat violent offender behaves badly in prison, he’ll not get his first parole hearing after the minimum sentence is served … and that probably means a year before he ever gets in front of a parole board. Parole boards will rarely release a repeat violent offender on first hearing (is my understanding), so he’s probably already added 2 years to his minimum sentence already.

This ‘good behaviour’ nomenclature is confusing people (possibly me also, but I think I’m right up to a few years ago at least when I knew parole officers and prison wardens and discussed this with them). Politicians could help by just choosing to call things by less confusing names, and perhaps passing a law to prosecute media when they purposely misrepresent the facts for a headline.

It is as bad as saying we have a basic 20% tax rate when we all know its really 29% (or whatever it is now) with national insurance added. That is another confusing piece of out-of-date nomenclature that needs to be changed.


You sound like Corbyn defending the Russians in Salisbury. Don’t be so ridiculous. Of course he wasn’t an innocent. Is it normal for members of the public to set about an innocent man walking down the street? No, but quite understandable for them to try and prevent a murderer with a knife attempting to murder more people.


Just saying Huw… we need to wait to hear the testimonies of those in the Hall. There was no clear footage of him ever holding a knife… just some chap running way with one. We haven’t seen the fake explosive belt either.

Just footage of a fight on London Bridge where a mob were attacking one person and 2 dead in a Hall.

Let’s wait for the forensics and the Police to do their job.
Don’t want kangaroo court justice do we?


FIAT - hi

Deliberately or through stupidity (I’ve seen enough of your posts to rule out the latter), you make a point (about guns and a high murder rate in the USA) that has bugg*r all to do with my post.
I’m saying that terrorist are per se ideologically motivated and probably immune to ‘rehabilitation’ and, I suggest, reintegration back into our society.
Give them 99 years end of.


HJ - hi

Much too polite for JW m8.


I was surprised that bloke didn’t get shot down running across London Bridge waving a big knife about. The first video of the incident I saw was that man running towards the camera with a large knife.

Suppose someone heard there was a knifeman on the bridge and already multiple casualties, and that was the first thing they saw on exiting their own building to help…

Now think where we might be in a year or two when instant execution and the public deciding on the spur of the moment who is guilty or not from what they see.

I would have tackled the bloke with the knife. I’f I’d have got it off him it would have gone straight in the river… I’ve been on the receiving end from the police (and their animals) too many times before when doing nothing but walking between the station and a football match.


So I guess he might not be the man who killed 2 people and stabbed others, he might just be an innocent passer by. The real culprit may have quietly skipped away and be laughing at home right now. Furthermore it could just be a complete coincidence that this innocent passer by just happened to be a convicted terrorist who had been released early from a long custodial sentence. I mean what are the chances eh?



I disagree that my post had bugger all to do with what you had written. Often the propositions of whole life tariffs and the death penalty are justified in terms of their supposed deterrent effect. If we look at the US there is scant evidence that this could be true.

I agree with the two Cambridge graduates who lost their lives trying to help ex-prisoners rehabilitate themselves into society. The possibility of redemption must be right even if, on occasion, it goes wrong.

99 years without parole is hugely expensive to administer. If some of these criminals might regret their crimes and be capable of rehabilitation then surely that is a better solution. Many violent criminals, but not all, are where they are because of difficult personal and family circumstances and mostly because of mental illness. A very high proportion of perpetrators of terrorist violence have backgrounds which include mental illness and criminality of one sort or another.

Where I do agree with some of the comments on this board is that where terrorist and serial sexual offenders are concerned there should be no such thing as automatic parole without assessment.

Life, as ever, is complicated and complicated questions have no easy answers.


Frog in a tree


Almost. We need to know what happened in the Hall. We know most of the people were in the Hall and that some involved worked there.
If it turns out that the chap with the tusk, the chap with the extinguisher and the chap with the knife actually murdered 2 people in the Hall and just one man, a reformed prisoner tried to stop them as they ran out of the building then it would cast a different light on things.
That’s why we need to see/hear all the evidence.


FIAT - hi

Not by me m8!
99 years for me is retributional on the terrorist and insurance against them repeat offending.
No sentence (from a police caution to the death penalty) will deter other terrorists. Deterrence and rehabilitation are concepts that might work on other offenders - not terrorists.
Get real


We will have to disagree. From my point of view, if terrorist behaviour in some stems from mental health issues then some possibility of reform must exist.



…a thought occurs. Is this the first time that a former terrorist convict has been released and gone on to kill? If so, then we may be dealing with a wholly exceptional case.



FIAT - hi

No doubt you would be happy to volunteer to visit the next-of-kin of future repeat terrorists to tell them their loved ones have become victims of your mistaken policy?
Someone will have to!



No surprise then that you are soft on sentencing. Bit odd though the other old lag Jack has a more hard line approach?





Found this - posted without comment.



You mean like Nelson Mandela?


Here’s a question… a man who murdered a child (he strangled her and cut her throat) where the girl had learning difficulties gets jailed for life… but with a minimum of 15 years to be served.
They then get released having served 15 years… just weeks ago.

That ok?

They then go to Fishmongers Hall last Friday where they get involved in a fight.


Eadwig - hi

Was that for aggravated BB posting m8 ?
How long did you get?



That is absolutely correct but it is the same fantastical notion that you purported to be the case in the Creggan murder: the “targeted” shooting of a journalist in the head stood at the back of a crowd from 40m with a clapped out old hand gun - in the dark.

Ah, I’ve been waiting a long time to get that off my chest!