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/news/uk-26236225

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Court of Appeal to announce ruling on whole-life terms Court of Appeal to announce ruling on whole-life terms
(about 9 hours later)
The Court of Appeal is set to announce its ruling on whether whole-life prison terms for some killers are legal.The Court of Appeal is set to announce its ruling on whether whole-life prison terms for some killers are legal.
The court heard the case last month, with a lawyer for the attorney general saying the terms were "not manifestly excessive or wrong in principle".The court heard the case last month, with a lawyer for the attorney general saying the terms were "not manifestly excessive or wrong in principle".
It came after the European Court of Human Rights ruled last year that the terms must be reviewed at some point.It came after the European Court of Human Rights ruled last year that the terms must be reviewed at some point.
The ruling could affect the sentencing of soldier Lee Rigby's killers, which was postponed pending the outcome.The ruling could affect the sentencing of soldier Lee Rigby's killers, which was postponed pending the outcome.
The judge said he would wait for the decision before passing sentence on Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, who were convicted in December of killing Fusilier Rigby in Woolwich, south-east London, in May last year.The judge said he would wait for the decision before passing sentence on Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, who were convicted in December of killing Fusilier Rigby in Woolwich, south-east London, in May last year.
Three casesThree cases
In a wider context, the ruling could determine the future direction of sentencing for the most serious murderers in England and Wales, as well as have an impact on the 52 prisoners currently on whole-life terms.In a wider context, the ruling could determine the future direction of sentencing for the most serious murderers in England and Wales, as well as have an impact on the 52 prisoners currently on whole-life terms.
Five of the country's top judges have considered three cases.Five of the country's top judges have considered three cases.
The ECHR, in Strasbourg, ruled last year that whole-life terms were a breach of human rights, following a successful appeal by convicted murderers Jeremy Bamber, Douglas Vinter and Peter Moore. The European Court of Human Rights, in Strasbourg, ruled last year that whole-life terms were a breach of human rights, following a successful appeal by convicted murderers Jeremy Bamber, Douglas Vinter and Peter Moore.
The court said that while it accepted whole-life orders could be justified, there should nevertheless be some way of having a sentence reviewed after 25 years.The court said that while it accepted whole-life orders could be justified, there should nevertheless be some way of having a sentence reviewed after 25 years.
That decision prompted the judge dealing with McLoughlin to sentence him to life with a minimum term of 40 years, rather than a whole-life term.That decision prompted the judge dealing with McLoughlin to sentence him to life with a minimum term of 40 years, rather than a whole-life term.
'No basis''No basis'
In January, James Eadie QC, representing Attorney General Dominic Grieve QC, said the Court of Appeal had already set out very clear principles and guidance on how whole-life orders could be imposed.In January, James Eadie QC, representing Attorney General Dominic Grieve QC, said the Court of Appeal had already set out very clear principles and guidance on how whole-life orders could be imposed.
He said the ECHR judgement did not remove the right of judges to impose a whole-life term - it only raised a question for the state as to whether there should be a later review. He said the European Court judgement did not remove the right of judges to impose a whole-life term - it only raised a question for the state as to whether there should be a later review.
"There is no basis for interfering with these sentences," he said."There is no basis for interfering with these sentences," he said.
He told judges that if a sentencing court was of the opinion that because of the seriousness of the offending, a minimum term should not be fixed, the court must impose a whole-life order.
He said any failure to do so "renders the sentence imposed unduly lenient".
The European decision, he said, did not make the imposition of a whole-life order "manifestly excessive or wrong in principle".
Lawyers for Lee Newell have argued that a whole-life term in his case was "manifestly excessive".
If he was given a 40-year minimum he would have the "flickering possibility that one day when he is 85 he will be released from prison".
Others serving whole-life terms in England and Wales include Moors Murderer Ian Brady and serial killer Rosemary West.