Ian Huntley gets 40 years

BillieTheBot

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cambridgeshire/4293158.stm

So... appropriate? Too little? Too much?

I don't think it's too little. Life without parole would probably have not gone amiss...

Former Member

It seems pretty long to me, I can imagine spending 1 year in prison let alone virtually all my adult life, I suspect he will attempt the easy way out again.

Former Member

Seems reasonable - two people won't be around in forty years time because he murdered them for his own gratification.

Former Member

i guess it depends if you think these kind of people can be rehabilitated or just need to rot in a cell so the rest of us are safe......and was it just me or did the whole trial seem really fishy? i'm not convinced what exactly happened........hmm.

Former Member

I personally think he should have got longer. In my opinion if someone gets life they should NEVER be allowed to leave jail and should die in jail.

Teh_Gerbil

~kaz~ wrote:

I personally think he should have got longer. In my opinion if someone gets life they should NEVER be allowed to leave jail and should die in jail.

:yes:

Former Member

Well he did kill two people, so i guess if you want to go around murdering people, you cant be too surprised when they lock you up and throw away the key.

Former Member

I think he probably will die in jail. They don't have to parole him.

Former Member

My money is on him being dealt with inside before the 40 years are up...

Former Member

life should mean life....he killed 2 young girls, who never really had the chance to live....because of him. He should stay there, it's what he deserves. Most of the time now they get about 5-10 years knocked off their sentance....or they claim they were high on drugs and shit. There is no excuse for murder. The only time i could understand if it was for self defence, and you REALLY had to.

Former Member

Ballerina wrote:

life should mean life....he killed 2 young girls, who never really had the chance to live....because of him. He should stay there, it's what he deserves. Most of the time now they get about 5-10 years knocked off their sentance....or they claim they were high on drugs and shit. There is no excuse for murder. The only time i could understand if it was for self defence, and you REALLY had to.

Totally agreed with this. Isn't it true that many murderers only serve half their setence?

Former Member

good behaviour?


death sentence i say

Former Member

Ballerina wrote:

life should mean life....he killed 2 young girls, who never really had the chance to live....because of him. He should stay there, it's what he deserves. Most of the time now they get about 5-10 years knocked off their sentance....or they claim they were high on drugs and shit. There is no excuse for murder. The only time i could understand if it was for self defence, and you REALLY had to.

:thumb:

Totally agree.

I hate the way people use stupid excuses to try and get a shorter sentence. If someone commits murder they deserve to serve the time for it. A life sentence should mean life. The fact they have taken away the privilege of life from someone else means they should suffer. Also, I hate it when murderers get let out early because they have shown good behaviour and the like. So what, if they have killed once, then they are still capable of it again.

Former Member

Ballerina wrote:

life should mean life.....

Difficulty with that approach is what you do with him inside. With no hope of release he has little reason to behave. Better to give something to cling to...

Former Member

And you are then assuming that all murder is the same.

Is Huntley as 'evil' as someone who kills someone in a pub brawl?

Former Member

~kaz~ wrote:

I personally think he should have got longer. In my opinion if someone gets life they should NEVER be allowed to leave jail and should die in jail.

No you don't.

I've said this umpteen times before, the minimum sentence you can get for murder is life. You do NOT get "time knocked off" because of valid mitigation. You don't even get time knocked off for a timely guilty plea, which is why nobody with any sense and good legal advice ever pleads guilty to murder.

This is regardless of whether you murder two girls in cold blood, as Huntley did, or you murder your husband in a fit of panic because he's been beating you for twenty years.

Should the woman who murders her husband in panic get the same sentence as the cold-blooded murderer? Would that be justice?

Former Member

mystifymysoul wrote:

:thumb:

Totally agree.

I hate the way people use stupid excuses to try and get a shorter sentence. If someone commits murder they deserve to serve the time for it. A life sentence should mean life. The fact they have taken away the privilege of life from someone else means they should suffer. Also, I hate it when murderers get let out early because they have shown good behaviour and the like. So what, if they have killed once, then they are still capable of it again.

That's not always true though...

Life meaning life - in a way I think that's wrong in another way I think I agree with you...

