FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

McCann rapist

Jump to newest
 

By *ickeyandmouse OP   Couple
over a year ago

nr Alicante

Can anybody enlighten me. He was recently convicted and given 33 life terms, to serve a minimum of 30 years. What’s that supposed to mean ? Why not a whole life term. 33 ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rwhowhatwherewhyMan
over a year ago

Aylesbury

What did he do? There are only a handful of people on a life tariff

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ty31Man
over a year ago

NW London

It means he's probably serving 33 terms concurrently for a minimum of 30 years before being eligible for parole.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"What did he do? There are only a handful of people on a life tariff "

He r*ped 8 people in a short space of time. The oldest was a 71 year old woman and two young children. He made them watch each other being attacked

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It means he's probably serving 33 terms concurrently for a minimum of 30 years before being eligible for parole."

Surely that's still wrong, life terms are generally given as 25 years. So theoretically he should serve 825 years

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *wisted999Man
over a year ago

North Bucks

He deserves to have several daily kicks in the bollocks for the rest of his life behind bars.

Utter scumbag.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *allySlinkyWoman
over a year ago

Leeds

The sentences are concurrent, not consecutive.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Castrate the fucker then put him in a cell with the biggest baddest guy in the jail that hates rapists more than anything.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mandajane01TV/TS
over a year ago

Ballymena

He only needed two sentences.... castration with a dull rusty blade then a month later hanging.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mmmMaybeCouple
over a year ago

West Wales


"The sentences are concurrent, not consecutive."

Exactly this but it’s still bollocks.

Consider this. I’m In my car doing 95mph on the M6, middle of the night on my way to Dover. I care not one jot for the speed limit or others. Due to the time I never go slower than 95mph & get flashed 33 times but I don’t give a shit.

Can I go to court & get three points @ £100 for one offence? Can I bollox.

So for fairness he got life thirty three times, we’ll say life is 20 so 50% tariff makes 10x33 so he’s doing 330yrs.

That is how it should be!

S

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *crumdiddlyumptiousMan
over a year ago

.

Should make him do the 30 years then put the sick fucker down

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago

Bristol East

Not a Madelaine update then?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ifty grades of shadyCouple
over a year ago

Carisbrooke, Isle of Wight

The Yorkshire ripper is on less and he's never going to be released. The home secretary of the time will not agree with releasing them, political suicide to pretend otherwise...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Has he spent a long time on remand, so effectively already served?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *allySlinkyWoman
over a year ago

Leeds


"Has he spent a long time on remand, so effectively already served?"

He certainly hasn't spent 300 years on remand.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hongguyMan
over a year ago

heckmondwike/desbury/batley

simple cut his balls off and let him bleed to death

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mberWoman
over a year ago

Preston

They screwed up and let him out once.

I would hope they wouldn't make the same mistake again.

How old is he?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *allySlinkyWoman
over a year ago

Leeds

34

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It means he's probably serving 33 terms concurrently for a minimum of 30 years before being eligible for parole.

Surely that's still wrong, life terms are generally given as 25 years. So theoretically he should serve 825 years "
do you think he will live that long, i hear its a good life in prison?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

I think it's suggested that he may always be a huge risk and so may not be released. Awful man

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mberWoman
over a year ago

Preston


"34"

So he'll be at least 64.

I feel sorry for the staff who have to deal with this vileness every day. It's not a job I'd fancy.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Should be death. Shouldn't waste my tax payers money on someone so evil.

Rather my money went to victims for support

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *xfordshireCoupleMFCouple
over a year ago

Abingdon


"Should be death. Shouldn't waste my tax payers money on someone so evil.

Rather my money went to victims for support"

This

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iddle ManMan
over a year ago

Walsall

Shoot him. Job done

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

He’s not coming out he will die in prison, the law need changing because there is no way prisoners should be automatically released everyone should always go through the parol bored.

Yes I know it’s never a perfect system but it’s a lot better than just releasing people even on licence without anything being done.

I am pretty sure there were some people who were trying to keep him in but the system is Automatic so needs changing now not in 6 months time

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ifty grades of shadyCouple
over a year ago

Carisbrooke, Isle of Wight

The worst part of this exposé is that we can't change the laws retrospectively from the sentence they've been given so it's going to be a ball ache coming up with something for these scumbags to be kept at arms length from decent folk.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

My understanding is its 30 years before he can be considered for parole.

