• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Should Peter Sutcliffe be released?

I would definately be wary of the release of a serial killer. They may have controlled his schizophrenia with therapy/medication, but it's the serial killer part that's the problem. The two aren't necessarily linked.
 
Huh, here in America getting a passport is rather rare. I know of only a handful of people who have one.


One strange thing about these supposed illnesses that I never understand is why people listen to the inanimate objects that talk. I mean if a headstone suddenly starts talking to me I would conclude my brain is malfunctioning because headstones don't talk I certainly wouldn't take advice from it, let alone kill someone on it's command.
 
A prediction: he won't be let out, unless pigs start flying about and Scotland wins the world cup.

I've always thought that his claims about hearing voices were mere lies. Has anyone here read the transcripts of his confessions during the initial police interviews? He murdered all those women because he enjoyed it. There is no way that any thinking justice would consider releasing that man, even if avoiding this outcome would require some truly twisted legal reasoning.

[edit] Yay...500th post. Do I get cake or some such?
 
A prediction: he won't be let out, unless pigs start flying about and Scotland wins the world cup.

I've always thought that his claims about hearing voices were mere lies. Has anyone here read the transcripts of his confessions during the initial police interviews? He murdered all those women because he enjoyed it. There is no way that any thinking justice would consider releasing that man, even if avoiding this outcome would require some truly twisted legal reasoning.

[edit] Yay...500th post. Do I get cake or some such?

You get a party with a well dressed clown. :D
 
One strange thing about these supposed illnesses that I never understand is why people listen to the inanimate objects that talk. I mean if a headstone suddenly starts talking to me I would conclude my brain is malfunctioning because headstones don't talk I certainly wouldn't take advice from it, let alone kill someone on it's command.

No, no. Inanimate objects don't speak, therefore if God speaks to you through an inanimate object you can be certain that it really is God, because who else has the power to make an inanimate object speak?

It's quite simple. Now, go out and start murdering people.

Re: Venables and his passport; I think there is a combination factors to consider which include "they probably offer a very very low risk of reoffending indeed" and "if their new identities are compromised they are at a very very high risk of being lynched". Combine those two, and making their new lives seem as normal as possible makes sense. After all - who doesn't have a passport, or can't get one if required? And any other convicted criminal is allowed to possess one, I can't see why they shouldn't be able to as well. There's no particular reason why their new identity shouldn't be declined a visa.
 
Last edited:
And as I understand it, many of you only get 2 weeks holiday in the year. If I was in that position, I'd do a "staycation" as well!

Rolfe.
 
Personally I think the question/concern should be: "Is 30 years even close to sufficient for 13 murders and seven attempts".
Certainly it is not enough if the intention of punishment was to avenge. If the intention is to correct, deter and protect society then it could be sufficient yes.
 
Sorry for the derail here, but please, someone tell me this CNN story is wrong about the circumstances regarding Thompson and Venables release: [ . . . ] They were given new passports?! They were permitted to travel outside the UK to other countries who had no idea who they are?
My speculation only, but I believe it is possible to issue a passport but still forbid travel out of the UK (and for the passport to be rejected at the UK border, since someone always has to do more than flash it at someone both for ticketing and for border control)

And as for why that would be worth doing, it could well be tied up with giving new identities to the offenders, so that nothing about their external identity carries the remotest suspicion of their past.
 
Certainly it is not enough if the intention of punishment was to avenge. If the intention is to correct, deter and protect society then it could be sufficient yes.

I'm all for corrective detention, but I also believe that some crimes are heinous enought to make somebodies freedom (indeed their life) forever forfeit.
 
There's a traditional, somewhat obsolete solution for this, but one often applied in earlier days in similar cases. Release him and order him transported. Basically make it someone else's problem. Drop him off on the beach in Melbourne.

A
 
Last edited:
There's a traditional, somewhat obsolete solution for this, but one often applied in earlier days in similar cases. Release him and order him transported. Basically make it someone else's problem. Drop him off on the beach in Melbourne.

A

Shows what you know, convicts weren't transportated to Melbourne. :D
 
There's a traditional, somewhat obsolete solution for this, but one often applied in earlier days in similar cases. Release him and order him transported. Basically make it someone else's problem. Drop him off on the beach in Melbourne.

A

If you're going to try and justify transportation, I think we need a new thread.
 
If you're going to try and justify transportation, I think we need a new thread.

Naaah. I'm not arguing for it, as at this stage it would just be exporting a problem. No place on earth suitable to transport to. Who'd take this one? Look at the trouble the USA has had finding nations willing to resettle the Guantanamo folks, even the ones who we never charged or proved did anything.

I'm actually of mixed feelings on this one. On the one hand, the fella did some really terrible things and there's no way to know for sure if he'll reoffend, so throw away the key and keep him in a cage forever. On the other hand, there's the concept of 'take your punishment, pay your debt, and get another chance'. The practical probably lies somewhere in the middle.

A
 
I'm aware of that, actually. I went back and edited it to read Melbourne, for reasons more related to taking the piss, so to speak.

A

Humour not your strong suit huh? ;)
Y'know pisstakin is an Aussie pasttime and we see right through amateurish efforts. :rolleyes:
 
I freely admit it's amateurish, but you did take the bait, proving that amateurish efforts are sufficient when standards are low. Some fish need bait that looks like the real thing in every aspect, but some fish will bite at anything shiny... One could use this to test the intelligence of fish, I imagine.

A
 
Last edited:

Yes.

(Oh you want some verification do you.. well it's my bedtime so it will have to wait!)

Sadly here's a very recent example: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/staffordshire/8551940.stm
 
Let me think really hard about this.
A man is convicted of 13 murders and 7 attempts.
He may, or may not be clinically insane as well as a mass murderer.
We have a choice;-
1. Lock him away for ever.
2. Let him out
3. Put him down.

Why does everyone find this so hard?
 

Back
Top Bottom