What Kind Of Message - Absolutely Cannot Believe It!

[bednobs]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-24446126

[anotheoldgit]

andy-hughes

/// That sounds slightly paranoid on your part AOG. ///

Not paranoid in the least just read some of the anti-Daily Mail posts that I receive.

/// I am sure the Mail will be all over this like a rash - it ticks all their readership buttons. ///

There you are, you have just proved me right.

Incidentally the Daily Mail are already over it, didn't you read the excerpts that I posted?

[anneasquith]

ye gods, she could still be fertile :(

[emmie]

likely, sadly there is nothing one can do about that, except perhaps remove any child she might have on the grounds of her incapacity of feeling, sense and overall disregard for her child's suffering.

[ludwig]

She must have said she was sorry. Parole boards love that.

[aelmpvw]

she's going to be closely monitored, and we know from the past how well that worked ....

[pixie373]

I can only assume there's more to this and that she's at least on very strong medication, or something. It is disgusting. And if she has another baby, it is only "likely" they'll take it away. Unbelievable.

[bazwillrun]

But strictly speaking she hasnt done her time...

no finite time was given, just that a minimum of 5 years be served.

So as far as i can see shes getting away with the absolute minimum.

another one who has pulled the wool over the eyes of one and all.

No doubt shes really sorry blah blah blah, and has said whatever they want her to say.

The punishement could have fitted the crime if these pathetic do-gooders werent involved and a judge with some nuts actually had handed down a proper sentence instead of what amounts to just 5 years for allowing the murder of a child.

i dont suppose Joe Public thought she'd serve such a paltry sentence after hearing "a minimum of five years" , most people would have expected a fair deal more to really punish her rather than this which what amounts to no more than a slap on the hand.

I wonder if theres any restrictions on her going near kids ?

[pixie373]

Sorry- not "likely" but "almost certainly". Is that enough?

[bazwillrun]

" if she has another baby, it is only "likely" they'll take it away"

and if they did try to take it away then I imagine her first port of call will be the ECHR

[Prudie]

Reading pixie's post has made me wonder, do we think her mindset at the time could have been altered by medication? Or was she just warped?

[pixie373]

If her mindset wasn't warped by medication at the time, it needs to be now. And vice versa. That is not normal behaviour.

[joko]

it makes you wonder if there is some ulterior motive here - i mean why do they do this?
they MUST know that this will cause extreme upset and anger all over the country.

they must know that torturing and killing a child deserves a longer punishment than 3 years

these are supposedly professionals, they must have seen all manner of criminals etc

so how can they think that she has been suitably punished?

is it some political game? do they know the judge wont actually do it? do they just want controversy? are they even just trying to wind her up?

prison is not just about rehabilitation, or keeping someone away from the public because they may be a danger - its meant to be a punishment - its meant to cause some level of suffering and hardship to the criminal in order to somewhat 'reset the balance'

so why set her free just because she is not a danger to the public? she never was, not really.

it makes no sense ... and as judge judy always says, if it makes no sense its probably not true ...

[FredPuli43]

The judge set a minimum of 5 years. He or she could have set a longer period. Therefore it was contemplated that she might serve only 5 years. Shall we blame the judge?

[youngmafbog]

Right-on, her 'ooman rights must come first.

If they didnt let her out the ECHR would soon do it (after we had spent a fortune trying to stop it).

Let's face it soft justice prescribed by the minority chattering classes is here and there is nothing the majority can do about it.

[FredPuli43]

On what basis, ymf, do you think the ECHR would intervene? Can you cite a single example of anyone being released ,early or at all, on the decision of the ECHR ? It would not and could not. This woman's crime is recognised by all states, and so is jail.

The judge set the minimum term. Why then is anyone surprised that this woman is to be released having served it? Is the judge one of the " minority chattering classes ", do you think ?

[andy-hughes]

joko - I am sure the powers-that-be are well aware of the groundswell of public opinion in this case but -

laws are not carried out with an input of moral outrage or desire for revenge, and nor should they be.

Our laws are created and implemented in an atmosphere of fact and dispassionate decision-making, and that has to apply in all cases in order for the system to work.

In this case, this woman has served her proscribed sentence - a little more allowing for time spent on remand, and the checks and balances of the case and the law have been applied.

Gnashing teeth and holding up hands solves nothing at all.

The decision is made by people who have far more access to relevent informantion than the geneal public, or indeed the media, so we must trust them to have made a balanced decision in this instance.

[vulcan42]

My issue with this is not so much her being released, it's the original "minimum five year prison sentence". Is a small boys life only worth 5 years incarceration?

[Zeuhl]

/If they didnt let her out the ECHR would soon do it/

That's rubbish ymb - when has that ever happened?

/and if they did try to take it away then I imagine her first port of call will be the ECHR /

Also rubbish from Bazzy

New born babies are frequently removed from 'unfit mothers' by Social Services without recourse to the (LOL) ECHR

Clearly Bazzy, the 'Real World' you imagine you inhabit isn't all that 'real' - or you'd know that

[Zeuhl]

/Is a small boys life only worth 5 years incarceration? /

sentencing is hardly a direct correlation or equivalence vulcan

there are numerous factors the Court takes into account

[emmie]

and don't blame whatever medication please, lot's on here take meds for all sorts of reasons, mental and physical, and they as far as one knows have not harmed or killed their child. This is too often the case mentally unbalanced, rubbish,