I do think life should mean life.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rwhowhatwherewhyMan
over a year ago

Aylesbury


"Should be death. Shouldn't waste my tax payers money on someone so evil.

Rather my money went to victims for support"

I'm not saying it wasnt him, if he's been tried and found guilty then he deserves punishment. But the reason we dont execute any more is because somebody completely innocent could be tried and found guilty. It happened before and it still happens now, only now we dont execute them they have a chance to prove their innocence. Is it not enough to lose years of your life from society as punishment? Another argument I hear is that prison is too soft. The problem with that is if you treat people like animals then they will behave like animals, the punishment is segregation from society.

*climbs down from soap box*

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rwhowhatwherewhyMan
over a year ago

Aylesbury


"My understanding is its 30 years before he can be considered for parole.

I do think life should mean life.

"

I think the life tariff is reserved for serial killers.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"My understanding is its 30 years before he can be considered for parole.

I do think life should mean life.

I think the life tariff is reserved for serial killers."

But he's clearly a danger to everyone.

I believe strongly in reforming and education in prison and I second chances but I also feel strongly that people should not realised until they are deemed safe.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Should be death. Shouldn't waste my tax payers money on someone so evil.

Rather my money went to victims for support

I'm not saying it wasnt him, if he's been tried and found guilty then he deserves punishment. But the reason we dont execute any more is because somebody completely innocent could be tried and found guilty. It happened before and it still happens now, only now we dont execute them they have a chance to prove their innocence. Is it not enough to lose years of your life from society as punishment? Another argument I hear is that prison is too soft. The problem with that is if you treat people like animals then they will behave like animals, the punishment is segregation from society.

*climbs down from soap box*"

I'd like to see this fucked up motherfucker prove his innocence!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"My understanding is its 30 years before he can be considered for parole.

I do think life should mean life.

"

All we can hope for is that someone gets to him in the next 30 years

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Should be death. Shouldn't waste my tax payers money on someone so evil.

Rather my money went to victims for support

I'm not saying it wasnt him, if he's been tried and found guilty then he deserves punishment. But the reason we dont execute any more is because somebody completely innocent could be tried and found guilty. It happened before and it still happens now, only now we dont execute them they have a chance to prove their innocence. Is it not enough to lose years of your life from society as punishment? Another argument I hear is that prison is too soft. The problem with that is if you treat people like animals then they will behave like animals, the punishment is segregation from society.

*climbs down from soap box*"

He has already behaved like an animal without being treated like one first. Personally, I feel any sentence should be in two parts. The first half as punishment for the wrongs done to society, the second half as rehabilitation including re-education.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Should be death. Shouldn't waste my tax payers money on someone so evil.

Rather my money went to victims for support

I'm not saying it wasnt him, if he's been tried and found guilty then he deserves punishment. But the reason we dont execute any more is because somebody completely innocent could be tried and found guilty. It happened before and it still happens now, only now we dont execute them they have a chance to prove their innocence. Is it not enough to lose years of your life from society as punishment? Another argument I hear is that prison is too soft. The problem with that is if you treat people like animals then they will behave like animals, the punishment is segregation from society.

*climbs down from soap box*

He has already behaved like an animal without being treated like one first. Personally, I feel any sentence should be in two parts. The first half as punishment for the wrongs done to society, the second half as rehabilitation including re-education."

He abused children in front of their siblings. Held people hostage and attacked old ladies

I dont think its 're education' that this one needs

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *innerdateMan
over a year ago

Leigh


"Should be death. Shouldn't waste my tax payers money on someone so evil.

Rather my money went to victims for support"

Totally agree, it costs over £100k a year to incarcerate such an evil b*stard in prison all from the tax payer, surely it’s better to spend this money on victim support or the NHS, also I’m sure a rope is fairly cheap and is re usable many times to, so good for the environment.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Can anybody enlighten me. He was recently convicted and given 33 life terms, to serve a minimum of 30 years. What’s that supposed to mean ? Why not a whole life term. 33 ?"
a life sentence is 15 years is it not, I'm like you i really dont understand how some of these guys get early parole after some of the heinous crimes they comit

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heIcebreakersCouple
over a year ago

Cramlington


"Can anybody enlighten me. He was recently convicted and given 33 life terms, to serve a minimum of 30 years. What’s that supposed to mean ? Why not a whole life term. 33 ?a life sentence is 15 years is it not, I'm like you i really dont understand how some of these guys get early parole after some of the heinous crimes they comit "
no a life sentence is not 15 years.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Can anybody enlighten me. He was recently convicted and given 33 life terms, to serve a minimum of 30 years. What’s that supposed to mean ? Why not a whole life term. 33 ?"

