Colin Pitchfork: Double Schoolgirl Murderer to be Released | Recalled to Prison

esmufc07

Brad
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
50,245
Generally I am against whole life tariffs without the possibility of parole but there are some crimes whereby you should never be allowed out of prison. Raping and murdering two schoolgirls should see that you’re never allowed to walk the streets again.

 
Typical Colin
 
What a surname. Why is he being paroled after a crime like that?
 
Green_Red said:
Should have been hanged, save the taxpayer some money.
Click to expand...
In countries with actual due process - where you're not just beheaded on the main square a day after your sentence -, the death penalty is more expensive than life imprisonment.
 
Very recently we had a murder case in Poland where an 18-year old was killed by a guy who initially went to a correctional facility when he was 14 for murdering a girl from his school (very brutally). He was released after 4 years because apparently you are not responsible for your action at all when you are 14 and it doesn’t matter if you don’t even show remorse and attempt rape during that time again.

When he went out, he almost immediately tried to rape a girl from his town, only to be sentenced for 2 years for an attempted rape. This got cut to 1 year for ‘good behavior’.

He was actually out and behaving somewhat fine for another 6 or 7 years before committing this crime (or just simply did not get reported) but it is beyond my comprehension how they could let him out when he was 18 even though it was clear he wasn’t right, and then giving him for two years for basically the same crime (except murder as she ran away).

Worst thing is you just know he will get 12 years now, get out after 6 or 7 and be a threat to society again.
 
I've never understood "time off for good behaviour" ... I get they want to try and see if people can change their behaviours and I'm sure they don't want prisoners who go "feck it, I'll kill someone in here if I've already got life".

But for some crimes (and Colin Pitchfork is one), I'd just say life in prison.
 
BeforeKeanetherewasRobson said:
I've never understood "time off for good behaviour" ... I get they want to try and see if people can change their behaviours and I'm sure they don't want prisoners who go "feck it, I'll kill someone in here if I've already got life".

But for some crimes (and Colin Pitchfork is one), I'd just say life in prison.
Click to expand...

On a broad scale it makes sense as a policy. It helps reduce overcrowding, reduce recidivism, makes prisons safer for inmates/officers and saves money. Plus it's broadly popular. When asked, people tend to be in favour of prisoners who no longer pose a threat to society being able to apply for earlier release and good behaviour counting towards their sentence.

It's when you break it down to individual cases like this that it becomes more difficult to swallow. But it's hard to devise fair laws that also treat what people might consider exceptional crimes in an exceptional way.
 
It happens, doesn't it.

A few weeks ago I heard a podcast about a sadistical and racist murderer who had killed three people in Germany, more than 20 years ago.
He seems to have deleted all the search records of him. It's very hard to find any information about him and his victims on Google. He is probably out by now and - being a member of a rich family - probably enjoys his life again. Yes, that sucks.
 
esmufc07 said:
Generally I am against whole life tariffs without the possibility of parole but there are some crimes whereby you should never be allowed out of prison. Raping and murdering two schoolgirls should see that you’re never allowed to walk the streets again.

Click to expand...


There will always be outlier cases like this that make everyone want to lose their shit. But a truly impartial justice system doesn't take emotion into consideration.
 
If it's a psychopath type murder where they've set out to kill a total stranger with no mitigating circumstances then they shouldn't ever be released, in my opinion.

There are a lot of cases in Ireland where we'd been too lenient with these types of offenders in the past. Some have committed murder while on day release.
 
The Corinthian said:
How? Is there evidence that backs this up?
Click to expand...

Yes, there are decades of research backing this up.

Looking at the US:

- A legislative audit in Kansas found that the estimated cost of death penalty cases was 70% more than comparable non death penalty cases.

- In Tennessee death penalty trials cost an average of 48% than trials where the prosecutor sought life imprisonment.

- In Maryland death penalty cases cost three times more than non death penalty cases.

- As per a 2008 California study, the then system with a death penalty cost $137m per year, whereas the estimated cost of a non death penalty system was $11.5m per year.

And so on.

The cost of appeals is a big factor. But (according to Amnesty at least) most of the costs come pre and during trial, so even if all post-trial appeals were abolished it would still cost more. Reasons for this include the increase complexity of the trials (they essentially become two parts, one establishing guilt/innocence and the other whether the death penalty is warranted) with all the attached special motions and extra time expended, increased investigative costs on the part of all parties and then the costs of life imprisonment anyway whenever verdicts less than death are ultimately reached.

And then any post-trial stuff, which can be significant not least because a third of death penalty verdicts between 1973 and 2013 in the US were overturned, often following years and years of expensive proceedings, many of which end not with the release of the prisoner but with the continued cost of their life imprisonment.
 
33 years is a long time to spend in prison, so if your prison system works on the basis of rehabilitation, and actually does it, then releasing him might just be proof that the system is working. I wouldn't trust someone released after 33 years in American prisons, though.

I assume these are professionals who have made the decision, under strong scrutiny. It's not like it's going to be some people going "oh we feel so sorry for him, let's just let him go".
 
Last edited:
He has served over 30 years, and has probably been assessed to the umpteenth degree, given his previous denial. Hard decision to make, if I was a family member of one of the girls I probably wouldn't be happy, but at the same time you would want to believe that people can change, given the right help. I would like to know what sort of upbringing he had etc.
 
Green_Red said:
Due process can end with hanging. Someone who rapes and murders two young girls is not due any process. Have you got kids, or a sister? Can you imagine going through that with your family? People like him don't deserve to be covered by "the rules".

Imagine living in a world where we can send soldiers into a foreign country to murder "terrorists" but rapists and murderers are entitled to due process. What a fecked up world we live in...
Click to expand...
Are you saying someone accused of murdering two young girls does not deserve a day in court? That they should just be hung in the public square?
 
