Kiaran Stapleton: Is 30 Years too Leniant?

you don't understand how it workes mate in prison he has numerous priveladges TV's, Books, Food no bills to pay he is surrounded be like minded people (thugs) he is the type to revel in that enviroment prison in the UK is bloody easy my uncle is a prison guard and said that himself he said many of the criminals prefer it in prison and that's why so many end up back there. they become institutionalised and they get in their own little comfort zone in prison where they are feared by fellow prisoners.

If you think this man should ever walk the streets again you are an crazy. If not the death penalty then he should be locked in a single cell 9ft by 9ft with a sink and toilet, a stone bed with only a thin blanket, no windows and only a book to read which changes every 2 weeks he should be allowed out of his cell for 3 hours on a saturday where he will be allowed to exersise but not allowed to talk to other prisoners he should be allowed 1 visit every month he should stay in such conditions untill the day he dies and all assets he has should be given to the victims family.

To be fair, I thought he'd get a less severe sentence, given how the justice system of the UK is known to be somewhat more lenient than that of some other countries, so kudos to the judge / jury for managing to impose such a sentence.

Now, as to what I really think he deserves, is the death penalty, as he clearly is not remorseful (given his behaviour in the trial and his tattoo amongst other things), and would not , but rather be a burden on the taxpayer for the rest of his life for three main reasons:
- 30 years (minimum) in prison does not cost nothing
- He will most likely be unable to get a job if he is alive when his sentence has been served, and thus will be on the dole.
- I doubt people (not really sure whether this person is actually worthy of being called a person) like him would ever be reformed, and thus would go back into a life of crime (presuming he doesn't have people within the prison whom he can bribe), which will most likely indirectly (or directly) cost the taxpayer.

Therefore, I believe, that it is cases like this one, where the death penalty should be put into use.

I'm fully against the death penalty, instead I sincerely hope he loses his anal virginity in prison..

The ultimate punishment would be to be chained to the floor for the rest of your life so you can't commit suicide in a room by yourself and feed / get hydrated through tubing. Obviously naked with your bum over a hole to poo in, and you can pee over yourself, in fact you'd be castrated so you didn't have a penis and the pee would be remapped to the ******* to make it easier.

Imagine that

Minimum of 30 years..... So he could be out when he is 51. That's not life!! He could have 30+ more years to live, especially with healthcare ever improving!!!

I disagree with you on the death penalty argument but that is not matter for this thread.

The ultimate punishment would be to be chained to the floor for the rest of your life so you can't commit suicide in a room by yourself and feed / get hydrated through tubing. Obviously naked with your bum over a hole to poo in, and you can pee over yourself, in fact you'd be castrated so you didn't have a penis and the pee would be remapped to the ******* to make it easier.

Imagine that

"the killer of Indian student Anuj Bidve, has been jailed for life with a minimum of 30 years."

What is the issue? It is essentially the maximum sentence, how can it ever be described as 'too lenient'?.

In no way shape or form should we ever bring back the death penalty, ever.

Well, enjoy the crushing burden of paying to keep monsters like these locked up for the rest of their lives, just as the economy gets worse and worse.

Go get yourself clued up before speaking next time, death penalty costs more.

Why does society have to live and suffer with such utter scum? And now we have to keep him for the next 30 years at the taxpayers expense.

Explain?

Explain?