David McGreavy: triple child killer cleared for release Watch

kazzykat95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#1
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...ester-46437471
This honestly disgusts me so much; someone who has murdered children is clearly not right in the head.
1
quote
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 week ago
#2
The current trend of believing that people can never rehabilitate is pretty bad too.
2
quote
reply
AngeryPenguin
Badges: 17
#3
Report 1 week ago
#3
(Original post by Drewski)
The current trend of believing that people can never rehabilitate is pretty bad too.
He's got a 45 year gap in his CV and a really bad rep. He's unemployable. He won't have a social network to fall back on. He's probably written out of his parents' wills. He'll probably get beaten up by vigilantes every so often. Might be blocked from using online services (if he even knows how to operate a computer) due to the nature of his crimes. Not sure about pensions but he might have a few years before he's eligible.

I bet he will turn back to crime, not only because he can't be right in the head but because he surely doesn't have another option.

Wouldn't it be kinder for everyone involved to just keep him in jail?
Last edited by AngeryPenguin; 1 week ago
quote
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 week ago
#4
(Original post by AngeryPenguin)
He's got a 45 year gap in his CV and a really bad rep. He's unemployable. He won't have a social network to fall back on. He's probably written out of his parents' wills. He'll probably get beaten up by vigilantes every so often. Might be blocked from using online services (if he even knows how to operate a computer) due to the nature of his crimes. Not sure about pensions but he might have a few years before he's eligible.

I bet he will turn back to crime, not only because he can't be right in the head but because he surely doesn't have another option.

Wouldn't it be kinder for everyone involved to just keep him in jail?
There are schemes around to help people.
I won't pretend to care that much about what happens to him as an individual, but I also won't pretend that I know better than the parole board.
Last edited by Drewski; 1 week ago
1
quote
reply
Rs5644
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 week ago
#5
(Original post by Drewski)
The current trend of believing that people can never rehabilitate is pretty bad too.
I'd say it's the opposite tbh.If you can murder 3 children and stick their bodies on spikes then you are unlikely to be able to be rehabilitated.Humans don't change that much.
1
quote
reply
LeapingLucy
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 week ago
#6
The purpose of our prison system is rehabilitation. This happened 40+ years ago. If the prison board are satisfied that he no longer poses a threat, then he should be let out.
0
quote
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 week ago
#7
(Original post by Rs5644)
I'd say it's the opposite tbh.If you can murder 3 children and stick their bodies on spikes then you are unlikely to be able to be rehabilitated.Humans don't change that much.
And that's why you're not in charge of the parole board.
1
quote
reply
iodo345
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 week ago
#8
They should bring back execution for people like this - then they wouldnt have to waste money on housing, feeding, looking after them etc as they obviously will go back to crime after prison
1
quote
reply
anosmianAcrimony
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 week ago
#9
(Original post by iodo345)
They should bring back execution for people like this - then they wouldnt have to waste money on housing, feeding, looking after them etc as they obviously will go back to crime after prison
Capital punishment, if used with the flimsiest pretense of human decency, requires so much expense in legal fees and additional security measures and personnel that it's cheaper to lock the person up for life.

And since when do we put money over human lives, anyway?
2
quote
reply
Notoriety
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 week ago
#10
(Original post by anosmianAcrimony)
Capital punishment, if used with the flimsiest pretense of human decency, requires so much expense in legal fees and additional security measures and personnel that it's cheaper to lock the person up for life.

And since when do we put money over human lives, anyway?
People say that, but that's calibrated on the US model of big showy trials and appeals on top of appeals at the state and federal level. There is nothing to say it would be the case in an English model.

(Original post by kazzykat95)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...ester-46437471
This honestly disgusts me so much; someone who has murdered children is clearly not right in the head.
He might not be, but you don't know the support he has been given -- over 45 years -- by shrinks and others to manage his demons. It might have helped him behave and think in a near-normal fashion.
0
quote
reply
anosmianAcrimony
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 week ago
#11
(Original post by Notoriety)
People say that, but that's calibrated on the US model of big showy trials and appeals on top of appeals at the state and federal level. There is nothing to say it would be the case in an English model.
If you, as a government, are going to pretend that what you're doing is right, you have to allow multiple appeals. An innocent person shouldn't be executed on the basis of a single trial or even two trials that find them guilty. I don't know about ''big showy'' trials, but you have to invest enough resources to be absolutely sure that the law has not gone astray. We could compromise on that and have a cheaper capital punishment justice system that found more innocent people guilty and executed them with less expense. I'll extend you the benefit of the doubt and assume you wouldn't be in favour of that.

