Chopped wife into 224 pieces

Ayresome_park said:
Each to there own chutney 👍, in the case which I've posted and in my opinion he should pay the full consequence of his actions and at the very minimum be never allowed out of his cell again, life should mean life. Also I wonder how the poor girls family feel with that sentence he has received.
Click to expand...
Ah the old "life should mean life" argument. Just take 3 minutes of your day to look up what it means to be sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term before being eligible for parole. It's really not that complicated.
 
Counter_Press said:
He hasn't been given 19 years. You clearly have no grasp of how life sentences with time served before being eligible for parole works
Click to expand...
What does the news article say on his sentence? I can only go from what I have read and to be fair I've never killed, stabbed or shot anyone, served any type of time so with your obvious experience please enlighten me 👍
 
I'm talking about this particular case, this lad, if the option was available should recieve the death penalty and I'm sure the poor victims family would agree with that. If it was inconclusive and there were questions around his guilt I can totally understand others point of view and I would be against it too but in this case he is bang to right, 100% guilty of a horrible act in which he knew what he was doing.

Talking about other people and weather it would put them off murdering someone is a different topic, I'm specifically talking about this case which I have read.
 
Ayresome_park said:
What does the news article say on his sentence? I can only go from what I have read and to be fair I've never killed, stabbed or shot anyone, served any type of time so with your obvious experience please enlighten me 👍
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I've read it and it says "An "evil monster" who cut his wife's body into more than 200 pieces has been jailed for life" and "Metson was sentenced to a minimum term of 19 years and 316 days behind bars."

It's pretty clear is it not? No need to kill, stab or shoot anyone. Just need to take in the words you're reading rather than looking at random words and making your own version up (y)
 
I would suggest that anyone who thinks a death penalty is suitable punishment go look at the list of countries that execute their guilty.

It's a small list and I wouldn't want to live in any of them.

Execution has nothing to do with justice nor is it to do with deterring murderers. There is ample evidence that it is not a deterrent.

Using the victims family and how they may feel as a justification for retribution seems a bit odd to me too.
 
As roofie said, anyone who commits crimes like this have no interest in the prospect of a death penalty. They invariably have no regard for people's lives, including their own, so its not a deterrent
 
Counter_Press said:
As roofie said, anyone who commits crimes like this have no interest in the prospect of a death penalty. They invariably have no regard for people's lives, including their own, so its not a deterrent
Click to expand...
I am not even sure if it's that simple. They probably don't comprehend their actions nor the consequences.

If we want to stop murder then you have to address the underlying societal cause. Perhaps having a police force fit for purpose who have resources to deal with preventing crime might be a start.

It's incredibly complex and murdering criminals is not a solution. I am not suggesting you said that BTW cp.
 
Counter_Press said:
"chopped his wife into 224 pieces, paid a friend £50 to dump the bags and he gets 19 years finny!!"

"he is guilty no DNA needed and he got just under 20 years"

(y)
Click to expand...
This was my opening post,

What the actual fcuk, another example of our joke of a justice system.

You can't tell me that the death penalty can't be used on someone like this!!

sentenced to a minimum term of 19 years and 316 days behind bars!!!

It also states in the article I have read the following,

Metson was sentenced to a minimum term of 19 years and 316 days behind bars.

You have then said to me,

He hasn't been given 19 years. You clearly have no grasp of how life sentences with time served before being eligible for parole works

so I'll ask again, maybe you will enlighten me with your extensive knowledge in the subject because I'm just going off what the news article says!! It's says nothing else about his sentence except the amount of years he will be serving.
 
sparkins said:
Another absolutely horrific case in Edinburgh that was reported today - the levels of violence in some of these cases is just unthinkable
Click to expand...
There was a girl who got murdered over the weekend with her baby in the pram, I think it was in Bradford
 
Ayresome_park said:
This was my opening post,

What the actual fcuk, another example of our joke of a justice system.

You can't tell me that the death penalty can't be used on someone like this!!

sentenced to a minimum term of 19 years and 316 days behind bars!!!

It also states in the article I have read the following,

Metson was sentenced to a minimum term of 19 years and 316 days behind bars.

You have then said to me,

He hasn't been given 19 years. You clearly have no grasp of how life sentences with time served before being eligible for parole works

so I'll ask again, maybe you will enlighten me with your extensive knowledge in the subject because I'm just going off what the news article says!! It's says nothing else about his sentence except the amount of years he will be serving.
Click to expand...
he can tell you and he did, and so will I.

Fact is to behave the way he did you must have serious mental health issues or be a psychopath. Neither of those will be deterred by a death penalty. So that makes it punitive only and once they’re dead they’re not going to suffer or contemplate what they’ve done.

Also, he has been given a MINIMUM of 19 years and change. He will serve all of that and significantly more, possibly the rest of his life
 
BoroMart said:
he can tell you and he did, and so will I.

Fact is to behave the way he did you must have serious mental health issues or be a psychopath. Neither of those will be deterred by a death penalty. So that makes it punitive only and once they’re dead they’re not going to suffer or contemplate what they’ve done.

Also, he has been given a MINIMUM of 19 years and change. He will serve all of that and significantly more, possibly the rest of his life
Click to expand...
I understand and please I'm not trying to be funny here but it doesn't state he has mental health issues so your making an assumption up and of course I know he has to serve the minimum sentence given but my understanding of a minimum sentence is after you have served that, then you could be given parole depending on behaviour etc, please correct me if I'm wrong. There is every chance that at the same time you say he could spend the rest of his life in prison, there is also the chance he could be out of prison by the time he is 50.
 
Ayresome_park said:
I understand and please I'm not trying to be funny here but it doesn't state he has mental health issues so your making an assumption up and of course I know he has to serve the minimum sentence given but my understanding of a minimum sentence is after you have served that, then you could be given parole depending on behaviour etc, please correct me if I'm wrong. There is every chance that at the same time you say he could spend the rest of his life in prison, there is also the chance he could be out of prison by the time he is 50.
Click to expand...
So he’s probably a psychopath then. It’s a negligible chance, it means they’ll have a parole meeting and deny
 
Perhaps we should look across the pond, to the country which uses the death penalty and every year hundreds of innocent people are either seriously injured [including school children] or killed - using publicly available weapons. It really works, doesn't it? (n)
 
Ayresome_park said:
I understand and please I'm not trying to be funny here but it doesn't state he has mental health issues so your making an assumption up and of course I know he has to serve the minimum sentence given but my understanding of a minimum sentence is after you have served that, then you could be given parole depending on behaviour etc, please correct me if I'm wrong. There is every chance that at the same time you say he could spend the rest of his life in prison, there is also the chance he could be out of prison by the time he is 50.
Click to expand...
The sentence as a minimum means he can't apply for parole prior to the minimum sentence had been served. After that there is no upper limit on the sentence and he can only be released on parole if those criteria are met. As I understand the sentence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top