Boyfriend gets 16 years for murdering girlfriend (From Daily Echo)
When news happens, text SDE and your photos or videos to 80360. Or contact us by email and phone.
Elliot Turner gets 16 years for murdering girlfriend Emily Longley
10:47am Tuesday 22nd May 2012 in News
Emily Longley
A violent man who strangled his aspiring model girlfriend in a jealous rage has been told he will serve at least 16 years in jail.
Wealthy jeweller's son Elliot Turner, 20, was found guilty by a jury at Winchester Crown Court yesterday of murdering 17-year-old Brockenhurst College student Emily Longley in his bed after going ''absolutely nuts''.
The attack was the culmination of a month of anger and upset over his suspicions that she was ''twisting his heart'' by seeing other men.
He had claimed during the trial he acted in self-defence when Emily attacked him and he grabbed her by the throat for five or six seconds and he then woke up to find her dead in his bed in Bournemouth, in May last year.
His parents, Leigh, 54, and Anita, 51, also face jail terms after being found guilty of helping to cover up the crime by destroying a confession letter from their son and taking away vital evidence after the killing at their home.
They will be sentenced later after being convicted of perverting the course of justice after the five-week trial. Turner had admitted the same charge.
Emily's father, Mark Longley, called Turner evil and said he hoped he would suffer every day in prison for killing Emily, who had come over from New Zealand to study at college just eight months before her murder.
Turner had a history of obsession with women and soon showed signs of jealousy towards Emily after they met in December 2010.
The short, volatile relationship quickly descended into violent arguments, with Turner threatening to kill his girlfriend on an almost daily basis.
The prosecution said Turner used a pillow to smother Emily and then strangled her after she went back to his house to talk things over following a violent argument that night.
Sentencing Turner, Mrs Justice Dobbs said: ''Emily was a lovely, kind, fun-loving girl who brought a ray of sunshine to those she touched.
''That light has been extinguished suddenly and needlessly by you.
''You told your parents you loved Emily - you really do not know the meaning of love.
''Loving someone is not telling them they are a whore, it is not trying to control them, it is not threatening them, it is not slagging them off to your friends.
''You did not love her, she was just a trophy.
''The relationship, if it can be called that, was all about you. It was about control: control you carried out using aggression and threats.
''You could not be seen to be dumped by her and be seen to look like an idiot to your friends.
''Your arrogance towards Emily when on remand and during the trial has been breathtaking. Your lack of remorse is chilling.
''It is particularly galling you conducted an interview with a New Zealand paper in which you appeared to show no remorse.
''In my judgment it's apparent you had been thinking of killing Emily and it was only a matter of time before it happened because it's clear she wanted to be free from you and you would not let that happen - if you could not have her no-one else would do.
''You bullied, harassed, threatened and assaulted her.
''You can put away thoughts of champagne, Bentleys and girls and concentrate on the reason you are serving a life sentence.''
Emily's mother, Caroline, father, Mark, and younger sister, Hannah, sat in the well of the court to hear the judge.
Mrs Justice Dobbs also sentenced Turner to nine months to run concurrently for perverting the course of justice.
Speaking outside court, Mr Longley said he was satisfied with the outcome.
''We are pleased he is not on the streets now. He's an incredibly dangerous person and we are relieved he cannot do this again.''
He said the family could now move on and grieve for Emily.
Comments(54)
Shoong
says...
11:02am Tue 22 May 12
Smartiepants
says...
11:05am Tue 22 May 12
Shirayuki wrote:Completely agree, this was calculated murder, backed up by his parents. An eye for an eye I say, if he has to be kept alive, put him inside forever. Why should he be allowed any human rights at all when he's robbed another person of theirs.
16 years? That's a pathetic minimum term for someone who is clearly a danger to other people. Look at all the evidence - he has shown no remose and is an absolute waste of oxygen. Bring back capital punishment.
Mike New Forest
says...
11:14am Tue 22 May 12
Linesman
says...
11:16am Tue 22 May 12
61 years would be more appropriate, and I would still think that he got off light.
jimmy.little
says...
