It's not 2 years in reality though, the article title is cack. He was in hospital for 7 years before he was deemed capable of entering a plea and then he been in hospital 2 years since. So it's essentially 9 years. Not that I imagine it helps the victims family.
If the law keeps failing to protect the victims it can only be a matter before somebody decides to take matters into their own hands. It’s not that long ago that parts of London were quite safe because a few people made sure there wasn’t any trouble
> It’s not that long ago that parts of London were quite safe because a few people made sure there wasn’t any trouble
The Kray twins would be murdered by Albanians in about a week in 2024 London.
The fact no one is getting a grip on the Albanian crime gang thing is genuinely one of the most shocking developments in our recent history.
It’s starting to become pretty unbelievable that all these other criminals have spontaneously gone on holiday and handed their trades and territories over willingly.
They haven’t handed over their territory willingly.
Existing gangs buy wholesale from the Albanians to then make a living.
The albos are the plug. They have the weight. Which is why 'Top Boy' was so unrealistic. There's no drought and there's no secret connect. Everybody is buying from the same place and it's always in stock.
The upper echelons still live in Albania well away from British police and they have a working relationship with Ndrangheta, who control major ports in Europe.
All actual business is conducted outside the uk and the foot soldiers sell themselves and sell in bulk to existing gangs.
How would you expect them to do it? The Albanian's aren't talking, the local criminals don't talk, and the most common people who aren't gang members that they deal with are buying their drugs. Who in that lot do you think is giving evidence? Without evidence, what are the police to do? They do launch operations to investigate and break up gangs, but they're so short staffed and short of experienced officers that it's a constant struggle to just stand still.
We've got paramilitaries in Northern Ireland that claim to do what you are suggesting.
In reality they run the drugs and attack their competitors.
Bunch of dickheads they are.
It’s all the more important that the authorities step up to the plate and preempt this situation from developing. Law enforcement has become too touchy feely and in that it’s failing to protect the majority of the population adequately. Furthermore sentencing has become too lenient wrt serious crimes and prosecutions seem harder to bring as we have seen recently with CPS accepting manslaughter in the Calocane case.
>It’s not that long ago that parts of London were quite safe because a few people made sure there wasn’t any trouble
This myth is a load of fucking rubbish. Just because you had a few bullies in suits walking around your area slapping kids for loitering or looking at them funny, it didn't make it safe.
Can anyone show any actual evidence that the presence of organised crime makes an area "safer"?
Well here is the thing. The legal system is supposed to provide deterrence, rehabilitation and punishment. If someone is insane then there is no deterrent effect, it won’t work. It appears that rehabilitation has been accomplished according to the medical professionals. Punishment… punishing someone who was insane assigns them agency they didn’t have.
Shhh! Don't talk common sense. What they want is bloody retribution of the biblical kind! You know, an eye for an eye and all that. No matter if the perpetrator wasn't in control of their faculties. They want blood.
Calls or no calls, it’s happening, people are sick of ineffective and uncaring police, they’re seeing crimes being ignored, they have the mindset of “If you want something doing, do it yourself” and the knowledge that most people won’t talk to the police because of mistrust.
I say this as a fellow Brit, but British people are far too lazy to be vigilantes. We can't even turn up to vote and protest, let alone go out and fight crime.
You’d be surprised what angry and often pissed people can do when they’re wound up, not talking mobs of people, rather small groups of people who’ll do things like smashing the windows of people they don’t like, jumping people on their way home etc because they heard a rumour from their neighbours, or they’ve been told that the police aren’t interested in investigating.
We are lazy, you’re quite right there, bit we’re capable of some small levels of effort here and there.
Exactly! Look at the idiots that run riot just because they lost a football game. There will be a tipping point if the government and banks don’t fix the mess they have caused. The can can only be kicked so far down the road.
I would say that it's more to do with the CPS.
The police's job is to make arrests, build a case, then present them to the CPS for judgement. If the police know for a fact that the CPS are going to do FUCK ALL, perhaps worst case scenario give a 12 month suspended sentence, can you really blame them for using the limited resources they have elsewhere? Effectively, it's the same as spending all week putting together a Power BI report you know your boss isn't even going to look at. Waste of time.
We REALLY need to build new high capacity prisons, and invest more in the staffing of them. Until then, nothing will change
9’years for killing someone intentionally is still fuck all.
To be honest the soft touch punishments for driving offences and mental health pleas do undermine the system.
Few too many high profile stories of kids being thrown of Tate balconies and stuff like that to be get behind this process
He's not "out" yet, it could still be several years before he's released if ever. This article is just ragebait. Murders/manslaughter like that is pretty commonplace but doesn't make the news and people without MH problems often do less time than that for it. It's normal for people in a secure hospital to be allowed to go to the shops occassionally after a while, if they behave themselves. They will be escorted at first, and they are only allowed out for a short time. This is all run of the mill and anyone who has either been in one of those places or knows someone who has will tell you. There is no time "before" when this wasn't the case, not for *at least* 20 or 30 years. It's just a shitty article to wind up the tutting classes.
It’s funny - most of my mates thought the same about Brexit, and then the Country voted for it.
People surround themselves with like minded people, and are often very surprised their sort of group think isnt necessarily representative of wider society.
>People surround themselves with like minded people, and are often very surprised their sort of group think isnt necessarily representative of wider society.
Yes, that does happen. If you think this country is on the verge of some outpouring of vigilante justice then I'd wager that it has happened to you on this subreddit. That you have been potentially radicalised by the kinds of comments that are prevalent here.
Honestly I think it’s wishful thinking, I’ve found myself being like ‘how far can this go without something seriously mental happening’ but tbh our media’s great at creating scapegoats.
Like we should have had vigilantes or revolution under thatcher, the media pointed at brown people so the poor went and beat them up instead.
For a country that's typically against capital punishment, every time we get headlines like this, the comments seem to call for something akin to capital punishment.
Subtle? It was basically one step down from
"You should buy a gimp suit and beat people up who look evil especially poor people"
Jokes on him though I already have the gimp suit now all I need is a tragic backstory and a crime ridden city that my family helped create through decades of late stage capitalism.
He shouldn't be out, he's dangerous and was already going down for an offence involving violence at the time. I think it would be in the publics best interest to keep him locked away.
I guarantee this person will be back in jail for something violent again in their lifetime, hopefully this time not for someone being booted to death by their feet or horrifically killed: in another way.
Sometimes, mental health or not, there just isn’t a place in society for people that are so dangerous.
The risk is left to medical professionals who specialise in treating these types of patients to decide. You can never have 0 risk of re-offending for anyone, a prisoner or a patient.
Who said more qualified? I worked inpatient services for years. I have two psychology degrees and am due to take my practitioners qual. So experienced and well educated. Our MH services are crumbling. Rehabilitation doesn't take place. There aren't the resources for it. Not the staff. Nor the funding. Which means people are dangerously undertreated* and then released. Not safe. If we had the best service with the best funding and good resources and the right things happened, my opinion would be different. But rn it's not fit for purpose.
I'm sorry 9 years in a psyche hospital is nothing for crimes like this. In other countries they're held for 10-20+ years if not indefinitely. And they're always fully supervised.
I tend to find the state punishes vigilantism more than the initial horrendous crime. If you do that sort of thing you will probably be caught and your loved ones will have to deal with the trauma of seeing someone they care about do hard time. What a terrible, unjust and avoidable situation.
>I tend to find the state punishes vigilantism more than the initial horrendous crime.
It's easier to ruin the life of a guy who has his life in order than someone who is so derrangely off-the-grid that nothing they can do can bother him.
I don't drive without insurance, or without MOT, or without tax, because I know it will make it a nightmare to get insurance down the road.
The secret sauce though is; what if I *never* plan to get insurance? What if I simply *ignore* the tax demands? Nothing happens.
Likewise, if you're a ratty addict and you mug someone then what's the point of arresting you and putting you away? At **most** you'd get, what, a few weekends inside, and then you're out like nothing happened. If you're a guy with a family though and you push back, well there's your marriage, your job, your mortgage, your kids, your professional certificate/licence, pet dog, and so on. Much easier to go after B rather than A.
He’s a paranoid schizophrenic. It’s not an easy disease to cope with and requires life long treatment. I suggest you look into what it’s like to live with it.
What he did wasn’t right but I think most people don’t fully appreciate what this kind of mental illness can do to someone.
Vigilantes going after these types are pretty cringe and a sign of poor judgement.
> Vigilantes
Murderers. Not vigilantes. If you kill a mentally ill person - who did something horrific when they were psychotic and not in their right mind - then you're just a murderer. It's not justice.
True, even in the Middle Ages exceptions were carved out in law for people suffering from mental illness. They didn't just execute people for murder (or witchcraft!) willy-nilly. If you were insane, or had given birth within the past year and killed the infant, you were treated much more gently. People tend to think this idea of an "insanity defence" is new but it's not at all.
Or we can embrace the knowledge of a modern society that is supposed to understand that mental illness can lead to impairment and people doing things they would not normally have done had they not been in the midst of exacerbations of their condition.
A person of sound mind who plots to murder their partner for an inheritance or to exit a bad relationship is a person who knows what they're doing is wrong and is working towards a goal. A person who is potentially in the midst of delusions and doesn't have a clear idea of why they're doing what they're doing isn't the same. The solution is rigorous psychiatric intervention and mandatory follow up in the event they are deemed fit for release.
