Starmer has had a good week. Came across better and more relaxed than previously. If Jones et al want another twenty years of Tory rule they are having a good week with their actions too.
Starmer only lied to lunatics, trots and entryists in order to take over the party. He will be practically applauded by ex-Labour voters for having now told said trots where to get off.
For me, the problem is not so much the shocking revelations of this case, it is the mindset of an institution, and indeed a political class, that thought Cressida Dick was even a credible candidate for the position of Head of the Met in the first place. From the manslaughter of Charles de Menezes, the jaw dropping incompetence in Operation Midland and the blatant and identified obstruction of the Morgan inquiry it is painfully obvious that she should have been sacked long before she made the top chair. Is it really any surprise that the incompetence, genuinely weird political misjudgements (Extinction rebellion and the handling of the Sarah Everard commemoration to name just 2 examples) have continued?
Was the fact that she was a woman and gay more important to our right on politicians? I mean, for god's sake. The decision to renew her contract not even a month ago with this pending, is one of the more inexplicable political decisions in recent times. Dick is not the only one who should be considering her position.
I'm not here to defend the Commissioner - would be very happy to see her resign. But there does appear to be a concerted campaign against her that is outsized vs the issue. Would - an example - a different commissioner have meant that this "man" would have been screened and caught out before he committed this heinous crime?
This alone would not for me be reason for her to resign. As horrendous as it is, if none of the red flags had reached her desk there's no way she could have known.
This, combined with the culture she's allowed to be in the Met, combined with the cover-up the Morgan Inquiry found, combined with de Menzies, combined with Midland . . . different story.
Yes, so we're back into the institutional culture problem. As the police (all forces) draw more of certain groups of people in than other groups there is a risk of being unbalanced. All the more reason why the leadership from the very top needs to be robust.
For me though this does feel like a bit of a blind alley. This case was so exceptional because it was that crime by a serving police officer - hence the exceptional sentence. If only the crime was an exception - it isn't. It isn't the police culture we need to change, but our own.
Until women are equal to men we will keep this horrible problem. Yes its a small minority of men, but they are fuelled by a society that amplifies their "rights" and "needs" as overriding those of others. We managed to make drink driving completely unacceptable when it used to be the norm. We can make "incel" and "phwoar" and"just a bit of fun" completely unacceptable if we try.
This won't 100% eradicate these kind of crimes because a very small number of people are unsaveable in this life. But we can shine light into the darkness.
It does concern me that Couzens may have only got a proper life sentence because he was a police officer. For sure, that's an aggravating factor, but his actions alone ought to have been more than enough to ensure that he would never be released.
Given the planning and that the attack was on a complete stranger, it seems almost certain that he would have repeated the crime if he'd not been caught.
That's an interesting point. The guidance on whole life sentences includes:
(a) the murder of two or more persons, where each murder involves any of the following— (i)a substantial degree of premeditation or planning, (ii)the abduction of the victim, or (iii)sexual or sadistic conduct...
But as you say, he was caught after one (or, at least, one that we know of). I think it would perfectly reasonable for a judge to come to the conclusion that he would more than likely have done it again had he not been caught.
There's every chance she was not his first victim too, but that he got away with others.
What is the point of specifying two victims in the guidelines, if we are happy for the judge to infer, and pb to infer, that there were probably other victims so that's all right then? That is a dangerous path. Guilt should be proven, not assumed or asserted. The presumption of innocence is the golden thread...
Except the judge didn't. Read the sentencing remarks about how he constructed, using the law and the guidelines, the sentence. He actually sets out his though process, in quite some detail.
The point at issue was that whole life tariffs are for exceptional circumstances, with *some* examples given. The wording is quite clear that these aren't the *only* reasons for a whole life tariff.
The judge then took the view that the combination of pre-meditation, the nature of the crime, the lack of remorse and attempted cover up, combined with the level of mis-use of the public office raised the crime to the whole life tariff category.
Yes, if Couzens had got into a fight in a pub whilst off duty and ended up killing someone, or murdered his wife after a row he may well have received a life sentence but not a whole life tariff.
Yep (and thanks was it you who posted the judge's remarks) - it was in particular his use of his warrant card as a serving police officer to perpetrate the crime that was largely the reason why he received the whole life tariff.
And I think it's unfortunate that it gives the impression that he wouldn't have got a whole life sentence had he not been a cop. The nature of the crime - especially the length of time over which it was perpetrated - should have been more than enough to put him away for the rest of his life. Sure, mention him using the warrant card etc. too, but I think it's a shame that it wasn't made clear that such a crime should get the maximum sentence irrespective of who perpetrates it.
I happen to agree but them's not the guidelines so the judge had to be precise in explaining why he had made an exception. Which I believe he did.
I don't think he made an "exception" - what he did was to look at the guidelines, which give some *examples* of exceptional circumstances, and reason why this was also an exceptional circumstance.
I suspect that's the problem. If Couzens hadn't been a police officer, then it perhaps, sadly, wouldn't have been exceptional enough.
Whole life sentences shouldn't be rationed like firsts at university.
Yes, they should. And I speak as someone who called for Couzens to get exactly this sentence yesterday.
What Couzens will experience is as close the British judicial system gets to a death sentence. No chance of release, no possibility of redemption, the rest of his entire life in something close to solitary confinement, constantly at risk of attack from others. As an ex con says in the Times today (££) ‘he may wish he’d got a death sentence instead’
This cruel punishment is necessary for multiple reasons, not least deterrence. Any other rotten copper fancying a bit of rape and murder needs to know that, if caught, they will be hurled into a dungeon until they die
Other murders are different, and deserve different life sentences. 20-30 years in prison is still enough to break someone into pieces, vanishingly few people re-offend after a life sentence like that, yet the release at the end offers the chance of redemption and remorse, and maybe repayment to society
What I do object to are the ‘life sentences’ that turn out to be 12 years or whatever, but I’m not sure they’re that common?
Of course, in reality, all that happens is that the parole board gets to deal with the problem. Look at some of these individuals...