Personally I'm against capital punishment in any form, because I consider it unacceptable if the government executes even a single innocent person.
0
quote
reply
Notoriety
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 week ago
#12
(Original post by anosmianAcrimony)
If you, as a government, are going to pretend that what you're doing is right, you have to allow multiple appeals. An innocent person shouldn't be executed on the basis of a single trial or even two trials that find them guilty. I don't know about ''big showy'' trials, but you have to invest enough resources to be absolutely sure that the law has not gone astray. We could compromise on that and have a cheaper capital punishment justice system that found more innocent people guilty and executed them with less expense. I'll extend you the benefit of the doubt and assume you wouldn't be in favour of that.

Personally I'm against capital punishment in any form, because I consider it unacceptable if the government executes even a single innocent person.
I think the ordinary appeals system works wonders. So for a murderer, he will have have a Crown Court trial. A decision. Most unlikely he will appeal, even more unlikely will he be successful in appealing. But he has the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court to go to, after the Crown Court. I am not sure why we would need an extra few steps because the person is going to be killed at the end of it. When locking anyone up we better be royally sure that they're guilty and that the sentence is appropriate. We don't need to interrogate whether the original trial was properly constituted because we have a firmer understanding of the rule of law and fair trials here versus the US. Also we have a more professional judiciary -- many state judges are elected officials, and hopeless.

Anyway, the US way is a lot different in hierachy of the courts -- state trial, state court of appeal, state supreme court, federal district court, federal court of appeal, and then the Supreme Court. A lot of the litigation comes from determining jurisdiction and constitutional questions, e.g. questions about Bill of Rights and the ability of states to make certain laws, rather than determining the potential liability of the person accused or the severity of the sentence.

To sum it up, it not quite right to say that an English capital punishment method must be more expensive than simply housing a prisoner for life. That argument is based on the American model. And look at the Privy Council's decisions affecting Commonwealth states who still have capital punishment -- simple and to the point, not hugely protracted or mutli-tiered (even though they're from other sovereign nations!).
0
quote
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 week ago
#13
Oh that poor mother.
She's already undergone over four decades of the most terrible suffering possible, I can't imagine what she's going through now.
Baby daughter battered to death, four year old son strangled and two year old daughter's throat slit open.
All three children murdered in their own home and either mutilated after death or left to die in agony impaled to a spike.

Another shameful and catastrophic sentencing decision from the parole board.
Three murder convictions, the sentence served seems to equate a life sentence for murder with 15 years x 3.
Bereaved mother "begged" for the child murder who stole her children's lives and devastated hers to remain locked up for life and is ignored.
The Monster of Worcester makes known that he prefers parole to being a convicted murderer incarcerated for life, parole board appease him.
Truly astounding.
Horrifying events and absolutely dire for the credibility of British justice.
1
quote
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 week ago
#14
(Original post by Drewski)
The current trend of believing that people can never rehabilitate is pretty bad too.
The probation service don't seem to reflect such a trend.
Nor does the long list of other murderers, serial rapists, career burglars and a bunch of other horrifying violent/sexual offenders granted probation or release without serving full sentence term.

For me its not so much the rehabilitation issue as one of criminal justice principles- mixed with concern for the distress this course of action causes to the bereaved mother, the precedent it sets and the financial costs involved in relocating/safeguarding the murderer over the next few years.
0
quote
reply
Rs5644
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 week ago
#15
(Original post by Notoriety)
People say that, but that's calibrated on the US model of big showy trials and appeals on top of appeals at the state and federal level. There is nothing to say it would be the case in an English model.


