This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/int/news/-/news/uk-11648739
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 3 | Version 4 |
|---|---|
| Murder life sentences questioned in attitudes research | Murder life sentences questioned in attitudes research |
| (about 4 hours later) | |
| Research into the sentencing of murderers has found no evidence that people support mandatory life imprisonment. | Research into the sentencing of murderers has found no evidence that people support mandatory life imprisonment. |
| The study found that those questioned had varying views about how long to jail murderers. | The study found that those questioned had varying views about how long to jail murderers. |
| The report, funded by the charity the Nuffield Foundation, said the public had limited understanding of how convicted murderers were sentenced. | The report, funded by the charity the Nuffield Foundation, said the public had limited understanding of how convicted murderers were sentenced. |
| Researchers interviewed more than 1,000 people across in England and Wales. | Researchers interviewed more than 1,000 people across in England and Wales. |
| The mandatory life sentence for all murders was introduced in 1965, when the death penalty was abolished. | The mandatory life sentence for all murders was introduced in 1965, when the death penalty was abolished. |
| Vague understanding | Vague understanding |
| The study by Coventry University's Professor Barry Mitchell and Oxford University's Professor Julian Roberts found the vast majority of those interviewed incorrectly believed there were more murders in England and Wales now than a decade ago. | The study by Coventry University's Professor Barry Mitchell and Oxford University's Professor Julian Roberts found the vast majority of those interviewed incorrectly believed there were more murders in England and Wales now than a decade ago. |
| But they went on: "We found no evidence of overwhelming or widespread public support for automatically sending all convicted murderers to life imprisonment. | But they went on: "We found no evidence of overwhelming or widespread public support for automatically sending all convicted murderers to life imprisonment. |
| "We found considerable evidence that the public perceive significant variations in the seriousness of different murder scenarios." | "We found considerable evidence that the public perceive significant variations in the seriousness of different murder scenarios." |
| Public support for the life sentence increased in relation to the seriousness of the crime, said the paper. | Public support for the life sentence increased in relation to the seriousness of the crime, said the paper. |
| It also asked people what they thought about "joint enterprise" murders - typically gang killings where more than one member was present, but only one of them carried out the attack. | It also asked people what they thought about "joint enterprise" murders - typically gang killings where more than one member was present, but only one of them carried out the attack. |
| The study said that just one-fifth of those surveyed said it was right to convict someone of murder if they had not struck the fatal blow. | The study said that just one-fifth of those surveyed said it was right to convict someone of murder if they had not struck the fatal blow. |
| The authors said that their survey also indicated the public only vaguely understood that murderers released on a life licence could be recalled to prison at any time, despite having served a minimum term, known as a tariff. | The authors said that their survey also indicated the public only vaguely understood that murderers released on a life licence could be recalled to prison at any time, despite having served a minimum term, known as a tariff. |
| "We found evidence that in relation to the more serious murders, those members of the public who favour release at some stage are content for sentencing judges to be given some measure of discretion, but would like that discretion to be limited or controlled, either through legal guidelines or through minimum and maximum periods of imprisonment," said the report. | "We found evidence that in relation to the more serious murders, those members of the public who favour release at some stage are content for sentencing judges to be given some measure of discretion, but would like that discretion to be limited or controlled, either through legal guidelines or through minimum and maximum periods of imprisonment," said the report. |
| The research team said that if the law mirrored public opinion, then the mandatory life sentence would be reserved for the most serious murder cases - and judges would be able to sentence other murderers to different terms. | The research team said that if the law mirrored public opinion, then the mandatory life sentence would be reserved for the most serious murder cases - and judges would be able to sentence other murderers to different terms. |
| The Law Commission, which advises government, proposed such a three-tiered system in 2006 - but the then government rejected it. | The Law Commission, which advises government, proposed such a three-tiered system in 2006 - but the then government rejected it. |
| It suggested first-degree murder, carrying a mandatory life sentence; second-degree murder, with a life term at the discretion of the judge plus sentence guidelines; and manslaughter, also with a maximum penalty of life. | It suggested first-degree murder, carrying a mandatory life sentence; second-degree murder, with a life term at the discretion of the judge plus sentence guidelines; and manslaughter, also with a maximum penalty of life. |
| Despite the lack of political support for such a move, top lawyers - including Keir Starmer, the current Director of Public Prosecutions, and his immediate predecessor Lord MacDonald - have continued to argue for the introduction of distinct first and second-degree murder charges. | Despite the lack of political support for such a move, top lawyers - including Keir Starmer, the current Director of Public Prosecutions, and his immediate predecessor Lord MacDonald - have continued to argue for the introduction of distinct first and second-degree murder charges. |
| Your comments: | |
| For a long time I have felt that we should have first and second degree murder. I also think capital punishment should be introduced for very serious murders such as the recent murder of a 15-month-old baby. It would be interesting to know how many people in the survey were affected by a murder that might change the findings. I find it hard to accept that someone who gets a life term for a horrific murder can be released in say, 15 years. | |
| Dave Wild, Stockport | |
| There should be distinct classifications of murder depending on the severity and the circumstances - from life meaning life to 10 years minimum. Sentences should reflect the seriousness of the crime and act as a deterrent. | |
| Paul Friswell, Rugby, Warwickshire | |
| My own view is that hanging should be re-instated for the worst crimes committed, and that includes murder. I am also of the opinion that jail has become far too amenable and although we should never revert back to the values of the Victorian era, prisoners should not be allowed to have luxuries such as the lottery, colour TVs etc. What seems to escape too many of the do-gooders in this country is that these people chose to break the laws of the land. | |
| Phil Christie, London | |
| I am appalled after reading this article that there is a possibility that the laws in this country could be softened further. It is becoming a bit of a joke. Since when was it OK to take a person's life and not receive the punishment that follows? No wonder people commit murder in this country as all they actually receive is a slap on the wrist. | |
| Jenny Gustafson, London | |
| A death at someone else's hands is a serious occurrence. However, I agree that the punishment needs to reflect the manner in which the death occurred. There is a big difference between a death during a heated argument, one that was planned in advance with a level head, and one that resulted from negligence. Just using the strongest punishment in each case does not reflect this and will not bring the dead person back. | |
| Simon Wilkinson, Romsey | |
| I believe 'life' should mean life. Murder is pre-planned (as far as I'm aware!), so should be punished. Soft crimes get more attention than these terrible ones. Just because the prison system is bulging and the government wants to save money shouldn't excuse people's crime. I certainly don't want a draconian state, but murder is murder and should be punished accordingly. You take someone's life, you should pay with your own (remaining life). | |
| Matthew, Plymouth | |
| As someone who worked with both victims and the perpetrators of violent crime, including murder, I fail to see why someone who has killed someone else, by dangerous driving should be seen as a less of a threat to others. Murdering someone is causing the loss of a life, be that by dangerous driving, stabbing, shooting, or whatever form it takes. Stop bleating on about varying sentences to fit the crime, when killing someone, is just that, murder, not a mistake. Make life mean life, and send out a clear message to anyone who thinks they can get away with a shorter sentence. | |
| Steve, Swindon | |
| They are asking the wrong questions. The real question is should we be keeping violent killers in prison or giving them a death sentence. Why are we wasting tax revenue keeping them in prison? | |
| Graham Sweetman, Llandysul, Wales |