Anthony Entwistle...[redacted as it's not very nice] In 2009, Mr. Justice Davis ruled at the High Court that Entwistle could be considered for release after 25 years (less 10 months spent on remand) if he was judged to no longer be a threat to the public, rather than imposing a whole life tariff, saying that "He can only be released if ever (and it may be never) he is assessed as no longer a danger to the public." The parole board turned down his request for release in June 2013.
And who's going to agree to release Roy Whiting?
Good Lord, this chap is out in three years !
Donald Andrews had received a whole-life term for rape and kidnapping in 2012, while having two previous convictions for manslaughter. This was reduced to a twelve-year minimum when he appealed in 2015, making him eligible for release in 2024.
There are several films set in the US, I saw one the other day but can't remember the name of it, where the baddies are being chased by State police and it's a race to the State border after which the baddies continue unhindered and the State police (usually in the films) get out of their cars at the border line, put their hands on their hips, and stare wistfully after their disappearing prey.
Fun fact: Sparta, Mississippi, where In the Heat of the Night is set is actually 130 miles away from the state line with Arkansas. The bridge featured is actually in Sparta, Illinois, where the picture was filmed. That is indeed on the state line over the Mississipi River, albeit across the water from Missouri, not Arkansas.
The Next Three Days - Russell Crowe. Good film. Don't want to give away any spoilers, that said.
Time for England to follow Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, Norway, Russia, Scotland, Spain, Sweden, the United States and many other countries and establish an English national police force.
They could call them the Antediluvian Imperial Bobbys, to keep JRM happy. Bung a plc on the end and the Tory snouts will love the new trough.
...because not one of those countries have any problems with rape or any other crimes??
We're talking about Dickson of Stockholm Green here. In his mind, the biggest crime in the world is being English ...
England used to be the country of the stiff upper lip. Now it is characterised by immense chips on shoulders.
LOL. Yet again, you show us your English expertise, through the prism of your pro-Scottish mania from your home in Sweden ...
Why can Scots or Swedes not be experts on England? What a bizarre concept. Is expertise in an area solely limited to inhabitants of that area? Often the opposite is the case. Distance gives perspective.
Funnily enough, PB is jam-packed full of experts on Scotland. However, it soon becomes apparent that most of them haven’t completed Chapter One of their copies of ‘Scotland for Dummies’.
And why on earth should a Scot not be “pro-Scottish”? It would be very odd if I was not.
Your entire post just reeks of psychological projection.
A national police force just means that you don't have anyone to call in, when the scandals get too big to ignore.
Police Scotland has been happily applying that system for a while.
That old chestnut.
Jocks = bad
One day England will move on. Nobody is holding their breath.
If the English wanted someone bigger to call in when their scandals got too big they shouldn’t have left the EU.
It's not being anti-Scottish. It's being anti-Police Scotland.
Every single country on earth has a problem with police corruption and law breaking. The question is what you do about it.
Cyclefree provides the answer: change the culture.
Bloody hard, time consuming and expensive. But it is doable.
In the long run, what you need is a very active anti-corruption investigative unit. Preferably from outside the police.
LAB: 31.6% (-1.7) LDEM: 30.3% (+30.3) IND (Geddis): 18.5% (-3.1) CON: 14.5% (+8.8) IND (Allen): 3.2% (+3.2) GRN: 2.0% (-1.8)
Looks like one of those anomalies where a party with reasonable local support (this time the LDs) for some reason didn't stand last time. Looking at the maths there must have been a popular independent getting around 35% last time round as there are total increases of 42.3% and decreases of 6.6%.
The Lib Dem figure is incorrect, the LDs did stand previously and received 2.2%. The Lib Dem candidate has been attempting to become a councillor since 1973.
LDEM: 30.3% (+28.1)
I have found the actual numbers
Labour by just 27 votes
Iain Scott (Lab) 661
John Lennox (LDem) 634
David Geddis (Ind) 386
Adelle Burnicle (Con) 303
Maurice Allen (Ind) 67
Justine Merton-Scott (Green) 41
Yes, I hear the RO refused a full recount but there was a bundle check.
2021
Lab 1,258 44.7% IND (Geddis) 554 19.7% Con 545 19.4% UKIP 313 11.1% Green 81 2.8% LD 63 2.2%
2814 votes
LAB: 31.6% (-13.1) LDEM: 30.3% (+28.1) IND (Geddis): 18.5% (-1.2) CON: 14.5% (-4.9) IND (Allen): 3.2% (+3.2) GRN: 2.0% (-0.8)
Council elections are fascinating, and local government deserves more attention and more respect.
I've often wondered why no major democracies have a pyramidal form of representation, where everyone elects their local councillors, and those then select representatives to act as MPs for multi-member constituences. It would strengthen the ties between local and national representation, remove duplication, provide for something closer to PR while maintaining (very) local links between the MP and the constituents, and open up a much bigger and more diverse political talent pool allowing people to rise through the ranks.
Other side benefits would be the virtual end of well connected candidates being parachuted into safe seats. One downside might be that it would put off ambitious high profile individuals who might not want to start at the bottom - the likes of Rory Stewart for example, or Glenda Jackson back in the day.
Or, alternatively, maybe local councillors would choose MPs who they consider most likely to act in the best interests of local councillors.
That's where democracy steps in. Those councillors are accountable to their electorate for the MP's actions, rather than just the state of bin collections or potholes. If they select a crap MP then they'll lose their council seats.
Will they? There are various reasons why you might get rid of your councillor, but the fact that they chose someone as MP who you wouldn't personally have chosen probably isn't high on the list. People relatively rarely get rid of poorly performing MPs under the current system, where at least the selection of an MP is the choice on the ballot - that would be LESS likely if the question is effectively a combined one including the identity of the MP plus local services and so on.
Also, I didn't say the MP would be "crap". Councillors might well chose a diligent, personable individual... who they consider, when push comes to shove, likely to act in the best interests of their electorate (i.e. councillors).
I also just don't think it would play out as you describe in terms of local links. I suspect non-local candidates would do extremely well in the system you describe, as they will have avoided becoming embroiled in local rivalries and disputes.
