Petition to stop the EARLY RELEASE for PC Harpers killers

Yes, but as Harper’s Law isn’t retrospective, there must be other people who are already in prison, who are eligible for early release because they were sentenced before it was introduced?

Casdon

You’re entitled to your opinion Tuliptree, as we all are, but it is just an opinion, what I want to know is what changing the law would actually mean in practice, and where a line would, or should be drawn. Everybody who has been murdered no doubt has people close to them, or members of the public, who want them to be treated as an exception, but the law needs to be consistent.

Yes I understand my support for Harper’s Law is an opinion and not a fact. However an opinion I guess is shared by many. I don’t understand the other point you’re making. When Harper’s Law came in, it applied to all cases from the specified day. The line was the day in the legislation That’s the consistency - all murders of emergency workers whilst on duty from whatever the date was.

You’re entitled to your opinion Tuliptree, as we all are, but it is just an opinion, what I want to know is what changing the law would actually mean in practice, and where a line would, or should be drawn. Everybody who has been murdered no doubt has people close to them, or members of the public, who want them to be treated as an exception, but the law needs to be consistent.

Thanks for the petition link overthemoongran and V3ra - now signed and passed on.

I’m in favour of Harper’s. Law . When emergency workers are on duty, often risking their own lives and safety to help us and keep us safe, I think it’s quite right that the law now treats their killers more harshly I don’t think it’s relevant about other murderers.

I’m in two minds about this, because I don’t understand what the implications are for other murderers and their accomplices who are still in prison. How many others are there who have killed or injured members of the emergency services, how many have killed others in the public eye, how many have killed people they didn’t know, and people they did know? I don’t think an exception should be made without some consistency being part of the consideration, because it will open more floodgates if it isn’t equally applied.

Tuliptree

It is life now for killers of emergency workers - this law was introduced after PC Harpers murder. But it can’t be applied retrospectively . As awful as this case is, we should all want to live in a society where the rule of law applies to all regardless of how terrible their behaviour is.

The law is an ass

It is Miss A

Then there is the issue of some people having started life with a large "head start", in terms of stability, education, parents, food, even heat, these days.

They all play a role, whether people want to consider that or not.
It's fact.

The problem is with many things that there has to be an initial investment and then later on it might pay off . But our political system encourages short- termism doesn’t it? It’s all very depressing but what I’m sure doesn’t help are populist solutions to heart breaking cases .

Extra tax, as a way?

MissAdventure

Oh, in that case, we'll have to put but not necessarily shut up, then.

Nothing the public can do other than make their feelings known.

Perhaps there will, ultimately, be more people seeking justice for themselves, or their family members.

What is really needed but won’t happen is for the public to really care about the CJS and being willing to fund a much better one for all our sakes but particularly in the name of justice

Oh, in that case, we'll have to put but not necessarily shut up, then.

Nothing the public can do other than make their feelings known.

Perhaps there will, ultimately, be more people seeking justice for themselves, or their family members.

MissAdventure

I'm convinced there must be people who pose no risk to others, who could be released and monitored.
Or perhaps people who needn't be given custodial sentences.

Hopefully, our new P.M will be looking into reviewing the whole system as a matter of urgency.
Do you think he will?

But I thought he had reviewed it - that’s why releases are delayed until October. He and the Justice Secretary are saying it’s the best they can do in the circumstances to safeguard the whole CJS. I really honestly believe that if there were another solution, they’d implement if. Neither of them are bad or stupid men.

I'm convinced there must be people who pose no risk to others, who could be released and monitored.
Or perhaps people who needn't be given custodial sentences.

Hopefully, our new P.M will be looking into reviewing the whole system as a matter of urgency.
Do you think he will?

MissAdventure

I don't believe any prisoners in the same category should be released, but I know very little about the law, the volume of prisoners vs. places.

The whole system needs a major overhaul, I'd think, and I seem to remember that being the case for many years.

