Author Topic: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?  (Read 32478 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jan

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #30 on: October 29, 2015, 08:08:PM »

Jan, it wasn't STRICTLY changed. Justice Drake gave him a MINIMUM of 25 years after which his suitability for release would be assessed. I believe he also said that it was possible he may never be released, although I'm certain Jeremy was clinging to his term being no more than 25 years.

I don't think so- the original sentence only offered a review in 2002 - he still probably knew he would not get out.

Offline mat

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6564
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #31 on: October 29, 2015, 08:09:PM »
The trial judge, Mr Justice Drake, sentenced Bamber to serve ‘life’ and both he and the Lord Chief Justice recommended that Jeremy Bamber should serve a minimum of 25 years before a review. However, in 1988 the Secretary of State, Mr Douglas Hurd, imposed a whole life tariff without informing Bamber.[5]

After prisoners won a Judicial Review of the Secretary of State’s reserved right not to tell prisoners the length of their sentence, on the 15th of December 1994, the Home Office Prison services, then formally advised Jeremy Bamber of this decision.[6] Until this point, Jeremy Bamber had been unaware that his sentence had been upgraded by the Government retrospectively. The fact that whole life sentences were introduced in 1983, and the first one was not set until 1988, is surprisingly not in breach of Article 7 (1) of the Human Rights Convention.

The Home Office Prison Service also formally advised Jeremy that he would serve the whole life sentence with a review which was already set for 2002 by the Secretary of State.[7]  But this review was withdrawn when the House of Lords held that the Secretary of State was not an ‘independent and impartial tribunal.

Being sentenced to life and being sentenced to a whole life tariff are different.

Offline Jan

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #32 on: October 29, 2015, 08:10:PM »

Jan, it wasn't STRICTLY changed. Justice Drake gave him a MINIMUM of 25 years after which his suitability for release would be assessed. I believe he also said that it was possible he may never be released, although I'm certain Jeremy was clinging to his term being no more than 25 years.

But it is changed if there is no chance of review whatsoever even if he admitted guilt and now as the court of HR have back tracked that is where he is at  now.

Offline mat

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6564
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #33 on: October 29, 2015, 08:11:PM »

Jan, it wasn't STRICTLY changed. Justice Drake gave him a MINIMUM of 25 years after which his suitability for release would be assessed. I believe he also said that it was possible he may never be released, although I'm certain Jeremy was clinging to his term being no more than 25 years.

I am sure that was in his head, although I think he believed he could get out on his first appeal.  I don't think he believes his future appeals can succeed though.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 19595
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #34 on: October 29, 2015, 08:11:PM »
Consecutive v concurrent?

I think he'd have faced a lynch mod if that had happened.
100% GUILTY - No doubts!

Offline Jan

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #35 on: October 29, 2015, 08:13:PM »
Being sentenced to life and being sentenced to a whole life tariff are different.

yes I know

Offline Jane J

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23318
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #36 on: October 29, 2015, 08:13:PM »
Being sentenced to life and being sentenced to a whole life tariff are different.

Yes Mat, I SEETHE every time I hear that someone has been given a life sentence with the recommendation that they serve a minimum of a pathetically short time.

Offline mat

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6564
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #37 on: October 29, 2015, 08:14:PM »
I think he'd have faced a lynch mod if that had happened.

That means he would have served only 5 years.  :o

Yes Mat, I SEETHE every time I hear that someone has been given a life sentence with the recommendation that they serve a minimum of a pathetically short time.

Yes, me too. A life sentence of 15 years... not sure how that is cricket at all.



Offline Steve_uk

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #38 on: October 29, 2015, 08:17:PM »
SCRUBS PRISON,WEDNESDAY 2 FEBRUARY 1989

DEAR COLIN,

SO YOU DECIDED NOT TO REPLY TO MY LETTER,I WONDER WHY? MAYBE IT'S BECAUSE YOU CAN'T FACE THE TRUTH THAT I DID NOT KILL YOUR CHILDREN OR SHEILA OR MUM AND DAD. HOW SAD,COLIN,THAT YOU CAN'T DISTINGUISH REALITY FROM MEDIA HYPE,MISGUIDED POLICE AND MY MONEY-GRABBING RELATIVES. OUT OF EVERYONE I THOUGHT YOU MIGHT UNDERSTAND BUT INSTEAD YOU'VE MADE YOURSELF A COG IN THE MEDIA WHEEL. THE VERY SAME MEDIA THAT YOU RIDICULE IN THE RADIO TIMES. YOU CAN'T IMAGINE HOW I'VE SUFFERED SINCE SHEILA KILLED MY FAMILY-I DON'T SUPPOSE YOU CARE AND WHY SHOULD YOU,COLIN,WITH YOUR NICE LITTLE BOOK AND YOUR PRETTY LITTLE SCULPTURES POURING OUT YOUR GRIEF TO ANY FILM CREW AROUND-NICE TIMING TOO-EH,-WITH MY APPEAL UP SOON,MAYBE YOU'D LIKE TO WAVE A BANNER OUTSIDE THE COURT WITH "JEREMY'S GUILTY BUT I DON'T WANT REVENGE."