LAB: 31.6% (-1.7) LDEM: 30.3% (+30.3) IND (Geddis): 18.5% (-3.1) CON: 14.5% (+8.8) IND (Allen): 3.2% (+3.2) GRN: 2.0% (-1.8)
Looks like one of those anomalies where a party with reasonable local support (this time the LDs) for some reason didn't stand last time. Looking at the maths there must have been a popular independent getting around 35% last time round as there are total increases of 42.3% and decreases of 6.6%.
There was a suggestion yesterday that come the GE in 24 lib dem and green voters will migrate back to labour but I see no evidence of this and think it is wishful thinking
I would suggest we are seeing a reduction in conservative support, labour struggling but both the lib dems and greens strengthening their appeal
I expect this to continue and labour to struggle in the red wall and make no impact in Scotland, while the lib dems cause quite some difficulty in the blue wall seats
Very interesting times and I expect in GE 24 the conservatoires to lose a good number of seats and emerge with a greatly reduced majority
However, we cannot predict more than a few weeks at present so who knows about GE24, it is also discussed with a considerable amount of understandable partisanship
It was me, and it's not "wishful thinking". How is it when someone makes a prediction it's assumed that they want that outcome too? I don't know who I will vote for next time, so I can't possibly have a preference for others to switch their votes or not. My prediction may be right or wrong, but it's no reflection of my preference.
Perhaps in Scotland the Green voters might not move so much to Labour - though it is a good question. The Starmer speech some months back, and the SNP-SG agreement more recently, undoubtedly both reflect the existence of the SNP alternative (the LDs seemingly not being convincing enough as an alternative except in their specialist c onstituencies).
Mr. Battery, catcalling as a hate crime seems over the top. Couzens didn't catcall or wolf whistle.
The Met needs massive reform. Dick should go. Neither of these things will happen.
Catcalling may be made illegal. It won't reduce the number of rapes. Rapists tend to either plan things carefully or be opportunists. Neither involves calling attention to oneself.
I thing the point Morris_Dancer is that cat-calling is part and parcel of a sub-culture within the UK population that tolerates the mistreatment of women & treats them as objects to be interacted with for the pleasure of the man in question, not as actual people.
The experience of cat-calling is completely different for men and women - the men that do it think that it’s harmless banter, but for many women it’s an implied threat: “be nice about me making sexual comments about you, or maybe I’ll come after you” is the message they hear loud & clear. To be oblivious to this reality is do deny the humanity of half the planet - to say that it’s OK for women to have to grin & bear this stuff whether they like it or not.
We know that Couzens was part of a WhatsApp group with other police officers where they shared misogynistic messages with each other & that he committed other offences before he was caught. When he was younger he had a relationship with a 14 year old girl.
Yet, if any of these things had been used as justification for sacking him before the horrific events of last year, you can bet that the usual subjects would be out defending these actions: The WhatsApp group would be “just banter”, the sex offences would be “just stress” & he’d be given a minor slap on the wrist & back at work in no time, the relationship would have been her fault somehow & not his. And so on and on and on.
Cat-calling is seen a part of this culture of tolerance of low level abuse of women that convinces people like Couzens that their actions are in some way supported by the society around them - that everyone would do these things if they thought they could get away with them. That’s why it’s being called out alongside everything else.
For me, the problem is not so much the shocking revelations of this case, it is the mindset of an institution, and indeed a political class, that thought Cressida Dick was even a credible candidate for the position of Head of the Met in the first place. From the manslaughter of Charles de Menezes, the jaw dropping incompetence in Operation Midland and the blatant and identified obstruction of the Morgan inquiry it is painfully obvious that she should have been sacked long before she made the top chair. Is it really any surprise that the incompetence, genuinely weird political misjudgements (Extinction rebellion and the handling of the Sarah Everard commemoration to name just 2 examples) have continued?
Was the fact that she was a woman and gay more important to our right on politicians? I mean, for god's sake. The decision to renew her contract not even a month ago with this pending, is one of the more inexplicable political decisions in recent times. Dick is not the only one who should be considering her position.
I'm not here to defend the Commissioner - would be very happy to see her resign. But there does appear to be a concerted campaign against her that is outsized vs the issue. Would - an example - a different commissioner have meant that this "man" would have been screened and caught out before he committed this heinous crime?
This alone would not for me be reason for her to resign. As horrendous as it is, if none of the red flags had reached her desk there's no way she could have known.
This, combined with the culture she's allowed to be in the Met, combined with the cover-up the Morgan Inquiry found, combined with de Menzies, combined with Midland . . . different story.
Yes, so we're back into the institutional culture problem. As the police (all forces) draw more of certain groups of people in than other groups there is a risk of being unbalanced. All the more reason why the leadership from the very top needs to be robust.
For me though this does feel like a bit of a blind alley. This case was so exceptional because it was that crime by a serving police officer - hence the exceptional sentence. If only the crime was an exception - it isn't. It isn't the police culture we need to change, but our own.
Until women are equal to men we will keep this horrible problem. Yes its a small minority of men, but they are fuelled by a society that amplifies their "rights" and "needs" as overriding those of others. We managed to make drink driving completely unacceptable when it used to be the norm. We can make "incel" and "phwoar" and"just a bit of fun" completely unacceptable if we try.
This won't 100% eradicate these kind of crimes because a very small number of people are unsaveable in this life. But we can shine light into the darkness.
It does concern me that Couzens may have only got a proper life sentence because he was a police officer. For sure, that's an aggravating factor, but his actions alone ought to have been more than enough to ensure that he would never be released.
Given the planning and that the attack was on a complete stranger, it seems almost certain that he would have repeated the crime if he'd not been caught.
That's an interesting point. The guidance on whole life sentences includes:
(a) the murder of two or more persons, where each murder involves any of the following— (i)a substantial degree of premeditation or planning, (ii)the abduction of the victim, or (iii)sexual or sadistic conduct...
But as you say, he was caught after one (or, at least, one that we know of). I think it would perfectly reasonable for a judge to come to the conclusion that he would more than likely have done it again had he not been caught.
