I bet there'd be a few applicants (not talking about this case specifically).
Colin Pitchfork: Double Schoolgirl Murderer to be Released | Recalled to Prison
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
There have been many cases where innocent people have been wrongly convicted because or partly because of mishandled or misapplied DNA evidence. It isn't an infallible silver bullet and certainly not cause for abandoning due process.
Which would never have been seen had he been hung before a trial took place.
Death sentences get appealed as many times as they can (usually three in the US). This is a long process that comes at a great cost to the justice system. So yes, it does cost more to judicially kill a convicted offender than it does to convict and imprison them for life.
Should an arbitrary list of offences that you personally find distasteful really be the basis of our penal tariffs?
True, and even if it was an infallible silver bullet, it could still be potentially misused by someone in a position of power. But I've always felt that it should be an option on the table, rather than mandatory or being completely abolished, for extraordinary circumstances.
I’m pretty sure most would find the rape and murder of two schoolgirls distasteful.
A death sentence costs more than life in prison I think.
I think that every right minded person believes that raping and murdering a child is abhorrent but not all right minded people believe in capital punishment as a form of justice.
He didn’t advocate for capital punishment to be fair.
I am against capital punishment and I’m not advocating for such.
Fair play.
I was more piggybacking on the back of your post to make a point. Apologies if it came across that I was accusing you of something.
There's evidence posted in this thread that you're seemingly ignoring and you're calling out someone else's intelligence?
The goal of prison should ultimately be rehabilitation. The rates of reoffending in countries that actively undertake this are much lower than in countries they treat prisoners like shite. Death sentences do not work as a deterrent. It's really as simple as that.
Of course, but would that mean never releasing any murderers or only ones where the victims elicit more sympathy?
You surely need to strip all emotion out of these decisions.
Absolutely, I mean, keeping Myra Hindley and Ian Brady locked up until they died was absolutely barbaric behaviour.
he's suggesting we just hang them without a trial, probably a bit cheaper to be fair
Guess it depends on your trust in the rehabilitation process within prisons.
Wouldn’t ever trust someone ever again who could commit such crimes, personally. Therefore will not ever be happy knowing that person is walking the streets free.
Wouldn’t ever trust someone ever again who could commit such crimes, personally. Therefore will not ever be happy knowing that person is walking the streets free.
What is the success rate for rehabilitation?
Good question... not many my guess.
Here in Chile, back in 2005, this guy killed his wife and daughter. Placed them inside a steel drum, covered them in lime, and buried them in his yard.
He was released in 2016 after 11 years in prison (originally sentenced to 27 years).
In 2020, he raped and murdered his girlfriend's 16yo daughter, with assistance from the girlfriend (girl's mother). Her son was also raped for several years (2017-2020).
The girl went missing for a week, and eventually was found buried in his killer's backyard...
Shit is fecked up.
The main purpose of prison is to deny a criminal of their liberty and to ensure safety to the public. It is widely accepted in law that most criminals are beyond rehabilitation.
Government set the boundaries for sentencing and a Judge applies it case by case.
Capital punishment should never be on the table. Just one mistake would disable the whole legal system and give a platform for every convicted death row prisoner to form an appeal.
With emotion these crimes are worth the death penalty but you can't attach emotion to law, it just wouldn't work.
Government set the boundaries for sentencing and a Judge applies it case by case.
Capital punishment should never be on the table. Just one mistake would disable the whole legal system and give a platform for every convicted death row prisoner to form an appeal.
With emotion these crimes are worth the death penalty but you can't attach emotion to law, it just wouldn't work.
Probably worth pointing out that someone convicted of those crimes now would be facing a whole life tariff (life imprisonment without parole) in the UK. So the law has already been adjusted to keep people like Pitchfork behind bars.
Unfortunately it can't be applied retroactively. They're bound by the minimum sentence he was convicted under, which in this case is just the 30 year minimum. So the issue isn't the law as it stands now but the law as it was then.
Unfortunately it can't be applied retroactively. They're bound by the minimum sentence he was convicted under, which in this case is just the 30 year minimum. So the issue isn't the law as it stands now but the law as it was then.
Insane. Anyone who is capable of such serious crimes obviously have serious issues. They may genuinely want to change but easier said than done because old habits die hard.
Absolute nonsense.
What if only one? What if murdered two, but no rape?
But it's not though. I work in and around these people every day but what do I know.