11:17am Tue 22 May 12
ajw1986
says...
11:25am Tue 22 May 12
Torchie1
says...
11:28am Tue 22 May 12
Mike New Forest wrote:I can't help asking myself if this 'rich' family tried to understate their wealth by choosing to live in a bungalow more suited to a pensioner.
The arrogant little rich kid has got what he deserved! He won't go down well in prison and I suspect he will spend most of his sentence in isolation for his own protection with all the sex offenders! I hope to hear news of his hanging soon.
roofspace
says...
11:31am Tue 22 May 12
His life and the poor girl he murdered has been ruined by their indulgence. Nasty people all three.
Stillness
says...
11:32am Tue 22 May 12
SaintJoeBhoy90
says...
11:40am Tue 22 May 12
bigfella777
says...
11:56am Tue 22 May 12
192 months for taking this beautiful young girls life away forever, where is the deterrent in this country not to commit murder?
Build more poor quality over crowded prisons now and get them all on hard labour building the roads we so badly need with shovels and picks.
freemantlegirl2
says...
12:01pm Tue 22 May 12
Linesman wrote:Agree, 16 years is insulting - he took away not only Emily's life/future but destroyed that of her family.
16 years?
61 years would be more appropriate, and I would still think that he got off light.
Glad the parents will be convicted too, evil all three of them!
Taskforce 141
says...
12:02pm Tue 22 May 12
bigfella777 wrote:Well said.
This just about sums up the justice system in this country now, pathetic.
192 months for taking this beautiful young girls life away forever, where is the deterrent in this country not to commit murder?
Build more poor quality over crowded prisons now and get them all on hard labour building the roads we so badly need with shovels and picks.
Saintcosser
says...
12:13pm Tue 22 May 12
Stillness wrote:Totally agree. Shocking to think that he could be out on the streets again in his mid 30's.
He has taken about 60 years of the girls life. I think he should be facing 60 years in prison.
BillyTheKid
says...
12:19pm Tue 22 May 12
My impression, over many years, is that the whole population of Britain feels that the length of prison sentences for murder and causing death by reckless behaviour are too short. So often victim's relatives have said that they have lost their loved one forever, but the killer will be out in 10 to 15 years and able to continue with their life. Obviously the possibility of a miscarriage of justice is always there, and sometimes happens, so bringing back capital punishment would not, perhaps, be a good idea. But how did we get from the death sentence to 15 years for similar crimes ?
Either we are all wrong, or our legal system isn't listening. With whom do we raise this issue ?
sb2012
says...
12:26pm Tue 22 May 12
a) a significant degree of planning or premeditation;
b) the victim was vulnerable because of age or disability;
c) mental or physical suffering inflicted on the victim before death;
d) the abuse of a position of trust;
The minimum starting point for this offence is 15 years
and the only mitigating factor that can be proven is turners age
Summary the UKs justice system at present is a joke.
Elliot is a despicable individual who has shown no remorse and blatantly attempted to manipulate the justice system and his own family to escape justice 16 years is an insult to Emily's family and all others close to her, I believe Elliots life funded by his parents and not restricted at all has led him to believe he is above the law and his arrogance and his parents denial led to them trying to escape justice
I again summarise 16 years what a joke hopefully he will do us all a favor and have the respect to die in jail before he escapes
SaintsBridge
says...
12:27pm Tue 22 May 12
sb2012
says...
12:28pm Tue 22 May 12
sb2012 wrote:I meant to say released not escapes ooops!
Aggravating factors should be
a) a significant degree of planning or premeditation;
b) the victim was vulnerable because of age or disability;
c) mental or physical suffering inflicted on the victim before death;
d) the abuse of a position of trust;
The minimum starting point for this offence is 15 years
and the only mitigating factor that can be proven is turners age
Summary the UKs justice system at present is a joke.
Elliot is a despicable individual who has shown no remorse and blatantly attempted to manipulate the justice system and his own family to escape justice 16 years is an insult to Emily's family and all others close to her, I believe Elliots life funded by his parents and not restricted at all has led him to believe he is above the law and his arrogance and his parents denial led to them trying to escape justice
I again summarise 16 years what a joke hopefully he will do us all a favor and have the respect to die in jail before he escapes
The Salv
says...
