Yep It's Another Belter From The Parole Board!

[ToraToraTora]

https://news.sky.com/story/man-dubbed-monster-of-worcester-after-killing-three-children-is-freed-11739630
Who are these people? Who can possibly conclude that this savage should ever see the daylight again?

[agchristie]

The original trial judge in the Kenneth Noye case had misgivings over issues of witness safety but stated that it was absolutely right to release him now.

Each case that the Parole Board looks at I should imagine is done so under the closest of scrutiny. We are not privy to the full documentation and process that is followed.

Of course, crimes such as these are particularly abhorrent and any subsequent release inevitable stirs up emotions of revulsion but uncomfortable decisions have to be taken based on a number of factors.

[Sqad]

There are some people who see good in everyone....I don't.
Remember Myra Hindley? She had a Fan Club and had support from that guy ?Lord Longford.

Parole Boards have an invidious task....they are critisised for throwing away the keys and critisised for allowing them out after serving their sentences......they can't do right from wrong and at each assessment take a gamble. I suppoose that a patole board would be made up of a couple of Psychiatrists, the prison Governor an representative of Human rights and the local pork butcher who will invariably be a leftie.
Are the applicants for parole a threat to society.......bloody right they are.

[ludwig]

Disgraceful. The original sentence should have been life imprisonment with no possibility of parole so this could never happen, but that aside, whatever rules the parole board are operating under really do need re-examining.

[agchristie]

Assessing risk cannot be an exact science.

It's not just the Parole Board of course. How many times have we seen trial judges release someone on bail only to go on and kill?

In this case, nearly 50 years on, the PB are not assessing the shocking nature of the murders but whether he now represents a danger to the community.

[Sqad]

"the PB are not assessing the shocking nature of the murders but whether he now represents a danger to the community. "

"Assessing risk cannot be an exact science. "

Exactly so ag.........so why take the chance?

[agchristie]

Ludwig, how do you decide which crimes should not be eligible for parole?

What rules should be amended when we don't actually know what criteria is being assessed?

[ludwig]

// David McGreavy, dubbed the "Monster of Worcester" - was given a life sentence in 1973 for killing nine-month-old Samantha Ralph, two-year-old Dawn and four-year-old Paul before hanging their mutilated bodies on a fence outside. //

Aside from the fact that anyone capable doing such a thing doesn't deserve to ever be released, It's fairly obvious they can never be considered 'safe'.

[agchristie]

//Exactly so ag.........so why take the chance?//

Are you advocating full life term tariffs Sqad?

Many cases are upheld and sometimes several times over. I can't comment specifically but officials must be extremely confident that he no longer represents a threat.

[ludwig]

// Ludwig, how do you decide which crimes should not be eligible for parole? //

The truly despicable ones. It's fairly obvious what they are when they occur. They usually involve the barbaric murder of innocents with no provocation or mitigation whatsoever.

// What rules should be amended when we don't actually know what criteria is being assessed? //

That's exactly the problem isn't it. Because we're not privy to the workings of the parole board, we don't know what needs changing. We just see the results, which sometimes beggar belief.

[agchristie]

//anyone capable doing such a thing doesn't deserve to ever be released..//

Maybe not Ludwig but that is not how the Parole Board functions.

[andy-hughes]

ag as usual presents a balanced argument.

The Parole Board have to work on the basis of potential redemption, and they do not act on a whim and simply send the individual out into the world and wait to see what happens.

It is a seriously difficult moral and legal dilemma, and I am sure I am not alone in being grateful not to have to be part of the decision making team.

[agchristie]

//Because we're not privy to the workings of the parole board, we don't know what needs changing. We just see the results, which sometimes beggar belief.//

But perhaps we may not be as surprised if it became public that he was terminally ill? Who knows?

[ludwig]

//Maybe not Ludwig but that is not how the Parole Board functions. //

Which is why I said 'aside from the fact'. The first mistake was made during sentencing which should have taken that part into consideration and ensured he could never come out. The Parole board should never have entered in to it.

[agchristie]

//and I am sure I am not alone in being grateful not to have to be part of the decision making team//

Andy, you are not alone!

[ludwig]

// But perhaps we may not be as surprised if it became public that he was terminally ill? //

Well, there is always the hope that he will die very soon of a painful disease. Even so, I don't really see why he shouldn't die in prison.

[ludwig]

// I am sure I am not alone in being grateful not to have to be part of the decision making team //

Yeah, what a bunch of heroes the parole board are eh? My god they're brave.

[Gladeian]

Totally agree Ludwig. Whether or not he presents no more danger to the public there is the question of his continuing punishment by his detention for ever. Why ever should such a vile creature as this ever breathe fresh air again ?

[agchristie]

//what a bunch of heroes the parole board are eh? My god they're brave.//

Not in my book Ludwig.

[ludwig]

// Not in my book Ludwig. //

Why are you so grateful not to have to do what they do then. Is it just that it doesn't pay very well?

[agchristie]

//there is the question of his continuing punishment by his detention for ever. //

Which is why he has been given a tag with an embargo on certain locations.