It is reported that Russell Bishop could be paroled this week...

[Mr Burns]

Why do you advocate different treatment of children from adults?

I think its very diiferent. If you go out to rape or murder and adult, thats fine. But if its a crime of passion or a fight that went to far, than it could be a tad harsh. I think theres a difference.

Whereas if you rape or murder a child, it's hardly going to be a crime of passion, so automatic death penatly, I would say is a fair result.

 

[timbha]

when he was released after the Babes in the Wood investigation fiasco no-one touched him, in fact I seem to remember him becoming a bit of a face in the Hikers Rest.

 

[El Presidente]

I think its very diiferent. If you go out to rape or murder and adult, thats fine. But if its a crime of passion or a fight that went to far, than it could be a tad harsh. I think theres a difference.

Whereas if you rape or murder a child, it's hardly going to be a crime of passion, so automatic death penatly, I would say is a fair result.

But irrespective of whether it is a child or adult, the killer has denied someone else their right to life, so surely the culprit should receive the same fate.

It seems inconsistent that if I kill someone aged 15 years and 364 days, you would punish them with the death penalty, but if you left the murder 24 hours the penalty would only be prison.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

If he gets parole then it will be on special license , the powers that be will advise him not to move back to Sussex. He will probably be given a new identity like Ian Huntley's girlfriend Maxine Carr. If word gets out that there is a nonce living in the neighbourhood his personal safety will be put in jeopardy.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Would that extend to killing someone whilst driving a car and

a) Speeding OR
b) Using a mobile phone OR
c) Under the influence of drink/drugs?

Difficult. In all instances, you know that you are breaking the law and the ramifications are potentially lethal. Although you are not pulling a trigger or putting the knife in, you are directly contributing to an untimely death....knowingly.

I am glad I don't have to make any of these decisions, as it is a very difficult topic to broach.

Certainly for drink and drugs, I think there should be zero tolerance. Am I right in thinking that pilots are not permitted to fly with any alcohol in their system? As far as I am concerned, there is little difference between 1 life and 400 lives.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

The problem that those people who advocate retributive "justice" being handed out on street corners in the dark is that they never face up to the question of possible mistaken identity. Bishop is now 41 years old. He was 24 when he was convicted and sent to prison for life. How many people can honestly say that they would recognise him if they came across him in the street? Or would it be fair game to attack any man in his early forties and "attempt to castrate him then punch him" (to choose, at random, one of the popular options in this poll)?

Anyway ... where did this story come from, HB&B?

 

[Deleted User X18H]

News of The World online my noble Lord

 

[dougdeep]

I think its very diiferent. If you go out to rape or murder and adult, thats fine.

....

 

[Lady Whistledown]

If he gets parole then it will be on special license , the powers that be will advise him not to move back to Sussex. He will probably be given a new identity like Ian Huntley's girlfriend Maxine Carr. If word gets out that there is a nonce living in the neighbourhood his personal safety will be put in jeopardy.

A few points re the above.

1) Lifers, if released, are almost always released on licence only. If he so much as nicked a bag of crisps from Tesco, he'd be recalled to prison.

2) Prisoners don't routinely get given new identities by the authorities, they may choose to do so themselves, but apart from exceptional cases- for example juveniles like Robert Thompson & Jon Venables, and Carr- this is not standard practice for the state to fund it.

3) Word gets out about a nonce in the neighbourhood? I think I can safely say that there are already "nonces", as you put it, living in whatever part of Brighton you're talking about, whether Bishop decides to move back there or not, so I wouldn't worry unduly about him.


Anyway, this whole argument is immaterial as things stand, as he hasn't been paroled yet. I'm fairly certain the issue came up a year or so ago, and his application was rejected then, so there must be a chance the same will happen this time round.

 

[desprateseagull]

thats what i dont get about this country- criminals seemingly get more protection (human rights etc). than their victims.

at the end of the day, he has assaulted someone, and suspected of killing two others.

how old he was, or they were doesn't matter. I am sure he will get a 'proper welcome', wherever he ends up.

 

[magoo]

You're all talking...

 

[Collar Feeler]

As I recall he got away with the babes in the wood case due to the police "loseing" a vital piece of evidence for an hour or 2, thus deeming the evidence useless and getting him aquitted

I don't think any evidence was lost, i recall a jumper he was wearing and another piece of evidence were either transported to the lab together or examined in the same Lab or maybe even both therefore they were deemed to have been cross contaminated and couldn't be used in the trial. Forensic evidence and procedures were pretty new at that time, i'd like to think the same scenario couldn't happen now.

 

[Skaville]

Burn him

 

[Gwylan]

Anyway, this whole argument is immaterial as things stand, as he hasn't been paroled yet. I'm fairly certain the issue came up a year or so ago, and his application was rejected then, so there must be a chance the same will happen this time round.

