Abigail Witchalls

[silly moo]

I assume that most if not all ABers will feel as shocked as I do as more details of this attack are made known.
Such a seemingly motiveless and senseless violent assault could surely only be committed to either a person high on drugs and / alcohol or severly mentally disturbed.
Am I the only person cynical enough to think that when this person is caught he will probably be given more help than punishment?

[Peter Pedant]

I wondered as I read the details of the case that when the perpetrator is caught - bearing in mind that the English Courts are not THAT good in convicting the guiltly and exonerating the innocent - he will be so obviously mad that he may be untriable.

We have not punished the criminally insane or mad people who have committed crimes in the same way as other criminals for a few hundred years. I do not see that mad people who do mad things in a mad way should be punished.

[joules99]

see my last entry in my original entry entitled hanging - basically whoever commited this crime should, in my mind, be given the death sentance, do gooders in this country you can shove your libralism up your politically correct *********. Did anyone see the documentary 'Classroom Chaos' tonight on Channel 5, this is what lack of punishment and lack of dicipline does to children, bring back corporal punishment in schools and capital punishment in general. I am sick to death of murderers, druggies, etc being treated as the victim, I despair at the mentality of the idiots of bureaucracy that are forcing THEIR laws and ideas onto the rest of the us... and for example the lib dems are proposing that the life sentance be cut in half for murderers, WHY? Is everyone in politics ******* mad?

[cruthinboy]

joules99 - what can I say? Bang on mate!

[smudge]

BUT - Peter Pendant - If someone is found to be criminally insane, I would ask why they were allowed to be roaming the streets in the first place - they should all be locked up for life, so as not to be a danger to society.

[Lillabet]

Clearly there are quite differing views on this to say the least! Personally I don't believe in the death penalty because of the possibility of mistakes being made. The judicial sacrifice of someone innocent seems to me too high a price to pay.

However I am confused that many of the answers seem to see the options as treatment or punishment. It surely isn't an either/ or choice. Yes there should be punishment for such a crime. I think we can all agree on that. If however the perpetrator is found to also be ill then that illness should be treated as far as is possible. Refusing to treat someone who is ill is something that I just find repellant. Secure hospitals such as Broadmoor are not fun places to be. They are prisons with medical facilities. As someone who has spent time inside a prison - for work reasons not as a criminal - I can safely say that time there would be a punishment.

Whilst there are legitimate concerns over crime there is an element of panic which is not fully borne out by the facts. In terms of serious crimes such as high level assaults and killings the conviction rate is around 95% the low conviction rates usually relate to much lower level offences including criminal damage such as graffiti or the smashing of bus shelter glass. In an ideal world these would be dealt with too but I'd rather the police cleared up serious crime than focussed on high volume crimes and ignored violence.

[Lillabet]

As for the rising levels of violent crime if you look in detail these are not anywhere near as alarming as they seem. Firstly over the last 10 years more offences have been classified as 'violent' offences as the number of categories was reduced. Numbers of these crimes have remained fairly constant and so violent crime goes up. Most importantly crimes are not now recorded in terms of 'incidents' instead they are recorded in terms or 'victims.' In practical terms this means that if 5 people have a fight there are now five crimes instead of the one under the old system. This has a big effect on the figures.

As for andy hughes' posts which seem to have caused such anger I think it should be recognised that purely on the numbers there are sadly many violent offences where little or no attention is paid by the media or the public at large. Sometimes this is for practical reasons - if they know who the offender is then there is less need for appeals and so forth but there are also cases which for whatever reason are not deemed newsworthy. I don't think it is a straightforward correlation between the social status and looks of the victim as to whether or not they are newsworthy but it certainly plays a part. Cases where homeless people or prostitutes are victims, sometimes of grotesque violence (just as two examples) are very rarely national news material unless a serial killer is suspected.

Ultimately if and when this person is caught if they serve their sentence and can then contribute to society then that is what should happen. There are people who, in my opinion, are utterly irredeemable. I would support the ability of the system to extend their sentences where re-offending is likely. There are also people who do leave offending behaviour behind and can go on to be useful members of society. In some cases the successful treatment or management of an illness will be part of that. In those cases yes I support reintegration.

[Sasha13]

I think a lot of people have made some very good points here - especially andy hughes (as always). I sometimes think that people forget that in this country we are basically ruled and governed by the media. We form our opinions on what they tell us - not suprisingly since for the vast majority of people, the media is the only source of information that we have. What happened to Ms Witchalls is awful and a shocking indictment of society today and her attacker deserves to be punished very strongly for what he/she has done - even if an element of that punishment involves help for any mental problems he/she may have. But the high media profile of the case is surely bound to influence any sentence meted out - if someone is eventually found guilty of the crime, the British public would not accept a 'soft sentence' and the Home Secretary would be put under enormous pressure to ensure this didn't happen - as in the case of Jamie Bulger. I do not believe that this pressure would be as strong if the victim wasn't a pregnant young mother who has been photographed in hospital with her son touching her face so poignantly. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I think that there is anything wrong with the media putting pressure on the case in this way - I hope the SOB gets everything that he deserves - but if he does I believe that the sometimes mad British justice system will have been given a little help along the way.

[londondave]

7 years should mean 7 years, not 3, but yes 7 years is not long enough, but if the lib dems get in, they want to release most ciminals early, abolish the life sentence for murder.

I am a supporter of the death penalty (if that is what the victims family want) after all a length of rope or a bukket cost 50p compared to life in prisonment.

I also believe in the 3 strikes and your nout rule. cells should be 8' x 4' no social interaction with other prisoners 24 hour lock up with no tvs/radios just bare white walls with food put through a small gap

[Andy008]

The media attention afforder the case will heavily influence the punishment afforder to the offender, if caught. Although it sounds like a horrible thing to say, the victim has terrific "marketability" for the media. As did Sarah Payne and the two Soham murder girls.

As for the person who stated that Andy Hughes would be telling us that someone is "innocent until proven guilty", if he were to do so he would be correct. In English law, guilt is a technical relationship between charge and evidence - it has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not a person is responsible for a crime.

[Andy008]

If Andy Hughes stated that people are innocent until proven guilty, he would be correct.

In English law, guilt is a technical relationship between charge and evidence. It has nothing to with whether or not somebody has committed a crime.

The punishment afforded to the offender if and when caught will be influenced largely by the media attention given to the case - in particular the sickening institution that is the Daily Mail. For a newspaper, Abigail Witchalls has terrific marketability, as did Sarah Payne and the Soham girls. That may sound like a horrible thing to say, but its also a fact/