There's every chance she was not his first victim too, but that he got away with others.
What is the point of specifying two victims in the guidelines, if we are happy for the judge to infer, and pb to infer, that there were probably other victims so that's all right then? That is a dangerous path. Guilt should be proven, not assumed or asserted. The presumption of innocence is the golden thread...
Except the judge didn't. Read the sentencing remarks about how he constructed, using the law and the guidelines, the sentence. He actually sets out his though process, in quite some detail.
The point at issue was that whole life tariffs are for exceptional circumstances, with *some* examples given. The wording is quite clear that these aren't the *only* reasons for a whole life tariff.
The judge then took the view that the combination of pre-meditation, the nature of the crime, the lack of remorse and attempted cover up, combined with the level of mis-use of the public office raised the crime to the whole life tariff category.
Yes, if Couzens had got into a fight in a pub whilst off duty and ended up killing someone, or murdered his wife after a row he may well have received a life sentence but not a whole life tariff.
Yep (and thanks was it you who posted the judge's remarks) - it was in particular his use of his warrant card as a serving police officer to perpetrate the crime that was largely the reason why he received the whole life tariff.
And I think it's unfortunate that it gives the impression that he wouldn't have got a whole life sentence had he not been a cop. The nature of the crime - especially the length of time over which it was perpetrated - should have been more than enough to put him away for the rest of his life. Sure, mention him using the warrant card etc. too, but I think it's a shame that it wasn't made clear that such a crime should get the maximum sentence irrespective of who perpetrates it.
I happen to agree but them's not the guidelines so the judge had to be precise in explaining why he had made an exception. Which I believe he did.
I don't think he made an "exception" - what he did was to look at the guidelines, which give some *examples* of exceptional circumstances, and reason why this was also an exceptional circumstance.
I suspect that's the problem. If Couzens hadn't been a police officer, then it perhaps, sadly, wouldn't have been exceptional enough.
Whole life sentences shouldn't be rationed like firsts at university.
Yes, they should. And I speak as someone who called for Couzens to get exactly this sentence yesterday.
What Couzens will experience is as close the British judicial system gets to a death sentence. No chance of release, no possibility of redemption, the rest of his entire life in something close to solitary confinement, constantly at risk of attack from others. As an ex con says in the Times today (££) ‘he may wish he’d got a death sentence instead’
This cruel punishment is necessary for multiple reasons, not least deterrence. Any other rotten copper fancying a bit of rape and murder needs to know that, if caught, they will be hurled into a dungeon until they die
Other murders are different, and deserve different life sentences. 20-30 years in prison is still enough to break someone into pieces, vanishingly few people re-offend after a life sentence like that, yet the release at the end offers the chance of redemption and remorse, and maybe repayment to society
What I do object to are the ‘life sentences’ that turn out to be 12 years or whatever, but I’m not sure they’re that common?
Of course, in reality, all that happens is that the parole board gets to deal with the problem. Look at some of these individuals...
Anthony Entwistle...[redacted as it's not very nice] In 2009, Mr. Justice Davis ruled at the High Court that Entwistle could be considered for release after 25 years (less 10 months spent on remand) if he was judged to no longer be a threat to the public, rather than imposing a whole life tariff, saying that "He can only be released if ever (and it may be never) he is assessed as no longer a danger to the public." The parole board turned down his request for release in June 2013.
And who's going to agree to release Roy Whiting?
Fascinating if grisly article. I see there is one guy who did 18 years inside for murder, then got released and murdered AGAIN. That is exceptionally rare, but shows it can happen
Also worth noting how many of these ‘whole life’ prisoners end up committing suicide, or die at the hands of other convicts, or die weirdly young ‘after a fall in prison’
Independent is often someone who left party X over matter Y. So it is not uncommon for them to "go home" and get re-elected under their old banner.....
Perhaps that is what happened here?
Apparently not according to Andrew Teale's reviews. The late councillor, John Smith, appears to have been a genuine, "local champion" type. Indeed, the fact the Conservatives stood against him last time whereas Labour and Lib Dems didn't, rather suggests he wasn't viewed as a Condependent.
I suspect the real story here is simpler - Conservative elected in a strongly Conservative area when a popular independent goes (and similar things happen in strongly Labour or Lib Dem areas when that happens).
Ah - so a (probably) conservative Independent replaced by a Conservative?
The reason I doubt that is that, at the last election, he had a Conservative opponent but no Lib Dem or Labour. I am not local to the area so don't know, but the sign I take from that is the independent was relatively progressive.
Of course, that does mean a pretty Conservative area may well have been returning an independent who was actually to the left of the electorate. But that's no great shock - West Sussex is very safe Tory territory, so the area could pretty safely choose a "local champion" who was no doubt personally popular and would make some noise to get their slice of the Council pie, without needing to worry too much about it fundamentally changing who was in charge.
There are several films set in the US, I saw one the other day but can't remember the name of it, where the baddies are being chased by State police and it's a race to the State border after which the baddies continue unhindered and the State police (usually in the films) get out of their cars at the border line, put their hands on their hips, and stare wistfully after their disappearing prey.
Fun fact: Sparta, Mississippi, where In the Heat of the Night is set is actually 130 miles away from the state line with Arkansas. The bridge featured is actually in Sparta, Illinois, where the picture was filmed. That is indeed on the state line over the Mississipi River, albeit across the water from Missouri, not Arkansas.
The Next Three Days - Russell Crowe. Good film. Don't want to give away any spoilers, that said.
Starmer only lied to lunatics, trots and entryists in order to take over the party. He will be practically applauded by ex-Labour voters for having now told said trots where to get off.
I am no fan of Starmer but he has had a decent week, his speech was too long, but if he is antagonising the likes of Owen Jones he cannot be doing anything wrong.