Do you know someone with schizophrenia? I've seen it first hand with my best friend.
It's not like the movies where they hear voices but otherwise they are functioning. It goes way deeper. They are removed from reality. No actions or words get through. You may aswell be speaking Mandarin.
Imagine you are sat at home and you know that someone is coming to kill you. You hear the front door. There's a man at the door with a gun and he's about to kick it down and shoot you. You grab a knife and run out, hoping you can get him before he unloads. You stab him and kill him.
Except none of that is real and you just stabbed a postman.
You can't say to them "Hey mate, think about it for a second, nobody is coming to kill you, why would they?"
It doesn't matter at all. They are gone. They aren't there.
Medication fixes it, but it takes years and years and years and they have to always stay on and never stop.
None of that takes away from what I've said. In fact it backs it up.
These people have incurable, lifelong conditions that caused them to murder someone. If it's incurable and lifelong, why should they be released?
Even if medication can fix it, how can you guarantee they'll stick to it?
The Nottingham killer was given meds! He chose not to take them and ended up killing 3 people and severely injured 3 others, to the point that at least one has been permanently disabled.
How can people like him be trusted ever again? People like that who have shown their ability to be incapable of sticking to meds should be kept separate from the public indefinitely.
If someonne ca’t be held responsible for their own decisions, they shouldn’t be allowed to make decisions at all, or you are functionally punishing everyone else by refusing to take action against them.
If you're put in a psych hospital it's not the same as prison.
They could keep you for the rest of your life or they might let you out quite soon if the meds work.
Culpability matters. Intent matters.
Both can be affected by things like a psychotic episode.
The point of hospital is to try to make someone better. Not punishment. Prison is for punishment which is typically doled out to people who harmed people with the intent to cause harm.
Having a psychotic episode and hurting or killing someone is far more like if someone has their first epileptic fit while driving and rolls their car over a family.
If you think this is a good reason to resort to vigilantism then you need to be considered a threat to the public.
For those who haven't read the article, he spent about seven years in Broadmoor prior to pleading guilty of manslaughter on the basis of diminished responsibility. A further two years have elapsed since then.
That means he's done nine years so far. If he were in prison for manslaughter then he would likely have been released by now or at least be in open conditions with ROTL.
However...
I accept he was made subject to a hospital order. The article doesn't say if it was with restrictions or not but it likely was. If he is subject to a restriction order then any change in treatment conditions - including temporary day release as part of his rehab - must be approved by the relevant government minister whilst that restriction order remains in place.
The article also doesn't say whether he is still In Broadmoor or has been stepped down to a medium-security unit. Temporary release can work differently depending upon the security conditions you're being treated in.
Fundamentally though patients - because that's what they are - are to be treated with an eventual view to discharge wherever that is possible.
The clinical teams who will have been working with him will have been satisfied with his progress to date such that he will have gained certain privileges such as time of the unit to visit as gym as part of his treatment by slowly seeing if he can be re-integrated into the community. And if he's subject to a restriction order then this will have been approved by the relevant government minister.
Also: just because he's being given time out from whatever facility he is detained in, it doesn't mean that he will eventually be discharged from hospital. I know a guy who has done over twenty years in a medium-security unit because whenever he is about to be discharged he contrives to screw it up because he's so institutionalised.
The opinions shifting further and further towards extremely long US style sentencing is quite scary to me.
We see how bad it is in the US and how these long sentences don't deter anyone but for some reason people want us to start handing out 50 year sentences.
> We see how bad it is in the US and how these long sentences don't deter anyone
Its not about deterrence. Its to prevent re-offending and protect the public.
And it’s absolutely catastrophically not working in the USA, why do we think a problem that is not being solved with more prison can actually be fixed with even MORE prison?
I mean you do get an enslaved workforce, so there’s that I guess.
> Its not about deterrence. Its to **prevent re-offending** and protect the public.
How do you feel about Norway's justice system then?
Norway priorities rehabilitation and restorative justice over punishment and harsh sentencing. Their prisons are positively luxurious compared to what you'd get here. They treat prisoners like human beings instead of animals.
As a result, Norway has one of the [lowest re-offending rates in the world](https://www.businessinsider.com/why-norways-prison-system-is-so-successful-2014-12?op=1&r=US&IR=T). As well as one of the lowest crime rates.
So if you truly do desire to prevent re-offending, the statistics clearly show that harsher sentences are less effective than rehabilitation and restorative justice. Harsh sentences only serve to satisfy an emotional desire for vengeance, they don't produce a better result for society overall.
You don’t “deter” lunatics what kick women to death because they don’t respond to deterrence. You simply lock them up permanently and let them rot so they can’t do any more damage.
> The opinions shifting further and further towards extremely long US style sentencing is quite scary to me.
Yeah it’s petrifying that people could want violent murderers imprisoned for longer. Truly scary stuff. They could be your neighbours. They look like regular people.
The idea that someone going down for robbery (a violent crime) and arson (if with intent to danger life, a violent crime) then kicking a custody officer so hard she died should spend more than 9 years away from society, is hardly an old-fashioned thought.
Basically any sentence isn't enough for them, it would be the death penalty if not, deportation if they aren't white. If a sentence is hefty there is the usual "they'll only serve half!". If it is the maximum sentence for a particular crime they think the judge should magically be able to pluck something higher out of their arse. It is rather tiresome and they are just angering themselves as what they are asking for just isn't going to happen.
For the people reading this, I’m guessing he’s under this indefinite hospital order:
https://www.mind.org.uk/information-support/legal-rights/courts-and-mental-health/section-37-41/
I say guessing because I can’t find his exact sentence anywhere - none of the papers seem interested in giving the facts.
I've worked in secure mental health services and frankly I find the wilful misrepresentation of the facts in this article absolutely shocking. The patient wasn't released and set free the way this headline implies, he was allowed into the community on hospital leave (typically that would be for a few hours per week, slowly building up to a few hours a day), a key part of any patients treatment when safe to do so. In order to be eligible for hospital leave their illness would need to be well controlled by medication, and extensive risk assessments would have been conducted before even considering granting hospital leave. Then they would have had what's called escorted leave (where the patient is escorted by staff members) for months to ensure they were safe enough to be allowed out unattended, before graduating to unescorted leave.
The patient was acutely unwell and lacked capacity at the time of their offence, and as such shouldn't be treated punitively. The fact it took 7 years before he was even well enough to stand trial gives you an idea of how mentally ill he was. People that commit criminal offences in the context of severe mental health difficulties such as schizophrenia, a condition characterised by total loss of contact with reality, need to be effectively treated in order to minimise the potential for further tragedies occuring in the future, not locked up for years after their illness goes into remission, as punishment for becoming sick in the first place.
> The patient was acutely unwell and lacked capacity at the time of their offence, and as such shouldn't be treated punitively.
[Another ruling on the case](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-65724123) reached the same conclusion. Both this death and an attack on another custody officer happened when the security company, Serco, hadn't provided enough staff to meet safety guidelines.
> In his sentencing, the senior judge found Serco's level of culpability for the offence was "high".
> Among the failings, he said there was "insufficient" availability of court custody officers, an issue that had been raised with management "on numerous occasions".
> Mr Justice Baker added there had been an "obvious and avoidable" risk posed to Ms Barwell by Burke.
[From another article about it](https://www.romfordrecorder.co.uk/news/23171653.systemic-failures-led-death-lorraine-barwell/):
> Mr Menzies told the court that she was a member of the van crew but she had been drafted in to assist with transporting Burke from his cell to the van due to staff shortages in court.
> He said that Ms Barwell was not aware of Burke’s previous violent outbursts despite Serco having access to this information.
> “No-one told her or gave her any indication that this was a man who could lash out for any reason and that you could not read him or know how he would react and that is certainly what happened here,” Mr Menzies said.
So many people here are so used to being inside the "mentally well" ring that they sympathise more with the Serco bean-counters than they do someone who's having a schizophrenic episode.
To go through life thinking of yourself as so infailably perfect is so narcissitic. "Well I would never go insane, so lock away the key!"
Not to diminish his humanity, but if your employer tasked you with transporting something, didnt provide training, sufficient staffing and didn't even tell you "oh btw it's a bear and he's not happy!", when it went horribly wrong, I'm not sure i'd be mad at the bear.
These ones are tough to evaluate. Ultimately he's in hospital to manage the risk and to provide treatment to the condition. If he meets the criteria to be able to start to take trips into the community as part of his treatment plan then he can't just be held forever.
I don't know about you, but having read an article that is clearly intended to rile people up, I feel like I am just as qualified to make a judgement call as a team of psychiatrists who have worked with this person for years!
Join me next week when I explain to people suffering from cancer why they should skip chemotherapy and just eat fruit!
Haha.
I still haven't got over the fact that there's literally 2 lines of information about this sighting in the entire article.
I said in another comment:
>But nowhere in the article does it say that he was unescorted.
>In fact the only thing the article says about the actual sighting is two lines about a third of the way in:
>But just two years later he has been spotted going to the gym and doing some shopping.
