Can someone explain to me how a "life" sentance can mean you are out, with your debt paid when you are 25?

[bednobs]

It seems crazy to me - how can life imprisonment mean he could be out on parole when he is in his mid twenties? Regardless of what i think of the crime or the sentance, what on earth is the legal prfession's understanding of "life" because it dosent tally up with mine.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/pressass/20080519/tuk -teen-jailed-over-sister-fire-deaths-6323e80.h tml

[weeal]

This is the kind of thing that sickens me to the core, and many many other cases of 'life' being a lenient sentence. I get so angry I cant put it into words.

[spudqueen]

The actual definition of 'life' is that they are on parole for life. This means that if they are no longer in prison they can be returned to prison at any time, whether they have committed a crime (in relation to their original crime or not) or not.

It just means that all us decent folk have to live with these 'lifers'. Fair or what?

[persianlady]

A life sentence should mean for the rest of that persons life. If a life sentence has replaced capital punishment , then that should be it - Locked up for life, no opportunity to hurt anyone else, ever! Its no wonder the streets aren't safe.

[jake-the-peg]

I don't think you're alone , I don't think many people seem to understand what a "life sentence" actually means

You are never out "with your debt paid" on a life sentence you are out on "license" - that is what a life sentence means. A Judge passing a life sentence specifies a minimum term that must actually be served the "tariff".

There is a "whole life tariff" which means that the recipient will die in gaol

See here for a list of people with those
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whole_life_tariff

There are also indeterminant sentences which mean that a prisoner cannot be released even if his sentence is completed if it is believed that he is still a danger

[jake-the-peg]

Incidently notice that this particular case is one of manslaughter not murder which is why the tariff is only 6 years

[123everton]

I often wonder when people watch the film "The Shawshank Redemption" what they think of Morgan Friedman's (hope I spelt that right) character?
Are they happy when he's released? Do they feel his incarceration is just?
The character is a killer.
Murderers should be in prison for life, meaning life.
All I ask is people be honest in their opinions on the subject, if it was someone you cared about what would you construe as justice?
Manslaughter covers a broad remit of "murders" now (it demands reform) I had an old colleague "manslaughtered" a few years ago.spare me these admonitions whilst I throw up...

[jake-the-peg]

You have to distinguish somehow between someone who deliberately goes out to murder someone with "Malice aforethought", someone who kills another person in the heat of the moment and someone who kills another through recklessness.

Giving all such cases the same punishment might seem like justice to the families of the victim to whom the effect is the same but it doesn't fill most people's notion of justice.

Giving someone who causes death due to his drink driving the same sentence as Peter Sutcliffe or Rose West?

I don't think so

[brionon]

But,regardless of what you think of Life Sentences,the question, surely, is Why call it life ? When it ain't ? Why not something approaching reason,like X number of years ?

[jake-the-peg]

It's called life because you're never free of it.

You're sentenced to life imprisonment but you may be allowed out on license - if you ever violate any of the terms of the license you can be sent back.

It's not like 18 months for theft after you're released you're free.

A sentence does not have to be served in prison. A Tariff does.

[jake-the-peg]

The X years you're talking about is the Tariff

[123everton]

We can all come up with examples for exemption, what if this happened what if that happened.
A drunk driver who kills for instance should get the sort of sentence meted out to current "lifers" (12 years) if you want to kill someone run them over.
When you read stories of killers let out after only a couple of years, I seethe.
I read one story about a man who killed his 16 year old ex-girlfriend, he'd done time for killing a previous ex before her.
He was 22!
It's just plain wrong.

[ludwig]

Let me get this straight, they let you out on license, but if you break any laws while you're out, they put you back in prison - and that remains true for the rest of your life.
So that would be errm - exactly the same rules that apply to the rest of us who've never committed a crime then?

[jake-the-peg]

I said violate terms of the parole not laws ludwig.

You might be required not to meet certain people for example or to check in with parole officers or not to leave the country without permission.

I'm sure you'll agree that's somewhat different to "the rest of us"

As for killers let out after a couple of years I think you'll find the minimum tariff for muder is 10 years.

Minimum tariffs are not good anyway as they take discretion from the trial Judge.

There's the issue of provokation and abuse - A woman might finally snap and murder her abusive violent husband. The judge is then bound to pass the minimum sentence which at the moment would be life with 10 years minimum.

This happened in this case.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/cou rt-frees-woman-who-shot-abusive-husband-603307 .html

In the end the conviction was quashed and replaced with one of manslaughter - which was wrong but had the desired effect.


But if it makes you angry - you can do something about it now - or at least have your say

The sentencing guidelines people do public consultations here:

http://www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk/consul tations/index.html

there are none open right now but there were Consultations for things like corporate manslaughter and causing death by dangerous driving last year.

So don't tell us you're seething, tell them!

[123everton]

A very shrewd observation Ludwig, I like it.
Although I think they lose the right to trial, and bail before conviction. I think also they can place exemptions for them such as no alcohol etc.
But other than that I'd have to say you're absolutely bang on.

[ludwig]

I was being slightly tongue in cheek with that previous comment - I realise it's not exactly the same as being freed unconditionally.

The fact remains though that after what many would consider fairly short terms of imprisonment, many 'lifers' are basically let out to carry on as before with a few restrictions on freedom and minor inconvieniences put in place.

The authorities seem more concerned with saving money and avoiding prison overcrowding than they do with administering real justice. Prison is where violent people should be. If there are too many people in there we should release a few of those who didn't pay their TV licence or close their wheelie bin properly.

[brionon]

I'm sorry but if the Term 'Life sentence' has to be interpreted time after time then it's a Foolish term.
Ever heard of a 'Spade' ?

[jake-the-peg]

Is a fine not a sentence Brionen?

What about a community sentence?

A suspended sentence?

It's not the term that's foolish

[123everton]

Thanks for the link and all but when you know people who've died violent deaths it takes on a wholly different resonance.
There have been cases in the press over the last few weeks of gangs killing innocent people in roobberies etc. what I found worrying is the look in their eyes and the countenance on their faces. These looks I see most days when I'm having to deal with scum bags like that, the only difference I can see is the ones I have to fight with have'nt killed anyone.
Yet....
The way to get real change is via the ballot box, trouble is all the politicians are playing JTP's tune, fiddling while Rome burns.