Thursday, September 29, 2005

Jail tariffs

Whilst welcoming the 40 year minimum tariff for Ian Huntley, has the high profile of the case increased the tariff more than it otherwise would have been?

The murderer of barmaid Janet Fleming received a minimum tariff of 'only' 17 years in comparison.

4 comments:

Stevo in HCM said...

All this tariff discussion would be academic if they just hanged the fekkers in the first place.

lascivious said...

In some respects I am glad this chap was not put in prison for "life". Public opinion should not dictate length or severity of sentence and, much that this man's crime was heinous, there are many people who have committed equivalent crimes that have not received "life" sentences. Compare this crime to those that have received "life", and it pales in comparison.

However, if all crimes of this severity were treated equally as harshly, then that would be a different matter.

Astolath said...

Makes sense...

If we're measuring the value of life in terms of years served, Huntley killed two and got 40 years. There's only six years discrepancy to account for in that case...
:b

Bag said...

This just goes to show that when the crime makes front pages the sentence mut be seen to be tough. Otherwise it's usually minimum sentencing.

As regards the hanging. I used to believe in it but no longer. There have been too many times when innocents have been jailed due to police framing them because they 'knew' it was them. Lack of evidence was because they were too careful. There is no way back from hanging.