LAB: 31.6% (-1.7) LDEM: 30.3% (+30.3) IND (Geddis): 18.5% (-3.1) CON: 14.5% (+8.8) IND (Allen): 3.2% (+3.2) GRN: 2.0% (-1.8)
Looks like one of those anomalies where a party with reasonable local support (this time the LDs) for some reason didn't stand last time. Looking at the maths there must have been a popular independent getting around 35% last time round as there are total increases of 42.3% and decreases of 6.6%.
There was a suggestion yesterday that come the GE in 24 lib dem and green voters will migrate back to labour but I see no evidence of this and think it is wishful thinking
I would suggest we are seeing a reduction in conservative support, labour struggling but both the lib dems and greens strengthening their appeal
I expect this to continue and labour to struggle in the red wall and make no impact in Scotland, while the lib dems cause quite some difficulty in the blue wall seats
Very interesting times and I expect in GE 24 the conservatoires to lose a good number of seats and emerge with a greatly reduced majority
However, we cannot predict more than a few weeks at present so who knows about GE24, it is also discussed with a considerable amount of understandable partisanship
It was me, and it's not "wishful thinking". How is it when someone makes a prediction it's assumed that they want that outcome too? I don't know who I will vote for next time, so I can't possibly have a preference for others to switch their votes or not. My prediction may be right or wrong, but it's no reflection of my preference.
Perhaps in Scotland the Green voters might not move so much to Labour - though it is a good question. The Starmer speech some months back, and the SNP-SG agreement more recently, undoubtedly both reflect the existence of the SNP alternative (the LDs seemingly not being convincing enough as an alternative except in their specialist c onstituencies).
When thinking about Green to Labour switchers you have to bear in mind how pathetically weak Starmer and Labour are on environmental issues. The landscape has changed even since 2019 and climate issues are very prominent now.
On investigation, it turns out the average life sentence actually served in the UK is 16.5 years. That seems a bit low to me. 20 is more imposing. But I don’t believe every murderer needs to be banged up til they croak. Couzens is an unusual case that DOES demand that
There are about 60 "life means life" convicts in the UK, I believe. That's actually more than I would have guessed. I'd thought it was just a handful.
@CorrectHorseBattery - not that I want to deter you from enjoying the outdoors, but you're probably just as likely to be attacked as a woman.
Not sure what the stats say but I sense there is a big difference in risk between men in their teens and early 20s on the one hand, and those of us in our middle age who certainly seem to be at very little risk after dark. I remember being incredibly nervous walking around dark or empty areas when I was about 18 or 19 because so many of my friends had been mugged or beaten up by groups of yobs (I never got worse than threats of attack and legging it out of danger). Now in my mid 40s the youths just seem to look straight through me. Whereas I think women my age still get a lot of the aggro.
That's an interesting point. You'd think being young should make you safer (fitter, faster, etc.). But I'm inclined to think you're probably right. Youngsters tend to gob off at other youngsters or, at least, seem less scared of them.
Young men are more at risk of physical assault than young women.
In public settings, I'd agree. In domestic settings, it's the reverse.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
Zemmour isn't a confirmed candidate but he is really eating into Le Pen's vote so somebody who could actually beat Macron might make the final two (unless it's Zemmour himself).
@CorrectHorseBattery - not that I want to deter you from enjoying the outdoors, but you're probably just as likely to be attacked as a woman.
Not sure what the stats say but I sense there is a big difference in risk between men in their teens and early 20s on the one hand, and those of us in our middle age who certainly seem to be at very little risk after dark. I remember being incredibly nervous walking around dark or empty areas when I was about 18 or 19 because so many of my friends had been mugged or beaten up by groups of yobs (I never got worse than threats of attack and legging it out of danger). Now in my mid 40s the youths just seem to look straight through me. Whereas I think women my age still get a lot of the aggro.
That's an interesting point. You'd think being young should make you safer (fitter, faster, etc.). But I'm inclined to think you're probably right. Youngsters tend to gob off at other youngsters or, at least, seem less scared of them.
It’s all Darwinism. Young men are competing for the same scant resources: nubile young women. So they fight and attack each other. As a middle aged man you are not seen as sexual competition so you are ignored, there is nothing to be gained from attacking you (unless they want to rob you), yet there is also risk: you might be powerful or rich and able to summon more resources in revenge.
Middle aged men are literally safer. As are middle aged women, btw
The median age for rape complainants is close to the age of peak female fertility: early 20s
Rather dangerously like Andrea Dworkin's thesis in her books that all men are (potential) rapists.
Never had you down as such a woke feminist.
Ironically, Dworkin went mad at the end and started fabricating fake rape attacks on herself. Quite a sad life
@CorrectHorseBattery - not that I want to deter you from enjoying the outdoors, but you're probably just as likely to be attacked as a woman.
Not sure what the stats say but I sense there is a big difference in risk between men in their teens and early 20s on the one hand, and those of us in our middle age who certainly seem to be at very little risk after dark. I remember being incredibly nervous walking around dark or empty areas when I was about 18 or 19 because so many of my friends had been mugged or beaten up by groups of yobs (I never got worse than threats of attack and legging it out of danger). Now in my mid 40s the youths just seem to look straight through me. Whereas I think women my age still get a lot of the aggro.
That's an interesting point. You'd think being young should make you safer (fitter, faster, etc.). But I'm inclined to think you're probably right. Youngsters tend to gob off at other youngsters or, at least, seem less scared of them.
Young men are more at risk of physical assault than young women.
In public settings, I'd agree. In domestic settings, it's the reverse.
Men are mostly killed by "friends" and strangers. Women are mostly killed by partners and family.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I would imagine Keir Starmer has also had it with Owen Jones!
But has he? If he's decided to do a muscular performative facedown of the left, and I reckon he has, then the likes of OJ kicking off might be precisely what he wants.
Floating voter: "Hmm, if all those types are mad at him, maybe he's on the right track."
This sort of thing. Not that I support doing this, I find it a bit sad and am skeptical of the benefit. We don't want to lose a ton of support to the Greens or Abstain. Still, the mood music on policy from the Conf was pretty encouraging. I think it could be a good manifesto that will score mid to high 30s at the GE.