Just kill him and be done with it

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Should be death. Shouldn't waste my tax payers money on someone so evil.

Rather my money went to victims for support

I'm not saying it wasnt him, if he's been tried and found guilty then he deserves punishment. But the reason we dont execute any more is because somebody completely innocent could be tried and found guilty. It happened before and it still happens now, only now we dont execute them they have a chance to prove their innocence. Is it not enough to lose years of your life from society as punishment? Another argument I hear is that prison is too soft. The problem with that is if you treat people like animals then they will behave like animals, the punishment is segregation from society.

*climbs down from soap box*

He has already behaved like an animal without being treated like one first. Personally, I feel any sentence should be in two parts. The first half as punishment for the wrongs done to society, the second half as rehabilitation including re-education.

He abused children in front of their siblings. Held people hostage and attacked old ladies

I dont think its 're education' that this one needs"

Kill him

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham


"He’s not coming out he will die in prison, the law need changing because there is no way prisoners should be automatically released everyone should always go through the parol bored.

Yes I know it’s never a perfect system but it’s a lot better than just releasing people even on licence without anything being done.

I am pretty sure there were some people who were trying to keep him in but the system is Automatic so needs changing now not in 6 months time "

It's not automatic. They have to go through programmes and various boards to prove their risk of re-offending has reduced first of all. He will at least be considered a potential category a prisoner so will sit in the high security estate for some time, facing to work his way down to open conditions (if possible) through good behaviour and reviews.

After the Warboys release the government will be looking very hard at cases like this and will be reviewing their processes. The London bridge attack, while dealing with a different type of prisoner, will also invoke a review of ROTL procedures.

He will have to watch his back in prison for sure. Sex offenders are given short shrift by other criminals. He'll be on a VP regime to try and protect him but prison staff can't watch him the whole time.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham


"Should be death. Shouldn't waste my tax payers money on someone so evil.

Rather my money went to victims for support

I'm not saying it wasnt him, if he's been tried and found guilty then he deserves punishment. But the reason we dont execute any more is because somebody completely innocent could be tried and found guilty. It happened before and it still happens now, only now we dont execute them they have a chance to prove their innocence. Is it not enough to lose years of your life from society as punishment? Another argument I hear is that prison is too soft. The problem with that is if you treat people like animals then they will behave like animals, the punishment is segregation from society.

*climbs down from soap box*

He has already behaved like an animal without being treated like one first. Personally, I feel any sentence should be in two parts. The first half as punishment for the wrongs done to society, the second half as rehabilitation including re-education."

That is what it is. The minimum tarrif is what is served before any reducing re offending programmes can be considered. Only after they have done those van they be considered for parole. I'd bet my best hat he will not be released from jail before he dies.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *wisted999Man
over a year ago

North Bucks

He will be seen as a target in jail. Bit like Huntley and the Yorkshire Ripper when someone decided to try and take his eyes.

Someone may earn some bragging rights from doing him.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ystique-blueWoman
over a year ago

lakes

Hopefully hel get beat to death in jail but the system protects nonces so that’s doubtful

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham


"Hopefully hel get beat to death in jail but the system protects nonces so that’s doubtful "

It protects everyone. That's their job.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Hopefully hel get beat to death in jail but the system protects nonces so that’s doubtful "

And rightly so. We can not have a system where you are locked away for killing/harming someone and allow people to the same thing.

It's not how a civilised society can work.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Can anybody enlighten me. He was recently convicted and given 33 life terms, to serve a minimum of 30 years. What’s that supposed to mean ? Why not a whole life term. 33 ?a life sentence is 15 years is it not, I'm like you i really dont understand how some of these guys get early parole after some of the heinous crimes they comit no a life sentence is not 15 years. "
well a life sentence could be a minimum of 15 years but the judge makes the decision based on the crime

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top