The Butcher of Worcester. Murdered 3 kids and impaled them. At least they had the decency to let the mother know. The parole board must deem he is not a risk ( probably if he takes his meds) and could really put something useful into society.

Didn't know of this case,saw it on the news,what that guy did to those kids he should have hung no ifs no buts.....T**t.

Monster

Steve1956 wrote:Didn't know of this case,saw it on the news,what that guy did to those kids he should have hung no ifs no buts.....T**t.

Completely agree what sort of a society are we that let’s a murderer like him free to walk the streets again.

Dy1geo wrote:Completely agree what sort of a society are we that let’s a murderer like him free to walk the streets again.

Dogooder's mate this country is full of em!

Isn’t this an old story? I’m sure there was a thread on here about it a while ago?

Got to admit, although i’m all for rehabilitation and reform, in his case life really should have meant life.

A different story, same old comments.

Here they come the wet lettuce brigade. He’s done his time you can’t leave people incarcerated forever. This is what we have therapy and counselling for.

Blackrod wrote:Here they come the wet lettuce brigade. He’s done his time you can’t leave people incarcerated forever. This is what we have therapy and counselling for.

When are they releasing Peter Sutcliffe then?

I do find this case concerning by the fact that he didn't receive a "whole of life sentence".

beddie wrote:I do find this case concerning by the fact that he didn't receive a "whole of life sentence".

And it should have been 3 life sentence's mate.

I feel for the victims Mother. It must have stirred up emotions that may have eased over the years. He killed them because he was fed up of the baby crying. I really don’t care if he’s no longer a threat to society. He should’ve died in Prison.

Look on the bright side, at least we won't be paying for the b@stard's keep any more !!!!!!!!

What's the opposite of a 'do-gooder'?

He first became eligible for parole in 1993 and then was up for review every 3 years since. So the decision to release him now, aged 68, has not been unduly rushed. Whether this decision is right or wrong it is in line with UK laws put in place, and reconfirmed by various Parliaments over 60+ years. According to the local MP, "There are strict curfew and tag conditions and he is banned from Worcester, and the area in Andover where Ms Urry lives."

From the HuffPost:
A document from the Parole Board about McGreavy’s case, following a hearing in November 2018, referred to a victim personal statement from the children’s mother.

In it she set out “the devastating effect” the deaths had on her “and still do have”.

But the document said that, following 45 years in custody, McGreavy now “takes full responsibility” for what he did.

It added: “He has developed self-control, as well as a considerable understanding of the problems that he has had and what caused them.

“The psychologist identified a number of factors which make it less likely that Mr McGreavy will re-offend in future.

“These included his improved self-control and the fact that Mr McGreavy has learnt to remain calm in stressful situations. He has also shown himself to be compliant and co-operative with authority, which suggests that he will comply with licence conditions. A network of supportive friends in the community was also identified as a protective factor.”

Announcing the decision of an independent panel at the end of last year, the Parole Board said:

“We can confirm that a panel of the Parole Board has directed the release of David McGreavy following an oral hearing.

Parole Board decisions are solely focused on whether a prisoner would represent a significant risk to the public after release. The panel will have carefully looked at a whole range of evidence, including details of the original evidence and any evidence of behaviour change. We do that with great care and public safety is our number one priority.”

Parole Board release decisions are sent to the Ministry of Justice, which arranges the physical release of prisoners.

AndrewJB wrote:What's the opposite of a 'do-gooder'?

Probably a “do-badder” and quite frankly a scumbag like him due to the fact that we don’t have the death penalty should get horrendous treatment every day of his life.

I honestly can’t see how anyone can defend the likes of him walking free to enjoy life, a privilege he took away from those children.

How can a murderer who has been in prison for 46 years have " a network of supportive friends in the community " ?

randomclaret2 wrote:How can a murderer who has been in prison for 46 years have " a network of supportive friends in the community " ?

At the risk of being accused of virtue-signalling by Damo, other inmates who are reformed and have since been released is a possibility.

Evil personified, how can any society justify his release. He should have been hung.

This is what you need in these situations:

https://tinyurl.com/yyoxmfbw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://tinyurl.com/y66tgqf7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We should have a Referendum on bringing back hanging.

Burnley Ace wrote:We should have a Referendum on bringing back hanging.

