Author Topic: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?  (Read 32480 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8563
Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« on: October 29, 2015, 07:05:PM »
I'm thinking mainly of the judicial process, where Jeremy has been incarcerated for thirty years in a tiny cell measuring not more than ten feet by seven if I hazard a guess, trapped in a cage of iron, which if it were mine I think I'd prefer to end it all today, innocent or guilty. On the other hand we have Colin, the silent victim who has quietly gone about rebuilding the shards of his shattered life with dignity, has remarried and now has more children of his own. Should Colin's wish to see the killer of his sons interned for life be paramount, or has Jeremy served his time and earned the right to eat pot noodle on a Dorset beach, the waves lapping at his feet as he saunters along the sands, or dons a wetsuit to partake of a spot of windsurfing before taking a bite to eat in a nearby cafe?

Offline mat

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6564
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #1 on: October 29, 2015, 07:13:PM »
Who has more right? Colin, clearly IMO.



Whereas Colin had got on with his life under horrible circumstances and still hasn't been able to remove himself fully from the murders because Bamber and his supporters won't let him. Even most recently on here supporters have said they can read between the lines of Colins own autobiography and that the don't believe Colin fully believes in Bambers guilt!! Colin corrected this recently with a short interview in which is confirmed, as he says in his book, he believe Bamber to be guilty.

Bamber, the convicted - has shown no remorse over the years. Not one shred.

Offline Jan

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #2 on: October 29, 2015, 07:15:PM »
Does any murderer deserve to be released?

And of course if JB is guilty he should serve 5 life sentences .



Offline mat

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6564
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #3 on: October 29, 2015, 07:16:PM »
Does any murderer deserve to be released?

And of course if JB is guilty he should serve 5 life sentences .

Alias believes that even if he is guilty he should be out by now.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #4 on: October 29, 2015, 07:21:PM »
I respect Colin for how he has handled the tragedy and its aftermath and feel that his wishes should be taken into consideration. I would only say that Colin now has a new family,and only he knows whether it has filled a void partly or not. Jeremy has no blood relatives whatsoever on the outside who wish to accommodate him,though no doubt there would be friends to whom he could turn were he to be released. Of course letting him out when he's seventy would mean no meaningful chance for him to start a family of his own.

Offline Jan

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #5 on: October 29, 2015, 07:23:PM »
Alias believes that even if he is guilty he should be out by now.

that's probably because we have an inconsistent system .

But what I do think is that the length of incarceration should be set at the time of the trial and not changed without extremely good reason.

« Last Edit: October 29, 2015, 07:23:PM by Jan »

Offline Steve_uk

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #6 on: October 29, 2015, 07:25:PM »
Does any murderer deserve to be released?

And of course if JB is guilty he should serve 5 life sentences .
Is there a general rule whereby someone convicted of killing one person like Dirty Den Leslie Grantham should be allowed out to pursue an acting career,whilst a mass murderer like Anders Behring Breivik may be let out in 21 years,as happened with Arnfinn Nesset,who may have murdered 138. Should murderers have any hope of release and if not what is the point of keeping them cooped up like hens where there is very little chance of rehabilitation?

Offline Jan

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #7 on: October 29, 2015, 07:27:PM »
I respect Colin for how he has handled the tragedy and its aftermath and feel that his wishes should be taken into consideration. I would only say that Colin now has a new family,and only he knows whether it has filled a void partly or not. Jeremy has no blood relatives whatsoever on the outside who wish to accommodate him,though no doubt there would be friends to whom he could turn were he to be released. Of course letting him out when he's seventy would mean no meaningful chance for him to start a family of his own.

There is no reason why he would be entitled to have a family of his own - unless of course he is innocent.

I don't think personally he has shown any indication he would be a threat to anyone but to be honest he might be better off inside - I don't know how he would cope.

Offline mat

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6564
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #8 on: October 29, 2015, 07:27:PM »
that's probably because we have an inconsistent system .

But what I do think is that the length of incarceration should be set at the time of the trial and not changed without extremely good reason.

Do you think that the original sentence was adequate? I don't think it was an adequate punishment for the crimes committed, the 5 lives extinguished for sheer greed - I think that the sentence not being adequate is a good reason for it being changed.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #9 on: October 29, 2015, 07:30:PM »
Who has more right? Colin, clearly IMO.



