ECHR ..... now - Killers' life terms 'breached their human rights'

[lookout]

lookout who is gormless (love that word) me or the BBC

The BBC of course Susan---------------never yourself,God forbid.

[susan]

Joanne told you we were not mad and we did hear correctly

[Patti]

My initial reaction to this was....Yes! Yes! and Yes! Finally Jeremy is on the winning end.

But, after the reality sunk in, my reaction changed. Do I really want all the whole lifers to have reviews with the prospect of freedom? Do I really want those killers loose on the streets of my Country and the answer to that is no.

I would have been more elated if Jeremy had won this in his own right for him alone.  I think each individual case should be judged fairly and in some cases some whole lifers should never be released. This has set a precedent now for all the whole lifers and their human right to have reviews after 25 years.....I should think that those that make the assessments know what they are doing and will only allow those that are no threat to society to be considered for release at some point in their life.

In Jeremy's case this does not really help him, because he wants justice and he wants to prove his innocence. 

I suppose the government will contest the ruling within the given time of 6 months....If they lose then they will have to apply the ruling and they no doubt will spend a considerable amount of time re-implementing something that was in place before 2003.

Apart from that I would love to be have been a fly on the walls of Jeremy's cell today or near the nearest phone......

And well done to the legal team that caused all of this to happen.... 

[lookout]

This is why I don't believe in Human Rights,Patti,because cases aren't looked at individually here,,and I objected strongly to Jeremy being named with the REAL murderers,who are both evil. A big let-down in terms really and a bit of a deflated feeling in a way. Then you have Cameron who doesn't have a clue,,though thankfully, and only because of Jeremy,,he can't go against what Europe says,,,at the moment anyway,,but sadly he can get round the ruling.

[Patti]

This is why I don't believe in Human Rights,Patti,because cases aren't looked at individually here,,and I objected strongly to Jeremy being named with the REAL murderers,who are both evil. A big let-down in terms really and a bit of a deflated feeling in a way. Then you have Cameron who doesn't have a clue,,though thankfully, and only because of Jeremy,,he can't go against what Europe says,,,at the moment anyway,,but sadly he can get round the ruling.

Hi Lookout

Yes they can contest the ruling, they have 6 months to do so.  So not a winner just yet!  But, at Jeremy's trial he was given a sentence of 25 years and in 2002 he was promised a review on his sentence, but that was taken away from him in 2003 when the goal posts changed and the reviews were stopped.  Now the ECHR has made this ruling it somewhat goes in Jeremy's favour, but it does not help his campaign to prove his innocence....I doubt Jeremy wants to be released based on a review.. Of course if the government don't contest the ruling then they will have to comply with ECHR...and Jeremy will no doubt be released in the future...when that will be is anyone's guess, because there are those that will kick off and try their best to block this....sadly those that want Jeremy to rot in jail have no jurisdiction on the ECHR.....

[Caroline R]

My initial reaction to this was....Yes! Yes! and Yes! Finally Jeremy is on the winning end.

But, after the reality sunk in, my reaction changed. Do I really want all the whole lifers to have reviews with the prospect of freedom? Do I really want those killers loose on the streets of my Country and the answer to that is no.

I would have been more elated if Jeremy had won this in his own right for him alone.  I think each individual case should be judged fairly and in some cases some whole lifers should never be released. This has set a precedent now for all the whole lifers and their human right to have reviews after 25 years.....I should think that those that make the assessments know what they are doing and will only allow those that are no threat to society to be considered for release at some point in their life.

In Jeremy's case this does not really help him, because he wants justice and he wants to prove his innocence. 

I suppose the government will contest the ruling within the given time of 6 months....If they lose then they will have to apply the ruling and they no doubt will spend a considerable amount of time re-implementing something that was in place before 2003.

Apart from that I would love to be have been a fly on the walls of Jeremy's cell today or near the nearest phone......

And well done to the legal team that caused all of this to happen.... 

I agree, I don't think the 'whole life tariff' is wrong (in some cases). But it should NEVER be used for political gain. I don't believe that politicians should ever be allowed to alter sentences that have already been passed - they always have an agenda!!

I think today is good because it has brought the case to the main headlines but I don't think Jeremy will benefit from today's ruling because he is maintaining innocence and they don't like that!!   

[Jane]

Patti/lookout, I agree with you both. There are some who are presently inside who I would HATE to have on the outside but sadly we can't make individual rules and we have to accept that this may be as good as it gets.

Like lookout, I was incensed to see Jeremy lumped together with such people and the media had a field day with it. However, both they and David Cameron should be very careful what they say because should a MOJ be proved, for anyone, they'll be forced to eat their words.

[Jane]

Hi Lookout

Yes they can contest the ruling, they have 6 months to do so.  So not a winner just yet!  But, at Jeremy's trial he was given a sentence of 25 years and in 2002 he was promised a review on his sentence, but that was taken away from him in 2003 when the goal posts changed and the reviews were stopped.  Now the ECHR has made this ruling it somewhat goes in Jeremy's favour, but it does not help his campaign to prove his innocence....I doubt Jeremy wants to be released based on a review.. Of course if the government don't contest the ruling then they will have to comply with ECHR...and Jeremy will no doubt be released in the future...when that will be is anyone's guess, because there are those that will kick off and try their best to block this....sadly those that want Jeremy to rot in jail have no jurisdiction on the ECHR.....

Patti, David Boutflour has already been on the box talking about how the family have to put up with this behaviour from Jeremy every few years.

[Caroline R]

Hi Lookout

Yes they can contest the ruling, they have 6 months to do so.  So not a winner just yet!  But, at Jeremy's trial he was given a sentence of 25 years and in 2002 he was promised a review on his sentence, but that was taken away from him in 2003 when the goal posts changed and the reviews were stopped.  Now the ECHR has made this ruling it somewhat goes in Jeremy's favour, but it does not help his campaign to prove his innocence....I doubt Jeremy wants to be released based on a review.. Of course if the government don't contest the ruling then they will have to comply with ECHR...and Jeremy will no doubt be released in the future...when that will be is anyone's guess, because there are those that will kick off and try their best to block this....sadly those that want Jeremy to rot in jail have no jurisdiction on the ECHR.....

Hi Patti - the government can't appeal against the ruling, they simply have six moths to respond.

[susan]

Hi Caroline  I find it very annoying to say the least that Jeremy's sentence of 25 years was altered to a full life tariff what was all that about.

[Caroline R]

Hi Caroline  I find it very annoying to say the least that Jeremy's sentence of 25 years was altered to a full life tariff what was all that about.

Politics Susan

[susan]

april  the poor things what they have to put up with is nothing compared to what they may have to put up with in the future.

[Jane]

april  the poor things what they have to put up with is nothing compared to what they may have to put up with in the future.

What goes around, comes around, Susan

[susan]

april I agree with you and Jeremy will have his day wait and see.

[lookout]

Patti/lookout, I agree with you both. There are some who are presently inside who I would HATE to have on the outside but sadly we can't make individual rules and we have to accept that this may be as good as it gets.

Like lookout, I was incensed to see Jeremy lumped together with such people and the media had a field day with it. However, both they and David Cameron should be very careful what they say because should a MOJ be proved, for anyone, they'll be forced to eat their words.

April,,the whole reporting stank. The media just put Jeremy in a bad light.. DB in his rose garden was lapping it up------------------as expected,looking the part.
None of them have any idea what Jeremys' case was about and just repeat parrot fashion what the police and media said.
The sooner they all choke on their words,the better because they're in for a rude awakening. Simon will be beavering away in the background now.