Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I need not go over the finer details of what has happened as I am sure you know already. But for murdering 6 children, he has basically gotten off with a slap on the wrist.

    Thats 30 months per murder. British "justice" has sunk to a new low.

    I cant understand why he isn't hung from the neck or locked in a small room with no light for the rest of his life. But alas he will be out in time for his 72nd birthday and back to living off our backs.

    And those of you who say that it is a minimum term. Don't try and kid me, or your self. You know he will be out as soon as he is done with those 15. Thats how things work in the UK. Crime and laziness is rewarded in a failed system, that tragically failed 6 people to the cost of their lives.



    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ouse-plot.html
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    I need not go over the finer details of what has happened as I am sure you know already. But for murdering 6 children, he has basically gotten off with a slap on the wrist.

    Thats 30 months per murder. British "justice" has sunk to a new low.

    I cant understand why he isn't hung from the neck or locked in a small room with no light for the rest of his life. But alas he will be out in time for his 72nd birthday and back to living off our backs.

    And those of you who say that it is a minimum term. Don't try and kid me, or your self. You know he will be out as soon as he is done with those 15. Thats how things work in the UK. Crime and laziness is rewarded in a failed system, that tragically failed 6 people to the cost of their lives.



    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ouse-plot.html

    Stop being so irrational!
    He did not mean to kill those kids.
    I seen so many cases where women have stabbed their partner to death and got done for manslaughter and walked free in under 3 years!

    I find it sexist how the women always get the lighter sentence compared to the men.
    Philpott wife should have got 15 years as well, but women always play the "weak, woman controlled by the man" card. She is a nasty piece of work, lazy low life who just breeds kids and lives of tax payers.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    For starters the reason it's 15 years is because he wasn't convicted of murder it was manslaughter. Secondly it's not 15 years, he received a life sentence with a minimum of 15 years, that means he can't even begin to appeal to be let out on good behaviour for at least 15 years.

    Whereas the other two people got 17 years even though they didn't start the fire this is because they didn't get a life sentence meaning that techniqully they could be let out on good behaviour in a manner of a few years

    Although to be quite honest, I think all three of them will serve very long sentences and if they are let out early will have to change their identity, also they will probably cost less to keep them in prison than it will to keep them on all the benefits they were receiving


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    I need not go over the finer details of what has happened as I am sure you know already. But for murdering 6 children, he has basically gotten off with a slap on the wrist.

    Thats 30 months per murder. British "justice" has sunk to a new low.

    I cant understand why he isn't hung from the neck or locked in a small room with no light for the rest of his life. But alas he will be out in time for his 72nd birthday and back to living off our backs.

    And those of you who say that it is a minimum term. Don't try and kid me, or your self. You know he will be out as soon as he is done with those 15. Thats how things work in the UK. Crime and laziness is rewarded in a failed system, that tragically failed 6 people to the cost of their lives.



    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ouse-plot.html
    A minimum of 15 years...

    edit: see above post
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Abbieastoria)
    For starters the reason it's 15 years is because he wasn't convicted of murder it was manslaughter. Secondly it's not 15 years, he received a life sentence with a minimum of 15 years, that means he can't even begin to appeal to be let out on good behaviour for at least 15 years.

    Whereas the other two people got 17 years even though they didn't start the fire this is because they didn't get a life sentence meaning that techniqully they could be let out on good behaviour in a manner of a few years

    Although to be quite honest, I think all three of them will serve very long sentences and if they are let out early will have to change their identity, also they will probably cost less to keep them in prison than it will to keep them on all the benefits they were receiving


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    This post shows how desperately out of touch you are and lacking in sympathy of the innocent lives that have been taken.

    I know its manslaughter, I can read. But when you pour petrol on the floor of your house and light it knowing that your children are asleep upstairs, that is effectively murdering them, and he should have been tried as such.

    The other two will do half, as it standard in UK prisons. So they will be out and about soon enough.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehforum)
    A minimum of 15 years...

    edit: see above post
    And he will be out in 15. Thats what I am saying, cant you read my post?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ssxx)
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/newr...ply&p=42081774

    Stop being so irrational!
    He did not mean to kill those kids.
    I would like to see someone prove that he didnt.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    This post shows how desperately out of touch you are and lacking in sympathy of the innocent lives that have been taken.