12:38pm Tue 22 May 12
Over the Edge
says...
1:10pm Tue 22 May 12
SaintsBridge wrote:I know its no consolation and I am not defending this vile creature, but he will not be out in 16 years time.
Mental! How is 16yrs life? Out at 36yrs old and able to carry on the rest of his life. Take someone’s life in this manor and you should lose your right to freedom and the hope of freedom for your life.
He will be able to apply for parole in 16 years, I would wager my mortgage on it that parole will be refused on the 1st occasion, (anyone who knows anything about our criminal justice will tell that) is always is, he will have to wait at least another before he can apply for parole again and then I imagine with his refusal to show any remorse a trial will go against him, even after the 16 years his 2nd application will be turned down and rightly so, I personally don't think this thing will hit the street until at least 2032.
I totally agree that a life sentence should mean a whole life sentence, regardless of the crime, if your lifed off you should do the a whole life sentence.
Over the Edge
says...
1:13pm Tue 22 May 12
I know its no consolation and I am not defending this vile creature, but he will not be out in 16 years time.
He will be able to apply for parole in 16 years, I would wager my mortgage on it that parole will be refused on the 1st occasion, (anyone who knows anything about our criminal justice will tell that) it always is, he will have to wait at least another year before he can apply for parole again and then I imagine with his refusal to show any remorse at trial will go against him, even after the 16 years his 2nd parole application will be turned down and rightly so, I personally don't think this thing will hit the street until at least 2032.
I totally agree that a life sentence should mean a whole life sentence, regardless of the crime, if your lifed off you should do the a whole life sentence.
Walter K
says...
2:14pm Tue 22 May 12
theamazingrob
says...
2:43pm Tue 22 May 12
For people saying that "life" will deter people from such heinous crimes, look at the history books. It has always been there, even with death penalties. I believe the only way to reduce this is by education and upbringing.
Although I think this is sickening, everyone should have a second chance.
Shirayuki
says...
2:56pm Tue 22 May 12
Georgem
says...
2:58pm Tue 22 May 12
Shirayuki wrote:You're missing the point. Ever hear the phrase "two wrongs don't make a right"?
Emily should have a second chance. Do you think she's going to get one?
Georgem
says...
3:03pm Tue 22 May 12
theamazingrob wrote:I half-agree. Prison is also about punishment, and about giving society a break from criminals. Long prison sentences are no deterrent, that's obvious. That's no reason not to give them out, though.
16 years is a long time, but the right time. I believe prison should be about rehabilitation and correcting ways. You wont be able to achieve this by indefinite sentences.
For people saying that "life" will deter people from such heinous crimes, look at the history books. It has always been there, even with death penalties. I believe the only way to reduce this is by education and upbringing.
Although I think this is sickening, everyone should have a second chance.
theamazingrob
says...
3:16pm Tue 22 May 12
Georgem wrote:If you gave someone 99 years, why would they even bother to try and amend their ways, If anything it would spur non-compliance with prison officers ect. and make a bad situation worse. What would they have to loose?
theamazingrob wrote:I half-agree. Prison is also about punishment, and about giving society a break from criminals. Long prison sentences are no deterrent, that's obvious. That's no reason not to give them out, though.
16 years is a long time, but the right time. I believe prison should be about rehabilitation and correcting ways. You wont be able to achieve this by indefinite sentences.
For people saying that "life" will deter people from such heinous crimes, look at the history books. It has always been there, even with death penalties. I believe the only way to reduce this is by education and upbringing.
Although I think this is sickening, everyone should have a second chance.
Where as the possibly of a second chance with a foreseeable future would work as an incentive. Encouraging active participation in counselling, learning trade skills, and maybe being able to contribute back so society.
It could also emote guilt and remorse, which is surely what is wanted. Whereas, "banging" someone up for their life, is only going to make inmates angry and despise society and people associated with it, possibly, reducing guilt of action.
