On the release of "cop killer" Harry Roberts and the media's double standards on murder

The release of "cop killer" Harry Roberts( convicted of the 1966 murder of three police officers) after nearly FIFTY years( actually forty eight) years behind bars has predictably aroused strong feelings not just amongst the families of the three slain officers or even amongst the ranks of serving police officers but the "usual suspects" in Fleet Street- "murder is murder/life should mean life" et al.

Personally although I DON'T condone the murder of policemen,(or anyone sle for that matter) I for one find the media huffing and puffing manifestly nonsensical if not deeply hypocritical. Firstly (a) Roberts has paid an ENORMOUS price for his actions- spending the years of his life behind bars when he could just as easily have been starting a marriage, career(other than armed robbery) and a family (b) when it suits its purposes, successive British Governments have discreetly ditched the principle that "life should mean life/murder is murder"- case in point the release of servicemen convicted of murder in the course of the NI "Troubles" such as paratrooper Lee Clegg and Scots Guardsmen Fisher and Wright as well as those IRA members convicted of killing RUC officers as per the Good Friday Peace Agreement of 1998- as one wag put it at the time, "Britannia waives the rules- YET AGAIN!" never mind the calls for clemency for Royal Marine sergeant Alexander Blackman convicted of murdering a Taliban prisoner (c) there is another issue at stake- do we as a society really wish to "hound and harry the sinner to his grave"?

Think about it- FORTY EIGHT YEARS behind bars( when Roberts went to prison, LBJ was still US President, Harold Wilson Prime Minister, Brezhnev ruled the Soviet Union, the Vietnam War was just heating up, apartheid was in place of South Africa, I was the same age my grandnephew Adam is right now), there are terrorists (Irish Republican and Islamic fundamentalists) who haven't served as long a period behind bars as Roberts has.

No, the real issue is NOT that a now old man(78) has been released to spend what remains of his wasted life in freedom( for an admittedly self-inflicted offence), it is the continuing attempts by sections of the British press to introduce an invidious distinction between "popular" malefactors( British soldiers pace "Bloody Sunday") and "unpopular" ones( paedophiles, terrorists be they Islamic fundamentalist or irish Republicans, illegal immigrants and others including "cop-killers").

I suspect that given the run up to next year's General Election(in which "law and order" is due to be one of the key campaign themes),, Roberts's release has a hidden political agenda. Fortunately, neither the European Court Of Human Rights or its Convention played any role in the decision to free him.

Anybody think as I do?

Terry

I don't think Life should mean life is someone can be properly rehabilited back into society. That being said, once people hit thier 70 and 80's and beyond, the arguement of being a danger to anybody is out of the widow. At the age of 78, the only thing Harry Roberts can murder is a nice fish supper.

But again this is just me.

Think a lot of people seriously underestimate what long term prison sentences mean. I mean, this guy has spent the best part of his life behind bars, he's had no job, no family of his own, probably no friends left thats not from the inside and so on. So he's basically left to live out the last 30 or so years of his life on the mercy of the government. And these 50 years have been spent in a seriously unpleasant enviroment.

Yes it is his fault and he got what he deserved, but come on, at 78 years of age he is unlikely to comit new crimes, whats keeping him locked up going to do for anyone? (But for the families still holding onto this; think... he is going to be reminded of all the stuff he missed out on while doing time for the rest of his wasted life, thats a really bitter realization he is going to have every single time he turns on the TV, the radio or reads the paper).

Agreed.

@outside_85

Think a lot of people seriously underestimate what long term prison sentences mean. I mean, this guy has spent the best part of his life behind bars, he's had no job, no family of his own, probably no friends left thats not from the inside and so on. So he's basically left to live out the last 30 or so years of his life on the mercy of the government. And these 50 years have been spent in a seriously unpleasant enviroment.

Yes it is his fault and he got what he deserved, but come on, at 78 years of age he is unlikely to comit new crimes, whats keeping him locked up going to do for anyone? (But for the families still holding onto this; think... he is going to be reminded of all the stuff he missed out on while doing time for the rest of his wasted life, thats a really bitter realization he is going to have every single time he turns on the TV, the radio or reads the paper).

Good point.