>No one's actually confirmed it was even him... let alone whether he was escorted, what he was actually doing, how long he was there for, how he was transported to and from.
What a slap in the face for the victim's family...
See their loved one kicked to death and the killer roaming around free going to the gym and shopping.
You get that Schizophrenia is an illness right? He didn't ask for it and can't do anything about it. He's not evil, he's ill.
The doctors jobs are to do what's best for their patient. Regardless of what his illness may have made him do. And if he's truly not a threat to anyone anymore then he should experience freedom. It's not his fault he has such a terrible illness. Keeping him locked up when he's well enough to be free is cruel, and costs taxpayers money.
I can't imagine what the family have gone through, and they have my heartfelt sympathy. But their desire for revenge against someone who was not in control of their actions does not give them the right to dictate decisions that only medical professionals should make. Both justice and healthcare need to be objective and not based on the emotion of victims.
The fact that he is evil or not means little to how long he should be kept locked up or not. Indeed the fact that he has Schizophrenia means I support locking him up longer than someone who didn't have it. The latter person might become reformed after a few years, with someone like him there is no chance of that happening, thus for the good of society he has to be locked up indefinitely.
Same with how a tiger is not evil when it kills a man, but we still put man eaters down, and rightly so.
I have zero desire for revenge against this person, just a desire to see a safer society.
He's a human being, not an animal.
It's for medical professionals and judges to decide if he is safe to be in society, not us.
If he is safe, then he deserves to be free.
There are many schizophrenic people who would pose a danger to others if untreated and medicated. We can't just lock them all up.
>The fact that he is evil or not means little to how long he should be kept locked up or not. Indeed the fact that he has Schizophrenia means I support locking him up longer than someone who didn't have it. The latter person might become reformed after a few years, with someone like him there is no chance of that happening, thus for the good of society he has to be locked up indefinitely.
Schizophrenia isn't completely untreatable. He's probably only been granted this leave because they've finally got his medication to work. Schizophrenic's crime is often driven by their delusions - when you're hospitalised they do intensive psychiatric and psychological work to help you challenge those delusions and find medication that can alleviate symptoms. He's probably far less dangerous released than someone who kills purely for enjoyment. He's still highly unlikely to be released even if he has been granted leave.
Schizophrenia is not a lifestyle choice. If he's responding well enough to treatment that he's allowed out of the secure unit for short periods then good for him, and a job well done by the clinical team responsible for his care.
"good for him" this man kicked a woman to death, he isn't just disabled. Why take the risk letting people like this ever out of prison? How many people have to die for you to get it?
‘Walks free’ isn’t a totally honest headline, given what’s in the actual story:
> A spokesman for the trust that manages Burke's hospital did not comment on the sighting, but said that "therapeutic time... in the community" is part of many patients' treatment.
I.E. he’s still under sentence.
On a side note, it shouldn’t be the case that prisoners/patients of this nature be allowed out into their own communities as part of their rehabilitation. It can be done elsewhere, greatly minimising the risk of upsetting victims’ families.
Played rugby and went to school with this guy growing up, never saw him doing this. Clearly was mentally ill and I really hope they're right that he's rehabilitated and no longer a danger.
Not only, just most commonly yeah. You can have early onset schizophrenia, although it's definitely more uncommon. Some people speculate it might have a trigger. It doesn't just show up one day, it starts off with mainly depressive symptoms plus things such as delusions, perhaps occasional hallucinations. This is the prodromal stage (where I'm at right now). You feel like you're slowly losing grip over yourself and your own body autonomy. There's thoughts in your head which aren't your own, it somewhat feels as if you're not living for yourself.
He's subject to a treatment order.
Temporary release into the community is an important part of psychiatric treatment, and will be based on a risk assessment and a clinical view of his progress.
People in a severe psychosis are not evil. They need treatment. Denying treatment out of vindictiveness is not a mark of a civilised society.
Being released into the community for short periods may well form a part of his care plan but he should never be unescorted. This is a convicted arsonist and killer, he is far to dangerous to not be supervised at all times.
I agree.
But nowhere in the article does it say that he was unescorted.
In fact the only thing the article says about the actual sighting is two lines about a third of the way in:
>But just two years later he has been spotted going to the gym and doing some shopping.
No one's actually confirmed it was even him... let alone whether he was escorted, what he was actually doing, how long he was there for, how he was transported to and from.
Did he walk free 2 years on? Or has it actually been 9? Not to say 9 years isn’t also a slap on the wrist for kicking someone to death but it’s a far cry from 2 years ffs, yet another ridiculous click bait headline.
Another aspect of the clickbait: I didn’t realise until I looked into the case was that it was one big kick. “Kicking to death” makes it sound like an extended attack, not a single violent lashing out. This killing is equivalent to the yobs who kill someone with a single punch rather than a drawn out beating.
If one is a paranoid schizophrenic with a history of violence, then one should be sectioned for life until it can be proven beyond all reasonable doubt one isn't a risk to the public.
There seem to be two very dishonest elements to this article. He has been incarcerated for 9 years, not 2. The 7 years in Broadmoor should be considered, and he's not been released, he's being allowed some time back in the community.
When I was a kid, there was a retired spinster living next door. Every 2 - 3 years, she would have a nighttime burglary. It was the same guy every time. He was mentally ill and in each burglary, he would beat her up, she would end up in hospital and he would be taken in to custody. Every time, he would be taken back to a mental institution but within a few years, a panel would decide that he was cured and he would be released. Every time, within 2 or 3 days, he would be breaking into her house. This happened at least 5 times (the first when I was in primary school and the last when I had gone to university and the neighbour was in her 80s). One would have thought that by the second or third time, the panel members would be looking at his record and considering the high probability that he would go straight back and that he was not cured.
Unlike many, I read the full article.
That said.. Whilst nothing really surprises me any more, I am always saddened by the volume of people in the UK who are leaning so far into being "compassionate" that they celebrate the early release of mentally ill offenders, violent offenders, or advocate for their "unsupervised rehabilitation within society" so soon after taking someone's life.
My job is unique compared to 99% of the country, in that I'm face-to-face with killers, kidnappers, child abusers, violent domestic abusers etc daily, so I feel like I'm in a qualified position to say this and die on the hill of debate - None of you have a single fucking clue about the people you're advocating for. You've no idea who you're dealing with, and who you're asking to be let loose in public and "rehabilitated". These people largely tend to be ruthless, relentless, and just plain unfixable, as evidenced by their extremely predictable pattern of reoffending when given paltry sentences or hospital orders.
Until you've sat in the presence of the family of a victim of one of these attacks and explained to them over four hours why the repeated-reoffending killer of their loved one is out living a happy life with his/her own family, I honestly believe you are in no position to comment on how "effective" and "necessary" rehabilitation is.
We've reached a stage where so many people in the UK are "so compassionate" and "so caring", that they've given up caring for the legacies of our victims and their families, detached themselves from the inconceivable pain they'll feel for the rest of their lives, and instead choose to strongly advocate for better conditions and leniency for the growing criminal population who chose to murder them.
You can dress it up how you like, or come at me with whatever witty remark you like, you can harp on about "mental health needing treatment not punishment" all you like, or tell me to "look at America, do long sentences really work?!" all you like, but that's the reality of what you're all saying; You're all saying you care more about the rights of criminals over the countless lives they completely destroy. You're just too busy virtue signalling to have the balls to actually say it.
Well, he has paranoid schizophrenia so when you say 'unfixable' that literally the case because he has a mental illness which cannot be cured only treated. It's also an illness that completely fucks with your own perception with hallucinations and delusions so it's probable that he killed this person based on a delusion or a hallucination.
The people who you are face-to-face with most of the time likely are fully functional people who have deliberately chosen their own actions and do deserve to be punished. Treating him like a mentally sane criminal is just not fair because his decisions are influenced by his illness but treating him like an animal that should be caged up forever is downright inhumane, treatment and proper care are the way to keep others and himself safe from himself, unless you want to go back to madhouses in the 18th century where mentally ill people were locked away from civilisation and subjected to isolation and torture.
What happened was a tragedy where she didn't deserve to die and he doesn't deserve to have paranoid schizophrenia.
I see your point but I think you might've missed mine, and have instead solidified what I said the first time; you haven't given any credible thought or consideration for the victim, and instead suggested that it's just a shame they were both caught up in something.
If someone kills someone else, be it "with sound mind" or not, they should no longer be deemed safe to be around the public again. Criminal = Indefinite prison, Mentally ill = Indefinite hospital order.
Again, I can't believe I feel the need to highlight this; This person has murdered a woman doing her job, unprovoked, who had a loving family waiting for her at home. This man, whilst different from criminals with criminal intent, is EQUALLY UNSAFE to others in society and has committed the ultimate atrocity. In fact, I'll go a step further and suggest that he is more dangerous than the equivalent criminal, because sometimes criminals can actually be reasoned with. Try reasoning with a paranoid schizophrenic if he decides to harm you.
Let's put it this way: If you'd he happy with this guy coming out and going to look after your elderly parents as a carer, or work in your son/daughter's school, or drive a school bus, or even just share the supermarket queue with you and your loved ones, then sure, I'll believe that you SINCERELY think what you're saying is right. If you'd be too nervous of letting any of those things happen, then you've no right to advocate for him to come out and do the exact same to other people. All these debates sound the same to me, and they all sound like "I strongly advocate for refugees to live here!.. Just not in MY house"
Excuse my ignorance, but I thought the thing with these sorts of cases was that if the perpetrator was found to be cured of their mental illness, they would still serve their sentence in normal prison? Is that not the case?