Necksit.

bfcjg wrote:Evil personified, how can any society justify his release. He should have been hung.

How can any society justify hanging someone to death?

bfcjg wrote:Evil personified, how can any society justify his release. He should have been hung.

Hanged not hung!

bfcjg wrote:Evil personified, how can any society justify his release. He should have been hung.

Drawn and quartered!

Rileybobs wrote:How can any society justify hanging someone to death?

Could just give the c""t a lethal injection instead.

Told you !

bfcmik wrote:He first became eligible for parole in 1993 and then was up for review every 3 years since. So the decision to release him now, aged 68, has not been unduly rushed. Whether this decision is right or wrong it is in line with UK laws put in place, and reconfirmed by various Parliaments over 60+ years. According to the local MP, "There are strict curfew and tag conditions and he is banned from Worcester, and the area in Andover where Ms Urry lives."

From the HuffPost:
A document from the Parole Board about McGreavy’s case, following a hearing in November 2018, referred to a victim personal statement from the children’s mother.

In it she set out “the devastating effect” the deaths had on her “and still do have”.

But the document said that, following 45 years in custody, McGreavy now “takes full responsibility” for what he did.

It added: “He has developed self-control, as well as a considerable understanding of the problems that he has had and what caused them.

“The psychologist identified a number of factors which make it less likely that Mr McGreavy will re-offend in future.

“These included his improved self-control and the fact that Mr McGreavy has learnt to remain calm in stressful situations. He has also shown himself to be compliant and co-operative with authority, which suggests that he will comply with licence conditions. A network of supportive friends in the community was also identified as a protective factor.”

Announcing the decision of an independent panel at the end of last year, the Parole Board said:

“We can confirm that a panel of the Parole Board has directed the release of David McGreavy following an oral hearing.

Parole Board decisions are solely focused on whether a prisoner would represent a significant risk to the public after release. The panel will have carefully looked at a whole range of evidence, including details of the original evidence and any evidence of behaviour change. We do that with great care and public safety is our number one priority.”

Parole Board release decisions are sent to the Ministry of Justice, which arranges the physical release of prisoners.

The highlighted part is the problem. The parole board has considered that if they let him out, he probably won't kill any more children. They don't say he won't - they say he is less likely to.

And you can be sure of one thing - whatever he has learned in theory, he has not learned in practice how to remain calm when a baby is crying.

randomclaret2 wrote:How can a murderer who has been in prison for 46 years have " a network of supportive friends in the community " ?

Sick b*stards and the mentally twisted like ‘Lord’ Longford was to the evil Hindley.

A sane person would not be able to live with themself having done such a heanous crime and would probably take their own life.

Funkydrummer wrote:Look on the bright side, at least we won't be paying for the b@stard's keep any more !!!!!!!!

Course not cos he'll be walking out into a well paid job to contribute to the tax system and accommodation he's paid for himself. Give your head a shake pal.

Ex-offenders are eligible for free TV licences for up to 36 months after release too.

The price we pay for being run by intellectuals, rather than people with common sense.

claret2018 wrote:Ex-offenders are eligible for free TV licences for up to 36 months after release too.

Unless they are over 75 I presume

Isn’t it ironic that the people who want to bring back hanging are usually of the opinion that Islam has failed to integrate because of its barbaric laws and practices

claret2018 wrote:Ex-offenders are eligible for free TV licences for up to 36 months after release too.

Where did you get that from?

Rileybobs wrote:How can any society justify hanging someone to death?

Quite easily when you look at the crimes he’s committed.

UpTheClaretsFCBK wrote:Isn’t it ironic that the people who want to bring back hanging are usually of the opinion that Islam has failed to integrate because of its barbaric laws and practices

Gets more obvious every day. No tolerance for the gays, control your women, bizarre or cruel punishments, anti abortion.. in fact if these Islamists weren’t, you know, mostly brown people they’d be wonderful bed fellows for the far right. Not that they’d go in for any of that sort of thing you understand.

Revenge! Revenge!

30 odd posts...like reading the dribblings of a horde of savages......

Its now been acknowledged that the haste to abolish the death penalty was probably an error.
Certain crimes needed to have the ultimate deterrent .
Murder and mutilation.terrorist bombings all fall into that category

Woodleyclaret wrote:Its now been acknowledged that the haste to abolish the death penalty was probably an error.