I think it's astounding that someone who killed 3 human beings is being described as having suffered enough.

If he's done his time by law, that's all there is. I don't see what the debate is.

The media storm over this(with the usual "rentaquote" sources like Boris Johnson, Mayor of London who is of course a Conservative) ignores the fact that (a) "cop killings" are extraordinarily RARE in this country - most police murders involve a single killing NOT three (b) most prison inmates are non-violent offenders(many with mental health, illiteracy and mental retardation. What we have is a"Dutch auction" of all three parties(mainly the Tories and Labour) vying with one another to show hardline "tough on crime" policies(never mind that overcrowding is a serious problem in most British prisons) prompted of course by the "red-top" tabloids that make their stock int rade drawing attention to a relatively small number of violent crimes( recent statistics suggest that the crime rate- at least for murder- is at its lowest rate since 1981).

Terry

This was my reaction as well. Three human lives were taken by this person. Life in jail should mean life in jail.

Unless the "perp" is a member of HM Forces aka "Our Boys"(pace Para Lee Clegg, Scots Guardsmen Fisher and Wright) presumably?

Terry

I have leftover birthday cookies....you get one.

Suffered? lol he only did 48 years. He should have done life for EACH person he killed.

We should do that to all murderers but oh well.

@lunacyde: happy birthday!

Though I must add that everyone ought to know by now not to take "life in prison" literally.

It's a shame that he had to spend 48 years in prison. It's a huge miscarriage of justice. The way he has suffered for his crimes all this time is unbearable. Can you imagine the culture shock of having to come out into the world fifty years after leaving it knowing you will soon be dead? It's Unmerciful and shameful. In addition to his years of suffering, he now has to listen to people complain he is free. He now has to be scorned by society just because he murdered three people. Where is the justice for this poor beleaguered cop killer?

That's why I say we should just shoot these guys in the head after conviction. It's much kinder.

Give execution a chance.

You're kidding right?- in the immortal words of a former Conservative Home Secretary Winston Churchill, the degree of humanity in any given society can be assessed by the state of its prisons and their inhabitants-based on this argument the UK is NOT doing too well. Yes, Mr Roberts's crimes were horrendous and appalling but at the end of the day our society's values are quite rightly NOT his!

'Nuff said!

Terry

Murder isn't the same as lawful execution. The two aren't even close. When convicted of a crime, you give up many of your rights. When you murder another person, you give up your most fundamental right, the right to life.

You frequently quote famous people as if they make your points for you. Ignoring the fact that famous people can be just as wrong as anyone else, you actually quoted somebody who goes against your own viewpoint this time. Churchill supported the death penalty. (Source) I don't know the details of his reasoning, but perhaps Churchill agreed with me that the state of prisons would be much better if they were emptied of murderers.

Yes, because symbolic sentences like that really make a difference.

Well, I mean technically it would since that would mean he would never get out of prison. Although in his case he is already an old man, so it would seem like a moot point. Still, basically means that 3 lives are only worth 48 years and that a murderer can have more freedom than 3 dead victims.

@aquaman01: Am I the only one that thinks a life sentence should mean someone is in prison for life, literally?

The legal system is weird.

Nope, I agree. In fact, I (and actually MANY people i know still do) used to believe life actually meant life.

I mean, can't make fun of them, it IS called life lol It really is weird.

Yes, let's waste tens of thousands of tax dollars feeding and housing this person to spite him. That'll teach him the error of his ways. If he hasn't already seen those errors in 48 years I doubt he will in the last 10-15.

Saying "life means life" only proclaims that the criminal justice system is no longer about practicality, it's about exacting revenge through a public forum. Sometimes I doubt that Western civilization has ever evolved past lynch mobs and guillotines.

@sophia89: 48 years isn't a walk in the park either. Such a sentence is a punishment because it deprives a perpetrator of the most eventful years of there life. By the time they are released they no longer possess the same aggressiveness and are more likely to become the victim of a crime than be the criminal again.

@laflux said it better than me:

@dngn4774: thanks bra :)

This. the man did the crime, and did the time. Obviously the law found it necessary to release him, so that's it, what's done is done. If you ask me, 50 years is enough time served, hell, that's a lifetime in and of itself.

