If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Jeffrey Archer Appeal
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
0
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Comments
I think……
They should release him and tag him with one of those curfew tags, It be cheaper for us if he were at home not allowed out and in to the public eye then if he stuck in jail. He has already been humiliated enough I think, and I doubt anyone will ever believe him again, what good does it do us the public by him staying there his fall or half his prison time?
He using a jail that could be used on another crook-shithead.
Am I right in thinking we have to pay for prisoner food, water etc etc….??
He is another crook shithead...
Yeah but its only because he was/is in the public eye that he got so such a long jail term sentence
I don't feel sorry for the bloke or anything but I don't see how it can benefit me by him staying in jail another 3-4 years
I don't think it was. I think it was because he paid someone to lie purely so that he could profit from a libel action. Then he lied under oath, on more than one occasion.
You could say the same about many criminals. So I'll trow your argument back at you. The only reason people think that is because he is Jeffrey Archer...
He should spend another year in nick, but I feel its disgusting that he gets 4 years when someone who runs a kid over cos hes driving pissed gets a few months and a £200 fine.
The courts are dependent upon people telling the truth under oath the majority of the time; otherwise they just wouldn't work. However, there are often reasons for people to lie, and the temptation to do so can be great. Thus it is necessary to have harsh penalties for perjury to discourage it; I think they're justified.
That made me laugh, since your post could be straight out of the pages of a "scummy little tabloid".
I have no real come back to that. I'm still trying to understand how the public benefit from him being in jail rather then him being at home with his family
He will/has already lost his career and politicisation. So I think he got his Punishment already.
Just my view tho!
Because people see the punishment for perjury and are thus less likely to commit it themselves, so society benefits.
I'd sooner people see harder punishment for rapist, drugies, and muggers and not commit it themselves, Sorry but "Jeffrey Archer" is small time. Or should be!
Sorry but there is No real benefits from him being in jail, Its only to keep the Press happy!
And as if anyone else is going to get that long for committing perjury!
You don't seem to understand the severity of the crime of perjury. The courts rely on the majority of people feeling compelled to tell the truth, or else it suddenly becomes a lot harder to convict all those rapists, druggies and murderers. Thus when people do lie under oath, they have to be severely punished.
But you are comparing apples and oranges there. I would agree that harsher penalties should apply in each of those cases, but not at the detriment of other crimes. Either criminals should be punished hard, or not.
In comparison to those other crimes, his apparently has no victim. But that isn't the case. The legal sytem suffers, because with a light sentence people won't worry about lying in court. The tabloids suffered bcause it cost them more than seven figures in the libel judgement and fees.
It bad enough to lie in court to get someone off a minor crime (I won't even go into lying for major cases), but what Archer did was motivated by greed alone. And he lied on more than one occasion.
Crap. The benefit is that it shows that no matter how much cash you have, if you commit a crime you will go down for it.
It also reinforces the mantra that you should not lie under oath.
I have to admit that I'm not aware of other perjury cases, except another Tory - Jonny boy Aitken - and I know he got less. But then he confessed...