Im not talking from experience, nor any expertise in the area, it just seems logical to me
Walter K
says...
3:21pm Tue 22 May 12
Shirayuki
says...
3:21pm Tue 22 May 12
Georgem wrote:Phrases can be both stupid and incorrect.
Shirayuki wrote:You're missing the point. Ever hear the phrase "two wrongs don't make a right"?
Emily should have a second chance. Do you think she's going to get one?
Someone who can do something this cruel and cowardly, attempt to cover it up and brag from prison about how he'll be released in 10 years or so and still a millionaire does NOT deserve a second chance.
If you think he does, I'd love to see you argue why to Emily's parents.
Georgem
says...
3:41pm Tue 22 May 12
Walter K wrote:Right. Because they're not being coloured by emotion. When I was burgled, I felt like strangling the perpetrators. Does this mean the punishment for burglary should ACTUALLY be the death penalty?
Comments like those above are obviously far easier to make when it's not your child/loved one that's been murdered...
Georgem
says...
3:47pm Tue 22 May 12
Shirayuki wrote:I don't see what his net value has to do with it. Are you suggesting people with money should have less rights than someone without?
Georgem wrote:Phrases can be both stupid and incorrect.
Shirayuki wrote:You're missing the point. Ever hear the phrase "two wrongs don't make a right"?
Emily should have a second chance. Do you think she's going to get one?
Someone who can do something this cruel and cowardly, attempt to cover it up and brag from prison about how he'll be released in 10 years or so and still a millionaire does NOT deserve a second chance.
If you think he does, I'd love to see you argue why to Emily's parents.
The point is, we're not going to solve the crime problem by just locking it away. We've been doing it for centuries, and it hasn't worked.
Walter K
says...
3:49pm Tue 22 May 12
Georgem
says...
3:52pm Tue 22 May 12
Walter K wrote:Sigh. Never mind. You're clearly not reading posts, rather, scanning them for words to react to. Forget everything I said, you win the Internet.
Didn't mention the Death Penalty - I personally feel that depriving Turner of 16 years liberty as the consequence for murdering a 17 year old girl with the majority of her life ahead of her is skewed.
theamazingrob
says...
4:01pm Tue 22 May 12
Walter K wrote:This is very true.
Comments like those above are obviously far easier to make when it's not your child/loved one that's been murdered...
It is also probably the wrong forum for debate on the topic.
For that, I apologise if a caused any distress, it was not my intention.
Fullest sympathies with the victims family, on what must be an unthinkably tragic time.
Shirayuki
says...
4:01pm Tue 22 May 12
Georgem wrote:No, don't put words in my mouth. My point is that boasts about wealth and getting out of prison quickly are extremely indicative of a lack of remorse.
Shirayuki wrote:I don't see what his net value has to do with it. Are you suggesting people with money should have less rights than someone without?
Georgem wrote:Phrases can be both stupid and incorrect.
Shirayuki wrote:You're missing the point. Ever hear the phrase "two wrongs don't make a right"?
Emily should have a second chance. Do you think she's going to get one?
Someone who can do something this cruel and cowardly, attempt to cover it up and brag from prison about how he'll be released in 10 years or so and still a millionaire does NOT deserve a second chance.
If you think he does, I'd love to see you argue why to Emily's parents.
The point is, we're not going to solve the crime problem by just locking it away. We've been doing it for centuries, and it hasn't worked.
And no, locking away a murderer does no good in most cases. We can prevent him carrying out future crimes by executing him.
Say what you want about capital punishment, but it sure does stop repeat offenses.
Over the Edge
says...
4:06pm Tue 22 May 12
theamazingrob wrote:Or they may realise that they're never getting out and top themselves.
Georgem wrote:If you gave someone 99 years, why would they even bother to try and amend their ways, If anything it would spur non-compliance with prison officers ect. and make a bad situation worse. What would they have to loose?
theamazingrob wrote:I half-agree. Prison is also about punishment, and about giving society a break from criminals. Long prison sentences are no deterrent, that's obvious. That's no reason not to give them out, though.