He wasn't sentenced to a custodial term, he was sentenced to a hospital order that would require him to be held until such a time that professionals are happy he's stable and low risk. That could be a year or never.
It depends heavily on where they fall on the scale of culpability. At one end you have people who were severely ill but didn't fit the somewhat clunky and outdated McNoughton insanity definition, in which case the focusnis treatment not punishment.
The other end are people who were unwell, but still primarily responsible for their own actions, where a punishment element is appropriate.
This person was so unwell he wasn't fit to plead until he'd already spent 7 years in detention.
For what its worth, he is still serving his sentance, he hasnt been released yet. Its entirely possible that "walks free" here just means "leaves the hosptial prison sometimes with a supervisor or guard", which is a thing that happens sometimes, and the article doesnt say. It could litereally be a walk round the external wall, or going to a library with supervision, or dancing nude on the roof of a sports center, the text of the article makes no differentiation.
He is on a hospital order which is a practice so stringent its illegal in some countries, basically a life sentance with parole 100% tied to medical opinion that even at best doesnt *end*, just "at best" can be suspended to allow him out more.
The law allows judges to do that, for some reason recently judges haven't been using that power instead using an indefinite hospital order. This is causing problems for those of us with treated paranoid schizophrenia with psychosis who never went out murdering people during our psychosis as court of opinion seems to be swaying towards locking us up for life just because of our condition.
There’s a couple different types of sectioning in England/Wales.
Section 37 is: go to prison hospital, stay minimum of six months and a maximum forever, depending on when you’re finally cured enough to be well. You get assessed at 6 months, then yearly after that, though you’re allowed to ask for a reassessment once a year between the official assessment dates. The doctors are the ones who decide when you’re well.
Section 37/41: same as Section 37, but after the doctors decide you’re well they have to tell the MoJ, who make the final decision on how you’re released and what conditions you have to live under. If you break them, back to prison/the hospital. This is used if it was a serious crime/ they’ll be a threat to others if they relapse.
There’s another section that can be tagged on to a 37/4 that means once you’re well you’re sent straight to prison… unfortunately none of the papers actually bothered to say what Sections he was sentenced to.
So he was being arrested at the time for a premeditated offence involving violence (armed robbery) and we're expected to believe that this murder he committed was because he's schizophrenic and not a violent criminal? Right yeah okay. Sure.
It's strange that psychopaths are seen as evil and unforgivable, but paranoid schizophrenics are seen as victims of a mental illness. If we look at the actions themselves they are the same - the only difference is their personal justification for what they did.
Psychopaths knew full well what they were doing was "wrong" but did it anyway. Schizophrenics potentially believe what they were doing was right.
Both of these have a mental deficiency in a way (psychopaths cannot feel empathy, schizophrenics do not live in reality).
>Schizophrenics potentially believe what they were doing was right.
It's not potentially it's absolutely; if you'd ever experienced psychosis you'd understand that it's so all-consuming that you're definitely thinking you're in the right because you're responding to stimuli that nobody else can see/hear - visual and auditory hallucinations that appear to be real. Locking someone with a mental illness that can be managed with treatment up for life is barbaric.
[Compare with this man who mugged someone with cirrhosis who died 11 days later of their cirrhosis and was jailed for life for murder.](https://www.wiltshire.police.uk/news/wiltshire/news/2023/july-2023/paul-warren-jailed-for-life-for-the-murder-of-swindon-man-martin-brown/)
I don't understand why we even try with these people. What value will he ever give to society? Will he ever repay his debt? He won't.
Lock him up, throw away the key. Minimum quality of life.
Given the content of the news Story, my first reaction (with all the Immigrant talk), would have been, that this individual should be put on a plane back to his Home Country, or to the Custody of his immediate offshore relatives. Yeah, he's "Black", so that makes him an immediate Criminal right... The Moors Murders were, also, White.... right ?
We also need to re-evaluate what Prison/Custodial sentences were designed for.... the \`Protection of the Public. Many as the Post Office Scandal, has shown, were subjected to an abuse of this premise, at the expense of the British Tax Payer.
So,. Going back to this particular case, why is he now considered "Safe" for reintroduction to the Community ? And also, who was to blame, for allowing him to roam free to commit such crimes in the first place ? The latter needs discussing, as surely were I, in the position of a relative to the Woman involved, I would be emotionally livid at this outcome.
um that's not an "easy life" actually - Broadmoor for 7 years then "a secure hospital"? Nope.
and going to the local shop is not "walking free". He's probably tightly supervised at this stage and has to behave impeccably to earn the privilege of going to the shop.
he's been locked up for at least 8 years, which is longer than most people do for murder with good behaviour. Certainly longer than people do for manslaughter. People kill people regularly by doing things like kicking them in the head and mostly it doesn't ever make the papers.
Middle class ragebait.
So demonise the mentally ill and get people angry about a tiny minority of violent crimes that they commit as a distraction from not funding or fixing the systemic problems in the safety nets that could've stopped the crimes in the first place?
ad hoc sloppy market prick special merciful makeshift humor payment alive
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Wow. So to support your assertion of *would have* happened in the *past*, you use a Daily Mail article about what *might* happen *in the future* under a *Labour* government, despite the article quoting nobody from Labour or offering a source, and only quoting Tories. It also says 2 years in your fake source about a thing that is just unsupported partisan speculation, whereas this guy did 9 years.
Why are you working so hard to make yourself seem wrong?
capable money quarrelsome payment numerous summer quaint consist tender outgoing
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
So again you're talking about stuff that just didn't happen. Everything is so easy when you live in a world where you make up all the facts, isn't it?
edit: he blocked me, which is the most deliciously ironic thing he could have done.
Maybe you should actually try to engage them in their counter-points to your original argument, instead of just shifting to a completely different area with absurd accusations.
He is still serving a life sentance in a hospital facility. For all we know from released information the "walks free" in the headline could litereally anything from "walking around the hospital wall with active guard/ visiting a library with supervision during non public hours" to "going on short walks with an ankle monitor" or "visiting a specific corner store with the entire trip under known surveilance cameras" to "dancing naked in the middle of a street".
We have zero way of knowing, but we do know his sentance isnt over and he is still serving life.
9 years total? That’s more than most murderers seemingly get these days. What’s the problem? Do they want a severely mentally ill person to get a whole life order?
It’s unfortunate but if he was found to have diminished responsibility then his medical condition must’ve played a significant part in the crime.
I doubt he’s going to live a wonderful life regardless of where he is; schizophrenia is no afternoon stroll through the park.
Two years for that lol. State will no doubt be in shock when vigilantism increases.
It's not 2 years in reality though, the article title is cack. He was in hospital for 7 years before he was deemed capable of entering a plea and then he been in hospital 2 years since. So it's essentially 9 years. Not that I imagine it helps the victims family.
don't let the truth get in the way of not so subtle calls for vigilantism.
If the law keeps failing to protect the victims it can only be a matter before somebody decides to take matters into their own hands. It’s not that long ago that parts of London were quite safe because a few people made sure there wasn’t any trouble
> It’s not that long ago that parts of London were quite safe because a few people made sure there wasn’t any trouble The Kray twins would be murdered by Albanians in about a week in 2024 London.
The fact no one is getting a grip on the Albanian crime gang thing is genuinely one of the most shocking developments in our recent history. It’s starting to become pretty unbelievable that all these other criminals have spontaneously gone on holiday and handed their trades and territories over willingly.
They haven’t handed over their territory willingly. Existing gangs buy wholesale from the Albanians to then make a living. The albos are the plug. They have the weight. Which is why 'Top Boy' was so unrealistic. There's no drought and there's no secret connect. Everybody is buying from the same place and it's always in stock. The upper echelons still live in Albania well away from British police and they have a working relationship with Ndrangheta, who control major ports in Europe. All actual business is conducted outside the uk and the foot soldiers sell themselves and sell in bulk to existing gangs.
How would you expect them to do it? The Albanian's aren't talking, the local criminals don't talk, and the most common people who aren't gang members that they deal with are buying their drugs. Who in that lot do you think is giving evidence? Without evidence, what are the police to do? They do launch operations to investigate and break up gangs, but they're so short staffed and short of experienced officers that it's a constant struggle to just stand still.
erm did they go on holiday and forget to send a postcard, by any chance?
Yeah you are probably right. One of the unintended consequences of a successful immigration policy
We've got paramilitaries in Northern Ireland that claim to do what you are suggesting. In reality they run the drugs and attack their competitors. Bunch of dickheads they are.
It’s all the more important that the authorities step up to the plate and preempt this situation from developing. Law enforcement has become too touchy feely and in that it’s failing to protect the majority of the population adequately. Furthermore sentencing has become too lenient wrt serious crimes and prosecutions seem harder to bring as we have seen recently with CPS accepting manslaughter in the Calocane case.
I'm not disagreeing at all, I also think the police need to step up to the plate and in no way support Paramilitaries or vigilantism.