GO AND ENJOY YOUR CELEBRITY STATUS,MAYBE YOU'LL BE ON WOGAN NEXT AND CAN ADVERTISE YOUR BOOK AND SCULPTURES THAT WAY-HOW YOU CAN CHEAPEN DANIEL AND NICHOLAS AND THEIR TRAGIC DEATH I JUST DON'T KNOW. NO ONE WANTED ANYTHING OF YOU BEFORE THEN AND NOW THEY'RE GONE YOU'RE USING IT FOR YOUR OWN ENDS-PRETENDING IT'S GRIEF COUNSELLING. YOU WERE ALRIGHT,COLIN,ONCE,BUT NOW I'M SORRY TO SEE YOU'RE NOTHING BUT A LEECH LIVING OFF YOUR OWN SONS' TRAGIC DEATH. IF THEY COULD SEE YOU NOW I BET IT WOULD SICKEN THEM AS IT SICKENS ME...I HOPE YOU LOVE YOURSELF,IN FACT I BET YOU DO. WHAT I WISH IS THAT YOU NEVER GET TO HAVE CHILDREN IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE YOU'LL FUCK THEM UP TOO-IT WAS YOUR FAULT THAT SHEILA WENT MAD AND KILLED EVERYONE. YOU KNEW SHE WOULD BREAK UNDER THE STRAIN OF BRINGING UP A FAMILY ON HER OWN-YOU DIDN'T CARE FOR YOUR CHILDREN EVEN IN THE WOMB..

WITH VERY MUCH SADNESS

JEREMY


Offline Jan

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #39 on: October 29, 2015, 08:20:PM »
what would be the average served ( in the old days) 25 years - with parole - on good behaviour 14 years - so for multiple deaths 50 years would have seemed fairer?

But as he has no chance of even a review whatever he does then personally I think if the appeal fails it may be the end for him anyway.



 


Offline Jane J

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23318
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #40 on: October 29, 2015, 08:22:PM »
SCRUBS PRISON,WEDNESDAY 2 FEBRUARY 1989

DEAR COLIN,

SO YOU DECIDED NOT TO REPLY TO MY LETTER,I WONDER WHY? MAYBE IT'S BECAUSE YOU CAN'T FACE THE TRUTH THAT I DID NOT KILL YOUR CHILDREN OR SHEILA OR MUM AND DAD. HOW SAD,COLIN,THAT YOU CAN'T DISTINGUISH REALITY FROM MEDIA HYPE,MISGUIDED POLICE AND MY MONEY-GRABBING RELATIVES. OUT OF EVERYONE I THOUGHT YOU MIGHT UNDERSTAND BUT INSTEAD YOU'VE MADE YOURSELF A COG IN THE MEDIA WHEEL. THE VERY SAME MEDIA THAT YOU RIDICULE IN THE RADIO TIMES. YOU CAN'T IMAGINE HOW I'VE SUFFERED SINCE SHEILA KILLED MY FAMILY-I DON'T SUPPOSE YOU CARE AND WHY SHOULD YOU,COLIN,WITH YOUR NICE LITTLE BOOK AND YOUR PRETTY LITTLE SCULPTURES POURING OUT YOUR GRIEF TO ANY FILM CREW AROUND-NICE TIMING TOO-EH,-WITH MY APPEAL UP SOON,MAYBE YOU'D LIKE TO WAVE A BANNER OUTSIDE THE COURT WITH "JEREMY'S GUILTY BUT I DON'T WANT REVENGE."

