SIGN UP

So We Can Put Theiving Lowlives Away Indefinately.......

Avatar Image
ToraToraTora | 15:36 Wed 10th Apr 2019 | News
25 Answers
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-47879038
Why isn't this system used more often?

Answers

1 to 20 of 25rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Do you think it's worth holding a petty thief for more than 10 years? To me sounds like a blooming waste of money and cell space.
IPP sentences were abolished because of the inappropriate use of them - had they been utilised correctly they would still have some purpose.
It's probably cheaper than the police keep having to arrest him and have him tried. On top of that it stops him upsetting the lives of a string of innocent victims.
The tone i get from TTT is prison should be for life almost regardless of why, and not for rehabilitation
Careful everyone, your reasoned replies will solicit the ususal 'liberal elite' cliche name-calling.
I'm a big supporter of "Three strikes and you're out". If someone has thrice committed crimes that warrant a prison sentence they have proved themselves unfit or unwilling to live in our society so should have the privilege removed from them.
Rehabilitation is a mythological concept promoted by the lefties liberal corps, or not.
.// Why isn't this system used more often?//

because we read line 2 and we see:
Wayne Bell was given a now-obsolete type of indefinite sentence for robbery in 2007.
We have had a thread on indeterminate sentences before

(3T - foo have we? an it went darn da khazi or somefing?]

indeterminate sentences ( you only get out if you are a good boy) locked men into prison for piffle
I think someone is inside for the twentieth year for stealing a wallet or perhaps a loaf of bread...
Acrapped five or so years ago
// IPP sentences were abolished because of the inappropriate use of them - had they been utilised correctly they would still have some purpose.//

that is long for - - - they didnt work

honestly we have had all this before .....
oh by the way
since all the carzies are gathered here being khazi
since all the crazies are gathered here being crazy that....
Aidan thingey who was indicted for serving in a twrrorist organisation
(long long fred on that one) has had the charges dropped ?

Times today ( 3T: what time dat den?)
Judge said there was no case to answer ( usually charges are dropped by the Crown) and it seemed that some were continued....

just saying ....
Thank you for once again repeating my reasoned reply Peter.

Crazy I am not.
Detention under an IPP was never an option for stealing a bicycle. Unless Mr Bell opted for a Crown Court trial such a matter would have been heard in the Magistrates' Court (where such a sentence was not an option). Even if it went to Crown Court at Mr Bell's request the sentencing guidelines wouldn't even come close to a custodial sentence for more than six months. More than that the Parole Board would not have declined his release for such a lengthy period.

It would be helpful if we knew what Mr Bell really was convicted of.
He assaulted the bike's owner - the report doesn't say how serious the assault was
I think there's more to this than we know.
That's not normally a parameter for discussions on here, N.
"He assaulted the bike's owner..."

Ah! Now we're getting somewhere.
He'd also got 'previous' since being expelled from school when he was 14. He'd been in lots of trouble and asked for other offences to be taken in to consideration.
Question Author
wow it's not like the BBC to leave out relevant details! So low life scum after all.
dont blame me Mama - I am trying to get down to the AB norm of three word sentences

the ref is here
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-47867871

and I was just pointing out the yarting and blaaahing when he was indicted and the complete silence when the charges are dropped

//"He assaulted the bike's owner..." Ah! Now we're getting somewhere.//
well he isnt, hur hur hur

From what I have read about the case, he has also been violent to other inmates and has started several fights. The reason he isnt getting parole when he goes before the Parole Board is because they do not feel that he is safe to be released. He committed a robbery with violence and has been violent inside. I agree with the Parole Board. He is better off inside than out on the streets where he can't control his temper and can lash out at some poor innocent victim again.

1 to 20 of 25rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

So We Can Put Theiving Lowlives Away Indefinately.......

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.