Sanity on whole life sentences at last

[RandBlade]

Article on today's news: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31110814

Tried searching for the original thread but can't find it, search is broken. The English courts have a highest sanction of a "whole life sentence" for the worst and most extreme murderers. I.e. life without parole. I support this as a maximum sentence as opposed to the death penalty as you can release someone who was innocent if acquitted but can't un-execute them. Won't bring the time back but is the best we can do in an imperfect world. But if found guilty of vicious serial murders they shouldn't be ever released while still guilty. Even most murderers in the UK are given life sentences (not whole life) which really mean being released a few years later, a whole life sentence is a sentence the courts can apply for the most extreme cases. There is a total of 49 people alive today this applies to, not hundreds or thousands.

A few years ago the European Court of Justice ruled this against human rights of these mass murderers because its "inhumane" to have no chance of release. Parliament and our Courts have repeatedly since confirmed it as valid which sets us on a collision course.

Today however in the first subsequent challenge to the ECJ the murderer bringing the challenge has lost his case. The judges appear to have reversed the previous ruling because there is a provision for a review.

The murderer Arthur Hutchinson challenging the law murdered a bride's parents and their son on the night of their daughters wedding. He also repeatedly raped a wedding guest. I see no reason why he should be released from prison for that and good on the court for making a sensible ruling this time. Hopefully this ends this nonsense. This ruling by the ECJ is sensible and in line with law and other court cases, it should stand and end this issue.

Background article on this killer's appeal: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23780889

[Aimless]

ECJ: You can't do it unless you fix these problems

UK: Okay we have now fixed those problems

ECJ: Ok goos

[Ominous Gamer]

Article on today's news: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31110814

Tried searching for the original thread but can't find it, search is broken.

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourcei...+life+sentence

what kind of sicko uses the built in search?

[Hazir]

I don't see how this ruling is any different than the previous one. Life sentences were never the problem, life sentences without review were.

[LittleFuzzy]

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourcei...+life+sentence

what kind of sicko uses the built in search?

Go teach your grandmother to suck eggs.

[Flixy]

ECJ: You can't do it unless you fix these problems

UK: Okay we have now fixed those problems

ECJ: Ok goos

This.

What does puzzle me:

The judge at his original trial at Sheffield Crown Court in 1984 ruled that he should serve 18 years but the-then home secretary Leon Brittan later ruled he should face the whole-life tariff.

Is it normal that a politician instead of a judge does the sentencing?

[RandBlade]

This.

What does puzzle me:

Is it normal that a politician instead of a judge does the sentencing?

Not anymore no. It was a legacy part of our law years ago but has since been changed. The sentences now are passed by judges (and others have been confirmed by judges).

ECJ: You can't do it unless you fix these problems

UK: Okay we have now fixed those problems

ECJ: Ok goos

Except AFAIK nothing changed. We never fixed anything. The UK Court of Appeal ruling on a related case said that the original ECJ ruling was mistaken because there is a review procedure for compassionate etc grounds in place. The new ECJ ruling apparently agrees with that but there wasn't a law change in between the two cases.

[Dreadnaught]

Maybe ECJ now recognizes that it has to incrementally subvert member state justice systems.