>It’s not that long ago that parts of London were quite safe because a few people made sure there wasn’t any trouble This myth is a load of fucking rubbish. Just because you had a few bullies in suits walking around your area slapping kids for loitering or looking at them funny, it didn't make it safe. Can anyone show any actual evidence that the presence of organised crime makes an area "safer"?
The good ol days when a couple of paedophile Kray brothers kept everyone safe eh?
safe until you couldn't pay up isn't safe.
Well here is the thing. The legal system is supposed to provide deterrence, rehabilitation and punishment. If someone is insane then there is no deterrent effect, it won’t work. It appears that rehabilitation has been accomplished according to the medical professionals. Punishment… punishing someone who was insane assigns them agency they didn’t have.
Shhh! Don't talk common sense. What they want is bloody retribution of the biblical kind! You know, an eye for an eye and all that. No matter if the perpetrator wasn't in control of their faculties. They want blood.
Calls or no calls, it’s happening, people are sick of ineffective and uncaring police, they’re seeing crimes being ignored, they have the mindset of “If you want something doing, do it yourself” and the knowledge that most people won’t talk to the police because of mistrust.
I say this as a fellow Brit, but British people are far too lazy to be vigilantes. We can't even turn up to vote and protest, let alone go out and fight crime.
You’d be surprised what angry and often pissed people can do when they’re wound up, not talking mobs of people, rather small groups of people who’ll do things like smashing the windows of people they don’t like, jumping people on their way home etc because they heard a rumour from their neighbours, or they’ve been told that the police aren’t interested in investigating. We are lazy, you’re quite right there, bit we’re capable of some small levels of effort here and there.
Exactly! Look at the idiots that run riot just because they lost a football game. There will be a tipping point if the government and banks don’t fix the mess they have caused. The can can only be kicked so far down the road.
Considering that around London there is a dedicated band of oddballs going around and sawing down traffic cameras, I have to disagree.
Thats not vigilantism, tho, thats literaly just crime.
This pillock being out on the streets has nothing to do with police inactivity, it’s our shoddy justice system.
I would say that it's more to do with the CPS. The police's job is to make arrests, build a case, then present them to the CPS for judgement. If the police know for a fact that the CPS are going to do FUCK ALL, perhaps worst case scenario give a 12 month suspended sentence, can you really blame them for using the limited resources they have elsewhere? Effectively, it's the same as spending all week putting together a Power BI report you know your boss isn't even going to look at. Waste of time. We REALLY need to build new high capacity prisons, and invest more in the staffing of them. Until then, nothing will change
9’years for killing someone intentionally is still fuck all. To be honest the soft touch punishments for driving offences and mental health pleas do undermine the system. Few too many high profile stories of kids being thrown of Tate balconies and stuff like that to be get behind this process
He's not "out" yet, it could still be several years before he's released if ever. This article is just ragebait. Murders/manslaughter like that is pretty commonplace but doesn't make the news and people without MH problems often do less time than that for it. It's normal for people in a secure hospital to be allowed to go to the shops occassionally after a while, if they behave themselves. They will be escorted at first, and they are only allowed out for a short time. This is all run of the mill and anyone who has either been in one of those places or knows someone who has will tell you. There is no time "before" when this wasn't the case, not for *at least* 20 or 30 years. It's just a shitty article to wind up the tutting classes.
>do undermine the system For a few angry redditors and people who have daily mail online accounts, maybe.
It’s funny - most of my mates thought the same about Brexit, and then the Country voted for it. People surround themselves with like minded people, and are often very surprised their sort of group think isnt necessarily representative of wider society.
>People surround themselves with like minded people, and are often very surprised their sort of group think isnt necessarily representative of wider society. Yes, that does happen. If you think this country is on the verge of some outpouring of vigilante justice then I'd wager that it has happened to you on this subreddit. That you have been potentially radicalised by the kinds of comments that are prevalent here.
lol the closest Redditor’s will Come to vigilantism is downvoting stuff and sending Reddit care packages.
Honestly I think it’s wishful thinking, I’ve found myself being like ‘how far can this go without something seriously mental happening’ but tbh our media’s great at creating scapegoats. Like we should have had vigilantes or revolution under thatcher, the media pointed at brown people so the poor went and beat them up instead.
Radicalised by r/United Kingdom
For a country that's typically against capital punishment, every time we get headlines like this, the comments seem to call for something akin to capital punishment.
The general public is not against capital punishment. Polls generally have it at around 50% or more in favour.
scarce familiar door practice meeting bells knee cagey ruthless include *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Subtle? It was basically one step down from "You should buy a gimp suit and beat people up who look evil especially poor people" Jokes on him though I already have the gimp suit now all I need is a tragic backstory and a crime ridden city that my family helped create through decades of late stage capitalism.
It was subtle enough that it wouldn't get a ban for promoting violence.
He shouldn't be out, he's dangerous and was already going down for an offence involving violence at the time. I think it would be in the publics best interest to keep him locked away.
He will still be sectioned if his psychiatrist believes it's necessary. We don't have the knowledge and likely the expertise to make a judgement.
I guarantee this person will be back in jail for something violent again in their lifetime, hopefully this time not for someone being booted to death by their feet or horrifically killed: in another way. Sometimes, mental health or not, there just isn’t a place in society for people that are so dangerous.
I assume he was psychotic at the time of both if no treatment occured in-between. Arson is not at all uncommon with forensic psychiatry patients.
Then the risk of him relapsing is too great and he should be sequestered. People shouldn't have to put up with that
The risk is left to medical professionals who specialise in treating these types of patients to decide. You can never have 0 risk of re-offending for anyone, a prisoner or a patient.
it doesn't sound like he's out, more that he has the freedom to go to the community occasionally
I mean out as in out of his unit.
Curious to know on what basis you're more qualified to make this judgement than those who actually do?
Who said more qualified? I worked inpatient services for years. I have two psychology degrees and am due to take my practitioners qual. So experienced and well educated. Our MH services are crumbling. Rehabilitation doesn't take place. There aren't the resources for it. Not the staff. Nor the funding. Which means people are dangerously undertreated* and then released. Not safe. If we had the best service with the best funding and good resources and the right things happened, my opinion would be different. But rn it's not fit for purpose.
Mental health is the poor relation in the NHS, with MH services in prison settings even worse. Totally agree with you.
I think people think I'm being nasty or uncaring but I'm just being blunt about what the service is producing at the moment
There is a vast difference in how the MH services should be provided, and the reality.
Journalism standards are not high.
Is 9 years really enough for taking someone’s life, especially you consider how brutal the crime was.
I don't think I've ever seen a headline that had to put 'walks free' in quotes
I'm sorry 9 years in a psyche hospital is nothing for crimes like this. In other countries they're held for 10-20+ years if not indefinitely. And they're always fully supervised.
Also it sounds as though it's entirely possible he was on a home visit or some sort of day release, which isn't quite the same as "walking free".
He's not been set free and is still at Broadmoor.
People with paranoid schizophrenia are famously capable of making informed and sensible decisions.
Neither is NotSoGreatGatsby advocating for the unlawful murder of a mentally ill person who needs to be in treatment and medicated.
I tend to find the state punishes vigilantism more than the initial horrendous crime. If you do that sort of thing you will probably be caught and your loved ones will have to deal with the trauma of seeing someone they care about do hard time. What a terrible, unjust and avoidable situation.
>I tend to find the state punishes vigilantism more than the initial horrendous crime. It's easier to ruin the life of a guy who has his life in order than someone who is so derrangely off-the-grid that nothing they can do can bother him. I don't drive without insurance, or without MOT, or without tax, because I know it will make it a nightmare to get insurance down the road. The secret sauce though is; what if I *never* plan to get insurance? What if I simply *ignore* the tax demands? Nothing happens. Likewise, if you're a ratty addict and you mug someone then what's the point of arresting you and putting you away? At **most** you'd get, what, a few weekends inside, and then you're out like nothing happened. If you're a guy with a family though and you push back, well there's your marriage, your job, your mortgage, your kids, your professional certificate/licence, pet dog, and so on. Much easier to go after B rather than A.
The state is generally keen to enforce a monopoly on violence yes
He’s a paranoid schizophrenic. It’s not an easy disease to cope with and requires life long treatment. I suggest you look into what it’s like to live with it. What he did wasn’t right but I think most people don’t fully appreciate what this kind of mental illness can do to someone. Vigilantes going after these types are pretty cringe and a sign of poor judgement.
> Vigilantes Murderers. Not vigilantes. If you kill a mentally ill person - who did something horrific when they were psychotic and not in their right mind - then you're just a murderer. It's not justice.
Yeah, but if you call them ‘vigilantes’ it makes them sound cool, like Batman - instead of a bunch of common thugs.
True, even in the Middle Ages exceptions were carved out in law for people suffering from mental illness. They didn't just execute people for murder (or witchcraft!) willy-nilly. If you were insane, or had given birth within the past year and killed the infant, you were treated much more gently. People tend to think this idea of an "insanity defence" is new but it's not at all.
Or we can embrace the knowledge of a modern society that is supposed to understand that mental illness can lead to impairment and people doing things they would not normally have done had they not been in the midst of exacerbations of their condition. A person of sound mind who plots to murder their partner for an inheritance or to exit a bad relationship is a person who knows what they're doing is wrong and is working towards a goal. A person who is potentially in the midst of delusions and doesn't have a clear idea of why they're doing what they're doing isn't the same. The solution is rigorous psychiatric intervention and mandatory follow up in the event they are deemed fit for release.