16 years is a long time, but the right time. I believe prison should be about rehabilitation and correcting ways. You wont be able to achieve this by indefinite sentences.
For people saying that "life" will deter people from such heinous crimes, look at the history books. It has always been there, even with death penalties. I believe the only way to reduce this is by education and upbringing.
Although I think this is sickening, everyone should have a second chance.
Where as the possibly of a second chance with a foreseeable future would work as an incentive. Encouraging active participation in counselling, learning trade skills, and maybe being able to contribute back so society.
It could also emote guilt and remorse, which is surely what is wanted. Whereas, "banging" someone up for their life, is only going to make inmates angry and despise society and people associated with it, possibly, reducing guilt of action.
Im not talking from experience, nor any expertise in the area, it just seems logical to me
Whole life sentences are an alternative to hanging and the lenient sentencing we have today.
Boatman
says...
4:12pm Tue 22 May 12
Georgem
says...
4:50pm Tue 22 May 12
Boatman wrote:The Echo Hivemind won't care. If you're not actively demanding the beheading of anyone committing so much as a minor parking offence, you may as well be wearing a dress and administering executive relief to hardened criminals for a living. There's no middle ground, no room for anything other than these two polar extremes.
Can I remind those baying for capital punishment that only last week a young man was released after 7 years in prison. He had been convicted of murder in an appalling miscarriage of justice.
espanuel
says...
5:16pm Tue 22 May 12
Georgem
says...
5:18pm Tue 22 May 12
espanuel wrote:You were quite interested in demands for Turner to be sodomized in prison?
Georgem, I was quite interested on what people had to say until you came on at 2.58 pm and then you tried to demolish everybody on what they had to say. Read what they have to say and abide by there reasoning.
cantthinkofone
says...
6:20pm Tue 22 May 12
espanuel wrote:"Abide by there (sic) reasoning"? What on earth does that mean?
Georgem, I was quite interested on what people had to say until you came on at 2.58 pm and then you tried to demolish everybody on what they had to say. Read what they have to say and abide by there reasoning.
Unfashionable though it is, I'm a big fan of rehabilitation and forgiveness. I wouldn't expect those close to Emily to agree with that - but that's why the victims of crimes don't determine the sentences. And as it goes, there have been plenty of bereaved parents/partners/etc who HAVE demonstrated an incredible ability to forgive the people who have taken a loved one from them.
A crime like this is horrible. But the blood-**** of the general public is more disturbing still. I guess it's much more comfortable to think that these people are just 'evil' than to recognise that we are all at the mercy of mental health and circumstance.
As stated before, sentences are no deterrent. Carrying out an act of this nature is not the act of a rational mind, so balancing the pros and cons is not going to be foremost. 'Punishment' serves no one. What does it achieve? It sure as heck won't bring the person back or compensate their family. So that leaves rehabilitation. Our sentencing and prisons should be centred around rehabilitation, and for that reason crimes like this should receive an indeterminate sentence, released when those with expert knowledge and proven good judgement are satisfied that they are no longer a threat.
sb2012
says...
6:51pm Tue 22 May 12
rich the stitch
says...
7:10pm Tue 22 May 12
sb2012 wrote:Do you think he'll do a 'long stretch inside'? I certainly hope so.
I hear posh spoilt brats are the ultimate must have to any self respecting prison heavy especially a woman abuser at that bye bye anal virginity the abuse this boy is going to suffer is half way to a sufficient punishment shame its not for longer
cantthinkofone
says...
7:43pm Tue 22 May 12
cantthinkofone wrote:"L-u-s-t" is automatically starred out? The censor software on these comment sections is radio rental.
espanuel wrote:"Abide by there (sic) reasoning"? What on earth does that mean?
Georgem, I was quite interested on what people had to say until you came on at 2.58 pm and then you tried to demolish everybody on what they had to say. Read what they have to say and abide by there reasoning.
Unfashionable though it is, I'm a big fan of rehabilitation and forgiveness. I wouldn't expect those close to Emily to agree with that - but that's why the victims of crimes don't determine the sentences. And as it goes, there have been plenty of bereaved parents/partners/etc who HAVE demonstrated an incredible ability to forgive the people who have taken a loved one from them.