Former Member

Man Of Kent wrote:

My money is on him being dealt with inside before the 40 years are up...

I agree with you there :yes:

Former Member

Aladdin wrote:

So... appropriate? Too little? Too much?

Totally Appropriate! One of the most tragic things I ever heard was when those two little girls had been murdered, I will always remember that, it was one of the first news headlines that opened my eyes to the world in which we live. It was a terrible thing that he did and I have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever.

Former Member

There are so many circumstances where you murder someone, life shouldn't always mean life for some people....however in Cuntleys' case, I think he should stay until he dies.

Teh_Gerbil

They said anyway, he was only eligible for parole in 40 years.

Not release.

Former Member

Man Of Kent wrote:

My money is on him being dealt with inside before the 40 years are up...

agreed!

Former Member

your-babe wrote:

but either way, someone has killed someone else, and has taken that person from their loved ones.

Should death by dangerous driving be a life sentence? Manslaughter? Death by negligence?

Life means life, by the way. If you are sentenced to life, then you have your liberty restricted for life. Even when you are released you are released on license, and if you break the terms of that license you will be sent straight back to prison.

Former Member

But I think life should mean that you stay in prision until you die.

Former Member

~kaz~ wrote:

But I think life should mean that you stay in prision until you die.

In all circumstances?

Former Member

Man Of Kent wrote:

My money is on him being dealt with inside before the 40 years are up...

I agree with this, that or he will kill himself. I think life should mean life in some cases, partcually violent muders, any involving children, or serial killers.

Former Member

But emotion has no place in the criminal justice system.

If someone is dangerous then they should be locked up for life. And they *are* locked up for life. But, bizarre as this sounds, not everyone who gets a life sentence is dangerous, because of political meddling and ludicrous mandatory sentences that don't work.

The only area that I think sentences are too lenient is in rape cases, such as the so-called "Lotto rapist". Rape sentences should become much stricter.

Former Member

Kermit wrote:

But emotion has no place in the criminal justice system.

If someone is dangerous then they should be locked up for life. And they *are* locked up for life. But, bizarre as this sounds, not everyone who gets a life sentence is dangerous, because of political meddling and ludicrous mandatory sentences that don't work.

The only area that I think sentences are too lenient is in rape cases, such as the so-called "Lotto rapist". Rape sentences should become much stricter.

I agree on emotion not having a place in legal affairs. Personally I think the whole idea of the death penalty is emotional, a form of revenge... In a sense it is the murder of a person to satisfy the public, who the majority of which probably haven't had the sort of harsh upbringing a lot of criminals have... Or the people have no understanding of, for example mental illness.

I don't condone murder, but I think the death penalty is barbaric. To criticise somebody for taking a life and then to take theirs is hypocrisy.

I don't know whether 40 years is long enough as I never knew the man and thus can't make a judgement, nor do I know the laws surrounding it, but one thing I do know is that people are killed everyday and that he is little worse than the people who are currently torturing people in Guantanamo for being Muslim, or companies like Nestlé who's irresponsible marketing to people in developing countries often results in the death of babies.

Former Member

Ballerina wrote:

life should mean life....he killed 2 young girls, who never really had the chance to live....because of him. He should stay there, it's what he deserves. Most of the time now they get about 5-10 years knocked off their sentance....or they claim they were high on drugs and shit. There is no excuse for murder. The only time i could understand if it was for self defence, and you REALLY had to.

:yes:

I totally agree he killed those girls and spoke to the BBc saying he was the last friendly face they saw and he had killed them he deserves life.

Former Member

We all agree (well maybe not Blagsta) that Huntley must never leave prison alive. I do not see how this truly evil man, who still claims he is innocent, can ever be rehabilitated. So I believe it is utterly pointless to lock someone up until they become brain dead zombies with no senses and incapable of living in the real world, undoubtedly Huntleys fate. If you think he deserves that then fair enough; it is just and severe enough for me. I just think an execution is the more humane punishment, and it would save a lot of time and money.

Former Member

turlough wrote:

In all circumstances?

If they have committed something as terriable as murder then yes.