Is this justice?
- Thread starter red11
- Start date
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 11 Dec 2002
- Posts
- 10,947
- Location
- Darkest Norfolk
RaohNS said:
yes, a real pity they didn't knock the crimal justice act back 50 years in one smooth move
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 11 Dec 2002
- Posts
- 10,947
- Location
- Darkest Norfolk
RaohNS said:
i would have though its rather clear, i'm saying that no-one has the right to determin if someone should live or die.
(oh and its more like 42 years)
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 11 Dec 2002
- Posts
- 10,947
- Location
- Darkest Norfolk
RaohNS said:
i seriously doubt someone like the accused in this case is fully able to consider, or understand fully the consiquences of his actions. And if your happy for that to be a good reason to kill them then thats your opinion and your welcome to it. Maybe we should start cutting off the hands of theifs and stoneing people we disagree with on religious subjects....
To be frank, i doubt that little boy did anything to deserve being beaten, murdered in a savage way, then dumped like rubbish.
I'm sure we were all well aware, at 14, that your not meant to smack people over the head with a frying pan, let alone stabbing them with the knives our parents should have kept out of our reach.
Whatever he gets, it's not enough, he took an innocent childs life, and should pay for his actions.
I'm sure we were all well aware, at 14, that your not meant to smack people over the head with a frying pan, let alone stabbing them with the knives our parents should have kept out of our reach.
Whatever he gets, it's not enough, he took an innocent childs life, and should pay for his actions.
The law needs changing any semi/serious crime should be jail able until rehabilitated. which could be 1 year or it could be never. I think a lot of paedophiles and serial killers can't be rehabilitated so they should never be let out.
Then devise some sort of check list to see if someone is likely to re-offend. Of course it'll never be right 100% of the time but would be a lot better. Say someone was speeding and killed someone, a year or 2 would be suffice and they probably wouldn't re-offend, so let them out. Where as a pedo which is very much a mind and physical state is likely to re offend even after 20years locked up so don't let them out.
Then devise some sort of check list to see if someone is likely to re-offend. Of course it'll never be right 100% of the time but would be a lot better. Say someone was speeding and killed someone, a year or 2 would be suffice and they probably wouldn't re-offend, so let them out. Where as a pedo which is very much a mind and physical state is likely to re offend even after 20years locked up so don't let them out.
Suspended
- Joined
- 3 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 3,092
No-one will ever be able to convince me otherwise; capital punishment has no place in civilised society and the sooner it is abolished the world over, the better.
The perpetrator of this crime was given a 12 year murder sentence because he pleaded guilty. I too am wondering how someone could do something so utterly depraved at such a young age.
Here we get into the whole debate of how responsible he was for his actions. He was very young, had no reason to premeditate the violence (and the evidence says he didn't). Is it a joke? I'm not sure. I don't think the ancient principle of an eye for an eye has a leg to stand on.
The perpetrator of this crime was given a 12 year murder sentence because he pleaded guilty. I too am wondering how someone could do something so utterly depraved at such a young age.
cymatty said:
Here we get into the whole debate of how responsible he was for his actions. He was very young, had no reason to premeditate the violence (and the evidence says he didn't). Is it a joke? I'm not sure. I don't think the ancient principle of an eye for an eye has a leg to stand on.
MasterMike said:
The problem is in twelve years he will only be 27 nowhere near life really is it?
He is young I agree however so was the other boy who life was lost at such a young age, why should this guy only get 12 years 30 years would be much fairer.
It needs to be borne in mind that the 12 years is a minimum. After that, he's eligible for a pasrole hearing. He could spend a lot more than 12 years inside, and even once he's out, is subject be being hoiked right back inside if he breaks the conditions of his licence. That's the "life" bit of a life sentence - you're on licence for the rest of your life.cymatty said:
Having said that, I agree. 12 years does seem too little for the crime.