Little Arthur

Me too.
I'd work extra to contribute if it kept them away from the rest of society for good.

Seriously, I would contribute to the building of another prison to keep them all in for the rest of their rotten lives.

Miss Adventure. Filming the results of their abuse.
What in the actual f"@$! is wrong with these abominations of humanity?!!!!

My thoughts exactly. It’s beyond chilling to think these monsters appear to be increasing or that we’re just hearing more about them. These poor children.

Oh well, perhaps they'll have to serve a whole 20 odd year sentence for this.
It's cruel to suggest they should be locked up for life, apparently.

I’ve just listened to the news report and I can’t stop crying

Filming the results of their abuse.
What in the actual f"@$! is wrong with these abominations of humanity?!!!!

Appalling. How many more times will we be told that lessons will be learned?

Another pair just found guilty of catastrophic injuries to a 16 month old baby girl. Two women. The bouncer girlfriend punching a baby. More filming, more making fun of the suffering.

I did read about this poor child at the beginning of the trial but then it all went quiet. Being filmed struggling to climb up some steps with a fractured leg! Being made to face the wall as punishment. 16 months old! More referrals by worried relatives.

I am lost for words really. Just unbearably tragic.

Yes, I know that.
My thoughts were on those cases that merit a full life tariff, with no release at all.
Any cases like these are suitable, I'd say, in the absence of the death penalty.

MissAdventure

I'm not sure anything could compete with the same cruelty meted out to Arthur.
The moors murderers, probably, and they got a whole life tariff.

I'm afraid there are many cases equally as bad as Arthur. The press seems to latch onto one in particular and we hear all the details, but any baby/child who is beaten, tortured or starved to death has suffered just as much. And there have been many of them.

I explained many posts back why, given the many different circumstances in which murder and manslaughter are committed, I don’t believe the law needs to be changed. A sentence felt to be inappropriate can be appealed and that is going to happen in this case.

Miss Adventure feel free to acquaint yourself with Victoria Climbie’s ordeals. I can assure you it’s almost beyond belief. Poor child was brought here in order to commit benefit fraud.

Maddyone. I don’t like the tone of your comment and I don’t need you to tell me the intricacies of the sentencing guidelines. I’m very familiar with them and explained them much further up thread. I also wish you’d stop referring to mob rule and baying for blood. I don’t need to campaign for changes to the law, there’s no need. Anyone can apply to have a sentence extended if they feel it’s unduly lenient and that has nothing to do with baying for blood.

Yes, quite true,*Calistemon*, something which I've thought about on a few occasions, which I think would depend on how the conscience functions should that have been the case, i.e wrongful conviction.

I remember one of the relatives of the case being asked how they'd think/ feel if the person was found innocent and the answer was that " they could live with that ". So some can literally shut-off.

I'm not sure anything could compete with the same cruelty meted out to Arthur.
The moors murderers, probably, and they got a whole life tariff.

Hear hear, maddyone.

Isn't it better that they spend many miserable years in prison where other inmates will surely give them a hard time. It will be a long punishment. Not even some of the worst criminals tolerate a child killer.

I’m not in any way trying to say that the crime committed was anything but terrible and I don’t need you tickingbird to point that out. If you don’t like the sentences set out in law for murder then perhaps you should start a campaign for the laws to be changed.

Personally I dislike the baying for blood on this thread. Capital punishment was abolished in the sixties, I think it might have been 1964 but I’m not certain of that. However it is my deeply held belief that the state never has the right to take life. If it does, it acts with the same cruelty and lack of justification that the murderer acted. And sometimes it gets it wrong and executes the wrong person. However this thread is not about capital punishment, it is about a little boy who was cruelly murdered by his step mother and father. It was a heinous crime, but we need to leave justice and punishment to the law makers and those who execute the law.

And right, for just as many.
Tustin, at least, would certainly not come under the "miscarriage of justice" heading.

I remember EllanVannin.
If we had had the death sentence when that person was found guilty, he/she wouldn't be here now.

I'm not saying there was a miscarriage of justice in that case but cases have been reviewed and people subsequently been found innocent.

I cannot see any reasonable doubt whatsoever in poor little Arthur's case but re-introducing the death penalty is just not right for all kinds of reasons.

I didn't say it like that Alegrias1, you did, even if I do think that some should die for their crimes.

As it so happens I'm a supporter of someone who's currently serving an " until you die " sentence, which I firmly believe is a MOJ. A submission went to the CCRC in March of this year so we're hoping for a successful appeal after being incarcerated for over 36 years----on shonky evidence.
Eric Allison of the Guardian supports this.

That would just be a bonus.

They’re funding plenty of other vile monsters. Charles Bronson is being kept in and he hasn’t killed anyone. More that he, like the Krays, would become a celebrity, if released. There are many anomalies in the justice system. Victoria Climbie’s killers are another pair that shouldn’t see the light of day.

Are you seriously suggesting that we kill people to save money?

Why should the tax-payer fund these monsters ?