    I know its manslaughter, I can read. But when you pour petrol on the floor of your house and light it knowing that your children are asleep upstairs, that is effectively murdering them, and he should have been tried as such.

    The other two will do half, as it standard in UK prisons. So they will be out and about soon enough.
    Murder:

    Actus Reus: Unlawful killing
    Mens Rea: Intent to kill or cause GBH.

    The prosecution's case was that they wanted to use this act of supposed heroism to persuade the Judge in his custody suit to award him custody. Therefore there was no intention to cause GBH or kill, therefore it wasn't murder.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by taintedCH)
    Murder:

    Actus Reus: Unlawful killing
    Mens Rea: Intent to kill or cause GBH.

    The prosecution's case was that they wanted to use this act of supposed heroism to persuade the Judge in his custody suit to award him custody. Therefore there was no intention to cause GBH or kill, therefore it wasn't murder.
    Like I was saying. This country is soft on justice. He got away with it.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Do you actually care about the children that died or is this all just a nice excuse for you and the Daily Mail to go on another political rant?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    Like I was saying. This country is soft on justice. He got away with it.
    He was sentenced to life imprisonment. Unless he can prove he is rehabilitated, he will never be released. He would only ever be released on licence too. I don't know about you, but I personally do not like the idea of retributive justice. I think retribution is best left for the countries in which thieves have their hands cut off. In Britain the system tries the scavenge the most of what's left and try to rebuild as many lives as possible.

    Were he to be executed, imagine how his family would suffer? He has 5 other children who, the crime aside, would likely not want to see their father die. This country is not soft on crime. We have an extremely high incarceration rate. Throwing people into prison does not solve the problems faced by society. You want to make people behave better? Raise people out of poverty and give them a decent education.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Redolent)
    Do you actually care about the children that died or is this all just a nice excuse for you and the Daily Mail to go on another political rant?
    I care that people died yes.

    I also care that people get away with doing it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    This post shows how desperately out of touch you are and lacking in sympathy of the innocent lives that have been taken.

    I know its manslaughter, I can read. But when you pour petrol on the floor of your house and light it knowing that your children are asleep upstairs, that is effectively murdering them, and he should have been tried as such.

    The other two will do half, as it standard in UK prisons. So they will be out and about soon enough.
    It isn't effectively murdering as it was not his intention to kill them, you can't just alter definitions and make false assertions to support your line of argument.
    Things have definitions for a reason, it was manslaughter, quite obviously and that is why they have been tried in this way.
    The justice system is not being out of touch, it is being logical and rational, something your failing at in this post.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    As much as I find what he did disgusting. It was manslaughter and not murder.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    I would like to see someone prove that he didnt.
    I would like to see you prove that he did?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Johnathon16)
    I would like to see you prove that he did?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The act in its self is prove enough.

    Also if people cant accept that this is murder, then maybe we need to redefine what manslaughter is.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    The act in its self is prove enough.

    Also if people cant accept that this is murder, then maybe we need to redefine what manslaughter is.
    But it wasn't ****ing murder as he wanted to get back at the woman who left.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    This post shows how desperately out of touch you are and lacking in sympathy of the innocent lives that have been taken.

    I know its manslaughter, I can read. But when you pour petrol on the floor of your house and light it knowing that your children are asleep upstairs, that is effectively murdering them, and he should have been tried as such.

    The other two will do half, as it standard in UK prisons. So they will be out and about soon enough.
    I resent that remark, I am not at all out of touch, I think what he did was absolutely disgraceful and he should never be let out when you also consider his past crimes he is a danger to society, however I was merely explaining why the judge would have ruled a 15year prison sentence


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    The act in its self is prove enough.

    Also if people cant accept that this is murder, then maybe we need to redefine what manslaughter is.
    No the act itself is not proof enough.

    Manslaughter is not in need of redefining either as it is perfectly logical and sensible.
    Murder requires intent to kill and if the act was not done with the intention of causing death it is not murder.
    If somebody punches a man in the face and he dies as a result is this murder? Should this person be tried on the same level as that of a man that has intentionally shot or stabbed somebody?



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    OP Do you believe that all who claim any benefit are workshy/lazy etc??


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 5, 2013
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.