Has it? By who?

Woodleyclaret wrote:Its now been acknowledged that the haste to abolish the death penalty was probably an error.

Acknowledged by...you?

I wouldn't worry about a TV licence, it costs £23,000 a year to keep your average criminal in jail. That's not an argument for his release by the way, just worth mentioning.

I don't know why, but I'm always surprised by the mentality of folk on here when it comes to the justice system. The state has no right to murder a citizen regardless of their crime, it completely contradicts the values we aspire to and that the state tries to uphold, in a civilised society.

As for his release, you haven't been privvy to his behaviour, rehabilitation and development as a human being for the last few decades. Why or how do you feel so confident in your assessment he should rot in jail? What he did was absolutely abhorrent, cruel and disgusting. But I like to think, merely as principle, that we want to live in a where change is possible and someone can in some small way begin to repay the huge debt they owe. Killing them rarely brings any satisfaction to victim's families even if it satisfies your thirst for more blood.

Woodleyclaret wrote:Its now been acknowledged that the haste to abolish the death penalty was probably an error.
Certain crimes needed to have the ultimate deterrent .
Murder and mutilation.terrorist bombings all fall into that category

Clearly proven it's not a deterrent.

willsclarets wrote:I wouldn't worry about a TV licence, it costs £23,000 a year to keep your average criminal in jail. That's not an argument for his release by the way, just worth mentioning.

I don't know why, but I'm always surprised by the mentality of folk on here when it comes to the justice system. The state has no right to murder a citizen regardless of their crime, it completely contradicts the values we aspire to and that the state tries to uphold, in a civilised society.

As for his release, you haven't been privvy to his behaviour, rehabilitation and development as a human being for the last few decades. Why or how do you feel so confident in your assessment he should rot in jail? What he did was absolutely abhorrent, cruel and disgusting. But I like to think, merely as principle, that we want to live in a where change is possible and someone can in some small way begin to repay the huge debt they owe. Killing them rarely brings any satisfaction to victim's families even if it satisfies your thirst for more blood.

So you think Thomas Mair should one day walk free again?

Dy1geo wrote:So you think Thomas Mair should one day walk free again?

At the risk of being accused of virtue-signalling by Damo, once he's served his sentence, and if the people we employ to judge whether an offender is suitably rehabilitated to re-enter society then yes. Of course.

Why is it that people are continually surprised that liberals actually want our justice system to be blind and for people to be treated equally, and not be treated based on the whims of the public? Thomas Mair walking free one day would not make me happy, in fact i'd probably hate it, but i'm smart enough to understand that that's the price we pay for having as fair a justice system as we have.

We shouldn't allow public opinion to be a factor when it comes to the parole of offenders, that's just asking for trouble.

Read my post again and you could probably deduce what my position is. But at the risk you could conclude I think he should be freed in the next few weeks, certainly not for a long time. Perhaps never, it depends on how he rehabilitates the coming years and probably decades. Do I think he should be hanged without that opportunity while having his liberty taken away? Certainly not.

Pimlico_Claret wrote:Course not cos he'll be walking out into a well paid job to contribute to the tax system and accommodation he's paid for himself. Give your head a shake pal.

I think you need to go to specsavers, pal. Haven't you seen the exclamation marks ? Never heard of sarcasm or irony or indeed satire ? Add cynicism to that list too.

willsclarets wrote:As for his release, you haven't been privvy to his behaviour, rehabilitation and development as a human being for the last few decades. Why or how do you feel so confident in your assessment he should rot in jail? What he did was absolutely abhorrent, cruel and disgusting. But I like to think, merely as principle, that we want to live in a where change is possible and someone can in some small way begin to repay the huge debt they owe. Killing them rarely brings any satisfaction to victim's families even if it satisfies your thirst for more blood.

Personally, I'm not confident that he should rot in jail. On balance of probabilities, since the experts tell me so, I would say he is unlikely to deliberately murder any more children or impale them on railings. Obviously it's hard to put a figure on these probabilities - but wild guess, say 0.5% chance? One chance in 200 that he will viciously murder a child?

Those aren't odds I'm happy with. If 200 child murderers are released and just one of them kills someone, then the system has failed. Child killers, especially multiple child killers, shouldn't get a second chance.

Hang em all let God sort em out.