Green_Red said:
Due process can end with hanging. Someone who rapes and murders two young girls is not due any process. Have you got kids, or a sister? Can you imagine going through that with your family? People like him don't deserve to be covered by "the rules".

Imagine living in a world where we can send soldiers into a foreign country to murder "terrorists" but rapists and murderers are entitled to due process. What a fecked up world we live in...
Click to expand...

Have you got kids or a brother?

Imagine your son was wrongly accused of raping and murdering two young girls. Would you be fine with him being hung without due process?
 
Green_Red said:
Due process can end with hanging. Someone who rapes and murders two young girls is not due any process. Have you got kids, or a sister? Can you imagine going through that with your family? People like him don't deserve to be covered by "the rules".

Imagine living in a world where we can send soldiers into a foreign country to murder "terrorists" but rapists and murderers are entitled to due process. What a fecked up world we live in...
Click to expand...

Talk about missing the point.
 
diarm said:
Have you got kids or a brother?

Imagine your son was wrongly accused of raping and murdering two young girls. Would you be fine with him being hung without due process?
Click to expand...

In this specific case, there was a suspect who actually confessed to one of the murders. Imagine if he wasn't allowed "due process"

Richard Buckland, a 17-year-old Narborough boy with learning difficulties, and who knew Dawn, appeared to have knowledge of some details of the crime that had not been made public. Under questioning he would repeatedly admit the crime, and then withdraw the admission. On 10 August he was charged with Dawn’s murder, and appeared in court the following day.

Buckland refused to confess to the murder of Lynda, however. He was adamant that he was not guilty of that crime. The police, in their certainty that both girls’ lives had been taken by the same person, were convinced he was lying.
Click to expand...
 
Green_Red said:
Due process can end with hanging. Someone who rapes and murders two young girls is not due any process. Have you got kids, or a sister? Can you imagine going through that with your family? People like him don't deserve to be covered by "the rules".

Imagine living in a world where we can send soldiers into a foreign country to murder "terrorists" but rapists and murderers are entitled to due process. What a fecked up world we live in...
Click to expand...

Human rights apply to all humans regardless of what they may or may not have done, not just the ones you want them to.
 
Mihai said:
In this specific case, there was a suspect who actually confessed to one of the murders. Imagine if he wasn't allowed "due process"
Click to expand...

I didn't know that but I'm not surprised. These things seem to happen all the time.

You can't flick through Netflix without seeing a hundred documentaries about miscarriages of justice, and that's with trials and due process.
 
diarm said:
Have you got kids or a brother?

Imagine your son was wrongly accused of raping and murdering two young girls. Would you be fine with him being hung without due process?
Click to expand...
Irrelevant. This guy was convicted with DNA evidence.
 
Green_Red said:
Due process can end with hanging. Someone who rapes and murders two young girls is not due any process. Have you got kids, or a sister? Can you imagine going through that with your family? People like him don't deserve to be covered by "the rules".

Imagine living in a world where we can send soldiers into a foreign country to murder "terrorists" but rapists and murderers are entitled to due process. What a fecked up world we live in...
Click to expand...
Do you write for the Daily Mail?
 
WI_Red said:
Are you saying someone accused of murdering two young girls does not deserve a day in court? That they should just be hung in the public square?
Click to expand...
No, but hanging should be a legitimate sentence.
 
diarm said:
Have you got kids or a brother?

Imagine your son was wrongly accused of raping and murdering two young girls. Would you be fine with him being hung without due process?
Click to expand...
Of course he is entitled to a trial, but the sentence of being hanged should be an option, especially for people who rape and murder children. Are you siding with this murderer?
 
Green_Red said:
100% agree. I never said he wasn't entitled to a trial. He could have been totally innocent of the crime. But he wasn't. He raped and murdered two young children, and was found unequivocally guilty of the crime, but we are debating whether he was entitled to due process. He had it. My point is he should have been hanged and then we wouldn't have to be debating his potential release back into society.
Click to expand...

You quite literally said:
Someone who rapes and murders two young girls is not due any process.
Click to expand...

Even if you were just referring to him not being due the right to live I still STRONGLY disagree. Being against the death penalty is not being on the side of the convicted. To echo Dwazza, vengeance is not justice. The state has NO right to take the life of one of its citizens.
 
Green_Red said:
It has more to do with the fact that nowadays prisons are privately held and the government have quotas to fill for number of inmates through the door. In order to increase that number, and for the private company to get paid, they release people in order to increase the throughput of the system. It has little to do with "good behaviour" like the prisoner has actually been rehabilitated.
Click to expand...
But any privately run prison is separate/independent from The Parole Service?
 
Green_Red said:
100% agree. I never said he wasn't entitled to a trial. He could have been totally innocent of the crime. But he wasn't. He raped and murdered two young children, and was found unequivocally guilty of the crime, but we are debating whether he was entitled to due process. He had it. My point is he should have been hanged and then we wouldn't have to be debating his potential release back into society.
Click to expand...

That's not what you said at all. You quite literally said that he wasn't entitled to any due process (his trial).

Also as has already been stated, execution is more expensive than life in prison. It's also barbaric, we're a society of intelligent people who don't need to stoop to the levels of people we're condemning. It's also far more favourable if you're idea of prison is punishment to have them live out decades of their life in solitude rather than getting a quick end to their misery. Justice is not revenge.
 
Green_Red said:
No, but hanging should be a legitimate sentence.
Click to expand...

The issue I would have with that is who does the hanging?

It's all well and good saying hanging should be allowed from a distance but what about the people who have to take the life in this state sanctioned death sentence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.