What's an appropriate sentence for a crime such as this?

[Lady Whistledown]

Possibly, or possibly not. We don't know whether or not they received help or even asked for it.

Unlikely to have asked for it, I'd have thought. Many heroin addicts (particularly the intravenous users) only get to the point of asking for help when a judge tells them it's that or a prison sentence (for the crime they've committed on that occasion, be it shoplifting, burglary or whatever). Their lifestyles are that chaotic, they can barely even look after themselves. All they focus on is scoring again. They don't eat, they don't wash. I've been in houses where the occupants use the bath as a toilet because they've not paid the water bill so they can't flush the toilet, or they can't be bothered (or tell the difference) to use the correct facility. They leave used needles on and in the sofa, and around the floor, because they've probably forgotten or haven't got enough energy to care.

No excuses whatsoever for what these two have inflicted on that poor child, but I'd wager that the pair of them were probably so off their tits most of the time, it's not even entered their wasted minds that there was an issue giving her the gear.

It'd be nice to think they'd serve the full thirteen years each, but obviously they won't. It'd also be nice to think the spell inside would rid them of their addictions, so that at least they might be slightly less of a drain on society when they do get out. Unfortunately, it probably won't....

 

[BadFish]

No not cutting benefits.

Turn somewhere really shit like say, Luton into a forced labour camp and send all the scum there. Scum being anyone at age 18 who can't pass a simple "I'm not a complete scumbag" test.

They then get a regular chance to pass a citizenship assessment where they can attempt to prove that they should be readmitted to society, by no longer being scum. Meanwhile, they are treated properly but have to work, for free. This would be a massive and extremely professional operation, no G4S type amateurism. It will cost a fortune.

However, the savings in benefits, costs of crime, health service costs etc mean this is all easily affordable especially combined with a policy of decriminalising all drugs and controlling and taxing them.

Society completely reformed in a generation. Could be considered slightly radical by some though......
[emoji6]

Sounds a bit dystopian like Children of Men, wasn't that camp in Bexhill?

I am sure there are less severe solutions if we care to look for them.

 

[AmexRuislip]

According to this 'child destruction' is life!
I know it's the maximum sentence, but it's what they deserve.

http://www.thelawpages.com/court-cases/maximums.php

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

Unlikely to have asked for it, I'd have thought. Many heroin addicts (particularly the intravenous users) only get to the point of asking for help when a judge tells them it's that or a prison sentence (for the crime they've committed on that occasion, be it shoplifting, burglary or whatever). Their lifestyles are that chaotic, they can barely even look after themselves. All they focus on is scoring again. They don't eat, they don't wash. I've been in houses where the occupants use the bath as a toilet because they've not paid the water bill so they can't flush the toilet, or they can't be bothered (or tell the difference) to use the correct facility. They leave used needles on and in the sofa, and around the floor, because they've probably forgotten or haven't got enough energy to care.

No excuses whatsoever for what these two have inflicted on that poor child, but I'd wager that the pair of them were probably so off their tits most of the time, it's not even entered their wasted minds that there was an issue giving her the gear.

It'd be nice to think they'd serve the full thirteen years each, but obviously they won't. It'd also be nice to think the spell inside would rid them of their addictions, so that at least they might be slightly less of a drain on society when they do get out. Unfortunately, it probably won't....

Which in turn means that when released early there is a good chance that they will re-offend putting another innocent child in grave danger.
Whatever way you look at it that is just not right.
If you don't agree with the death sentence then a prison should be built to house these type of offenders and child sex offenders and keep them there until they die.
Keeping kids safe from these animals must come first.

 

[Mackenzie]

I'm not from the flog 'em, beat 'em, hang 'em school of thought as you know.

However this behaviour seems off the scale in terms of its depravity and cruelty.

Is this a reflection of a too liberal judicial system, an appropriate sentence for two people whose addictions have impacted upon their ability to make decisions, or just a barometer of twenty-first century England?

25 years and clinically neutered.

 

[tip top]

Keeping kids safe from these animals must come first.[/QUOTE]

Sadly, it doesn't :-(

 

[luppers]

There are many replies I would like to give to this statement, but I suspect most of them would be totally unacceptable for this forum.

