Brianna Ghey

Sorry but my sympathy is firmly with the victims. I really don’t care what happens to the perpetrators. Assuming, of course, that they haven’t been wrongly charged as in that terrible post office scandal.

Parsley3 👍🏻

Of course they will be allowed internet and phones
They won't. The actual punishment is loss of freedom and anyone who thinks that prison is like a holiday camp is wrong. Education is rightly available to inmates and rehabilitation is the correct aim. There is much that is wrong with our prison service,eg the availability of smuggled drugs and phones, but the bottom line is that a prisoner is under lock and key for the duration of their sentence. I doubt that anyone would think that their imprisoned family member was living it up with pizza for lunch and soft drinks all round.

Another thing is that if prison were absolutely basic - no tv, education, hobbies allowed etc, then any penalties for breaking the rules would be difficult to enforce. Basically (assuming we rule out physical punishment) it would mean lengthening sentences, which costs money and may not be a deterrent to those who have nothing outside anyway.

Allowing 'perks' means that they can be withdrawn if a prisoner doesn't comply with the rules, and give the staff some leverage.

If we are keeping people in prison for any reason, we need to do all we can to ensure they do not re offend when released. Education is one way of enablinbg this.

If we keep people inprison for long periods we need to ensure that they are also kept in good physical and mental health. Education, especially for the younger ones is part of this mix.

Anyone who thinks prison is a cushy number because conditions within the prison are humane and even pleasant just hasn't thought the matter through.

Someone in porison is incarcerated in a specific building in a specific place and that can be changed at any time. They have little or no control over any aspect of their lives. They have to do exactly what the prison authorities require.

They cannot go outside, cannot go for a walk, cannot see the spring flowers or go to a fair, or to a party or socialise with their friends. Longterm prisoners will not have opportunities to form real partnerships or have children.

I waseducated at a quite strict boarding school. That was paradise compare dwith being incarcerated in a prison.

If it's who I'm thinking of, nanna8, he won't ever be freed, at least we hope not.

Of course they will be allowed internet and phones. They will also get free higher education with no fees when they are of age. That is what happens here, anyway and I doubt it is any different there. We have a mass murderer in jail here, totally unrepentant and aggressive who has got a law degree whilst inside ( they cost a fortune for most people ) I resent that. He wastes money with constant appeals and it is all paid for by legal aid. No one even considers how his many victim families feel. Ridiculous.

It still is the old days for some

In the old days a starving child could be hanged for stealing a loaf of bread and the saying, 'as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb' was because you would be hung for stealing a sheep or lamb.

Infanticide could also mean women who killed their baby because they had post natal psychosis or depression depression - in the old days! But that was the old days.

Itsn't the old days now . We know and understand better. These children, like the other chidren locked up last week for long periods for killing other children. They have already ruined their lives before they even started.

They will all serve long terms in prison and will only be released after that, if it is safe to do so. We know from other cases that the prison service has not hesitated to put back in prison, life prisoners who do not meticulously obey their parole conditions and this will undoubtedly happen in this case.

Maggiemaybe

I don’t read nanna8’s posts as saying that this is what she’d like to see happen. Rather that she thinks there should be something between that harsh treatment and what she sees as our “too soft” approach.

Of course I may be wrong, I often am.

I read it like that too.

Loss of freedom for years, especially for teenagers is a good punishment as long as they are not allowed phones and the internet.

Is imprisonment a too soft approach ?

I don’t read nanna8’s posts as saying that this is what she’d like to see happen. Rather that she thinks there should be something between that harsh treatment and what she sees as our “too soft” approach.

Of course I may be wrong, I often am.

nanna8

In the old days they would have been publicly humiliated, stocks, beatings etc. In some countries today they would be publicly caned and imprisoned. They are lucky they live in the UK. Pizza for lunch and fizzy soft drinks all round.

Oh Nana8what a disappointing post from you would you like to be one of the people that cheered at hangings or threw tomato’s at people in stocks really surprised that anyone in this day and age can hold such warped views

Yes, things are smuggled in. I hope these two are too young to have criminal friends on the outside who will provide these things.

Germanshepherdsmum

I don’t think prisoners are allowed internet access Molly.

They are not allowed drugs either, but what you’re not allowed to do in prison and what you can organise are two different things.

He did.
Smuggled in.

Perhaps he had an illicit mobile phone.

They do use the internet though.

My daughter at one point was contacted on facebook years ago by a man who was in prison, and he became a nightmare, hounding the life out of her day and night.

I don’t think prisoners are allowed internet access Molly.

I don’t think anyone can imagine being locked up for that length of time, but those two won’t even have had any experience of being an adult.
It’s hard to picture what sort of rehabilitation there could be, when they will still have access to all the evil available in the internet, but there should be some attempt to do it. Not sure how it’s success will be assessed though.

We have to at least try to rehabilitate people. Specially young people, and horrible though their crime was, we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that they are children. Of course they should be punished, but if we write people off at 15 there is no hope for any of us.

I think that at 15 they will have known that what they did was not just wrong, but dreadful. What I'm not sure about is whether at 15 people can understand what it means to be locked up for 22 years. It's longer than they've been alive. I don't think that real consequences mean much until the brain matures at 25 or so, and even then it's not straightforward. I'm sure that if we were mature at 15 we'd all have worked hard at school, studied instead of having fun, got a pension sorted out with our first pay packet, saved every spare penny, exercised twice a day and never eaten chocolate, drank wine or had unsuitable boyfriends. Before someone points out the exemplary nature of their youth, I realise that some people did do all of that, but it doesn't describe the teenage years of anyone I know. That's why there are different laws for young people.

Maybe they are beyond redemption, in which case yes, let them stay in jail, but I think the system should at least try to turn things round - both for them and for society at large.

Me too Iam.

JaneJudge - some young people respond well to the care in Secure Units. I’m interested in the higher success rates in scandi countries, which take a less punitive, more hopeful rehabilitative approach , even with children who have killed

Impossible to imagine JaneJudge they couldn’t stop loving when their children were arrested

It must be awful for them Anniebach. Prison is supposed to rehabilitate people too, it isn't just for punishment. Hopefully young people are more open to rehabilitation, I don;t know