The Student Room Group

Ann Maguire 16 year old killer has been sentenced to a minimum of 20 years

Scroll to see replies

Reply 82
Original post by CJKay
Psychopaths have the highest re-offending rate of any other inmates. I am inclined to suggest they make the sentence longer.


Has he been officially diagnosed as a psychopath?

I may have missed it where he has, although to my knowledge the only time that word has been used in relation to this case was when it was splashed on the front cover of the Daily Mail.

I obviously think what he did was horrendous, I also believe that the sentence is fair. I do not think it is fair to label him a psychopath unless that is how he has been diagnosed however. If you can provide the source of the diagnosis I would love to read it.
Reply 83
this **** shouldnt ever see the light of day again
He should be sentenced to life without Parole. He deserves to be punished !!
Original post by Thuggee
this **** shouldnt ever see the light of day again



Original post by -Native Briton-
He should be sentenced to life without Parole. He deserves to be punished !!


For what purpose? What is gained by such a sentence?
Original post by james22
For what purpose? What is gained by such a sentence?


The fact that justice has been served and that he is being justly punished for his horrendous crime and the fact that it would act as a much stronger deterrent.
Original post by -Native Briton-
The fact that justice has been served and that he is being justly punished for his horrendous crime and the fact that it would act as a much stronger deterrent.


Yeah because before he did what he did, I am certain he thought: "Oh, I sure hope I don't get punished too much..."

Because that is what a totoally reasonable person would think. And he is clearly a totally reasonable person.
Original post by InnerTemple
Yeah because before he did what he did, I am certain he thought: "Oh, I sure hope I don't get punished too much..."

Because that is what a totoally reasonable person would think. And he is clearly a totally reasonable person.


How are you so certain about what he thought ? Do you have ability to read peoples minds ?
Original post by -Native Briton-
How are you so certain about what he thought ? Do you have ability to read peoples minds ?


Yes. Yes I do.

But even if I wasn't blessed with this super power, I'd still be willing to bet that he didn't really care about the consequences of his actions.
Original post by InnerTemple
Yes. Yes I do.

But even if I wasn't blessed with this super power, I'd still be willing to bet that he didn't really care about the consequences of his actions.


Whether he did or not. That is not to say the a life without parole sentence is not an effective deterrent.
This kid will probably run the prison as the psycho who will bite anything. He may not get sculpted for a while.
Original post by -Native Briton-
The fact that justice has been served and that he is being justly punished for his horrendous crime and the fact that it would act as a much stronger deterrent.


Absolutely no evidence that it acts as more of a deterrent.

As to the rest of your post-how does that benifit anybody else?
Original post by james22
Absolutely no evidence that it acts as more of a deterrent.

As to the rest of your post-how does that benifit anybody else?


well you cannot quantify if it would act as a deterrent unless your a mind read or can see alternative timelines of the future. I would say it would obviously be deterrent as it is a harsher sentence and it benefits society to keep murders locked away for life for obvious reasons. Whether it benefits the average person on the street is either here nor there as I believe that life without parole for such a wicked killing is justice being served i believe it is a punishment that fits the crime
Original post by james22
Absolutely no evidence that it acts as more of a deterrent.

As to the rest of your post-how does that benifit anybody else?


how about this for evidence that longer sentences act as a deterrent -

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090518111726.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8504923/Longer-prison-sentences-deter-re-offending-study-shows.html
Original post by -Native Briton-
well you cannot quantify if it would act as a deterrent unless your a mind read or can see alternative timelines of the future. I would say it would obviously be deterrent as it is a harsher sentence and it benefits society to keep murders locked away for life for obvious reasons. Whether it benefits the average person on the street is either here nor there as I believe that life without parole for such a wicked killing is justice being served i believe it is a punishment that fits the crime


Evidence suggests that harsh punishments do not act as a deterrent. Just look that the USA for exampl,e they have extreme sentencing yet have a far higher crime rate.



I'm not sure if you actually read those. The first refers to suspended sentences for people who have already been to prison (neither applying here). The second says that they cannot conclude what the reason for lower reoffending was. They can't even decide if it was the time in prison or the time on licence that made them less likely to reoffend, let alone take into account that those on longer sentences may be a very different type of criminal (so not compareable) or that they were better rehabilitated. Even then it refers to reoffending rate not crime rate, so neither of these articles applies to this case at all even if they were totally valid.
Original post by james22
Evidence suggests that harsh punishments do not act as a deterrent. Just look that the USA for exampl,e they have extreme sentencing yet have a far higher crime rate.



I'm not sure if you actually read those. The first refers to suspended sentences for people who have already been to prison (neither applying here). The second says that they cannot conclude what the reason for lower reoffending was. They can't even decide if it was the time in prison or the time on licence that made them less likely to reoffend, let alone take into account that those on longer sentences may be a very different type of criminal (so not compareable) or that they were better rehabilitated. Even then it refers to reoffending rate not crime rate, so neither of these articles applies to this case at all even if they were totally valid.


Crime would probably be much more prevalent in the US if they did not have long sentences.
Original post by -Native Briton-
Crime would probably be much more prevalent in the US if they did not have long sentences.


This is all guesswork from you. Please provide actually evidence.
Original post by -Native Briton-
Crime would probably be much more prevalent in the US if they did not have long sentences.


Haha, Classic.

Person 1: Harsh sentences don't deter - look at America
Person 2: Well, they aren't being harsh enough!!
Original post by james22
This is all guesswork from you. Please provide actually evidence.


I already have

Quick Reply

Latest