Absolutely right. It's a prisoner's right to seek parole after a certain time - and a parole board's right to refuse it. I would say that this will certainly happen in this case and it's just the NotW trying to hype up a story.

 

[The Large One]

I think its very diiferent. If you go out to rape or murder and adult, thats fine. But if its a crime of passion or a fight that went to far, than it could be a tad harsh. I think theres a difference.

Whereas if you rape or murder a child, it's hardly going to be a crime of passion, so automatic death penatly, I would say is a fair result.

Sorry, this doesn't make sense to me. El Pres asked the difference between murdering a child and murdering an adult. Your second sentence, I suspect, needs some clarification.

A 'crime of passion' (murder) that you're alluding to still carries life imprisonment, and is not a mitigating circumstance or defence against the crime. A 'crime of passion' in the form of rape is an absurd notion. Rape has nothing to do with (in the context you mean) 'passion', and everything to do with power, brutality and harm. And there is no justification for it on anyone - adult or child.

If you're talking about a 'fight that got out of hand', then depending on the circumstances, there may be some mitigating circumstance.

However, when it comes to children, and the rape and/or murder of them, the point I think El Pres was asking was, what is the justification for placing a higher value on a child's life compared to an adult's life in order that the rape or murder of a child should carry a heavier penalty?

 

[Storer68]

Can I just point out that he has not been convicted of killing anyone.


Russell Bishop (born 1966 in Brighton, Sussex, England) is a convicted child sex offender and abductor. He is serving life imprisonment for the abduction, molestation and attempted murder of a seven-year-old girl in the Whitehawk area of Brighton. The crime was committed on 4 February 1990 and Bishop was sentenced on 13 December 1990. Now in his 17th year of imprisonment, Bishop is now one of the longest serving prisoners in Britain not to be serving a sentence for murder, despite the trial judge recommending a minimum term of 14 years which could have seen him out of prison in 2004.

Bishop first became the centre of media attention and public villification in October 1986 when he was arrested on suspicion of the murders of two nine-year-old girls whose bodies were found in Wild Park, Brighton. He was cleared on both murder charges at his trial in December 1987, though many people remain convinced that he did kill the girls. The Double Jeopardy law seemed to eliminate any possibility that Bishop might one day face a new trial for the murders, but new legislation in 2005 meant that a criminal could face a new trial for a crime if substantial new evidence came to light. In September 2006, the High Court decided that there was not enough for Bishop to face a second trial for the murders.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

A few points re the above.

1) Lifers, if released, are almost always released on licence only. If he so much as nicked a bag of crisps from Tesco, he'd be recalled to prison.

2) Prisoners don't routinely get given new identities by the authorities, they may choose to do so themselves, but apart from exceptional cases- for example juveniles like Robert Thompson & Jon Venables, and Carr- this is not standard practice for the state to fund it.

3) Word gets out about a nonce in the neighbourhood? I think I can safely say that there are already "nonces", as you put it, living in whatever part of Brighton you're talking about, whether Bishop decides to move back there or not, so I wouldn't worry unduly about him.


Anyway, this whole argument is immaterial as things stand, as he hasn't been paroled yet. I'm fairly certain the issue came up a year or so ago, and his application was rejected then, so there must be a chance the same will happen this time round.

Wouldn't he be treated as an exceptional case in view of the Babes in the Wood trial and later conviction for the young girl he snatched ? Mind you all he needs to do is change his name by deed poll. If he did move back to Brighton , will the CPU be monitoring him along with the "others" ? I agree that it is all hypothetical but strange things do happen. In all likelihood the parole application will be turned down as he will still be considered a menace to society.

 

[Questions]

Absolutely right. It's a prisoner's right to seek parole after a certain time - and a parole board's right to refuse it. I would say that this will certainly happen in this case and it's just the NotW trying to hype up a story.

They desperately need a new Myra Hindley.

 

[Stumpy Tim]

If he gets parole then it will be on special license , the powers that be will advise him not to move back to Sussex. He will probably be given a new identity like Ian Huntley's girlfriend Maxine Carr. If word gets out that there is a nonce living in the neighbourhood his personal safety will be put in jeopardy.

Maxine Carr needed a new persona - she was villified for giving a false alibi... sure it was a silly thing to do, but hardly Myra Hindley stuff. She was tricked into believing her boyfriend was being setup & suffered the consequences

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Wouldn't he be treated as an exceptional case in view of the Babes in the Wood trial and later conviction for the young girl he snatched ? Mind you all he needs to do is change his name by deed poll. If he did move back to Brighton , will the CPU be monitoring him along with the "others" ? I agree that it is all hypothetical but strange things do happen. In all likelihood the parole application will be turned down as he will still be considered a menace to society.

If I remember rightly, Bishop hardly sought anonymity or a low profile away from the local community after the murder trial. What makes people think he would be any different if and when he is released next time?