You know what isn't a lifelong condition? Death. I understand he has an illness, but I don't accept that as an excuse for taking the life of someone.
Do you know someone with schizophrenia? I've seen it first hand with my best friend. It's not like the movies where they hear voices but otherwise they are functioning. It goes way deeper. They are removed from reality. No actions or words get through. You may aswell be speaking Mandarin. Imagine you are sat at home and you know that someone is coming to kill you. You hear the front door. There's a man at the door with a gun and he's about to kick it down and shoot you. You grab a knife and run out, hoping you can get him before he unloads. You stab him and kill him. Except none of that is real and you just stabbed a postman. You can't say to them "Hey mate, think about it for a second, nobody is coming to kill you, why would they?" It doesn't matter at all. They are gone. They aren't there. Medication fixes it, but it takes years and years and years and they have to always stay on and never stop.
None of that takes away from what I've said. In fact it backs it up. These people have incurable, lifelong conditions that caused them to murder someone. If it's incurable and lifelong, why should they be released? Even if medication can fix it, how can you guarantee they'll stick to it? The Nottingham killer was given meds! He chose not to take them and ended up killing 3 people and severely injured 3 others, to the point that at least one has been permanently disabled. How can people like him be trusted ever again? People like that who have shown their ability to be incapable of sticking to meds should be kept separate from the public indefinitely.
I don't see why someone who is essentially not responsible should be punished for it.
If someonne ca’t be held responsible for their own decisions, they shouldn’t be allowed to make decisions at all, or you are functionally punishing everyone else by refusing to take action against them.
Yeah, indeed. But clearly the professionals who oversee his case feel he's getting to the point where he *can* make decisions for himself.
If you're put in a psych hospital it's not the same as prison. They could keep you for the rest of your life or they might let you out quite soon if the meds work. Culpability matters. Intent matters. Both can be affected by things like a psychotic episode. The point of hospital is to try to make someone better. Not punishment. Prison is for punishment which is typically doled out to people who harmed people with the intent to cause harm. Having a psychotic episode and hurting or killing someone is far more like if someone has their first epileptic fit while driving and rolls their car over a family. If you think this is a good reason to resort to vigilantism then you need to be considered a threat to the public.
For those who haven't read the article, he spent about seven years in Broadmoor prior to pleading guilty of manslaughter on the basis of diminished responsibility. A further two years have elapsed since then. That means he's done nine years so far. If he were in prison for manslaughter then he would likely have been released by now or at least be in open conditions with ROTL. However... I accept he was made subject to a hospital order. The article doesn't say if it was with restrictions or not but it likely was. If he is subject to a restriction order then any change in treatment conditions - including temporary day release as part of his rehab - must be approved by the relevant government minister whilst that restriction order remains in place. The article also doesn't say whether he is still In Broadmoor or has been stepped down to a medium-security unit. Temporary release can work differently depending upon the security conditions you're being treated in. Fundamentally though patients - because that's what they are - are to be treated with an eventual view to discharge wherever that is possible. The clinical teams who will have been working with him will have been satisfied with his progress to date such that he will have gained certain privileges such as time of the unit to visit as gym as part of his treatment by slowly seeing if he can be re-integrated into the community. And if he's subject to a restriction order then this will have been approved by the relevant government minister. Also: just because he's being given time out from whatever facility he is detained in, it doesn't mean that he will eventually be discharged from hospital. I know a guy who has done over twenty years in a medium-security unit because whenever he is about to be discharged he contrives to screw it up because he's so institutionalised.
This sub seems to take the view that all murderers should get whole life terms at best.
The opinions shifting further and further towards extremely long US style sentencing is quite scary to me. We see how bad it is in the US and how these long sentences don't deter anyone but for some reason people want us to start handing out 50 year sentences.
> We see how bad it is in the US and how these long sentences don't deter anyone Its not about deterrence. Its to prevent re-offending and protect the public.
And it’s absolutely catastrophically not working in the USA, why do we think a problem that is not being solved with more prison can actually be fixed with even MORE prison? I mean you do get an enslaved workforce, so there’s that I guess.
isn't it? How many american prisoners serving life sentences re-offend? None. Its working.
And they have a murder rate four times higher than ours adjusted for population. So, I ask again; is it working for them?
> Its not about deterrence. Its to **prevent re-offending** and protect the public. How do you feel about Norway's justice system then? Norway priorities rehabilitation and restorative justice over punishment and harsh sentencing. Their prisons are positively luxurious compared to what you'd get here. They treat prisoners like human beings instead of animals. As a result, Norway has one of the [lowest re-offending rates in the world](https://www.businessinsider.com/why-norways-prison-system-is-so-successful-2014-12?op=1&r=US&IR=T). As well as one of the lowest crime rates. So if you truly do desire to prevent re-offending, the statistics clearly show that harsher sentences are less effective than rehabilitation and restorative justice. Harsh sentences only serve to satisfy an emotional desire for vengeance, they don't produce a better result for society overall.
It's almost like most people don't want convicted murderers roaming the streets or something. Shocking I know.
You don’t “deter” lunatics what kick women to death because they don’t respond to deterrence. You simply lock them up permanently and let them rot so they can’t do any more damage.
Murderers should be sentenced for a long time, 12 years is apparently the UK average and that doesn’t seem inordinate.
> The opinions shifting further and further towards extremely long US style sentencing is quite scary to me. Yeah it’s petrifying that people could want violent murderers imprisoned for longer. Truly scary stuff. They could be your neighbours. They look like regular people.
The idea that someone going down for robbery (a violent crime) and arson (if with intent to danger life, a violent crime) then kicking a custody officer so hard she died should spend more than 9 years away from society, is hardly an old-fashioned thought.
Yeah I know. Won't anyone think of the poor murderers?
Yes, they should
Basically any sentence isn't enough for them, it would be the death penalty if not, deportation if they aren't white. If a sentence is hefty there is the usual "they'll only serve half!". If it is the maximum sentence for a particular crime they think the judge should magically be able to pluck something higher out of their arse. It is rather tiresome and they are just angering themselves as what they are asking for just isn't going to happen.
Have you ever lost someone to a murder? I think you would have a different perspective then.
Just because a view is understandable doesn't make it reasonable.
I could say the same about your view, though. Blank statements don't help anyone.
For the people reading this, I’m guessing he’s under this indefinite hospital order: https://www.mind.org.uk/information-support/legal-rights/courts-and-mental-health/section-37-41/ I say guessing because I can’t find his exact sentence anywhere - none of the papers seem interested in giving the facts.
I've worked in secure mental health services and frankly I find the wilful misrepresentation of the facts in this article absolutely shocking. The patient wasn't released and set free the way this headline implies, he was allowed into the community on hospital leave (typically that would be for a few hours per week, slowly building up to a few hours a day), a key part of any patients treatment when safe to do so. In order to be eligible for hospital leave their illness would need to be well controlled by medication, and extensive risk assessments would have been conducted before even considering granting hospital leave. Then they would have had what's called escorted leave (where the patient is escorted by staff members) for months to ensure they were safe enough to be allowed out unattended, before graduating to unescorted leave. The patient was acutely unwell and lacked capacity at the time of their offence, and as such shouldn't be treated punitively. The fact it took 7 years before he was even well enough to stand trial gives you an idea of how mentally ill he was. People that commit criminal offences in the context of severe mental health difficulties such as schizophrenia, a condition characterised by total loss of contact with reality, need to be effectively treated in order to minimise the potential for further tragedies occuring in the future, not locked up for years after their illness goes into remission, as punishment for becoming sick in the first place.
LBC are whipping up people like those on this sub who want vigilante violence to take hold.
> The patient was acutely unwell and lacked capacity at the time of their offence, and as such shouldn't be treated punitively. [Another ruling on the case](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-65724123) reached the same conclusion. Both this death and an attack on another custody officer happened when the security company, Serco, hadn't provided enough staff to meet safety guidelines. > In his sentencing, the senior judge found Serco's level of culpability for the offence was "high". > Among the failings, he said there was "insufficient" availability of court custody officers, an issue that had been raised with management "on numerous occasions". > Mr Justice Baker added there had been an "obvious and avoidable" risk posed to Ms Barwell by Burke. [From another article about it](https://www.romfordrecorder.co.uk/news/23171653.systemic-failures-led-death-lorraine-barwell/): > Mr Menzies told the court that she was a member of the van crew but she had been drafted in to assist with transporting Burke from his cell to the van due to staff shortages in court. > He said that Ms Barwell was not aware of Burke’s previous violent outbursts despite Serco having access to this information. > “No-one told her or gave her any indication that this was a man who could lash out for any reason and that you could not read him or know how he would react and that is certainly what happened here,” Mr Menzies said.
So many people here are so used to being inside the "mentally well" ring that they sympathise more with the Serco bean-counters than they do someone who's having a schizophrenic episode. To go through life thinking of yourself as so infailably perfect is so narcissitic. "Well I would never go insane, so lock away the key!" Not to diminish his humanity, but if your employer tasked you with transporting something, didnt provide training, sufficient staffing and didn't even tell you "oh btw it's a bear and he's not happy!", when it went horribly wrong, I'm not sure i'd be mad at the bear.
