Killing of PC Harper

[cromwell]

The driver has got 16 years and the other two 13........not good enough,in fact a disgrace should've been at least 30 years.

OK, I'll stick my neck out and guess 12 years.

More than I expected.

Well always believed that you have to accept a decision (unless of course a jury has been nobbled) but I believe a longer sentence  was available and should've been imposed,

It's not just these three scrotes you see coppers have been injured before by those determined to escape,also they deliberately ram police cars to  escape and don't care about the members of the public they endanger,the ram can easily injure and the repair costs too,I think for that there should be a mandatory sentence  say 5 or 8 years to deter and not be made to run concurrently .

[Barry]

The driver has got 16 years and the other two 13........not good enough,in fact a disgrace should've been at least 30 years.

OK, I'll stick my neck out and guess 12 years.

More than I expected.

[patman post]

Those lobbying for a retrial or longer sentence or review, etc, do themselves no favours by continuing to report false news to strengthen their claims:

Mr Justice Edis said: "I have been made aware that there has been some discussion about the trial and, in particular, the measures which were in place for the protection of the jury.
"It may be believed in some quarters that the jury was subject to some improper pressure. To the best of my knowledge and belief there is no truth in that at all."
A link within the BBC link in #41

But I hope there is a way the actions of these three can be reviewed and more appropriate sentences arrived at...

[cromwell]

https://www.change.org/p/government-overturn-a-miscarriage-of-justice

[papasmurf]

The driver has got 16 years and the other two 13........not good enough,in fact a disgrace should've been at least 30 years.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-46544144

[Borchester]

All this leads me to the question of correction and punishment... In  the western  world the UK and the US appear to have the highest number of prisoners, and it seems the UK and US also have the highest amount of crime. So do our/their current correction and punishment systems actually work?

England and Wales' prison population rate, at 140, remains much higher than that of its European neighbours such as Ireland (78), France (100), the Netherlands (61), Germany (75), Italy (98) and Spain (126).

The United States has 655 prisoners per 100,000 population.

http://www.bbk.ac.uk/news/global-prison-population-soaring

I suspect the unlawful killing rates would also show similar differences in numbers, but I haven's checked...

It is far less to do with severity of sentence and far more to do with chances of being caught which deters crime. Doesn't matter how stiff the sentence, if a criminal thinks he is going to get away with it he is not going to be deterred. A real risk of being caught in combination with a meaningful sentence is the only real deterrent. The police need to catch more real criminals with less of a focus on easy targets.

The problem is that the villains were Pikkies, to whom going to jail is pretty much expected and even something of a badge of honour in their community.

[cromwell]

The driver has got 16 years and the other two 13........not good enough,in fact a disgrace should've been at least 30 years.

[srb7677]

All this leads me to the question of correction and punishment... In  the western  world the UK and the US appear to have the highest number of prisoners, and it seems the UK and US also have the highest amount of crime. So do our/their current correction and punishment systems actually work?

England and Wales' prison population rate, at 140, remains much higher than that of its European neighbours such as Ireland (78), France (100), the Netherlands (61), Germany (75), Italy (98) and Spain (126).

The United States has 655 prisoners per 100,000 population.

http://www.bbk.ac.uk/news/global-prison-population-soaring

I suspect the unlawful killing rates would also show similar differences in numbers, but I haven's checked...

It is far less to do with severity of sentence and far more to do with chances of being caught which deters crime. Doesn't matter how stiff the sentence, if a criminal thinks he is going to get away with it he is not going to be deterred. A real risk of being caught in combination with a meaningful sentence is the only real deterrent. The police need to catch more real criminals with less of a focus on easy targets.

[patman post]

All this leads me to the question of correction and punishment... In  the western  world the UK and the US appear to have the highest number of prisoners, and it seems the UK and US also have the highest amount of crime. So do our/their current correction and punishment systems actually work?

England and Wales' prison population rate, at 140, remains much higher than that of its European neighbours such as Ireland (78), France (100), the Netherlands (61), Germany (75), Italy (98) and Spain (126).

The United States has 655 prisoners per 100,000 population.

http://www.bbk.ac.uk/news/global-prison-population-soaring

I suspect the unlawful killing rates would also show similar differences in numbers, but I haven's checked...

[johnofgwent]

Wouldn't "joint enterprise" in this case mean all being charged with whatever was the most serious offence anyone in this group committed while carrying out this crime?
But my query was why isn't killing while committing a crime automatically considered murder? Was it ever in recent times...?

Ah. whoops. wikipedia is then your friend.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_murder_rule#United_Kingdom

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homicide_Act_1957#Section_1_%E2%80%93_Abolition_of_constructive_malice

So to be exact. The point you made was that where a crime is committed, AND someone dies in the course of committing that crime, the USA permits a "felony murder" charge to stick, and you feel the UK should, or at least question why it does not.

The exact answer lies in Section 1 of the Homicide Act of 1957.

PRIOR to that act, english and welsh law did indeed permit that constructive malice, or malice aforethought, the mental intent that must be proved to make a charge of murder stick, was indeed present in the intent to commit any crime of any kind for any reason, and that therefore a charge of murder could automatically be brought should any crime lead in any way to any death.

I quite like that, particularly since the punishment at that time was a short rope and a long drop. I feel it is certain that the number of serial offenders in all sorts of categories of crime were much reduced.

Sadly, Section 1 of the Homicide Act of 1957 did away with the legal doctrine of the automatic presence of constructive malice. And that is why we can no longer bring a charge of murder as we once could.

Bloody 'Ooman Roights lawyers eh....

[papasmurf]

Wouldn't "joint enterprise" in this case mean all being charged with whatever was the most serious offence anyone in this group committed while carrying out this crime?
But my query was why isn't killing while committing a crime automatically considered murder? Was it ever in recent times...?

Causing a death in the commission of a crime is on the statute book and has been for a long time. But as for how that is applied you would need to do some research. (It would not necessarily be classed as murder.)

[patman post]

Wouldn't "joint enterprise" in this case mean all being charged with whatever was the most serious offence anyone in this group committed while carrying out this crime?
But my query was why isn't killing while committing a crime automatically considered murder? Was it ever in recent times...?

[papasmurf]

joint enterprise

The legal doctrine is "joint enterprise"

It also seems that one can be done for murder if the court can prove intent to cause "gbh".
[/quote]


A lot more detail:-

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/secondary-liability-charging-decisions-principals-and-accessories

[johnofgwent]

There was a case last year in the US when a group of teenagers drove to another suburb in a stolen car in order to steal an Audi, and one of them was shot by the Audi's owner.
The teenager died and the Police arrested the rest of teenagers and charged them with first degree murder "due to them being in commission of a forcible felony".

In Illinois, felony murder law allows prosecutors to charge a perpetrator with murder if someone dies while the felony is committed.

Why isn't that the law in the UK...?
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/car-owner-kills-teen-suspect-during-attempted-theft-five-other-n1042786

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_murder_rule#United_Kingdom

I have also stumbled upon the answer to what has puzzled me.

The legal doctrine is "joint enterprise"

It also seems that one can be done for murder if the court can prove intent to cause "gbh".

[papasmurf]

In Illinois, felony murder law allows prosecutors to charge a perpetrator with murder if someone dies while the felony is committed.

Why isn't that the law in the UK...?

It is.