[Closed] Harry Roberts released

served his sentence, got released. Not much of a story is it.

You can't make up special rules just because you don't like how the rules were applied in a particular case. So I don't have a problem with it.

Its justice not revenge

Judging by the reports from the farm where he was being reintroduced back into the community, he is still very much an unreformed character.
He shouldn't have served a sentence, he should have been executed.

Quite a contrast to the treatment of Ched Evans I thought.

Same as Evans serve the sentence as dictated by the system. Got a problem with the system change it.

Only Evans isn't being treated as though he has served his time and can now go back to his chosen career .

He shouldn't have served a sentence, he should have been executed.

We don't have capital punishment in this country.

No but he should be.

[quote=Ramsey Neil ]Only Evans isn't being treated as though he has served his time and can now go back to his chosen career .
I don't think the courts can hand down a mandatory change of career as part of the sentence.

No but he should be.

So no capital punishment except for the people we really don't like?

The sooner we do away with all this namby pamby, liberal nonsense about independent judicuial procedures, and the rule of law, and have sentencing set directly by Paul Dacre, maybe in a phone-in poll in the Mail, the better!!!

[img] [/img]

I don't think the courts can hand down a mandatory change of career as part of the sentence.

Sometimes they can, such as stipulating that offenders can't work with / be anywhere near children for example, which, if they'd previously been a school teacher, amounts to it.

IRA blokes killed more and were released far sooner. in the name of peace....which makes it ok I suppose.

Author Kate Kray, who interviewed Roberts for her book Natural Born Killers (1999, ISBN 1857823826), said that he has no remorse for his victims and recreates the murders in art and pastry decorations, making apple pies and decorating them with pastry cut-outs of policemen being shot. Kray said that he also produces "precisely drawn and coloured" paintings depicting someone shooting a policeman

He should never of been let out.

Horrible piece of work and still is by all accounts.

Here's the view of someone who is effected by the decision:
[i].."It is an utter disgrace.”
+
Police chiefs, politicians and the loved one of those murdered by Roberts have lined up to condemn the Parole Board’s decision as “sickening” and “abhorrent”
[/i]

The Judge saying he should never be released carried no weight obviously .

Mentally ill. Needs treatment not incarceration.
Another part of this is surely about how well he will be able to adjust to life outside after having all his needs taken care of inside.
And, some Police's behaviour in recent times has no doubt diluted the respect and resultant ongoing outrage at the murder of one of their own too.

Mentally ill.

Really?

When was he diagnosed?

Have to agree with geoffj there

[i]said that he has no remorse for his victims and recreates the murders in art and pastry decorations, making apple pies and decorating them with pastry cut-outs of policemen being shot.[/i]

Even by the standards of this place, does that sound like the actions of a sane person?

What you unto there Harry?

What? This? Its a cheese and onion pasty featuring scenes of domestic violence

Oh... ok...... could I just take that knife out of your hand

He killed two policeman and was found guilty in relation to the murder of a third.

It sends, in my opinion, a poor message to society. If you murder a policeman it should mean LIFE imprisonment.

But then one assumes karma will prevail and he might fall down a set of stairs somewhere now he's out.....

Pyschopaths can only ever be controlled not rehabilitated.

If you murder a policeman it should mean LIFE imprisonment.

I think the sentence should be the same regardless of whether the victim was a policeman or not.

I dunno, police are working to protect us, if(!) greater sentences makes them safer then would help them with their job.

Give big punishments to the police that abuse their position though.

I dunno, police are working to protect us, if(!) greater sentences makes them safer then would help them with their job.

You could make that argument about other public servants. But in any case I think it's a false premise: is there any evidence that (say) a 50 year sentence rather than a 30 year sentence makes the police safer?

Personally, I think that we should aspire to be a country in which we're all equal before the law, and that should mean similar sentences for similar crimes.

Can't see a problem with it if the parole board thought it the correct thing.

I'm not a fan of the mob deciding the length of prison terms.

I also don't understand why the police should get more protection than anyone else. we are all ment to be equal under law. The occupation of a victim shouldn't come into it.