GO AND ENJOY YOUR CELEBRITY STATUS,MAYBE YOU'LL BE ON WOGAN NEXT AND CAN ADVERTISE YOUR BOOK AND SCULPTURES THAT WAY-HOW YOU CAN CHEAPEN DANIEL AND NICHOLAS AND THEIR TRAGIC DEATH I JUST DON'T KNOW. NO ONE WANTED ANYTHING OF YOU BEFORE THEN AND NOW THEY'RE GONE YOU'RE USING IT FOR YOUR OWN ENDS-PRETENDING IT'S GRIEF COUNSELLING. YOU WERE ALRIGHT,COLIN,ONCE,BUT NOW I'M SORRY TO SEE YOU'RE NOTHING BUT A LEECH LIVING OFF YOUR OWN SONS' TRAGIC DEATH. IF THEY COULD SEE YOU NOW I BET IT WOULD SICKEN THEM AS IT SICKENS ME...I HOPE YOU LOVE YOURSELF,IN FACT I BET YOU DO. WHAT I WISH IS THAT YOU NEVER GET TO HAVE CHILDREN IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE YOU'LL FUCK THEM UP TOO-IT WAS YOUR FAULT THAT SHEILA WENT MAD AND KILLED EVERYONE. YOU KNEW SHE WOULD BREAK UNDER THE STRAIN OF BRINGING UP A FAMILY ON HER OWN-YOU DIDN'T CARE FOR YOUR CHILDREN EVEN IN THE WOMB..

WITH VERY MUCH SADNESS

JEREMY


I believe lookout has implied several times that there was no anger in Jeremy. If the above doesn't signify HUGE anger, I don't know what does...................and before ANYONE says it's because he's in prison and innocent, those feelings aren't new. He's been holding them for a VERY long time.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #41 on: October 29, 2015, 08:23:PM »
Steve, I would never have expected less, from you, than this thought provoking and many layered thread.

I'm not Colin and I have no idea what may be his capacity for forgiveness. I don't have children so I will never experience their lives being torn away by another human being but I suspect that if I did I would NEVER forgive them. Doing away with the death penalty eliminated total finality -incidentally, I never saw it as a deterrent but as sending out the message that should someone commit this particular crime, it would be the punishment they'd receive- so when a life sentence is handed down, it should be exactly that. The incidences of those who have murdered, that I believe should be released, are very few.

Having got that out of the way, I wonder how a wholly institutionalized person would cope in the outside world. A person who has had all their thinking done for them surely won't -how ever much they may have longed for their freedom- be able to cope. Then there's the problem of public opinion which isn't easy to change. Especially when the crime committed has involved children. Of course, in the case of younger people being released there's the possibility of changing their identities, but the older the released person, the more difficult they are likely to find the transition. Whatever their age, I see the strong possibility of a life of drinking and drug taking to avoid facing the difficulties and potential loneliness. I also see the possibility of new crimes being committed in order for them to go back to the confines of a prison OR suicides.
Do you think it harms people by not being able to forgive,do we not see the bitter faces from people we see in town who have been the victims of crime,of broken love affairs or cheated monetarily or does it sustain them in the cold winter nights and give them independence of mind? Either way with Colin I would not condemn him,but I just wonder whether he should have the final say,important as his opinion is speaking for himself and the victims.

Offline Jan

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #42 on: October 29, 2015, 08:24:PM »
I said I don't think the letters were appropriate even if he was innocent.



Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 34520
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #43 on: October 29, 2015, 08:25:PM »
I'm not sure how to approach this because I don't believe in " human rights " for starters. To my mind it's often used as an excuse mainly by the wrong-doers in society ( I'm actually thinking about the schoolboy thug who murdered another pupil ) the do-gooders will be out in force,background,one-parent and all that tripe.
Murder is murder and in JB's case after certain questions etc have been answered and there's no other conclusion other than he remains to be a "guilty" man then he can stay where he is until death.

In one respect the publicity that JB's getting is appropriate when so many believe that he's been let down by the system,but if the time comes that he does find freedom,people are going to know him wherever he goes and that won't be good as there'll always be someone out there waiting for him,even if he's proved innocent.  If it wasn't on the forum or publicised at all nobody would have been any the wiser if he'd been released or not because nobody would know him.
I wonder how many released murderers are walking the streets ? We don't know do we because it's never made public ? Look how many paedo's are released and God help you if you ever find out who they are ?! The law doesn't allow that because " they've got rights ".NO they jolly well haven't !!
The law is an ass !!

Offline Steve_uk

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #44 on: October 29, 2015, 08:25:PM »

Jan, it wasn't STRICTLY changed. Justice Drake gave him a MINIMUM of 25 years after which his suitability for release would be assessed. I believe he also said that it was possible he may never be released, although I'm certain Jeremy was clinging to his term being no more than 25 years.
Do you think politicians should be granted the right to extend a sentence,given that they are often acting out of political expediency,when it's those inside the prison who have day to day contact with prisoners who know them best?