A crime like this is horrible. But the blood-**** of the general public is more disturbing still. I guess it's much more comfortable to think that these people are just 'evil' than to recognise that we are all at the mercy of mental health and circumstance.
As stated before, sentences are no deterrent. Carrying out an act of this nature is not the act of a rational mind, so balancing the pros and cons is not going to be foremost. 'Punishment' serves no one. What does it achieve? It sure as heck won't bring the person back or compensate their family. So that leaves rehabilitation. Our sentencing and prisons should be centred around rehabilitation, and for that reason crimes like this should receive an indeterminate sentence, released when those with expert knowledge and proven good judgement are satisfied that they are no longer a threat.
BillyTheKid
says...
11:59pm Tue 22 May 12
cantthinkofone wrote:I cannot believe what you have just written. The person who commits a crime must be severely punished BECAUSE the loved one cannot be brought back. Also, it keeps a vast number of people on the straight and narrow, who, if punishments were not there, WOULD consider violence.
espanuel wrote:"Abide by there (sic) reasoning"? What on earth does that mean?
Georgem, I was quite interested on what people had to say until you came on at 2.58 pm and then you tried to demolish everybody on what they had to say. Read what they have to say and abide by there reasoning.
Unfashionable though it is, I'm a big fan of rehabilitation and forgiveness. I wouldn't expect those close to Emily to agree with that - but that's why the victims of crimes don't determine the sentences. And as it goes, there have been plenty of bereaved parents/partners/etc who HAVE demonstrated an incredible ability to forgive the people who have taken a loved one from them.
A crime like this is horrible. But the blood-**** of the general public is more disturbing still. I guess it's much more comfortable to think that these people are just 'evil' than to recognise that we are all at the mercy of mental health and circumstance.
As stated before, sentences are no deterrent. Carrying out an act of this nature is not the act of a rational mind, so balancing the pros and cons is not going to be foremost. 'Punishment' serves no one. What does it achieve? It sure as heck won't bring the person back or compensate their family. So that leaves rehabilitation. Our sentencing and prisons should be centred around rehabilitation, and for that reason crimes like this should receive an indeterminate sentence, released when those with expert knowledge and proven good judgement are satisfied that they are no longer a threat.
I ask you this, canthinkofone. Somebody with a psychological disorder breaks into your mother's, sister's, or your grandmother's house, ties them up, rapes them several times, tortures them, and many hours later finally kills them. Now you come back to this forum and tell us you would say "Oh dear, what a shame, lets rehabilitate this person. And I forgive them, by the way."
I have seen some absolute lunacy spelled out on this forum over the years, but yours takes some beating.
IronLady2010
says...
12:15am Wed 23 May 12
BillyTheKid wrote:Not all families of Victims wish punishment, many want an understanding of what caused the initial crime, so they can understand as best they can.
cantthinkofone wrote:I cannot believe what you have just written. The person who commits a crime must be severely punished BECAUSE the loved one cannot be brought back. Also, it keeps a vast number of people on the straight and narrow, who, if punishments were not there, WOULD consider violence.
espanuel wrote:"Abide by there (sic) reasoning"? What on earth does that mean?
Georgem, I was quite interested on what people had to say until you came on at 2.58 pm and then you tried to demolish everybody on what they had to say. Read what they have to say and abide by there reasoning.
Unfashionable though it is, I'm a big fan of rehabilitation and forgiveness. I wouldn't expect those close to Emily to agree with that - but that's why the victims of crimes don't determine the sentences. And as it goes, there have been plenty of bereaved parents/partners/etc who HAVE demonstrated an incredible ability to forgive the people who have taken a loved one from them.
A crime like this is horrible. But the blood-**** of the general public is more disturbing still. I guess it's much more comfortable to think that these people are just 'evil' than to recognise that we are all at the mercy of mental health and circumstance.
