Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by PinkBabe1966:
My opinion is that the bastards didn't get a long enough sentence at the beginning, and it would be ironic if they appealed and the Appeal Court judges ruled their sentences should be lengthened, although I'm not 100% sure they can do this.


I think, and sincerely hope, that they can. I think I've seen sentences being being increased before.
Joyron
quote:
Originally posted by clumsycat:
quote:
Originally posted by fookat:
they have no shame! I would think the fact they are appealing shows they have no remorse and therefore they should increase their sentences...


lock em in a room for the rest of their lives with a non stop crying baby noise in the background...


Now that sounds like a plan!!!
Joyron
Again, bear in mind that they were not convicted of murder but causing or allowing the death. This was because it could not be proved beyond reasonable doubt which of the co-accused actually did it. The maximum sentence is 14 years. I'd have liked them all to get longer sentences than the maximum too, but there you go.
FM
quote:
Originally posted by PinkBabe1966:
My opinion is that the bastards didn't get a long enough sentence at the beginning, and it would be ironic if they appealed and the Appeal Court judges ruled their sentences should be lengthened, although I'm not 100% sure they can do this.


Yes it can happen,hopefully it will this time.
kattymieoww
No matter what sentences they get,it will not stop dreadful crimes like this happening again and again.
The backgrounds of all the accused were depraved and lacked boundaries.Violence,drugs and molestation were part of their everyday lives.And,in Connelly's case,her mother before her.It begs belief that in a so-called civilised society we can have this parallel world of anomie and anarchy where neglect is a way of life.

I have no answers and I am certainly not condoning any of the guilty parties involved.Just saying it's far more complicated than merely locking them up.
Its doubtful they will be rehabilitated or be able to make new starts when they leave prison.More than likely they will repeat the behaviours as its all they've ever known.And they are far from alone.Frowner
M
quote:
Originally posted by Daniel J*:
quote:
Originally posted by Mazzystar:
It begs belief that in a so-called civilised society we can have this parallel world of anomie and anarchy where neglect is a way of life.

Ooo, good use of 'anomie' there! Thumbs Up


Isnt it?? Thumbs Up

But thats exactly what it is.A purpose less existence.No community to support you.It makes me sad that anyone should have to live in this parallel anti-society.
M
quote:
Originally posted by Liverpoollass:
quote:
Originally posted by Demantoid:
quote:
Originally posted by Liverpoollass:
Does it not compute with their lawyers either? Mad

They have a legal right, which has to be upheld. It doesn't only exist for scum like them, but for people who might genuinely have been dealt with too harshly.


Yes, I know that.


They most definitely can have their sentences increased. if they lose their appeal they can also be forced to start their sentences from scratch. Their legal team must believe they have a good case otherwise i'm sure they wouldn't recommend appealling, especially so soon after the original trial while it's so high profile. Either that or someone is talking rhoooooobarb lol
fifilapew
They should not be allowed out for a long long time if ever imo so I hope that their sentences are increased.

I read a really interesting piece in the Observer last Sunday about the generations of abuse and neglect that culminated in what happened to that poor little mite.
It is sympathetic in parts to the Social Services and does list (albeit briefly) the injuries to the baby but it is well worth reading for the perspective it brings

Observer article
FM
quote:
Originally posted by Veggieburger:
They should not be allowed out for a long long time if ever imo so I hope that their sentences are increased.

I read a really interesting piece in the Observer last Sunday about the generations of abuse and neglect that culminated in what happened to that poor little mite.
It is sympathetic in parts to the Social Services and does list (albeit briefly) the injuries to the baby but it is well worth reading for the perspective it brings

Observer article


Aye.I read that too Veggie.So sad that such dire circumstances just get passed down from generation to generation,creating an ever spiralling pit of depravity.Beatings and torture and cruelty is all these people knew Disappointed
M
quote:
Originally posted by Mazzystar:
No matter what sentences they get,it will not stop dreadful crimes like this happening again and again.
The backgrounds of all the accused were depraved and lacked boundaries.Violence,drugs and molestation were part of their everyday lives.And,in Connelly's case,her mother before her.It begs belief that in a so-called civilised society we can have this parallel world of anomie and anarchy where neglect is a way of life.

I have no answers and I am certainly not condoning any of the guilty parties involved.Just saying it's far more complicated than merely locking them up.
Its doubtful they will be rehabilitated or be able to make new starts when they leave prison.More than likely they will repeat the behaviours as its all they've ever known.And they are far from alone.Frowner


Clapping
SH
I don't understand the thinking behind some of these sentences. Surely part of the reason for locking these people up is that they are a danger to innocent people? Surely they're going to be just as dangerous in 12 or 14 years? Unless they get some form of intensive treatment while they are in prison, and I somehow doubt that this will happen.
fabienne
quote:
Originally posted by Karma_:
All damn 3 of them.

Does something not compute with these bastards? I think their sentences were too lenient as it is.

So even more tax money will now be wasted entertaining these arseholes.

Mad


why wouldn't they appeal - when some man who murdered 270 ppl gets out just because he is ill it goes without saying that other sickos will also try their luck!!
P
quote:
Originally posted by Pretty_P:
why wouldn't they appeal - when some man who murdered 270 ppl gets out just because he is ill it goes without saying that other sickos will also try their luck!!

Just because he's ill? Put it this way, he won't be needing to buy a winter overcoat now he's released. He's about to die! Laugh
FM
quote:
Originally posted by fabienne:
I don't understand the thinking behind some of these sentences. Surely part of the reason for locking these people up is that they are a danger to innocent people? Surely they're going to be just as dangerous in 12 or 14 years? Unless they get some form of intensive treatment while they are in prison, and I somehow doubt that this will happen.

They've been given indeterminate sentences for exactly that reason. I dunno whether that means they can be held beyond the normal maximum sentence for the offence though.
FM
quote:
Originally posted by Karma_:
All damn 3 of them.

Does something not compute with these bastards? I think their sentences were too lenient as it is.

So even more tax money will now be wasted entertaining these arseholes.

Mad


Don't worry theyve got no chance of getting out at first appeal. Thats why they were given 'indeterminate sentances'. remember they could'nt do them for murder or even manslaughter as it was'nt clear who had caused the fatal injury. This was the best sentence possible under present law. Personally I think there should be some seperate law covering groups of people who cause death by neglect or cruelty.
kimota
quote:
Originally posted by Daniel J*:
quote:
Originally posted by JacksonB:
they didn't get the maximum sentence in the first place, why not? i mean what the hell more do you have to do to warrant the max?

there wasn't much left they could do, was there?

You can read the judge's remarks Here in pdf form.


its a bit hard to read that and i didnt finish it
but was the sentencing less bacause they dont kno who actually killed peter because they couldnt prove who broke his back?
jamieboy
quote:
Originally posted by FGG Aka Crocodile Rock:
Perhaps the judge might agree that sentencing was wrong...and then up it!

I'm sure its been known before.



YES!! thats going through myn head - better still make them pay for their lawyar too - how they do it is up to them - sweep floors,mop toilets etc - I am not being hard am I Laugh Laugh better still give someone a hacksaw blade with instructions.

to hurt a defenceless kiddie is beyond belief and the solicitor taking the case on should be struck off.
porto

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×