how come he can be released after just under 2 years?
2007-10-14 08:27:19 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
p.s i know your all wondering what this person did, so i hope you are not too shocked when i say he went to prison for a form of child abuse.
2007-10-14 08:29:10 · update #1
TERRY m thanks for your answer but believe me everything in the case was more than correct. I was there,in court every day
2007-10-14 08:36:35 · update #2
It has absolutely nothing to do with prison overcrowding and prisoners are not simply let out early for behaving themselves, particularly sex offenders..
The proportion of the 7 years that he has to serve inside is dependent on whether the offences were committed before or after the implementation of the 2003 Criminal Justice Act. If it was before then he'll serve 2 thirds, after and he serves half.
If he was on remand prior to sentence then that time will be deducted. Under some circumstances there may be release under home detention curfew, but this is not routinely given to sex offenders.
2007-10-14 10:54:25 · answer #1 · answered by angrymammal 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sentence is always halved if certain conditions are complied with whilst he was serving his sentence.
After 2 years of a more than 4 year sentence a prisoner may apply for parole. Parole board check out his history whilst inside and weigh up the consequences if released early (eg not a threat to society)and if all is well and good in their eyes they will allow him release ...but its usually a gradual process....sort of a day release here and there...maybe a less secure prison etc
2007-10-14 09:42:49 · answer #2 · answered by stormydays 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the law in the UK states that for a sentence up to three years, 1/2 must be served. After that, the person may or not be released on licence. If they breach the licence for the remainder of the time, they go back to prseon to serve the rest.
Anything over 3 years, 2 thirds of the sentence have to served before licence is considered.
However, some sentences are back-dated to the time of arrest. Is it possible the person served time in custody before trial?
2007-10-14 08:43:09 · answer #3 · answered by baby_face_paris 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Recently because of the chronic state of overcrowding in our prisons, a large number of prisoners were released prematurely. However, this was not supposed to include people sentenced to terms of over four years or to people convicted of serious sex offences. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6766119.stm
The sad thing is, that the government is not apparently learning from earlier mistakes. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article526276.ece
2007-10-14 09:05:15 · answer #4 · answered by Doethineb 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is quite likely that the home office have reason to believe the something in the case was not quite right. If the offender is released there is far less chance of the judicial system finding itself being ridiculed yet again.
2007-10-14 08:34:17 · answer #5 · answered by Terry M 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
you quite have the incorrect thought. Atheists are no longer antagonistic to god from now on then they're antagonistic to the easter bunny or something that they do no longer belive in. you could't be antagonistic to a minimum of a few thing which you do no longer have faith is real. as a strategies because of the fact the penitentiary question, shall we turn it around. What it in case you have been imprisioned because of the fact of your faith. could you think approximately giving up on your faith? I particularly doubt that any atheist is going to tutor to god basically because of the fact life have been given undesirable for them (like prision). and that i actually desire which you does not supply up your faith for the comparable reasons.
2016-10-09 05:29:49 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lets hope the buggar has had a good whipping while he has been inside and that he receives another so bad when he gets out that he wishes he was still inside
2007-10-14 08:38:53 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's all down to prison overcrowding and we mustn't infringe their Human Rights. Pretty disgusting I agree.
2007-10-14 09:42:54 · answer #8 · answered by flint 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Generally they serve 85% of their sentence. They could get other credits against time also.
2007-10-14 08:31:48 · answer #9 · answered by Bob W 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
called good behaviour and for most sentaces wot ever the judge says prisoners only have to serve half their sentance and i think thats wrong !!!!
2007-10-14 08:32:57 · answer #10 · answered by ck 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