@lunacyde: First, Happy Belated Birthday! Second, thanks for the cookie. Third, I hope your birthday was awesome.

Are you suggesting a death sentence? How is taking a person off the streets who killed three members of society (police officers, no less) representative of a revenge mentality on the part of the judicial system? You reduced this to a monetary issue, then say western civilisation hasn't evolved past lynch mobs and guillotines. It's almost as if there can be a price placed on a human's life, which I am not certain you meant to convey.

Life in prison, to me, is an acknowledgement there is no intent to rehabilitate. Life in prison, to me, means the person is to be removed from society and incarcerated for the remainder of his/her life. For the sake of the public. Does that mean tax dollars spent? Yes. Just like in all civilised society where as a whole, we are responsible for all. I don't care if he's an old man, and if nothing "worked" while in jail. What I know is three people were murdered by him, rotting away in their graves (or cremated) and several people's lives have been destroyed because of it.

Life in prison should mean life in prison. When a life sentence is passed down, it's done so fully cognisant of what that entails. It reflects the severity and atrocity of the crime committed. The only punishment worse is a death sentence. It should stand to reason a person who killed three times should have it served consecutively. 48 years is just over one third too soon.

Who gives a f*ck? He killed people and he did his jail time. That's all that matters.

No, I'm saying that life in prison is a much more severe punishment than we actually acknowledge as a society. As such, sentences shouldn't be issued without the correct oversights needed. My problem is not with the sentence itself, some people are in fact a danger to society, my problem is with how it is applied. In extreme cases such as this, sentencing is done as a kneejerk reaction to public outrage since their is no way for a jury to be impartial to a cop killer. The trials in turn become more theater for the prosecution, making it more about revenge than justice. In turn, once the verdict comes in they lock him away for life and everyone pats themselves on the back as if the entire Justice system is done with its job.

What I'm claiming is that the Criminal Justice system has an obligation to evaluate whether inmates have rehabilitated or are no longer a danger to society. If not, then the prisoner is no longer remaining behind to protect us, he is just being punished for a shameful act. Too often politicians use jails to lock away their mistakes in a place where the public can forget about the issue altogether. Nothing will bring back those 3 officers and adding much more time through consecutive sentences doesn't improve anything either (it's just petty). The purpose of justice should not be to exact scores for revenge it should be to protect the people who abide by the law. Since the people are no longer in danger from this elderly man the decision should not be controversial.

Recently a man in Texas fired his gun at intruders, those intruders were police performing a no-knock raid, he now faces life in prison, even though the drugs they were looking for were never there

When anything means life(not just the justice system) but say for example you get free candy for life, it does not mean as long as you live, it means about 50-55years because that is predicted time span for people to live

@redbird3rdboywonder: That's silly.

@squares: That's just how it is. I learned about this in school, I forgot what I read it at but I was like wow

@redbird3rdboywonder: Ugh. I'm extremely literal-minded, so that really bothers me.

@squares: Honestly our whole justice system bothers me, the fact that a killer/rapist/anyone who commits a serious offence can get off scott free if they accept a plea bothers me.

Mercy seems to be something people may be lacking slightly. I don't know whether the guy is sorry or not but if he does want to be forgiven and truly feels bad for what he's done then I think he should be forgiven (that doesn't mean the event should be forgotten however).

Just because someone is sorry or wants forgiveness doesn't mean that person should receive it.

Of course, this is coming from someone who lacks sympathy for criminals like murderers and rapists, so I am pretty bias.

All I know is if I ever met a certain someone, I would murder him stone cold even if there was a squad of policemen next to me. I am not a forgiving guy ;)

He's never expressed any remorse for what he has done. He has gone so far as to declare he felt "electrified" after committing the crime. Also, while incarcerated, he became known for baking pies in which he would depict the murder of police officers on the crusts' top. Further to this, back in 2001 while out on his day work pass at an animal farm, he is suspected to have hacked a horse to death, (trying to behead the poor thing) and killing several other pets of a woman after she reported his bad behaviour during his time there (she was unaware of who who was). She has been in fear of her life for the past fourteen years, received calls from prison from this man who threatened her and her husband's life (the husband has since passed on), and she was forced to provide evidence at the parole hearing back then against her will, assured he would never be released. She didn't even know he was being released until the news broke of it this week. Being in your 70's does not make you a frail, old man. He attempted to break free of prison 22 times, and when first hunted for these murders, he was able to stave off capture for months due to his training as a former soldier. All bits of the story that add more context. He was lucky the death penalty was abolished the year before he committed this crime as he would have been on the gallows, for sure. The judge who sentenced him considered his crime to be the most heinous of the generation at the time. This was a big thing back then, and it's still a big thing now.

