Huntley case typifies what's wrong with the criminal justice system

So lets get this right. A convicted child murderer is suing the prison service because another prisoner slashed his throat. Gosh my heart bleeds for him. How on earth anyone in their right mind could show one ounce of sympathy for that man, or indeed suggest that he very fact that he is able to bring such a case forward is sensible, is beyond me.

Until the rights of the victims of crime are given a much higher priority I just don’t want to hear anything about the rights of prisoners!

About these ads

12 Responses to Huntley case typifies what's wrong with the criminal justice system

  1. toryradio says:

    Therefore the ultimate conclusion could well be to indeed protect the likes of Huntley will locked up and reintroduce capital punishment? Something I assume you would support.

  2. toryradio says:

    Not being a member of the EU would be no huge loss.

    I prefer to think that how we measure society is how we treat our victims of crimes.

  3. Roger Helmer MEP says:

    As I Tweeted earlier, "Mr. Justice Bean (honest — I'm not making this up) says Venables must be protected. Errr….Why?"

    • John Hirst says:

      I am very surprised that a MEP is asking such a stupid question! Mr Venables (or whatever name he goes under now) is a human being and is therefore entitled to human rights. Perhaps, MEPs should be means tested to see if they have a high enough IQ to do the job of representing other people?
      My recent post Sarahs Law just another knee-jerk policy!

      • toryradio says:

        How does "means testing" equate to tetsing for intelligence? Mind you… you have said I have nothing between my ears.

      • John Hirst says:

        Sometimes it appears that there is only hot air between your ears. Try some rational thought process and apply logic.
        My recent post Sarahs Law just another knee-jerk policy!

      • toryradio says:

        LOL such sweet nothings

      • Roger Helmer MEP says:

        He is "entitled to human rights". these include a right to liberty, and a right to own property. Yet the criminal justice system deliberately curtails these rights, by fining peple or locking them up. So convicted criminals do not in fact have the same "human rights" as anyone else. In principle, of course, no one can approve of summary justice. Yet nor can I condemn those who are exceedingly angry with Venables for what he did.

  4. John Hirst says:

    Evetyone is entitled to protection under the law. As Mr Justice Bean rightly ruled recently in the Jon Venables case, "unpopular prisoners have as much right to protection from retribution as anyone else". It is Ian Huntley's legal right which I defend not the criminal conduct which warranted his imprisonment. No prisoner or prison officer has any right to exact additional punishment upon Mr Huntley. If he can show that the prison authorities were negligent then he will succeed in his claim.
    My recent post Sarahs Law just another knee-jerk policy!

  5. John Hirst says:

    It is very difficult protecting the likes of Mr Huntley in a prison environment. He has a human right to association with others, but by exercising this right it increases the potential for assault. It is a balancing exercise. If the liberty is not properly supervised by the guards, then particular prisoners can be very vulnerable. I think we should get away from the "Lock 'Em Up and Throw Away the Key" mentality.

    I do not support Capital Punishment, and no State can be a Member State of the Council of Europe or European Union if it engages in State sanctioned murder (Capital Punishment).

    A reminder of Winston S. Churchill's 1910 speech, that we can measure how civilised society is by how we treat prisoners, shows that some are still very primitive in thinking…
    My recent post Sarahs Law just another knee-jerk policy!

    • Roger Helmer MEP says:

      John: you are defying the plain meaning of words by seeking to conflate judicial execution with "murder". You might as well say that imposing a fine is "State Sanctioned Theft".

    • operanut1972 says:

      Er, why? "Can't take the time, don't do the crime!" So again, why are we not supporting capital punishment? Surely we the public have the right to carry on law abiding lives in the knowledge that we are safe from harm, and that should harm befall us, we have the weight of justice and retribution metered out by the courts? If someone has chosen to commit a crime they are throwing away their right to certain things as penance!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 21,440 other followers

%d bloggers like this: