Should 'life' Mean Life?

[anotheoldgit]

Do you agree that whole-lifers should be entitled to a review of their sentence 25 years into their term at the very latest?

Well it seems that the European Court of Human Rights does.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10645444/Court-of-Appeal-to-rule-on-life-means-life-sentences.html

[sandyRoe]

A review is just that, it doesn't suggest they'd be released after 25 years. Even the worst of us is capable of change. To leave people with no hope of ever being released will surely make change much harder.

[jim360]

Some people evidently don't trust the parole board when it releases people who end up reoffending, or object to various sentences perceived as "far too short". It would seem to me that if you have good cause to doubt the ability of the Justice system to get it right, that should extend to every decision they make -- including the whole-life tariffs with no review. A review, the, surely makes sense -- if nothing else, at least we can check that the system was right to lock them up in the first place. I don't understand why this is a bad thing.

[Ellipsis]

Fairly soon we may crack the long-life gene. That's going to raise a few ethical dilemmas ...

[askyourgran]

The ECHR should be disbanded, what a load of trollocks, Why hand life sentences out if they are going to be paroled half way through their sentence? Life sentences should mean death behind bars, unless there is definate proof that the wrong man is languishing there.

[jim360]

It's just been announced that the Court of Appeal has thrown the case against Whole-life tariffs out. I'm guessing that most people will be pleased by this.

[emmie]

will they be pleased, do you think the killers of Lee Rigby should get out at some point.

[emmie]

and i am aware they haven't been sentenced as yet, but that means that after a time, they could be free, walking our streets.

[barney15c]

If 'life' doesn't actually mean they will spend their dying days in prison then it shouldn't be called 'life' , typical establishment farting around skating over the subject. Bit like normal sentances cut to a third, especially for politicains and the like,

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26236225

[jim360]

Not really... like I said, they've thrown the case against whole-life tariffs out. So whole-life tariffs stay.

[sandyRoe]

Does the Court of Appeal have the final say? Will a European chamber not have the last word?

[Ric.ror]

Yes

[emmie]

if they do they shouldn't, if a court in Britain sentences a person to life without parole, then no one should gainsay it. And quite honestly i wouldn't care that the likes of the killers of Lee Rigby and terrorists ever get out.

[SlackAlice]

Life should mean 'Life'. You don't leave prison until certified dead and in a casket.

[Brenden]

We had a referendum on the death penalty quite a fews years ago with the "promise" that a life sentence would mean "life" with no parole, so no, they should not be entitled to a review of their sentence at any time - they end their lives behind bars. Sentencing is a joke in this country, when you think a life sentence is the ultimate punishment and then they can and do walk free after serving 10-15 years.

[emmie]

having maimed and murdered their way, i don't think they deserve pity or freedom.

[brionon]

As I see it-the real problem is Prison Officers having to deal with inmates who have nothing to lose.

[modeller]

Too many 'Lifers' are released and kill again . As long as that occurs I don't see how we can entertain blanket release after a specific period of time.
However I accept in some cases it does warrant a review e.g Mercy killing or insanity, but these cases are usually treated as manslaughter anyway.

[Old_Jim]

Someone sentenced to life imprisonment may be released on license by the Home Secretary following a review by the Parole Board. If there's any suggestion that the individual is involved in any form of crime, he can be recalled to gaol as happened with Terry Venables. There's no obligation on the Home Secretary to release somebody. Myra Hindley had her sentence reviewed a number of times, but she remained in gaol.

What the ECHR is saying is that judges should not have the power to prevent the Parole Board or future Home Secretary from ever reviewing a case. Once again, the ECHR is acting for common sense and humanity, and the right wing press is seeking any old excuse to rubbish them. Don't look for a balanced opinion in UKIP's favourite newspaper.

[sir.prize]

Releasing James Bulger's killers was a disgrace.