On investigation, it turns out the average life sentence actually served in the UK is 16.5 years. That seems a bit low to me. 20 is more imposing. But I don’t believe every murderer needs to be banged up til they croak. Couzens is an unusual case that DOES demand that
There are about 60 "life means life" convicts in the UK, I believe. That's actually more than I would have guessed. I'd thought it was just a handful.
Its a pretty extreme sentence. But necessary in some cases
There have been attempts to get these sentences deemed inhumane: at the ECHR
Zemmour isn't a confirmed candidate but he is really eating into Le Pen's vote so somebody who could actually beat Macron might make the final two (unless it's Zemmour himself).
Starmer only lied to lunatics, trots and entryists in order to take over the party. He will be practically applauded by ex-Labour voters for having now told said trots where to get off.
It's all revisionist crap from Corbynists, in my view.
The choice in the 2020 leadership election was really clear. Want continuity Corbyn? Vote RLB. Sure, Starmer has hardened the language and approach since then, but nobody was under any illusion that Starmer was going to stick with the approach of the previous four years - a period which had ended in very decisive failure.
Mr. Battery, catcalling as a hate crime seems over the top. Couzens didn't catcall or wolf whistle.
The Met needs massive reform. Dick should go. Neither of these things will happen.
Catcalling may be made illegal. It won't reduce the number of rapes. Rapists tend to either plan things carefully or be opportunists. Neither involves calling attention to oneself.
I thing the point Morris_Dancer is that cat-calling is part and parcel of a sub-culture within the UK population that tolerates the mistreatment of women & treats them as objects to be interacted with for the pleasure of the man in question, not as actual people.
The experience of cat-calling is completely different for men and women - the men that do it think that it’s harmless banter, but for many women it’s an implied threat: “be nice about me making sexual comments about you, or maybe I’ll come after you” is the message they hear loud & clear. To be oblivious to this reality is do deny the humanity of half the planet - to say that it’s OK for women to have to grin & bear this stuff whether they like it or not.
We know that Couzens was part of a WhatsApp group with other police officers where they shared misogynistic messages with each other & that he committed other offences before he was caught. When he was younger he had a relationship with a 14 year old girl.
Yet, if any of these things had been used as justification for sacking him before the horrific events of last year, you can bet that the usual subjects would be out defending these actions: The WhatsApp group would be “just banter”, the sex offences would be “just stress” & he’d be given a minor slap on the wrist & back at work in no time, the relationship would have been her fault somehow & not his. And so on and on and on.
Cat-calling is seen a part of this culture of tolerance of low level abuse of women that convinces people like Couzens that their actions are in some way supported by the society around them - that everyone would do these things if they thought they could get away with them. That’s why it’s being called out alongside everything else.
Absolutely excellent post, if I may say so.
Sir is most kind, etc.
As an aside, I’ve been struck by the outpouring of posts on Twitter from people detailing their own personal disturbing experiences with the police. It’s clear that the utterly tone-death response of the MET to this case has aroused a lot of anger.
On investigation, it turns out the average life sentence actually served in the UK is 16.5 years. That seems a bit low to me. 20 is more imposing. But I don’t believe every murderer needs to be banged up til they croak. Couzens is an unusual case that DOES demand that
There are about 60 "life means life" convicts in the UK, I believe. That's actually more than I would have guessed. I'd thought it was just a handful.
Question for me is whether it works. If we go too far down the line of vengeful justice, and obviously there is a place for that, we will end up like America with half the population banged up and 200-year sentences, and it is not like the US is now crime-free.
Maybe we should take another look at countries in Europe and see how they do things.
More important than sentencing is detection and conviction and it is there that things have got far worse in recent years.
There is a 2-year backlog of criminal cases, and detectives are increasingly bogged down by the huge amount of data that surrounds every crime. Get murdered and in the old days, it was a few hours' door-to-door and a quick sweep of the ground. Now, it is that plus a call for cctv images for weeks before and from dozens of cameras, and umpteen mobile phones. Just think of the amount of police manpower taken up searching through all those images. Cctv does not watch itself (though I dare say the AI boffins are working on it).
@CorrectHorseBattery - not that I want to deter you from enjoying the outdoors, but you're probably just as likely to be attacked as a woman.
Not sure what the stats say but I sense there is a big difference in risk between men in their teens and early 20s on the one hand, and those of us in our middle age who certainly seem to be at very little risk after dark. I remember being incredibly nervous walking around dark or empty areas when I was about 18 or 19 because so many of my friends had been mugged or beaten up by groups of yobs (I never got worse than threats of attack and legging it out of danger). Now in my mid 40s the youths just seem to look straight through me. Whereas I think women my age still get a lot of the aggro.
That's an interesting point. You'd think being young should make you safer (fitter, faster, etc.). But I'm inclined to think you're probably right. Youngsters tend to gob off at other youngsters or, at least, seem less scared of them.
Young men are more at risk of physical assault than young women.
In public settings, I'd agree. In domestic settings, it's the reverse.
Men are mostly killed by "friends" and strangers. Women are mostly killed by partners and family.
Which is why, when the reverse happens, it is always a big news story. (Woman killed by stranger, man killed by family). Much more if you are white, professional and good-looking.
Starmer has had a good week. Came across better and more relaxed than previously. If Jones et al want another twenty years of Tory rule they are having a good week with their actions too.
Yes, clear betting fav for Next PM now. Soon have a 3 handle, I think. Love my long @ 8.
I hope Owen stays onboard though. The tent should be big enough. And the left is needed for ideas.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
Mr. Battery, catcalling as a hate crime seems over the top. Couzens didn't catcall or wolf whistle.
The Met needs massive reform. Dick should go. Neither of these things will happen.
Catcalling may be made illegal. It won't reduce the number of rapes. Rapists tend to either plan things carefully or be opportunists. Neither involves calling attention to oneself.
I thing the point Morris_Dancer is that cat-calling is part and parcel of a sub-culture within the UK population that tolerates the mistreatment of women & treats them as objects to be interacted with for the pleasure of the man in question, not as actual people.
