Well the fault there lies with the Parole Board, since they're only supposed to release prisoners who no longer pose a threat to society. I agree that the present system isn't perfect. Ideally what should happen is that a judge should set a minimum and maximum tariff (which I believe is something currently being campaigned for).

Completely agree.

Life without possibility of parole is worse than a death sentence. There's a high chance of turning a one-off killer into a desperate monster who'll reach every depth of depravity to keep or regain his liberty.

Why not kill or mutilate all your prison mates, prison guards and butcher every one else that gets in your way? You have nothing left to lose, and hey - you may as well go down fighting. In that situation, with a manic laugh and blood on your face you have an opportunity to enjoy taking your vengeance on the world like a demon possessed with no inhibitions. Rape and pillage, for there may be no tomorrow.

Then you have the argument that life in prison means death penalty......... it would solve that problem.

</devils advocate>

The death penalty isn't quite as bad as life without parole, but it's still very wrong.

Obviously, death eliminates the potential of repeat offending or escape. However;

1. In America, the death penalty usually means sitting on death row for many years before the sentence is executed (sic). Therefore, it's actually not much different.
2. Prior to capture and during trial, the same "desperado" effect is evident.
3. There is no chance of re-trial in the case of a bad conviction.
4. It's premeditated murder, which I personal think is immoral.

Yes I know

But I still come back to my point earlier :

If that person was in for a serious violent crime. I know I don't want them out early.

Didn't we used to send bad people some place? Australia or something...

I agree that people should be given the chance to argue their case, but I think the person who decides should be very strict. Then again I also think that anyone sitting in prison should have nothing but the three stone walls and some iron bars to look at, and nothing more than bread and water to consume.

I'm unconvinced of any correlation between successful rehabilitation and length of incarceration. In fact, if you took a perfectly normal bloke and banged him up for 15 years I think there's a high chance you'd turn him into a criminal.

Rehab requires psychiatric care and assessment. How long that might take is impossible for a judge to know at the time of sentencing. Some people simply can't be cured, where as some might be totally reformed after a few weeks of self reflection.

Punitive revenge is counter productive and immoral. Someone should be released when they're fit to be released. If they're released too early, then that is a failure of the parole board to successfully evaluate the situation.

I wouldn't classify some that goes around committing violent crimes as "a perfectly normal bloke" to be honest.


Granted but with violent crimes are you prepared to take the risk?


For none violent crimes I agree totally. But for the heavy stuff who decides and how? I'm afraid I know some people who sit on a parole board and i wouldn't trust them to decide on the days menu.........

I was suggesting that 15 years in prison might turn an innocent man like yourself into a hardened criminal.

I don't know what the answer to violent crime is, but I'm pretty sure incarceration alone does not make people better.

Probably but if I was innocent why would I be put there for 15 Years? ( excluding the odd cock up in the legal system)

Completely agree with you, it just protects the rest of society from the perpetrators of it.

Hopefully you wouldn't, but that's not my point. My point is that prison is currently a "criminal university" system to create more violent criminals that are more likely to f*ck you up when they eventually get out.

Parole is probably the only part of the system that actually offers a positive incentive for criminals to change. If you take it away, you make an imperfect system much worse.

Agreed, but how else do we punish those that breaks the rules the society lives by?

I actually don't believe it makes criminals change ( see you point regarding "criminal university") I believe it gives them an incentive to try and con the parole boards.
I am most definitely not suggesting what we've got is perfect or that we should go to the death penalty situation but I believe we must have a penalty system that protects and deters serious crime. If we don't it then becomes every man for himself ............... Somehow society needs to be protected.

I agree, and I think the penalty system can be grossly inadequate in cases such as Baby P, etc. These sentences seem lenient to me and wouldn't deter sadists like the perpetrators in this case. The charming Mr Barker here surely can't be allowed to roam free ever again.

BBC Clicky.