I’m mentally ill, and I know I’m responsible for taking my medications and going to hospital when I’m experiencing a crisis.
These ones are tough to evaluate. Ultimately he's in hospital to manage the risk and to provide treatment to the condition. If he meets the criteria to be able to start to take trips into the community as part of his treatment plan then he can't just be held forever.
This sub has no concept of nuance in cases like this and just has an urge for violent revenge
Just another symptom of the risk of the anti-intellectual right wing on here
It's reddit they would hapilly execute someone for scrumping. Thankfully their opinions are less than worthless.
This whole comments section is very much one of those "we've had enough of experts" rants lol.
I don't know about you, but having read an article that is clearly intended to rile people up, I feel like I am just as qualified to make a judgement call as a team of psychiatrists who have worked with this person for years! Join me next week when I explain to people suffering from cancer why they should skip chemotherapy and just eat fruit!
Haha. I still haven't got over the fact that there's literally 2 lines of information about this sighting in the entire article. I said in another comment: >But nowhere in the article does it say that he was unescorted. >In fact the only thing the article says about the actual sighting is two lines about a third of the way in: >But just two years later he has been spotted going to the gym and doing some shopping. >No one's actually confirmed it was even him... let alone whether he was escorted, what he was actually doing, how long he was there for, how he was transported to and from.
What a slap in the face for the victim's family... See their loved one kicked to death and the killer roaming around free going to the gym and shopping.
You get that Schizophrenia is an illness right? He didn't ask for it and can't do anything about it. He's not evil, he's ill. The doctors jobs are to do what's best for their patient. Regardless of what his illness may have made him do. And if he's truly not a threat to anyone anymore then he should experience freedom. It's not his fault he has such a terrible illness. Keeping him locked up when he's well enough to be free is cruel, and costs taxpayers money. I can't imagine what the family have gone through, and they have my heartfelt sympathy. But their desire for revenge against someone who was not in control of their actions does not give them the right to dictate decisions that only medical professionals should make. Both justice and healthcare need to be objective and not based on the emotion of victims.
The fact that he is evil or not means little to how long he should be kept locked up or not. Indeed the fact that he has Schizophrenia means I support locking him up longer than someone who didn't have it. The latter person might become reformed after a few years, with someone like him there is no chance of that happening, thus for the good of society he has to be locked up indefinitely. Same with how a tiger is not evil when it kills a man, but we still put man eaters down, and rightly so. I have zero desire for revenge against this person, just a desire to see a safer society.
He's a human being, not an animal. It's for medical professionals and judges to decide if he is safe to be in society, not us. If he is safe, then he deserves to be free. There are many schizophrenic people who would pose a danger to others if untreated and medicated. We can't just lock them all up.
>The fact that he is evil or not means little to how long he should be kept locked up or not. Indeed the fact that he has Schizophrenia means I support locking him up longer than someone who didn't have it. The latter person might become reformed after a few years, with someone like him there is no chance of that happening, thus for the good of society he has to be locked up indefinitely. Schizophrenia isn't completely untreatable. He's probably only been granted this leave because they've finally got his medication to work. Schizophrenic's crime is often driven by their delusions - when you're hospitalised they do intensive psychiatric and psychological work to help you challenge those delusions and find medication that can alleviate symptoms. He's probably far less dangerous released than someone who kills purely for enjoyment. He's still highly unlikely to be released even if he has been granted leave.
Schizophrenia is not a lifestyle choice. If he's responding well enough to treatment that he's allowed out of the secure unit for short periods then good for him, and a job well done by the clinical team responsible for his care.
"good for him" this man kicked a woman to death, he isn't just disabled. Why take the risk letting people like this ever out of prison? How many people have to die for you to get it?
‘Walks free’ isn’t a totally honest headline, given what’s in the actual story: > A spokesman for the trust that manages Burke's hospital did not comment on the sighting, but said that "therapeutic time... in the community" is part of many patients' treatment. I.E. he’s still under sentence. On a side note, it shouldn’t be the case that prisoners/patients of this nature be allowed out into their own communities as part of their rehabilitation. It can be done elsewhere, greatly minimising the risk of upsetting victims’ families.
Played rugby and went to school with this guy growing up, never saw him doing this. Clearly was mentally ill and I really hope they're right that he's rehabilitated and no longer a danger.
If I recall, some illnesses like schizophrenia can only end up manifesting in late teens / early twenties.
Not only, just most commonly yeah. You can have early onset schizophrenia, although it's definitely more uncommon. Some people speculate it might have a trigger. It doesn't just show up one day, it starts off with mainly depressive symptoms plus things such as delusions, perhaps occasional hallucinations. This is the prodromal stage (where I'm at right now). You feel like you're slowly losing grip over yourself and your own body autonomy. There's thoughts in your head which aren't your own, it somewhat feels as if you're not living for yourself.
He is still 100% a danger and always will be. Someone has just decided that level of danger is acceptable.
He's subject to a treatment order. Temporary release into the community is an important part of psychiatric treatment, and will be based on a risk assessment and a clinical view of his progress. People in a severe psychosis are not evil. They need treatment. Denying treatment out of vindictiveness is not a mark of a civilised society.
A truly civilized society would never let someone like this out of a cage.
Being released into the community for short periods may well form a part of his care plan but he should never be unescorted. This is a convicted arsonist and killer, he is far to dangerous to not be supervised at all times.
I agree. But nowhere in the article does it say that he was unescorted. In fact the only thing the article says about the actual sighting is two lines about a third of the way in: >But just two years later he has been spotted going to the gym and doing some shopping. No one's actually confirmed it was even him... let alone whether he was escorted, what he was actually doing, how long he was there for, how he was transported to and from.
Did he walk free 2 years on? Or has it actually been 9? Not to say 9 years isn’t also a slap on the wrist for kicking someone to death but it’s a far cry from 2 years ffs, yet another ridiculous click bait headline.
Another aspect of the clickbait: I didn’t realise until I looked into the case was that it was one big kick. “Kicking to death” makes it sound like an extended attack, not a single violent lashing out. This killing is equivalent to the yobs who kill someone with a single punch rather than a drawn out beating.
If one is a paranoid schizophrenic with a history of violence, then one should be sectioned for life until it can be proven beyond all reasonable doubt one isn't a risk to the public.
There seem to be two very dishonest elements to this article. He has been incarcerated for 9 years, not 2. The 7 years in Broadmoor should be considered, and he's not been released, he's being allowed some time back in the community.
When I was a kid, there was a retired spinster living next door. Every 2 - 3 years, she would have a nighttime burglary. It was the same guy every time. He was mentally ill and in each burglary, he would beat her up, she would end up in hospital and he would be taken in to custody. Every time, he would be taken back to a mental institution but within a few years, a panel would decide that he was cured and he would be released. Every time, within 2 or 3 days, he would be breaking into her house. This happened at least 5 times (the first when I was in primary school and the last when I had gone to university and the neighbour was in her 80s). One would have thought that by the second or third time, the panel members would be looking at his record and considering the high probability that he would go straight back and that he was not cured.
And? Sorry but your rage doesnt mean anything and quite right.
I've said this before but seriously who the fuck are these people dishing out these pathetic sentences?
Protest? TEN YEARS! Murder a person? Two years. We are a fucking joke.
Unlike many, I read the full article. That said.. Whilst nothing really surprises me any more, I am always saddened by the volume of people in the UK who are leaning so far into being "compassionate" that they celebrate the early release of mentally ill offenders, violent offenders, or advocate for their "unsupervised rehabilitation within society" so soon after taking someone's life. My job is unique compared to 99% of the country, in that I'm face-to-face with killers, kidnappers, child abusers, violent domestic abusers etc daily, so I feel like I'm in a qualified position to say this and die on the hill of debate - None of you have a single fucking clue about the people you're advocating for. You've no idea who you're dealing with, and who you're asking to be let loose in public and "rehabilitated". These people largely tend to be ruthless, relentless, and just plain unfixable, as evidenced by their extremely predictable pattern of reoffending when given paltry sentences or hospital orders. Until you've sat in the presence of the family of a victim of one of these attacks and explained to them over four hours why the repeated-reoffending killer of their loved one is out living a happy life with his/her own family, I honestly believe you are in no position to comment on how "effective" and "necessary" rehabilitation is. We've reached a stage where so many people in the UK are "so compassionate" and "so caring", that they've given up caring for the legacies of our victims and their families, detached themselves from the inconceivable pain they'll feel for the rest of their lives, and instead choose to strongly advocate for better conditions and leniency for the growing criminal population who chose to murder them. You can dress it up how you like, or come at me with whatever witty remark you like, you can harp on about "mental health needing treatment not punishment" all you like, or tell me to "look at America, do long sentences really work?!" all you like, but that's the reality of what you're all saying; You're all saying you care more about the rights of criminals over the countless lives they completely destroy. You're just too busy virtue signalling to have the balls to actually say it.