The experience of cat-calling is completely different for men and women - the men that do it think that it’s harmless banter, but for many women it’s an implied threat: “be nice about me making sexual comments about you, or maybe I’ll come after you” is the message they hear loud & clear. To be oblivious to this reality is do deny the humanity of half the planet - to say that it’s OK for women to have to grin & bear this stuff whether they like it or not.
We know that Couzens was part of a WhatsApp group with other police officers where they shared misogynistic messages with each other & that he committed other offences before he was caught. When he was younger he had a relationship with a 14 year old girl.
Yet, if any of these things had been used as justification for sacking him before the horrific events of last year, you can bet that the usual subjects would be out defending these actions: The WhatsApp group would be “just banter”, the sex offences would be “just stress” & he’d be given a minor slap on the wrist & back at work in no time, the relationship would have been her fault somehow & not his. And so on and on and on.
Cat-calling is seen a part of this culture of tolerance of low level abuse of women that convinces people like Couzens that their actions are in some way supported by the society around them - that everyone would do these things if they thought they could get away with them. That’s why it’s being called out alongside everything else.
Absolutely excellent post, if I may say so.
Sir is most kind, etc.
As an aside, I’ve been struck by the outpouring of posts on Twitter from people detailing their own personal disturbing experiences with the police. It’s clear that the utterly tone-death response of the MET to this case has aroused a lot of anger.
(Edit: tone-deaf!)
Given the personal experiences surely it's highlighting that the issue is a fundament issue, not just a one off rogue person.
I would imagine Keir Starmer has also had it with Owen Jones!
But has he? If he's decided to do a muscular performative facedown of the left, and I reckon he has, then the likes of OJ kicking off might be precisely what he wants.
Floating voter: "Hmm, if all those types are mad at him, maybe he's on the right track."
This sort of thing. Not that I support doing this, I find it a bit sad and am skeptical of the benefit. We don't want to lose a ton of support to the Greens or Abstain. Still, the mood music on policy from the Conf was pretty encouraging. I think it could be a good manifesto that will score mid to high 30s at the GE.
Totally agree. I think it's great for Starmer if the right people are disagreeing with him. Similarly, I think he'd be very relaxed about Corbyn standing as an independent against Labour next time - even though it'd probably mean Labour losing that seat. He has to nail the message "this is not the Labour Party you decisively rejected in 2019" and nothing says it more clearly.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
Did his Dad get anything ?
He fled the country, unfortunately. The man was a complete arsehole.
On investigation, it turns out the average life sentence actually served in the UK is 16.5 years. That seems a bit low to me. 20 is more imposing. But I don’t believe every murderer needs to be banged up til they croak. Couzens is an unusual case that DOES demand that
There are about 60 "life means life" convicts in the UK, I believe. That's actually more than I would have guessed. I'd thought it was just a handful.
Its a pretty extreme sentence. But necessary in some cases
There have been attempts to get these sentences deemed inhumane: at the ECHR
Since the death penalty isn't allowed, how about fitting a catheter, food tube, colostomy bag/system, oxygen and CO2 clearing system and burying Couzens alive for a hundred years ?
Zemmour isn't a confirmed candidate but he is really eating into Le Pen's vote so somebody who could actually beat Macron might make the final two (unless it's Zemmour himself).
Melenchon wouldn't beat Macron, would he?
And is that Plastic Bertrand in third place?
Sadly not Plastic.
Last 2 polls had Macron narrowly beating Bertrand in round 2 but a couple of earlier ones had the reverse.
On investigation, it turns out the average life sentence actually served in the UK is 16.5 years. That seems a bit low to me. 20 is more imposing. But I don’t believe every murderer needs to be banged up til they croak. Couzens is an unusual case that DOES demand that
There are about 60 "life means life" convicts in the UK, I believe. That's actually more than I would have guessed. I'd thought it was just a handful.
Question for me is whether it works. If we go too far down the line of vengeful justice, and obviously there is a place for that, we will end up like America with half the population banged up and 200-year sentences, and it is not like the US is now crime-free.
Maybe we should take another look at countries in Europe and see how they do things.
More important than sentencing is detection and conviction and it is there that things have got far worse in recent years.
There is a 2-year backlog of criminal cases, and detectives are increasingly bogged down by the huge amount of data that surrounds every crime. Get murdered and in the old days, it was a few hours' door-to-door and a quick sweep of the ground. Now, it is that plus a call for cctv images for weeks before and from dozens of cameras, and umpteen mobile phones. Just think of the amount of police manpower taken up searching through all those images. Cctv does not watch itself (though I dare say the AI boffins are working on it).
There are people who it would be far too dangerous to allow back into society.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
Yes I basically agree. Imagine a boy who joins a south London gang at 15 then stabs a rival to death in a fracas, age 20. If he gets out 17 years later I’d say that’s probably fair. He did a terrible thing and has lost the best years of his life as a result. Now he gets a chance to be a decent citizen and repay
Any murder accompanied by, say, rape, should be 25 years minimum. Likewise terrorism
I remember reading a study of jail sentences. There is a length of sentence after which almost no one ever reoffends, I believe it is about 15 years (but I need to check). In essence, if you spend that long in prison it changes you - breaks you, perhaps. You never want to go back inside. Psychos are different of course, they cannot be helped
That’s why I was surprised by the guy who did 18 years then murdered again. Incredibly unusual
Zemmour isn't a confirmed candidate but he is really eating into Le Pen's vote so somebody who could actually beat Macron might make the final two (unless it's Zemmour himself).
Melenchon wouldn't beat Macron, would he?
And is that Plastic Bertrand in third place?
If someone prevents Le Pen getting into the second round that is bad news for Macron.
The government is writing to everyone licenced to drive 7.5t+ vehicles.
If they're licenced to do so and decline the invitation, so be it. But some of those who read the letter will think "I'd like the opportunity actually" and take it up. Especially if the pay on offer is good.
Yes some caught up in a mass mailing may not be interested, but so frigging what?
Irvine Welch is looking like a prescient novelist. The main character in 'Filth' now seems far less cartoonish, and didn't Welch also have a Jimmy Savile-esque character long before that truth came out?