Ramsey Neil - Member

Only Evans isn't being treated as though he has served his time and can now go back to his chosen career .

Unrepentant rapist Ched Evans was training with Sheffield Wednesday yesterday. Wonder why they chose yesterday to break the news?

Sheffield [s]Wednesday[/s] United.

FTFY.

I don't like him being released.

However, those with the knowledge and experience to make those decisions have done their job, so whether I like it really doesn't matter. So long as justice is fair and equitable to all, best not let forumites get involved

Mixing them up wouldn't cause any problems, surely?

I'm a tad surprised (should I be....) at the thoughts that the Police shouldn't receive greater protection legally.

Take the scenario of someone breaking into your house intent to cause you injury. You call the Police, and instead of them running to the rescue, risking their own safety, they say "Well, you're just one person Sir, if someone has to die it may as well be you".

I doubt you'd be impressed.

If "full life" sentences were mandatory and it made people think twice about pulling a gun, or a knife, or whatever, on a copper, then it would be worth it.

If "full life" sentences were mandatory and it made people think twice about pulling a gun, or a knife, or whatever, on a copper, then it would be worth it.

1. You can't have a full life sentence - breaches human rights thingy dunnit.
2. Coppers get killed in countries with the death penalty and I don't think people stabbing coppers are thinking, 'it's alright I'll be out by the time I'm 60'.

If "full life" sentences were mandatory and it made people think twice about pulling a gun, or a knife, or whatever, on a copper, then it would be worth it.

Thats the problem though. It doesn't. The American example of sentencing 'Cop Killers' to a million years in prison has made no difference whatsoever. If you're the kind of headcase who's going to do it, you'll do it whatever. I doubt that you'll be planning a moment of quiet contemplation shortly beforehand to weigh up the relative merits of potential sentences.

I know the people calling for bringing back hanging etc arn't too bothered about triviality like evidence, while they're foaming at the mouth with righteous indignation

DrRS**** - Member
I'm a tad surprised (should I be....) at the thoughts that the Police shouldn't receive greater protection legally.

Take the scenario of someone breaking into your house intent to cause you injury. You call the Police, and instead of them running to the rescue, risking their own safety, they say "Well, you're just one person Sir, if someone has to die it may as well be you".

I doubt you'd be impressed.

If "full life" sentences were mandatory and it made people think twice about pulling a gun, or a knife, or whatever, on a copper, then it would be worth it.

So they shouldn't think twice about pulling a gun, knife or wherever on a normal person? The law is fine, tbh, I'm against mandatory life sentances for anything, the system allows for life sentances to be given, but this is done on a case by case basis, as it should be. Arbitrary justice, isn't where I think we should be.

btw it strikes me that in your scenario, it's unlikely the police would be able to respond in time to save your life, even if they had personal forcefields!

1. You can't have a full life sentence - breaches human rights thingy dunnit.

Yes you can, the bit that breached human rights legislation was having a politician deciding it.

Thats the problem though. It doesn't. The American example of sentencing 'Cop Killers' to a million years in prison has made no difference whatsoever. If you're the kind of headcase who's going to do it, you'll do it whatever. I doubt that you'll be planning a moment of quiet contemplation shortly beforehand to weigh up the relative merits of potential sentences.

Funnily enough, Lord Condon agrees with you. He goes further and says if you introduce whole-life tarrifs, you could actually reduce protection for police because the killers would have nothing left to lose.

[i]Judging by the reports from the farm where he was being reintroduced back into the community, he is still very much an unreformed character.
He shouldn't have served a sentence, he should have been executed.[/i]

Correct.

Too many miscarriages of justice for the death penalty to ever be an option.

Too many miscarriages of justice for the death penalty to ever be an option

How many ?

How many is too many ?

Examples please.

One is too many

Judging by the reports from the farm where he was being reintroduced back into the community, he is still very much an unreformed character.

Link? evidence?

How many is too many ?

One.

How many is too many ?

1 is too many.

How many ?

How many is too many ?

Examples please.

One innocent person being executed to satisfy your blood lust is one too many. I don't need to provide any more evidence than that really.