Mother killed her kids because they got in the way of her sex life is jailed for life.

Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,572
Even the most heinous of criminals should eventually be eligible* for parole.

*note I said eligible which doesn't mean it should alway be granted.

Subject to the circumstances of the crime and their actions since.


A young person who commits a hideous murder of a child or children in their care is not likely to pose much of a risk 40 old years later under intense supervision conditions and requirements.
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Sep 2011
Posts
5,544
Location
Monkey Island
Because I believe she doesn't deserve to live after such a heinous crime...bit obvious really.

Do you think she deserves life?

Yes, its obvious that you believe she should die for her crimes, but that is not what I asked... I asked why you believe capital punishment should be brought back.

Yes, I do believe she deserves life... but I don't believe in revenge killings.

Am gonna bring up the point I made earlier, do you agree with your country selling arms to people who use them on civilians?
 
Soldato
Joined
14 Nov 2007
Posts
16,226
Location
In the Land of Grey and Pink
Yes, its obvious that you believe she should die for her crimes, but that is not what I asked... I asked why you believe capital punishment should be brought back.

Yes, I do believe she deserves life... but I don't believe in revenge killings.

Am gonna bring up the point I made earlier, do you agree with your country selling arms to people who use them on civilians?

Again, pretty obvious.

I said I wished capital punishment would be reinstated so this reprehensible excuse for a human being could receive apt punishment. Might make her think twice before doing it again.

And I would quite happily see arms dealers shot or blown to pieces by the very product they sell.
 
Soldato
Joined
14 Jan 2018
Posts
14,797
Location
Hampshire
Even the most heinous of criminals should eventually be eligible* for parole.

*note I said eligible which doesn't mean it should alway be granted.

Subject to the circumstances of the crime and their actions since.


A young person who commits a hideous murder of a child or children in their care is not likely to pose much of a risk 40 old years later under intense supervision conditions and requirements.

Why should they be eligible?
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
19 Jun 2004
Posts
19,437
Location
On the Amiga500
As a country, we the UK, the second largest arms dealers of the world... Have sold bombs and guns that have been used to kill children.

I hope that every person in here who is appalled by the killing of these two children are also campaigners against our arms trade, because we provide weapons to those committing horrific war crimes.
What a reacher of a connection. Well done you.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,572
Why should they be eligible?

Because prison should serve multiple purposes.

Including rehabilitatation and protecting the public.

If a supervised person represents a low risk to the public (specifically the type of victim previously targeted) and has served a suitable long sentence it doesn't make much sense to keep people in prison into their dootage subject to the usual conditions for parole.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
21,004
Location
Just to the left of my PC
I wasn't tracking this story but yesterday the "model" was sentenced for life for killing her one and three year old children since they got in the way of her sex life. She strangled them both within weeks of one another so she could go and do sordid sex work.

Shocking that a mother could do that to her children but 32 years? (which it won't be). Surely she shouldn't see light of day. [..]

She was, of course, sentenced to life. She was not sentenced to "32 years (which it won't be)"

The 32 years mentioned is the minimum time before which she can apply for parole. So yes, it will be at least those 32 years unless the original sentence is overturned. She might never be released - being allowed to apply for parole doesn't mean it'll be given.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
19 Jun 2004
Posts
19,437
Location
On the Amiga500
She was, of course, sentenced to life. She was not sentenced to "32 years (which it won't be)"

The 32 years mentioned is the minimum time before which she can apply for parole. So yes, it will be at least those 32 years unless the original sentence is overturned. She might never be released - being allowed to apply for parole doesn't mean it'll be given.
Still, it's an insufficient length of time. Thank you for correcting my mistake, like others did, though.

What's your opinion on the matter instead?
 
Permabanned
Joined
28 Nov 2003
Posts
10,695
Location
Shropshire
With any luck at all a distracted prison officer will fail to see her crudely and slowly eviscerated in some dark corner of her prison by inmates to whom a child is still precious. I'd like to witness it, my lips would remain sealed, my testimony worthless. My targeted misogyny grows monthly.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Oct 2011
Posts
21,594
Location
ST4
Should be taken from the court, fed a last meal and hanged. Would save the taxpayers millions in keeping it fed and watered inside, no doubt in a cushy unit away from all the other nasty, violent inmates who would like to smear the walls with it's entrails.
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Jul 2010
Posts
23,795
Location
Lincs
Life, no parole.

Well yes, that's the only answer to that question isn't it. But then you are dismissing any notion of rehabilitation within the justice system and treating it as punitive only.

Should be taken from the court, fed a last meal and hanged. Would save the taxpayers millions in keeping it fed and watered inside, no doubt in a cushy unit away from all the other nasty, violent inmates who would like to smear the walls with it's entrails.

But if it's anything like the American legal system, it's more costly in legal fees for a death sentence than it is for life time incarceration!
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Oct 2003
Posts
10,787
Location
Left of the middle
Don't kill her, no chance. Let the woman live a mental break down until she begs to die, but then keep her alive to live all the pain and hate she put on those lovely little babies and then repeat this process until she loses her mind and breaks to the shin bones. Never give such people an easy way out, that's if we had such a death penalty of any choosing (which we don't).

Rehabilitation went out the window.
 
Caporegime
Joined
1 Dec 2010
Posts
52,496
Location
Welling, London
Well yes, that's the only answer to that question isn't it. But then you are dismissing any notion of rehabilitation within the justice system and treating it as punitive only.



But if it's anything like the American legal system, it's more costly in legal fees for a death sentence than it is for life time incarceration!
She deserves no chance at rehabilitation, and is probably well past that stage anyway. She’s an abhorrent excuse for a human being and should never see the light of day again.
 
Back
Top Bottom