What I would like to ask, exactly who should have helped them? who should have known that these two despicable apologies for human beings should have known, had the foresight to have known, that they were putting drugs into that poor child's mouth? why should society plunge vast amounts of tax payers money into something that most normal people would never ever contemplate doing.

What these vile scum choose to do to themselves is their choice, apart from the very obvious fact that this poor child suffered at the hands of the so called parents, the other sad fact is, they never got enough drugs to finish themselves off.

I am far from jubilant, knowing that for the next 8 years or whatever it is deemed to be (hopefully the inner prison justice will shorten that period!) my hard earned taxes are keeping that scum with a roof over their head and supplying them both with 3 meals a day.

Why should another human being/s be responsible for low life shite like these two?

However, I will now show a far kinder more sympathetic side to myself........I will personally pay for the two of hem to go on a rehabilitation cruise, The Pacific Ocean is nice, very sunny as well, the only condition is, when the ship is at least 400 miles from any land, they go for a swim and the ship sails away and leaves them to sunbathe and frolic in shark infested waters!

The above is purely only my opinion and I don't expect everyone to agree with it.

This is a silly comment .I mean how can you afford to pay for both of then therefore I am prepared to help out by going halves with you

 

[Blue3]

Life with no parole or life with sterilisation and the chance of parole

 

[marshy68]

Big this. Another innocent child has lost their life due to an incompetent local authority.

Cant agree it wasn't the local authority giving a 4 year old child drugs. We don't hear everyday about the 1000's of children protected by our authorities. Aside from that these "parents" should be given a whole life tariff in my opinion.

 

[Surrey_Albion]

Going somewhat off topic now.
Quite, third and fourth generations of hopelessness with a warped version off right and wrong really do not stand a chance of living a normal life. The question is how do we break the cycle for these people. Would you recommend cutting benefits for these people?

Not cut completely but carrying on paying for them to live a degenerate life then yes, they should have to do something for the money and like I said there should be social and community condemnation for what they do wrong, the cycle needs to be broken not continued with a fluffy unrealistic "ahhh it's not your fault", the people I work with DO NOT have any responsibility or blame for their actions because they get what they want given regardless

 

[BBassic]

Any right minded person should want to flog 'em, beat 'em, hang 'em, but that's not going to help the next Poppy.
Who in turn wasn't helped by the long list of innocent children who have already died at the hands of their drug fueled parents.

Speak for yourself.

Lock them up in a dark hole for the rest of their lives, never to see the sun or to feel the wind on their faces ever again. Sure. I fail to see what physical violence and execution achieves though.

 

[GT49er]

Lock them up in a dark hole for the rest of their lives, never to see the sun or to feel the wind on their faces ever again.

That sounds pretty violent to me.

 

[BBassic]

That sounds pretty violent to me.

Sure, it's quite extreme and not necessarily something I'm comfortable with. Seemed a good counter-point to "Execute them" though.

 

[Bruntburger]

Death by execution


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lady Whistledown]

According to this 'child destruction' is life!
I know it's the maximum sentence, but it's what they deserve.

http://www.thelawpages.com/court-cases/maximums.php

The offence of child destruction refers to an unborn foetus (that is capable of being born alive) so not applicable here.

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

I have not read the details of the case and see my posts for my thoughts on these two but, if social services were involved you have to wonder why the child was still with them, they have obviously been junkies for a long time,and should have been removed before this happened, same as baby P and others, but I will never blame social workers if this is the case, they would not leave a kid with people like this on purpose, but it does keep happening, if I am right the government has not learnt any lessons from the awful past where lack of staff, money and the system was the main contributor (and Shoesmith)

 

[ferring seagull]

I'm not from the flog 'em, beat 'em, hang 'em school of thought as you know.

However this behaviour seems off the scale in terms of its depravity and cruelty.

Is this a reflection of a too liberal judicial system, an appropriate sentence for two people whose addictions have impacted upon their ability to make decisions, or just a barometer of twenty-first century England?

If they don't flog them, beat them and then hang them they should certainly sterilise the woman to preclude the possibility of further such acts (as the courts should do in many circumstances to prevent recurrences of some of the most disgusting crimes against humanity ( our people ).

AH was right in some respects ) !

 

[Return of the Rev]

THIS!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVS5GGa2_Z8

 

[AmexRuislip]

The offence of child destruction refers to an unborn foetus (that is capable of being born alive) so not applicable here.

Thanks for the correction