Philpott Sentence

I totally agree specki4eyes.

Lets hope all the old lags give him the treatment he deserves. That man is despicable and the sentence is pathetic when you consider not just what he did, but how he behaved afterwards. And the taxpayer has paid not just for his living but for his trial and conviction - it can't be right. Justice? Nothing could atone for his behaviour.

Yes j08 I don't understand why prisoners are given a sentence which they generally only serve about half of. Seems daft to me! Why not give them a sentence which can be extended under whatever circumstances are opposite to the ones which let them out early?

I wondered that movedalot.

Life should be just that for the lot of 'em.

He's got life with a minimum tariff that he'll have to complete - her's is a fixed sentence that she'll do half of before she is considered for parole. Theoretically, she'll serve less time in prison, if she is of good behaviour.

Her 17 years isn't a minimum term. She'll probably be out in 6 or 7 with good behaviour.

Why has she got 2 years more than him?

There have been numerous occasions where a person has been freed after serving the minimum sentence who has gone on to reoffend. One would hope that when his minimum term is finished the people on the board deciding whether he is to be freed take into account the vileness of his crime and his violent past and not just whether he appears to be contrite.

I think he would have to be adjudged to be safe to be freed at the end of the minimum term - if he survives. Give the attacks on other foul murderers it may not be likely. I don't approve of violence, but I could make an exception in his case.

These minimums are ridiculous - is this guy ever going to be safe? He just needs locking up! He has already served a previous term for violence. He is a serious danger; his thoughts are derranged.

I suppose it was the maximum possible sentence - but most people will be hoping it really means he will never be out.