Oh, you're one of those posters!
I'm reminded of this quote from Red Dragon, by Hannibal Lecter.
Firstly, he should have hanged. For the rape and murder of two girls, there should be no place on earth for scum such as Pitchfork.
Of course he should never be released and such is the public outrage of his crimes, hopefully he never will be.
Of course he should never be released and such is the public outrage of his crimes, hopefully he never will be.
Last edited:
boahh... sounds gross... any links?
Your statement is demonstrably incorrect. You having personal, anecdotal evidence to the contrary doesn't change that fact.
Please cite anywhere in 'law' the belief that most criminals are beyond rehabilitation.
You saying the word fact doesn't make it true.
Jerome G. Miller, D.S.W (1989)
Returning Home: Emerging Findings and Policy Lessons about Prisoner Reentry. Dr Visher (2012)
Respect and Resistance in Punishment Theory. Alice Ristroph (2007)
Deterring retributivism: The injustice of "just" punishment. R. L Christopher (2002)
ONS reoffending statistics.
Beyond Rehabilitation: A New Theory of Indeterminate Sentencing. Maquette University School of Law
Prisons cannot be places of rehabilitation. B J Moore (2012)
Full rehabilitation rarely works.
Last edited:
Someone like this should never, ever be allowed out of prison. I can understand the rationale behind no death penalty, as it applies to the legal system as a whole, but I do not believe he should have ever been allowed out.
Agree with this.
Yawn.
The first one is literally titled: "The Debate on Rehabilitating Criminals: Is It True that Nothing Works?" and definitely doesn't support your argument.
Let me refine the question for you.
The US approach to rehabilitation probably is closer to your statement. They're all beyond help, lock them up.
The only UK source there is the ONS stats. I don't regard it as particularly relevant to whether someone is or isn't rehabilitated, but hey, you chose it so let's see.
Percentage of offenders who reoffended: 29.2%. Please explain how 29.2% = 'most'.
Let me give you an out: you can just tighten your incongruous statement to: "once a nonce, probably always a nonce". If you have a sexual urge to feck kids that's unlikely to go away with a course in prison.
Fair play to the Parole Board making this recommendation knowing full well the political fallout. The last guy resigned over Worboys.
US law is build around UK law (they still cite case law from both countries). The US studies are widely used in UK law everyday.
Gtr.ukr.org - breaking the cycle - prison visitation and recidivism in the UK.
It reads, In the uk, 75% of ex-inmates reoffend within nine years of release, and 39.3% within the first twelve months.
The figure you quote includes cases where a person receives a non-custodial conviction at court, or received a caution or reprimand. Totally different.
Gtr.ukr.org - breaking the cycle - prison visitation and recidivism in the UK.
It reads, In the uk, 75% of ex-inmates reoffend within nine years of release, and 39.3% within the first twelve months.
The figure you quote includes cases where a person receives a non-custodial conviction at court, or received a caution or reprimand. Totally different.
I was trying to look for these statistics and I came across both of those. Was a bit confused to which was correct or, whether both were correct but in different situations (i.e. all the little details, paroles, types of crimes done, how long they'd been in, committed multiple crimes beforehand). But yeh I was seeing 69-75% on some pages, and then on others the 29-32% area. If anyone has more clarity on the meaning of these statistics, because there's a massive difference
.Both are correct but measure different things. The higher number is more relevant to the penal system and the effect it has on rehabilitation.I was trying to look for these statistics and I came across both of those. Was a bit confused to which was correct or, whether both were correct but in different situations (i.e. all the little details, paroles, types of crimes done, how long they'd been in, committed multiple crimes beforehand). But yeh I was seeing 69-75% on some pages, and then on others the 29-32% area. If anyone has more clarity on the meaning of these statistics, because there's a massive difference
The British Justice system is and should be about rehabilitation. While I am not minimising what he has done, or the effect his actions have had on the young lives and friends/families of the victims, the man has been in an open prison for four years without further offence and has proven he is now safe to be released back into the community. If he commits a further offence, he will be immediately recalled.
We may as well have the death penalty if we’re just going to say ‘life means life’.
We may as well have the death penalty if we’re just going to say ‘life means life’.
All of those penalties are criminal (perhaps not reprimands, but they no longer exist), and that's the exact point I'm making.
Are you changing your position only to include criminals who have been to prison, then?
Cite all the studies you wish; your statement is nonsense.