My take on this is that she's not going to murder anyone else and it's a waste of money keeping her prison. Better she's out and has to run the gauntlet of public hate and derision than sit in luxury in prison like Rose West.
She should rot in jail for life. The origional sentence was pathetic, but to let her out at the earliest date possible is a travesty. She will be given a new identity, every benefit going, and I doubt she will suffer one minute of remorse.
-- Edited by Syl on Monday 30th of November 2020 12:39:50 AM
She should rot in jail for life. The origional sentence was pathetic, but to let her out at the earliest date possible is a travesty. She will be given a new identity, every benefit going, and I doubt she will suffer one minute of remorse.
-- Edited by Syl on Monday 30th of November 2020 12:39:50 AM
They don't rot in jail. They live in care and comfort, and are looked after. Rose West has a computer, a TV, books, she's well fed, etc. If they'd have let her out, someone would have had her.
... He is paralysed from the waist down from fighting in Libya against the forces of Gaddafi and therefore should be treated as a war hero given Britain's overseas action to overthrow Gaddafi in bombing Libya.
I wasn't opining that this individual was a war hero I gave an argument that in the context of Britain's overseas actions above he can be treated as a war hero. The implication was that if you agreed with Britain's actions to overthrow Gaddafi it could be hypocritical to deny that this individual was a war hero. Was this one of the mitigating factors for his release? I don't know.
That's the problem, once you get past all the rationalisation as to why it's better to release her - whatever they may be - the underlying message is that the taking of life/lives comes with a sell by date, and thus those lives are not that big a deal.
Seems not, as she was released at the first opportunity....just over a year served in jail for each child killed by her actions is pathetic whichever way you look at it.
Seems not, as she was released at the first opportunity....just over a year served in jail for each child killed by her actions is pathetic whichever way you look at it.
I agree, she should never have been released! She's as evil as Myra Hindley!
Seems not, as she was released at the first opportunity....just over a year served in jail for each child killed by her actions is pathetic whichever way you look at it.
I agree, she should never have been released! She's as evil as Myra Hindley!
She will have an army of social workers looking after her.
It makes you sick.
__________________
Simple. You, you're the threads. But me, I'm the rope.
Seems not, as she was released at the first opportunity....just over a year served in jail for each child killed by her actions is pathetic whichever way you look at it.
I agree, she should never have been released! She's as evil as Myra Hindley!
She will have an army of social workers looking after her.
It makes you sick.
Women like her should be forcibly sterilised as soon as they are released from prison.
-- Edited by John Doe on Thursday 17th of December 2020 02:30:37 AM
From the article...."Cole and Bowers launched separate appeals against their convictions for manslaughter, which were also rejected."
Given the way the rights of the criminal often seem to override the rights of the victims, I suppose people should be thankful some ridiculous do-gooder didn't convince the appeal board that said scum had suffered enough.