But if we don’t want that category releasing, there has to be another group instead released. There really is a crisis with lack of prison places and prisons can’t obviously materialise overnight.

I don't believe any prisoners in the same category should be released, but I know very little about the law, the volume of prisoners vs. places.

The whole system needs a major overhaul, I'd think, and I seem to remember that being the case for many years.

MissAdventure

We have to hang on to the rule of law, but that doesn't mean we can't make our feelings about the law known.
530,000 signatures suggest that people think the law's indeed an ass.

What was wrong was that the killing of emergency workers didn’t attract a mandatory life sentence before. Now it does and I can’t imagine hardly anyone disagreeing with that. As for stopping the early release of prisoners in the same category as these two, who would we release instead? That’s the issue isn’t it? If there were a simple solution, I’m sure AB would have implemented it. I actually think it’s to his credit that he’s not taking the superficially easy route out of this. The real time for petitions would have been between 2010-2024 when creating net prison places practically ceased. But that was not making headlines sadly.

Tuliptree

Well all the petitions in the world won’t make Harper’s Law retrospective and nor should they. As for joint enterprise, I’m sure you know that it still exists but is applied differently . In the face of dreadful crimes, a civilised society has to hang on even more tightly to due process and the rule of law otherwise we’re no better than Russia, China and many other lawless countries where political/ military leaders hold sway over the courts.

My heart wants to throw away the key for these two little ****.
My head agrees with Tuliptree.
There doesn't seem to be a legal way of making an exception in their case.

MissAdventure

We have to hang on to the rule of law, but that doesn't mean we can't make our feelings about the law known.
530,000 signatures suggest that people think the law's indeed an ass.

Absolutely indeed.

We have to hang on to the rule of law, but that doesn't mean we can't make our feelings about the law known.
530,000 signatures suggest that people think the law's indeed an ass.

I think the question should be whether those who committed this heinous crime are still a danger to society, and if they have no remorse and will presumably be returning to the same social circles that may have influenced their behaviour, then YES they are still a danger to society, so keep them under lock and key.

Well all the petitions in the world won’t make Harper’s Law retrospective and nor should they. As for joint enterprise, I’m sure you know that it still exists but is applied differently . In the face of dreadful crimes, a civilised society has to hang on even more tightly to due process and the rule of law otherwise we’re no better than Russia, China and many other lawless countries where political/ military leaders hold sway over the courts.

www.change.org/p/petition-to-stop-the-early-release-from-jail-of-pc-andrew-harper-s-killers?cs_tk=A-7I5W5jdA1rMqtde2oAAHicq64FAAF1APkzZmQ4ZjQwODNjY2RhYjc1MTlhOWZjYWM5NWVkZTI4YmViMTJmYjEyYzVlOWRkZmQyMmIyYmMzOWRlZjRlNTE5&utm_campaign=8d6e995b5bd5416c92f9af8fd6c361df&utm_content=20251125_supporter_milestone_50000&utm_medium=email&utm_source=633943_supporter_milestone_50000&utm_term=itbl

Over 530,000 signatures now.

My son and daughter-in-law are both police officers, he sent us the link to sign.

Tuliptree

I think the public discourse on this has got a bit muddled - my understanding is that the ‘normal’ situation would be to be considered for parole halfway through their sentences. My guess is they wouldn’t have been granted it. After two thirds served they would have got ‘normal’ early release. Again my understanding is that the thinking behind this is to give an incentive for good behaviour and make prisons easier to manage. In the current ‘abnormal’ circumstances of course the plan is to give them ( and others in their category) another type of early release with supposedly enhanced post release supervision after half the time served. I think I’ve understood it correctly but the term early release seems to get used interchangeably and so muddies the waters. My overall thinking on this is that due process has to followed even if we don’t like what that means. I think AB is in a tough position as he is privy to knowledge about the knock on effects of not freeing up some prison places.

Yes I understand all that, we who think they should have got life sentences are not muddled.
What happened to joint enterprise?
Should have received the same sentence as the driver imo