@dngn4774:

I agree with you about life imprisonment being much more severe than people consider it to be. It is not a government paid vacation, particularly for those serving life sentences. This is documented, and suicides amongst these prisoners are high, as are requests for euthanasia. Also, I agree with your point about our laws reflecting the whim of society, moulded and fanned by politicians who know it's one of the best ways to capture votes. More importantly, I too don't want to live in a society where the courts become a place for vengeance, with penalties laid for the best, dramatic effect. You raise very valid points. Thank you for them, sincerely.

In this instance, I looked into the matter further and I don't think this man can be considered no longer a threat to society at large. The above information I gave to the other poster gives a bit more kick to those who think this particular case deserves a literal punishment of life behind bars, and I just skimmed off the tip of the story behind him. Thing too, he did not actively seek out parole, it's automatically visited every five years (I think, in the UK?) once he hit his tariff of 30 years minimum served. Not to say he doesn't want to be freed (he indicated he does), but this really is a special situation when taking this story in its entirety.

Let the dirt-bag rot in jail where he belongs.

Dude killed THREE people, and just because he served 50 years in prison he should be let go? I'm sorry, but to take away a life, should equal more time than 50 years in the slammer, let alone taking away three.

@ms-lola: That's fair. At least you did some research. Half the people here only saw the words "cop killer" and decided he was no longer a human being. Justice can only work if judgments derive from critical thinking instead of raw emotion.

@ms-lola: Holy crap, that's messed up. Especially the bit with the pies.

Exactly. A person who works for the parole board in this situation put it very well (I think, anyway).

Juliet Lyon, director of the Prison Reform Trust, said mandatory sentences to lock up people for the rest of their lives, even after they presented no further risk to society would distort the principles of justice and be regressive. “The prison service has spent the last 20 years struggling to become a service that’s decent, humane and tries to rehabilitate,” Lyon said. “Who do you encourage to do this important public service if its just a holding operation? What kind of people want to work in that sort of system?”

@squares: It gets worse, especially when you consider it was his elderly mother who would bring him pies with hidden files in them to help him escape. Which started his baking career in jail. It's sickening, really.

Christ. It's cases like these that make me seriously consider supporting the death penalty.

this is how i feel. And when people say two wrongs don't make a right, or it makes you not better than them.

So on one table we have a person who rapes , tortures, murders and does horrific things.

And then we have someone who votes lethal injection as a punishment for doing those things.... the people who want that are not the equivalent of a rapist who tortures and murders? okay fair enough.

There is no way to measure a person's life. Especially if they were robbed of it, but 3 people equal 50 years give or take.

@ms-lola: If that's the case then frankly I don't really care what happens to him.

My whole point in my OP was to note the manifest and demonstratable hypocrisy that often beclouds the whole issue of murder(particularly when the perpetrators are "popular"- ie soldiers) in the UK. As for Roberts's purported lack of repentance for his murders of three police officers, it is worth noting that as part of the Good Friday Peace Agreement in NI, the then British Government discreetly released many IRA members convicted of killing soldiers and RUC men who never expressed any remorse for their actions. If "sackcloth and ashes" penitence or lack of same was the justiifcation for releasing (or not releasing) murderers then few if any would make the cut!

Either way you look at it, Roberts has paid an enormous price for his actions( as he should)- would critics of his release be happier if he died in prison?- it wouldn't have brought those three cops back from the grave!

Terry

=)

As long as it isn't your family or friend the man killed he paid his debt, that's what I see when I read some of these posts lol. People are so damn funny I can always get a good laugh on this site.

@immortal777: Nope wrong