As stated before, sentences are no deterrent. Carrying out an act of this nature is not the act of a rational mind, so balancing the pros and cons is not going to be foremost. 'Punishment' serves no one. What does it achieve? It sure as heck won't bring the person back or compensate their family. So that leaves rehabilitation. Our sentencing and prisons should be centred around rehabilitation, and for that reason crimes like this should receive an indeterminate sentence, released when those with expert knowledge and proven good judgement are satisfied that they are no longer a threat.
I ask you this, canthinkofone. Somebody with a psychological disorder breaks into your mother's, sister's, or your grandmother's house, ties them up, rapes them several times, tortures them, and many hours later finally kills them. Now you come back to this forum and tell us you would say "Oh dear, what a shame, lets rehabilitate this person. And I forgive them, by the way."
I have seen some absolute lunacy spelled out on this forum over the years, but yours takes some beating.
Many emotions run through peoples minds after a crime, some want imprisonment, some want to face the offender. We can't be judge and Jury in all cases.
I'd rather they were all locked up, but that will never happen.
BillyTheKid
says...
12:37pm Wed 23 May 12
But hanging has been replaced with 16 years in jail for murder. To me, that's like replacing a speeding fine of £80 and 3 points on your licence with a card from the police saying "Naughty, naughty" on it.
There are even instances where a prison sentence for murder is shorter than one for sexual abuse of a child. ( Before anyone tries to misinterpret my words, I believe child abuse crimes should always be dealt with very severely, with up to whole-life sentences where appropriate. I believe that the crime of murder is not dealt with severely enough. )
Think of that statue, holding the scales of justice. It is supposed to symbolise the right to a fair trial, the examination of all sides to the argument, and, if guilt is proved, the balancing of the crime with the punishment. I ask everyone who posts here : does forgiveness and rehabilitation equate with murder ?
bigal007
says...
8:28pm Wed 23 May 12
true fact
Georgem
says...
11:10pm Wed 23 May 12
bigal007 wrote:3 meals, probably all cooked. That's about as close to 'fact' as this drivel gets. Did you even read the story? He'll serve a MINIMUM of 16 years. He has not been sentenced to 16 years, he will be eligible to apply for parole in 16 years. Which he probably won't get.
mad thing is he be out in 7 years 3 cooked meals tv xbox and all the drugs that he wants
true fact
Still not long enough, but a far cry from the 7 years at Butlins you've been brainwashed into thinking.
That, my friend, is a true fact.
BillyTheKid
says...
11:19am Thu 24 May 12
Down Pompey
says...
6:03pm Thu 24 May 12
Shirayuki wrote:This boy is even uglier on the inside than the outside - if that's possible! Hanging is to good for him, years and years o living each day in fear for his personal safety, having to check his food and drink carefully for "extras" and the knowledge that he ever gets out it'll be even worse isn't adequate punishment, but it'll hurt far more than 15 mins dangling at the end of a rope! I'm going out for a drink tonight, enjoy the first of many thousand nights in a shared cell scumbag!
16 years? That's a pathetic minimum term for someone who is clearly a danger to other people. Look at all the evidence - he has shown no remose and is an absolute waste of oxygen. Bring back capital punishment.
BillyTheKid
says...
8:48pm Thu 24 May 12
Down Pompey wrote:While I can understand and feel the outrage at this man's crime, when I read YOUR words, Pompey, I shudder that emotionally unstable people such as yourself may be called for jury service at any time. They need rational, balanced human beings, not candidates for a lynch/terror mob.
Shirayuki wrote:This boy is even uglier on the inside than the outside - if that's possible! Hanging is to good for him, years and years o living each day in fear for his personal safety, having to check his food and drink carefully for "extras" and the knowledge that he ever gets out it'll be even worse isn't adequate punishment, but it'll hurt far more than 15 mins dangling at the end of a rope! I'm going out for a drink tonight, enjoy the first of many thousand nights in a shared cell scumbag!
16 years? That's a pathetic minimum term for someone who is clearly a danger to other people. Look at all the evidence - he has shown no remose and is an absolute waste of oxygen. Bring back capital punishment.
flowtheartist
says...
1:22pm Fri 25 May 12
Shirayuki says...
11:00am Tue 22 May 12