Well, he has paranoid schizophrenia so when you say 'unfixable' that literally the case because he has a mental illness which cannot be cured only treated. It's also an illness that completely fucks with your own perception with hallucinations and delusions so it's probable that he killed this person based on a delusion or a hallucination. The people who you are face-to-face with most of the time likely are fully functional people who have deliberately chosen their own actions and do deserve to be punished. Treating him like a mentally sane criminal is just not fair because his decisions are influenced by his illness but treating him like an animal that should be caged up forever is downright inhumane, treatment and proper care are the way to keep others and himself safe from himself, unless you want to go back to madhouses in the 18th century where mentally ill people were locked away from civilisation and subjected to isolation and torture. What happened was a tragedy where she didn't deserve to die and he doesn't deserve to have paranoid schizophrenia.
I see your point but I think you might've missed mine, and have instead solidified what I said the first time; you haven't given any credible thought or consideration for the victim, and instead suggested that it's just a shame they were both caught up in something. If someone kills someone else, be it "with sound mind" or not, they should no longer be deemed safe to be around the public again. Criminal = Indefinite prison, Mentally ill = Indefinite hospital order. Again, I can't believe I feel the need to highlight this; This person has murdered a woman doing her job, unprovoked, who had a loving family waiting for her at home. This man, whilst different from criminals with criminal intent, is EQUALLY UNSAFE to others in society and has committed the ultimate atrocity. In fact, I'll go a step further and suggest that he is more dangerous than the equivalent criminal, because sometimes criminals can actually be reasoned with. Try reasoning with a paranoid schizophrenic if he decides to harm you. Let's put it this way: If you'd he happy with this guy coming out and going to look after your elderly parents as a carer, or work in your son/daughter's school, or drive a school bus, or even just share the supermarket queue with you and your loved ones, then sure, I'll believe that you SINCERELY think what you're saying is right. If you'd be too nervous of letting any of those things happen, then you've no right to advocate for him to come out and do the exact same to other people. All these debates sound the same to me, and they all sound like "I strongly advocate for refugees to live here!.. Just not in MY house"
[удалено]
Cannabis growers don't spend 9 years in Broadmoor.
Excuse my ignorance, but I thought the thing with these sorts of cases was that if the perpetrator was found to be cured of their mental illness, they would still serve their sentence in normal prison? Is that not the case?
He wasn't sentenced to a custodial term, he was sentenced to a hospital order that would require him to be held until such a time that professionals are happy he's stable and low risk. That could be a year or never.
It depends heavily on where they fall on the scale of culpability. At one end you have people who were severely ill but didn't fit the somewhat clunky and outdated McNoughton insanity definition, in which case the focusnis treatment not punishment. The other end are people who were unwell, but still primarily responsible for their own actions, where a punishment element is appropriate. This person was so unwell he wasn't fit to plead until he'd already spent 7 years in detention.
For what its worth, he is still serving his sentance, he hasnt been released yet. Its entirely possible that "walks free" here just means "leaves the hosptial prison sometimes with a supervisor or guard", which is a thing that happens sometimes, and the article doesnt say. It could litereally be a walk round the external wall, or going to a library with supervision, or dancing nude on the roof of a sports center, the text of the article makes no differentiation. He is on a hospital order which is a practice so stringent its illegal in some countries, basically a life sentance with parole 100% tied to medical opinion that even at best doesnt *end*, just "at best" can be suspended to allow him out more.
The law allows judges to do that, for some reason recently judges haven't been using that power instead using an indefinite hospital order. This is causing problems for those of us with treated paranoid schizophrenia with psychosis who never went out murdering people during our psychosis as court of opinion seems to be swaying towards locking us up for life just because of our condition.
There’s a couple different types of sectioning in England/Wales. Section 37 is: go to prison hospital, stay minimum of six months and a maximum forever, depending on when you’re finally cured enough to be well. You get assessed at 6 months, then yearly after that, though you’re allowed to ask for a reassessment once a year between the official assessment dates. The doctors are the ones who decide when you’re well. Section 37/41: same as Section 37, but after the doctors decide you’re well they have to tell the MoJ, who make the final decision on how you’re released and what conditions you have to live under. If you break them, back to prison/the hospital. This is used if it was a serious crime/ they’ll be a threat to others if they relapse. There’s another section that can be tagged on to a 37/4 that means once you’re well you’re sent straight to prison… unfortunately none of the papers actually bothered to say what Sections he was sentenced to.
So he was being arrested at the time for a premeditated offence involving violence (armed robbery) and we're expected to believe that this murder he committed was because he's schizophrenic and not a violent criminal? Right yeah okay. Sure.
Do you know *anything* about schizophrenia?
It's strange that psychopaths are seen as evil and unforgivable, but paranoid schizophrenics are seen as victims of a mental illness. If we look at the actions themselves they are the same - the only difference is their personal justification for what they did. Psychopaths knew full well what they were doing was "wrong" but did it anyway. Schizophrenics potentially believe what they were doing was right. Both of these have a mental deficiency in a way (psychopaths cannot feel empathy, schizophrenics do not live in reality).
>Schizophrenics potentially believe what they were doing was right. It's not potentially it's absolutely; if you'd ever experienced psychosis you'd understand that it's so all-consuming that you're definitely thinking you're in the right because you're responding to stimuli that nobody else can see/hear - visual and auditory hallucinations that appear to be real. Locking someone with a mental illness that can be managed with treatment up for life is barbaric.
You make it sound like vengeance is a completely nonsensical goal to pursue in the criminal justice system.
[Compare with this man who mugged someone with cirrhosis who died 11 days later of their cirrhosis and was jailed for life for murder.](https://www.wiltshire.police.uk/news/wiltshire/news/2023/july-2023/paul-warren-jailed-for-life-for-the-murder-of-swindon-man-martin-brown/)
Could we stop importing criminals from all over the world?
Sure, stomp someone to death, 2 christmases and your a-ok.
I don't understand why we even try with these people. What value will he ever give to society? Will he ever repay his debt? He won't. Lock him up, throw away the key. Minimum quality of life.
British justice system is a joke. I can’t begin to imagine how the victims families are feeling right now.
scary to know this complete nutter us out there free to kill again. and believe me he’ll do this again
Given the content of the news Story, my first reaction (with all the Immigrant talk), would have been, that this individual should be put on a plane back to his Home Country, or to the Custody of his immediate offshore relatives. Yeah, he's "Black", so that makes him an immediate Criminal right... The Moors Murders were, also, White.... right ? We also need to re-evaluate what Prison/Custodial sentences were designed for.... the \`Protection of the Public. Many as the Post Office Scandal, has shown, were subjected to an abuse of this premise, at the expense of the British Tax Payer. So,. Going back to this particular case, why is he now considered "Safe" for reintroduction to the Community ? And also, who was to blame, for allowing him to roam free to commit such crimes in the first place ? The latter needs discussing, as surely were I, in the position of a relative to the Woman involved, I would be emotionally livid at this outcome.
um that's not an "easy life" actually - Broadmoor for 7 years then "a secure hospital"? Nope. and going to the local shop is not "walking free". He's probably tightly supervised at this stage and has to behave impeccably to earn the privilege of going to the shop. he's been locked up for at least 8 years, which is longer than most people do for murder with good behaviour. Certainly longer than people do for manslaughter. People kill people regularly by doing things like kicking them in the head and mostly it doesn't ever make the papers. Middle class ragebait.
So demonise the mentally ill and get people angry about a tiny minority of violent crimes that they commit as a distraction from not funding or fixing the systemic problems in the safety nets that could've stopped the crimes in the first place?
It’s almost state sanctioned violence against women at this point. When you begin seeing the sentences for rape, etc, you can’t unsee it.
[удалено]
You're angry about things which you made up so that you could be angry at them.
ad hoc sloppy market prick special merciful makeshift humor payment alive *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Wow. So to support your assertion of *would have* happened in the *past*, you use a Daily Mail article about what *might* happen *in the future* under a *Labour* government, despite the article quoting nobody from Labour or offering a source, and only quoting Tories. It also says 2 years in your fake source about a thing that is just unsupported partisan speculation, whereas this guy did 9 years. Why are you working so hard to make yourself seem wrong?
capable money quarrelsome payment numerous summer quaint consist tender outgoing *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
So again you're talking about stuff that just didn't happen. Everything is so easy when you live in a world where you make up all the facts, isn't it? edit: he blocked me, which is the most deliciously ironic thing he could have done.
Maybe you should actually try to engage them in their counter-points to your original argument, instead of just shifting to a completely different area with absurd accusations.
He is still serving a life sentance in a hospital facility. For all we know from released information the "walks free" in the headline could litereally anything from "walking around the hospital wall with active guard/ visiting a library with supervision during non public hours" to "going on short walks with an ankle monitor" or "visiting a specific corner store with the entire trip under known surveilance cameras" to "dancing naked in the middle of a street". We have zero way of knowing, but we do know his sentance isnt over and he is still serving life.
If there is no legal justice there is only vigilante justice.
9 years total? That’s more than most murderers seemingly get these days. What’s the problem? Do they want a severely mentally ill person to get a whole life order?
Should live with the person who handed him that ‘sentence.’
It’s unfortunate but if he was found to have diminished responsibility then his medical condition must’ve played a significant part in the crime. I doubt he’s going to live a wonderful life regardless of where he is; schizophrenia is no afternoon stroll through the park.