LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksLet him serve his sentance then he can leave.
Let him serve his sentance then he can leave.
Uh, it's probably cheaper to let *many* of the worse criminals run free. The reasons to lock someone up is not just, and I dare say primary not, an economical one.Originally Posted by dangel
He should not get parole, so he is old and ill now, tough! he shouldn't have tried to stay out of jail by going abroad.
The trouble is that nowadays too many people are let out of jail early, and it no longer acts a deterant. Remove their TV's, stick half a dozen in a cell and make them do hard labour. Wait a minute, "Human Rights" you say? They gave those up the moment they decided to break the law - we should be worried about the human rights of the victims, not the criminals!
Perhaps I wasn't clear enough:
- he's a cripple.
- he's a piece of scum.
- he has no quality of life to speak of.
- his total risk to society is exactly... diddly squat.
- he's costing me (and you) money
therefore, all I care about is reducing the burden on the state - as far as i'm concerned he can rot in hell.
Follow now?
Crosshair VIII Hero (WIFI), 3900x, 32GB DDR4, Many SSDs, EVGA FTW3 3090, Ethoo 719
Different debate, remeber Pinochet was considered by some to be the lessor of evils. But yes Mr Straw letting him off did seam a bit off!
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
How exactly is a foreign-puppet military dictator who committed horrific human rights abuses on a massive scale in any way the lesser evil than the democratically elected president he overthrew to protect US interests at the expense of the Chilean people?
Spain requested his extradition to stand trial, he was under house arrest in the UK, Jack Straw let him go free as a personal decision that spat in the face of judicial process on an international level. Much, much worse than if he were to release Ronnie Biggs for no damn reason either.
Yer I agree with you mate
Exactly that point, to protect US interests. Ronnie Biggs did it with no friends in high places.
You can't put the same crimes together, they are very different, as there are people who will argue for the helpful ness of pinochet, there are some reasons why both sucsessive governments we have had have been chummy with him. Sometimes using the devil can be helpful for maintaining ideals.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
Brilliant answer, exactly how I feel about it all.
The problem with politicians arresting other politicians is that they all have a "There, but for the grace of God, go I" sort of feeling. No politician wants to approve of punishing another politician for any crime, in case it sets a bad precedent for when he gets caught.
There have to be two laws in place, or how else would our politicians go about their illegitimate business?
(Thanks Evilmunky)
Eagles may soar, but weasels never get sucked into jet intakes.
I think they discovered capital punishment costs just as much.therefore, all I care about is reducing the burden on the state - as far as i'm concerned he can rot in hell.
Follow now?
Total burden on state is probably least if he stays in jail - as said before there is a portion of sentencing that is chosen for deterrant reasons as much as rehabilition and justice. If the next Ronnie is put off from commiting the crime then that's a massive saving for the state, and if not, then maybe they'll stay away rather than come back for benefits.
"Jail isn't just about protecting society. It's also about being a deterrant and a punishment.
Leave him locked up until his snetence is complete or he dies."
+1 noting that he'd be out already had he completed his sentence earlier in life.
Was reading the Wikipedia article and noticed this:
Gotta love The Sun.In 2001 Biggs announced to The Sun that he would be willing to return to the UK. Biggs was aware that he would be detained upon arrival in England and returned voluntarily on 7 May 2001, and was immediately arrested and re-imprisoned. His trip back to England on a private jet was paid for by The Sun, which reportedly paid Michael Biggs £20,000 plus other expenses in return for exclusive rights on the news story. Ronald Biggs had 28 years of his sentence left to serve.
But, like many others, I think he should of finished his sentence like everyone else including the extra time for running off.
He was released a few days ago:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8188898.stmBut on Thursday Mr Straw said the medical evidence clearly showed "that Mr Biggs is very ill and that his condition has deteriorated recently".
He added: "His condition is not expected to improve. It is for that reason that I am granting Mr Biggs compassionate release on medical grounds."
The common sense in me says he committed a crime which injured the train driver and could possibly have contributed to his death, whatever, it certainly didn't do the poor sod any good. None of the train robbers ever owned up to being the one who hit him either.
So no, no parole. As the old saying goes 'If you can't do the time, don't do the crime' but he did and he didn't.
He wasn't a loveable old lag he was a cheap two-bit SE London second rate criminal who got lucky then didn't have the bottle to serve his time.
He then stuck two fingers up at Britain cavorting about with what was left of the Sex Pistols. And that was quite apt, the Sex Pistols without Johnny Lydon were minor league and so was Biggs.
However, his days are very likely numbered so it wouldn't hurt the powers that be to show some compassion and give him an act of kindness before he dies.
it does hurt imo, they should make in die in jail as a form of deterrent, just as they should have the krays.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
