The Government's ill-judged prisoner-release scheme puts the public at risk
First, the punishment meted out by the courts should match the gravity of the crime. Stricter sentencing would surely act as a deterrent to help reduce criminality, whereas the present system allows certain sentences to be commuted or for the prisoner to be granted parole. This in itself creates too much recidivism, and it is now to be exacerbated by the early release of offenders, many of whom are likely to reoffend.
This is not the decision of a sensible government that is weighing up all the facts with balanced judgment.
Secondly, we should consider our already overworked police officers, many of whom do a fantastic job and lack the high regard they deserve, particularly given the much wider range of policing responsibilities they are now expected to undertake compared to 20 years ago.
Policing the streets is of paramount importance, especially in inner-city areas, where regard for the law is often lax. Presumably the Government will now expect the police to monitor those on early release.
What has happened to our once highly regarded system of justice and policing? It appears to be yet another casualty of this ludicrous Labour Government.
Tony Millard
Redhill, Surrey
SIR – Week after week, our local magistrates' court deals with an endless list of people who have been caught driving drunk or high on drugs. At present, they are fined and disqualified from driving for a period. Isn't it time that our society made people wholly responsible for their actions, by imposing a lifetime driving ban on them if caught? It may make them think twice before getting behind the wheel when they are drunk or stoned, and consider the devastating impact that such selfish behaviour could have on others. It would also save the magistrates from having to deal with repeat offenders.
The roads are dangerous enough without people who view driving as a right, rather than as a privilege with enormous responsibilities.
Andy Breare
Plymouth, Devon
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
'I spent months fighting £25 parking penalty'
A man has said he spent months fighting and eventually winning an appeal against a £25 charge after parking outside his home. Mark Toplass has a brain injury, which causes memory loss and he relies on reminders about everyday activities like bills and car 55-year-old received the penalty in February when his parking permit, which allows him to park for free outside his home in The Meadows in Nottingham, had numerous demands from Nottingham City Council for payment, Mr Toplass later discovered that the authority's policy states it will send a reminder to residents ahead of their permit expiring - which he said he did not receive. Mr Toplass, who has had two brain injuries - his first a haemorrhage aged 38 - said: "My memory is shocking so I have reminders set up for everything. I've had to adapt my life."This should've been dealt with at the very first appeal. Instead, they kept telling me the fine would double if I didn't pay, which is when it got stressful."I've had to spend hours upon hours on this, just to show that they're not following their own procedures."Mr Toplass said the council told him it only reminded residents to renew their permits as a matter of digging into the issue, the former Army veteran - who used to work in local government - discovered the part of the council's policy, which states that "reminders will be issued to permanent residents... via email" before a permit charge was then cancelled in May after his second appeal. Since then, Mr Toplass has filed an official complaint and a freedom of information (FOI) request in a bid to find out how many other residents have been said: "My grievance now is how many other people in Nottingham are in the same boat?"In this day and age, we're all tight on money and don't want to be paying for something that isn't our fault."Mr Toplass has now cancelled his parking permit as he "doesn't want to go through the rigmarole", and will instead park on his own driveway, which he previously left empty so local children could play football on city council said its policy was to send reminder letters to residents with virtual parking permits, but added the responsibility for renewal remained with the permit holder.A council spokesperson said they were sorry to hear about the difficulties Mr Toplass had council has not told the BBC why the charge was spokesperson added: "We understand that situations like this can be challenging, particularly for residents with additional needs, and we aim to take a fair and proportionate approach to enforcement. "Anyone who receives a penalty notice can appeal, and all appeals are reviewed on a case-by-case basis, taking individual circumstances into account."
