Justice

[no-infernomark]

Robbo, firstly my opinions are my own and no one elses.

i do accept i did miss a tiny bit of grammar in the above sentence but it has been a long day.
the victim of rape is the person being raped. the rapist should never be given an easy way out. the rapists should live a big brother lifestyle, being watched and monitored throughout life, the victim has to live with it. if they as much as walk down the wrong road bring em back to jail.

A lot of prisoners are remorseful and cant live with the consequences of what they have done and are more than willing to accept this, granted in equal amounts they dont care. i in no way said that i would be letting them off, they are going to serve time, they are going to be monitored upon release, however in todays prisons brutal beatings are not common place, albeit they should. management structures are not what they used to be, there are cameras everywhere and with the do-gooder solicitors robbing tax payers money to provide legal aid in and out of prison it is easier to chop out the "rogue" officers than to fund the processes of courts and compensation claims that do, to frequently, happen. ask any governor, solicitor, judge, barrister or high court judge, the purpose of a prison sentence is to remove their liberty from them.
if i was in charge of a prison, i firstly wouldnt be giving the knuckleheads access to a gym 6 days a week, or social visits where they can hold hands and cuddle. i totally agree that the prisons are to soft but compared to other prison systems we dont do to bad. north american jails are violent and ruthless but their re-offending rates are far higher than ours. many lifer prisoners who do not admit what they did do not leave prison until they accept it and do the relevant sentence plan, i have seen a person receive 11 years when they were 19 and said person is now pushing 55 and is still in prison due to denial. so keep the person locked up. sod em

i totally agree that a prison is only a deterrent to a minority of prisoners, this minority will not return, a small minority will try not to return and a vast majority will return. career criminals are used to the system and use it as a source of income. i argue that a bit of fear in prison is what is needed to stop people coming back but again history has shown this does not always work. the UK prison system is aimed around rehabilitation the punishment is the removal of liberty by entering one.

 

[Robbo]

I would hope that anything you do write is your own, that's why we assign user names and are therefore all accountable in terms of what we post.
I think your heart is in the right place but some of what you write is way off the mark and anything you then base upon it is gonna be undermined.

I'll take a couple of points, firstly, you say you know a guy who copped an 11 year spread when 19 and he's still banged up at the age of 55. There is no jail I know that extends sentences merely because someone doing time is in denial ... I have heard of sentences being extended because you haven't pleaded guilty at the trial stage and I suppose this is because the accused may be in denial of some kind ... but there is no way a guy is gonna do an extended stretch [time past his sentence time] for reasons of denial whilst inside ... the only way you can cop an extension to your sentence is if you commit another crime inside and the inside crime attracts a custodial sentence that gets added on to the previous one.

Secondly, if you genuinely believe the prison population is split down the middle in terms of those who feel guilt about what they did as against those who do not, then you truly are grossly mistaken.

Recidivism rates for the UK that were compiled by the ministry of justice from 14 prisons were over 70% .. 70 frikkin percent ... now that's hardly indicative of half the prison population being racked by guilt ... the vast majority of the guys I know who have done some bird, their only regret was getting nicked; they really didn't give two sh!ts about doing the crime.

 

[no-infernomark]

said person was a female. it appears you are not aware of how a sentence plan works or how a parole board operates and the inner works of probation, prison service orders and instructions and home office appointed rules and regulations. If a prisoner who has a tariff does not complete any of their sentence plan because they feel anger management, rapt course and any other course they deem fit because they refuse to accept accountability and when their parole board sits they get declined and their tariff is extended this is the same for all life sentenced prisoners.

The people you know are only a very small collection of the millions of people who have been inside. To use such a small group does require a certain amount of charity.

for my last module on my course I did a prison servery on the 1000 prisoners we hold at my establishment and all sanctioned by my establishments governors, if we go by stats then its actually a lot closer to my statement of it being mixed feelings of guilt than saying there all have no feelings about it at all.

 

[Smally85]

said person was a female. it appears you are not aware of how a sentence plan works or how a parole board operates and the inner works of probation, prison service orders and instructions and home office appointed rules and regulations. If a prisoner who has a tariff does not complete any of their sentence plan because they feel anger management, rapt course and any other course they deem fit because they refuse to accept accountability and when their parole board sits they get declined and their tariff is extended this is the same for all life sentenced prisoners.

The people you know are only a very small collection of the millions of people who have been inside. To use such a small group does require a certain amount of charity.

for my last module on my course I did a prison servery on the 1000 prisoners we hold at my establishment and all sanctioned by my establishments governors, if we go by stats then its actually a lot closer to my statement of it being mixed feelings of guilt than saying there all have no feelings about it at all.

So what you meant to say is that the woman who was convicted at 19, was given a life sentence with a minimum term of 11 years?

I'm always a bit sceptical about one on one surveys or even annoymous surveys that take a persons "feelings" as a statistic. Who's to say the guys/girls you surveyed were not just answering how they thought they should answer, or simply ticking the boxes on the left hand side of the page because they could? The proof is in the pudding here, just look at the actual hard evidence supplied on re-offending rates.

