A Robber Is Sentenced To Three Life Terms

[emmie]

with a minimum of 8 and a half years, does anyone understand that.
I only patched into the news for a moment, but a guy had robbed the same bank three times, he was finally caught on the scene by the flying squad with wads of cash and a gun, these weren't the only crimes committed. why would you sentence someone to three life terms, and then say minimum of 8 and half years.

[emmie]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/questions-for-prison-system-after-notorious-armed-robber-sean-bradish-is-sent-back-to-prison-following-a-string-of-crimes-committed-while-he-was-on-day-release-9145223.html

[emmie]

on day release as well, what a vile bloke.

[jomifl]

They obviously don't pay these criminals enough to live in prison..

[emmie]

it would seem part of the piece was that he robbed the same bank and the same teller was behind the counter, i think she has either quit or is on sick leave.

[Gromit]

I thought the flying squad disappeared years ago?

[emmie]

the term was used by the newsreader.

[emmie]

wiki

The Flying Squad is a branch of the Specialist Crime & Operations section, within London's Metropolitan Police Service. The Squad's purpose is to investigate commercial armed robberies, along with the prevention and investigation of other serious armed crime. Possibly one of the best known operations of the squad was their foiling of the Millennium Dome raid.

[emmie]

perhaps someone can answer the question.

[Gromit]

Emmie,
Yes, I have just read that and was going to fess up as being wrong. I am surprised, I thought they had been discredited long ago (their commander was sentenced to 8 years).

The ambiguity of the sentence is not the story here. The story was that he was committing a string of robberies while still in prison.

[emmie]

he was on day release and the story on the news was about the teller,
i didn't catch all of it, but that was what the newsreader said.

[emmie]

and three life terms, what on earth is that all about.

[Gromit]

The sentences are concurrent not accumulative. I believe there is an plan to adopt the American accuulative sentences. As it is, one violent robbery or half a dozen results in the same time in prison. That must be wrong.

[emmie]

in the header i was quoting what the newsreader said, it just doesn't make sense.

[FredPuli43]

Gromit, the sentence total is to reflect the seriousness of the crimes as a whole. Someone convicted on several indictments, or on several counts on the same indictment, will be sentenced to a greater sentence than one convicted on one.

How the total is arrived at may be making all consecutive, all concurrent, or a combination of both.

[FredPuli43]

In the instant case, what would you do ? The maximum for robbery is life. you can't have consecutive life sentences, obviously. The offences are equally serious; each merits life,if only because of this defendant's appalling record for such offences. He would not have been given a minimum number of years; that's for murder.

[ludwig]

// As it is, one violent robbery or half a dozen results in the same time in prison. That must be wrong. //

Agreed. I've never really understood the principle of concurrent sentencing for serious crime.

[FredPuli43]

But half a dozen violent robberies don't result in the same sentence as one violent robbery! That is what I explained above.

[Peter Pedant]

Fred - I dont think they are asking why he wasnt sentenced to Probation and a slap on the hands

but why the judge said Prison for life oops or 8 1/2 y
the two bits being kinda inconsistent

It might have been that the judge wanted him to serve 9 y min
and not be eligible for probation after a third.....

But who - who Fred knows what is going on in a judges head at any time ?

[Zacs-Master]

It is early, but I can't see anywhere in the article where it says 8.5 years minimum.

[pixie373]

Fred, i thought a life sentence was 25 years? So you could have three accumatively.