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Stephen Lawrence's father pleads with one of the thugs who murdered his son to reveal the names of the other gang members involved in the attack
The father of Stephen Lawrence has issued a heartfelt plea for one of his son's killers to reveal the names of all those responsible - as the convicted murderer is set to make a bid for his freedom. David Norris, 48, had always denied being involved in the 1993 murder of the teenager. But in March, it was revealed that Norris had a change of heart and 'accepted he was present at the scene.' He also admitted to punching the 18-year-old, but claimed he did not 'wield the knife' during the fatal stabbing incident at a bus stop in Eltham, south-east London, on April 22, 1993. Only Norris and Gary Dobson, 49, two of the original five prime suspects, were convicted in connection with Stephen's killing. Both were found guilty under the law of joint enterprise, which allows people to be convicted of murder even if they did not inflict the fatal blow. It has never been proven who stabbed Stephen, who suffered two knife wounds, or whether more than one knife was used. Now ahead of Norris' public parole hearing next week, Neville Lawrence, 83, is urging the killer to reveal exactly what happened on that fateful day. Speaking to The Mirror, Mr Lawrence said: 'My message to him would be, 'You have served so many years in prison, you've known what you did was wrong and you refused to give the information in the early days about all the other boys that were involved. David Norris (pictured) had always denied his involvement in the 1993 murder until earlier this year. The convicted murderer is set to make a bid for his freedom at a public parole hearing 'I need you to say exactly who was there with you that night because we now know that you were there'. He added that it felt 'unfair' if Norris succeeds in his parole, because he will be able to walk out of prison and live his 'everyday' life again. Mr Lawrence said: 'My son will never be able to do that because he's dead and it's because of these people that robbed me of my son.' In March, Parole Board vice chair Peter Rook KC announced Norris had changed his stance on his involvement. 'Recent reports now suggest he has accepted he was present at the scene and punched the victim but claims that he did not wield the knife. 'He does not accept he holds racist views.' In a major victory for the Mail and the Lawrence family, Norris' parole hearing will be heard in public. Norris fought against such an application from this newspaper, arguing that having the hearing in the open to do so would increase the risk to his safety. But Mr Rook ruled that his case should be made in public, and in his judgement quoted extensively from an application made by the Mail which argued that without press scrutiny it is unlikely that Stephen's killers would have faced justice. Five men were initially arrested over the murder, in Eltham, southeast London, with Norris, 16 at the time, and Gary Dobson, 16 then but 49 now, only brought to justice after a belated forensic breakthrough. Both were given life sentences in 2012. It followed a lengthy campaign from the Mail to secure justice for Stephen, including a 1997 front page in which Norris was named as one of his killers. The application to the Parole Board also quoted from a recent interview with Stephen's father, Neville, in which the 82-year-old said he would be willing to accept Norris's release from prison if he apologised and showed he was a changed man. The Mail argued that a public hearing would provide the killer with the platform to properly express remorse for his actions. The Lawrence family supported a public hearing but lawyers for Norris argued that the murderer, who has been diagnosed with PTSD, would suffer from 'emotional stress' should a hearing be held in public. They also argued that it would increase the risk to his safety within the prison estate, given he has been attacked three times while incarcerated, and that he would be incapable of giving his 'best evidence' should his remarks be made public. But Mr Rook found that the case remained of public importance because of its impact on policing, that it was accepted that not all those involved have been brought to justice and that the public will be interested to know whether Norris now accepts his responsibility for Stephen's murder. The criminal justice system had clearly failed with regard to this case at earlier stages, he said, with the subsequent MacPherson report into the investigation making multiple recommendations still relevant today. 'There is a clear public interest in seeing the Parole Review conducted in a proper judicial manner with evidence-based decisions on risk,' Mr Rook said. Norris's time in prison has not been without issues that will likely count against him when the panel makes its decision. He was caught illegally using a smartphone in jail in 2022, which he used to take a sickening selfie from his cell on Dartmoor's E wing, which houses supposedly well-behaved inmates. The phone was recovered from his body after he was X-rayed and a police investigation into how he obtained the device was launched. A date is yet to be set for the hearing. Stephen's father called on Norris to name his son's other killers and tell the truth about what happened on the night of his murder for the first time. During an interview from his home in Jamaica in March, Mr Lawrence thanked the Daily Mail for its fight to ensure his parole hearing would be heard in public. 'Thank you to the Daily Mail for doing this service for us,' he said. 'Without your appeal this would have stayed behind closed doors.' Mr Lawrence added: 'If he's going to make a statement the public will hopefully finally hear everything that happened. 'He knows who was there with him. 'And he has been in prison for all this time so it's his chance to say it wasn't just him alone, there were others with him. And name them. 'I don't think he's going to do that but that's what I want him to do. 'This is his chance to come clean and confess to what happened that night.' Mr Lawrence said he planned to attend the hearing and his solicitor would read a statement outlining the effect Stephen's murder has had on the family. 'He's going to be able to walk away and live the rest of his life if he behaves himself. 'Stephen can't do that,' he said. 'I feel if someone is lucky enough to have that chance for parole they should have to say I'm sorry, I'll never get into trouble again and they should have to admit what they did. 'If he admits it and said how sorry he was and he names the other people I could accept him coming out. 'No one who was there that night has ever told the truth about what happened or even admitted the fact that they were there. 'If he does do that it will be the first time. 'If he admits he was there and caused my son to lose his life I would accept what happened and it would make it seem to me he was a changed person but if he just says nothing I can't accept [his release].'
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
SARAH VINE: Why is 16 too young for voting? Ask a brain scientist...
As the mother of two young adults (22 and 20), I am tentatively enjoying some early fruit of my parental labours. My daughter has just graduated with a first from Manchester (shameless mum-brag, guilty as charged), and my son is gainfully employed over the summer holidays in a job that not only gets him out of the house but also keeps him fit and fed (he's a busser in a restaurant). But the news last week that our glorious leader, Sir Keir Starmer, has followed through on his electoral threat to lower the voting age to 16 has rather dampened my mood. It is, quite simply, the height of idiocy. As any Year 11 teacher will tell you, most 16-year-olds aren't fit to tuck their own shirt in, let alone participate in the democratic process.