Your views on the punishment of rapists certainly doesn't sit right with me. As far as I'm concerned in many cases rape is a crime as serious as murder, in some cases for the victim it can be worse than death. The fact that you think a rapist should serve his time and then spend the rest of his life being overwatched at every turn is way too lenient. I will contractdict my first post in the thread here, but only because I think the sentencing is too lenient for rapsits. These guys should be punished in every thinkable way until they pass away.

 

[Robbo]

I'm gonna answer this but if you respond with a similar manner to the one above, then the discussion ends .... why?
It's because I really don't like banging my head up against a prison wall.
However, the one thing I did consider after untangling your post, I could be mistaken which of course is always possible.
Whenever this happens, I go looking for information to substantiate whatever it is you are telling me.
I've looked and found bugger all to back your position up.
To extend a sentence, you must go before a parole board hearing and you have to fulfill certain criteria if a sentence is to be extended past your original sentence date and these are:-

a) You have been given an indeterminate sentence (no fixed term)

b) Your original 'fixed term' sentence was for more than 4 years, given for some serious violence or rape
and or other sexual crimes.

c) You have been sent back to the nick for another crime or violating the conditions of any probation handed out before.

The case you quote mentions none of these and so I still fail to see how this person gets an extended sentence.
As for your comment re stats, comments like these are generally made because people have heard flip remarks concerning this area of mathematical presentation and they just parrot them out before checking up on what's what.
It's quite true to say some stats can be made to mislead but for the vast majority of their use, they provide a valuable insight into whatever subject area they purport to represent.

There's a rule of thumb that underwrites this and it's basically, the more complex the statistical representation, the more opportunity there is for misrepresentation.
The 74% quoted by the Criminal Justice people is unambiguous because it asks a simple question of the sample size and that is, have you re-offended ?
There is little to no room for ambiguity here and the only thing you can question is the sample size; I don't give two monkeys how many guys you've had around you when you were banged up, what I do take note of is the fact that survey asked 14 prison loads of inmates for their recidivism rate.
This cannot be brushed aside so easily I'm afraid because it answers the question is such a simple unambiguous way and it does so after looking at a significant number of prisoners.
These are but two problems I have with your post and there are a lot more besides where you basically state things that are just not true but if you feel as though you need to rebut my post, no problem, I won't be responding again because unless certain things are acknowledged by yourself then this ain't worth my time in tapping one more keystroke to explain where you are mistaken.

If I were you, I'd spend a little more time researching your position than just knee-jerking a response.
If you find any mention, anywhere, of extended sentences that go beyond the original sentence whilst still in jail then please come back on and provide me a link; I have looked and can't find any but that doesn't mean to say there isn't any.
I have found information that backs me up and I'll give you the link, no problem, but only after you have tried to track down any information that backs up your position.
Just a thought ...

 

[Tom Allen]

i have seen a person receive 11 years when they were 19 and said person is now pushing 55 and is still in prison due to denial. so keep the person locked up. sod em

So what you meant to say is that the woman who was convicted at 19, was given a life sentence with a minimum term of 11 years?

Pete i think this is what Mark was referring to. The woman was given a life sentence with a minimum term of 11 years. This means after 11 years she would qualify for release on licence by the parole board who decide if they are fit to be released. Now this rarely happens at the first stage, and it can take many years for a new parole hearing to happen (there is a set length of time for this). This person then remains in prison until they satisfy the parole board that they are fit to be released. Obviously this woman has not satisfied the parole board that she is safe to be released from prison, and may stay in prison for the rest of her life.

 

[Robbo]

Tom, if that's the case, then the original sentence was life and not 11 years ... the fact she was eligible for parole was not mentioned mate, he never said anything concerning an original life sentence.
It might have helped if he'd actually told us this ..

Tom, where exactly do you conclude she was given a life sentence or are you just surmising it?

 

[Tom Allen]

i see that Mark doesn't actually say that this person recieved a life sentence, but the general conversation within this thread is steered that way, so i believe Mark meant it that way.

 

[Smally85]

i see that Mark doesn't actually say that this person recieved a life sentence, but the general conversation within this thread is steered that way, so i believe Mark meant it that way.

Thats pretty much how I read it after digging into the details and assuming some things, unfortunately not everyone posts in much detail and that always causes problems with posting on forums.

 

[Robbo]

Tom, I genuinely couldn't and still can't see any inference to that person been handed down a life sentence; It's curious to me as to why having read my post that he still didn't mention it even when he must have realised I was reading his post and assuming she had been given 11 years and not life ... why not just come out and say so???

It's all well and good people saying, it can be inferred within the wider context of the post but that's just not the case here mate; which sentence, which paragraph does infer it was a life sentence.
In my head, when he says she got 11 years, I took it as read, 'she got 11 years' ....
In fact,. thats exactly what he said, he wrote, 'the person received 11 years' ... that's pretty unequivocal Tom and does not infer, imply even hint that she in fact received life.

I think No inferno's heart is in the right place but I think some of what he thinks gets ambushed at the writing stage of putting it down when typing.
Even so, I'm still trying to come to terms with a lot of the remainder of his post; it's a bit 'out there' as it were ...