butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Saying the right thing is not pedantry. The first of your other suggested alternative ones for example is vastly different from the following two.
Last edited:
Harry Roberts has been freed
- Thread starter Citizen66
- Start date
andysays
Love and solidarity
That the Home Secretary can't just overule the decisions of the trial judge and the parole board, just because you and your hangin', floggin' and lock-em-up-and-throw-away-the-key kind would like that. And however imperfect our judicial system is, I'm glad it has at least the nominal separation of those powers.
(I know you haven't specifically referred to flogging in this thread, but I can't be arsed to check if you have previously, and anyway, it's too good a line not to use
)
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Technically, no. Not since 2003. It used to be, of course, that all lifers were only released on the Home Sec's nod. As VP said earlier, pressure can certainly be brought from the Home Office behind the scenes, but the parole board doesn't have to abide by the Home Sec's wishes on this.
tbh I'm not sure how much May will care about this. Electorally it's pretty small potatoes. But now that the thing has been covered in the papers, she may feel the need to appear to be outraged.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
This may or may not be correct but I can't be arsed to look it up since I don't see the relevance of it. Why are you labouring this?
RubyBlue
faded and jaded
Very true but I think the gist of what I was saying would have been understood - perhaps - indeed - I mistakenly used the wrong word but it was stupid for some to use that to distract from the main and obvious point. Enjoy your day posting - I'm going out for lunch
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
What are you having?
andysays
Love and solidarity
Because you are the one asserting that
Given that the PB have OKed his release, I'm assuming that means you are aware of some legal procedure by which the PB can be overruled. That's why I asked
to which you replied
Such a procedure may exist, though I'm unaware of it, but for you to be as sure as you were originally claiming I'd expect you to know WTF you're talking about, not just be pulling assertions out of your arse.
Anyway, I'm off out for the afternoon, so you can go away and find the legal facts to back up your assertion while I'm gone, or not...
Ax^
Silly Rabbit
Sheffield should sign him
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Um. He could have been kept detained legally by the parole board turning down his request for parole. Any lifer can be kept detained until death legally in this way. And 'life' means that release is only ever on licence. I think you're swinging at windmills here.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
You miss the point quite spectacularly.
Roberts could be detained lawfully by the parole board refusing to release him. You brought up the Home Secretary in this context, not me.
andysays
Love and solidarity
But however much it pains you to recognise it, the PB haven't refused to release him, they have judged that he's no longer a threat to the public, so your dearest wish that he rots in jail until he dies has been dashed.
Saying that the PB could have refused to release him makes as much sense at this stage as saying that the original trial judge could have given him a difference sentence, or that the jury could have found him not guilty.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Ah Urban.
Nowhere else can people so furiously agree with each other.
Nowhere else can people so furiously agree with each other.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
There's no "legal authority" or legislation beyond the standard sentencing appeal - i.e. the sec of state can call for a review of a sentence. Jack Straw (IIRC) tried to legislate to be able to retrospectively amend criminal sentences, but was knocked back - no-one with a brain in their head wanted to give any HS, of whichever political persuasion, the ability to retrospectively change shit. The Home Secretary can "put a view" to a Parole Board, but it's up to the PB whether they listen or not.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Really? So that's what's happened!!!!
Lol! I'm sure there's some logic in there somewhere.
Enjoy your afternoon out, Andy.
Betsy
Well-Known Member
Police Killer Harry Roberts Released From Prison.
Police killer Harry Roberts has been released from prison after spending 48 years behind bars.
The 78-year-old, who was jailed for life for his involvement in the shooting dead of three unarmed officers in 1966, was released from Littlehey prison in Cambridgeshire on Monday night.
Detective Sergeant Christopher Head, 30, Detective Constable David Wombwell, 25, and PC Geoffrey Fox, 41, were shot dead without warning while questioning three suspects in a van on August 12, that year.
Roberts pulled the trigger to kill two of the officers. An accomplice shot the third policeman but Roberts was sentenced to three life sentences.
He pleaded guilty to murdering Det Sgt Head and Det Con Wombwell but was found guilty by a jury of the murder of PC Fox.
Sky News reported last month that Roberts was due to be released after satisfying his parole board that he was ready to be freed.
Roberts' minimum tariff expired 18 years ago.
A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice said: "We do not comment on individuals.
"Offenders on life sentences are subject to strict controls for as long as their risk requires them. If they fail to comply with these conditions they can be immediately returned to prison.
"Offenders managed through multi-agency public protection arrangements (Mappa) are monitored and supervised by probation, police and other agencies."
The revelation he was to be released sparked anger from police groups and politicians.
http://news.sky.com/story/1371559/police-killer-harry-roberts-released-from-prison
Police killer Harry Roberts has been released from prison after spending 48 years behind bars.
The 78-year-old, who was jailed for life for his involvement in the shooting dead of three unarmed officers in 1966, was released from Littlehey prison in Cambridgeshire on Monday night.
Detective Sergeant Christopher Head, 30, Detective Constable David Wombwell, 25, and PC Geoffrey Fox, 41, were shot dead without warning while questioning three suspects in a van on August 12, that year.
Roberts pulled the trigger to kill two of the officers. An accomplice shot the third policeman but Roberts was sentenced to three life sentences.
He pleaded guilty to murdering Det Sgt Head and Det Con Wombwell but was found guilty by a jury of the murder of PC Fox.
Sky News reported last month that Roberts was due to be released after satisfying his parole board that he was ready to be freed.
Roberts' minimum tariff expired 18 years ago.
A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice said: "We do not comment on individuals.
"Offenders on life sentences are subject to strict controls for as long as their risk requires them. If they fail to comply with these conditions they can be immediately returned to prison.
"Offenders managed through multi-agency public protection arrangements (Mappa) are monitored and supervised by probation, police and other agencies."
The revelation he was to be released sparked anger from police groups and politicians.
http://news.sky.com/story/1371559/police-killer-harry-roberts-released-from-prison
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
I'm aware that this is true in practice, but why? An individual is not allowed to systematically harass people, so why a newspaper?
"Public interest."
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
If I were to bottle Iain Duncan Smith that would be demonstrably in the public interest but I still don't reckon I'd get away with it.
el-ahrairah
forward communism, forward gerbils!
you wouldn't, but surely it would be worth it.
hot air baboon
Well-Known Member
Similar threads