He might not be, but you don't know the support he has been given -- over 45 years -- by shrinks and others to manage his demons. It might have helped him behave and think in a near-normal fashion.
Hmm and can they change his DNA too? It might be unpopular to state it but I'd say there is a fair chance that murderers are born not made.If murderous impulses are genetic then psychotherapy won't do much good.
0
quote
reply
Just my opinion
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#16
Report 1 week ago
#16
He should never see the light of day for what he did. It should have been a whole life tariff.
1
quote
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 week ago
#17
(Original post by Drewski)
And that's why you're not in charge of the parole board.
Well said.
(Original post by londonmyst)
Oh that poor mother.
She's already undergone over four decades of the most terrible suffering possible, I can't imagine what she's going through now.
Baby daughter battered to death, four year old son strangled and two year old daughter's throat slit open.
All three children murdered in their own home and either mutilated after death or left to die in agony impaled to a spike.
Was there any point in this little diatribe other than to try and inflame peoples passions?
Another shameful and catastrophic sentencing decision from the parole board.
Pray tell why it is 'shameful and catastrophic'? Do you know any of the factors they used to come to this decision? I rather doubt it.
Three murder convictions, the sentence served seems to equate a life sentence for murder with 15 years x 3.
Bereaved mother "begged" for the child murder who stole her children's lives and devastated hers to remain locked up for life and is ignored.
Probably because we live in a country with a free and impartial judiciary that doesnt pander to the hoi pollois every whim or we'd be blowing people from guns still.
The Monster of Worcester makes known that he prefers parole to being a convicted murderer incarcerated for life, parole board appease him.
Truly astounding.
Do you know what you're writing?
Horrifying events and absolutely dire for the credibility of British justice.
Do you even know the point of the justice system in this country? We don't live in a system of mob rule by the ignorant masses for a damn good reason.
Besides, it isnt designed as a purely punitive one and your ignorance of this is rather telling.
0
quote
reply
StriderHort
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#18
Report 1 week ago
#18
*shrug* He's done 45 years and the parole board have decided he's no longer a sufficient threat, some people will never be happy as long as he (and others) exist regardless of what the law or rehab achieves. (So there is little point trying to appease them)

I feel for the mum for obvious reasons, but again, it's been 45 years, whatever an official might have told her in the 70's things change a lot, it's understandable for her to want the guy never released, but well, it's not up to her, her wishes are largely incompatible with UK justice.

The idea that people shouldn't be realsed from prison if 3rd parties don't think they have a lot to live for is pretty insidious, there's a reason we call it a sentence and not a whim, no different to your boss deciding not to pay you because they think you'll waste it.
0
quote
reply
zhog
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#19
Report 1 week ago
#19
The media have developed an unhealthy habit of tapping into 'controversial releases' for a story and that is bad news for the justice system, we end up with people like Warboys being dragged into the public arena to feed the 'public outcry' and therefore being dispensed 'popular justice' instead of what it should be. He never stood a chance at his last hearing, the pannel terrified at the prospect of the populace camped outside for his head. This is not the way the justice system is supposed to work, the question is whether this is how the people want it to be like.
0
quote
reply
StriderHort
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#20
Report 1 week ago
#20
(Original post by zhog)
The media have developed an unhealthy habit of tapping into 'controversial releases' for a story and that is bad news for the justice system, we end up with people like Warboys being dragged into the public arena to feed the 'public outcry' and therefore being dispensed 'popular justice' instead of what it should be. He never stood a chance at his last hearing, the pannel terrified at the prospect of the populace camped outside for his head. This is not the way the justice system is supposed to work, the question is whether this is how the people want it to be like.
I feel that was a bit different though, in the case of Worboys the parole board essentially seemed to have went rogue and refused to take into account a lot of his suspected crimes, it was quite genuinely a case where the general public had more more accurate info on Worboys than the board did, and the boards response was to basically stonewall and pretend it wasn't an issue, if I remember right that's when the outcry really started and the Chairman got punted...It's like when a dog tries to steal something from your plate, and you say 'NO!' ...and it slowly looks you in the eye and moves towards the plate again...The Parole Board made it clear they couldn't be trusted to act reasonably and that got folk worried.

No, that's not how the system is supposed to work, but tbh afterwards that panel SHOULD have been professionally terrified, they'd massively fked up and broken their own rules trying to set someone with a VERY long history of offending and failed rehab free for the sake of their own paperwork and nothing else, I suspect people felt in the citcumstances they had no option but to oppose the Parole Board. By their own rules Worboys was in no way eligable for release.
0
quote
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Were you ever put in isolation at school?

Yes (233)
27.51%
No (614)
72.49%

Watched Threads

View All