Whereas Colin had got on with his life under horrible circumstances and still hasn't been able to remove himself fully from the murders because Bamber and his supporters won't let him. Even most recently on here supporters have said they can read between the lines of Colins own autobiography and that the don't believe Colin fully believes in Bambers guilt!! Colin corrected this recently with a short interview in which is confirmed, as he says in his book, he believe Bamber to be guilty.

Bamber, the convicted - has shown no remorse over the years. Not one shred.
A trusting Colin foolishly wrote to Jeremy in the early days post-murders in the hope of some clarification,but as seems usual with that character no meaningful information is imparted through correspondence with him. It set off a spate of letters whereby Jeremy accused him of profiting from the crimes through writing his book,when all Colin wanted to do was to pay tribute to his sons and rectify errors made in press reports.

Offline Jan

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #10 on: October 29, 2015, 07:32:PM »
Is there a general rule whereby someone convicted of killing one person like Dirty Den Leslie Grantham should be allowed out to pursue an acting career,whilst a mass murderer like Anders Behring Breivik may be let out in 21 years,as happened with Arnfinn Nesset,who may have murdered 138. Should murderers have any hope of release and if not what is the point of keeping them cooped up like hens where there is very little chance of rehabilitation?

21 years ? Really?

what I was saying is that I don't think  5 murders should be treated the same as one murder .

The no chance of release subject was covered in Jeremys blog - I am not sure what I think really because there  is no incentive to improve  or  change if there is no prospect of release  and  in Jeremys case he is scuppered because he wont admit guilt so any chance of rehabilitation is removed anyway?


Offline Steve_uk

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #11 on: October 29, 2015, 07:33:PM »
Do you think that the original sentence was adequate? I don't think it was an adequate punishment for the crimes committed, the 5 lives extinguished for sheer greed - I think that the sentence not being adequate is a good reason for it being changed.
The criminal justice system is supposed on paper to strike a balance between punishment and rehabilitation. The problem I foresee is if Jeremy wished to travel to a Cornwall beach and find himself in close proximity with Colin and his daughter it would surely be an unacceptable state of affairs?
« Last Edit: October 29, 2015, 07:35:PM by Steve_uk »

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12801
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #12 on: October 29, 2015, 07:36:PM »
21 years ? Really?

what I was saying is that I don't think  5 murders should be treated the same as one murder .

The no chance of release subject was covered in Jeremys blog - I am not sure what I think really because there  is no incentive to improve  or  change if there is no prospect of release  and  in Jeremys case he is scuppered because he wont admit guilt so any chance of rehabilitation is removed anyway?
He has said he can't remember being 'outside' it's so long ago, the prison is his world.  I cannot imagine how he would be able to cope outside of the prison system, he must be totally institutionalised and innocent or guilty ne would suffer badly on the outside. :-\

Offline Jan

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #13 on: October 29, 2015, 07:37:PM »
A trusting Colin foolishly wrote to Jeremy in the early days post-murders in the hope of some clarification,but as seems usual with that character no meaningful information is imparted through correspondence with him. It set off a spate of letters whereby Jeremy accused him of profiting from the crimes through writing his book,when all Colin wanted to do was to pay tribute to his sons and rectify errors made in press reports.

I am not sure it was a spate of letters but yes it seemed Jeremy was angry because the book came at a crucial time in his appeal and I thought the tone of the letters was very  inappropriate . But if JB is innocent Colin promised to stick by him after the murders as he had no family and Jeremy must have felt abandoned by him and incredulous that he would believe his guilt. He seemed angrier with him than Julie in some ways - but then we don't know we have seen all letters that have been written do we?

Offline Steve_uk

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #14 on: October 29, 2015, 07:37:PM »
Do you think that the original sentence was adequate? I don't think it was an adequate punishment for the crimes committed, the 5 lives extinguished for sheer greed - I think that the sentence not being adequate is a good reason for it being changed.
I wonder what the point of keeping people behind bars for life is solely to vegetate if they are not deemed a risk to the public? If they are criminally insane they should naturally be placed in the appropriate institution.