The government is writing to everyone licenced to drive 7.5t+ vehicles.
If they're licenced to do so and decline the invitation, so be it. But some of those who read the letter will think "I'd like the opportunity actually" and take it up. Especially if the pay on offer is good.
Yes some caught up in a mass mailing may not be interested, but so frigging what?
Its not news, it is just more FBPE lunatics making everything about Brexit.
@CorrectHorseBattery - not that I want to deter you from enjoying the outdoors, but you're probably just as likely to be attacked as a woman.
Not sure what the stats say but I sense there is a big difference in risk between men in their teens and early 20s on the one hand, and those of us in our middle age who certainly seem to be at very little risk after dark. I remember being incredibly nervous walking around dark or empty areas when I was about 18 or 19 because so many of my friends had been mugged or beaten up by groups of yobs (I never got worse than threats of attack and legging it out of danger). Now in my mid 40s the youths just seem to look straight through me. Whereas I think women my age still get a lot of the aggro.
That's an interesting point. You'd think being young should make you safer (fitter, faster, etc.). But I'm inclined to think you're probably right. Youngsters tend to gob off at other youngsters or, at least, seem less scared of them.
Young men are more at risk of physical assault than young women.
In public settings, I'd agree. In domestic settings, it's the reverse.
Men are mostly killed by "friends" and strangers. Women are mostly killed by partners and family.
Which is why, when the reverse happens, it is always a big news story. (Woman killed by stranger, man killed by family). Much more if you are white, professional and good-looking.
Sabina Nessa, the murdered schoolteacher, has also been extensively in the news, despite pb saying she would not get the coverage for not being White. Professional, yes.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
Yes I basically agree. Imagine a boy who joins a south London gang at 15 then stabs a rival to death in a fracas, age 20. If he gets out 17 years later I’d say that’s probably fair. He did a terrible thing and has lost the best years of his life as a result. Now he gets a chance to be a decent citizen and repay
Any murder accompanied by, say, rape, should be 25 years minimum. Likewise terrorism
I remember reading a study of jail sentences. There is a length of sentence after which almost no one ever reoffends, I believe it is about 15 years (but I need to check). In essence, if you spend that long in prison it changes you - breaks you, perhaps. You never want to go back inside. Psychos are different of course, they cannot be helped
That’s why I was surprised by the guy who did 18 years then murdered again. Incredibly unusual
Most psychopaths go through life without offending. You probably know one or two.
The government is writing to everyone licenced to drive 7.5t+ vehicles.
If they're licenced to do so and decline the invitation, so be it. But some of those who read the letter will think "I'd like the opportunity actually" and take it up. Especially if the pay on offer is good.
Yes some caught up in a mass mailing may not be interested, but so frigging what?
The German licences are up to 7.5 tons in the article, not over that.
Zemmour isn't a confirmed candidate but he is really eating into Le Pen's vote so somebody who could actually beat Macron might make the final two (unless it's Zemmour himself).
Melenchon wouldn't beat Macron, would he?
And is that Plastic Bertrand in third place?
If someone prevents Le Pen getting into the second round that is bad news for Macron.
The government is writing to everyone licenced to drive 7.5t+ vehicles.
If they're licenced to do so and decline the invitation, so be it. But some of those who read the letter will think "I'd like the opportunity actually" and take it up. Especially if the pay on offer is good.
Yes some caught up in a mass mailing may not be interested, but so frigging what?
Its not news, it is just more FBPE lunatics making everything about Brexit.
I don't get it. There's a shortage of HGV drivers and the government is being criticised for trying to address that shortage.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
In prison parlance, people given a life sentence are said to have been ‘lifed away’. They have dead eyes and grey skin. They are inert. All hope is extinguished. Psychopaths aside they lose any sense of menace after a decade or so, and turn to human dust
I have a friend who does NA meetings in HMP Dartmoor (which now houses just the saddest old cases, the prison is due to shut entirely, soon). He says the lifers there are absolutely pitiful. They often look 10-20 years older than their actual age
LAB: 31.6% (-1.7) LDEM: 30.3% (+30.3) IND (Geddis): 18.5% (-3.1) CON: 14.5% (+8.8) IND (Allen): 3.2% (+3.2) GRN: 2.0% (-1.8)
Looks like one of those anomalies where a party with reasonable local support (this time the LDs) for some reason didn't stand last time. Looking at the maths there must have been a popular independent getting around 35% last time round as there are total increases of 42.3% and decreases of 6.6%.
There was a suggestion yesterday that come the GE in 24 lib dem and green voters will migrate back to labour but I see no evidence of this and think it is wishful thinking
I would suggest we are seeing a reduction in conservative support, labour struggling but both the lib dems and greens strengthening their appeal
I expect this to continue and labour to struggle in the red wall and make no impact in Scotland, while the lib dems cause quite some difficulty in the blue wall seats
Very interesting times and I expect in GE 24 the conservatoires to lose a good number of seats and emerge with a greatly reduced majority
However, we cannot predict more than a few weeks at present so who knows about GE24, it is also discussed with a considerable amount of understandable partisanship
It was me, and it's not "wishful thinking". How is it when someone makes a prediction it's assumed that they want that outcome too? I don't know who I will vote for next time, so I can't possibly have a preference for others to switch their votes or not. My prediction may be right or wrong, but it's no reflection of my preference.
Perhaps in Scotland the Green voters might not move so much to Labour - though it is a good question. The Starmer speech some months back, and the SNP-SG agreement more recently, undoubtedly both reflect the existence of the SNP alternative (the LDs seemingly not being convincing enough as an alternative except in their specialist c onstituencies).
When thinking about Green to Labour switchers you have to bear in mind how pathetically weak Starmer and Labour are on environmental issues. The landscape has changed even since 2019 and climate issues are very prominent now.
Of course, yes, that too: the SNP reluctance to support Cambo is useful in that sense, as is more generally such things as opposition to fracking (probably a factor in Jo Swinson's defeat given her funding) and the row with Mr Trump over the offshire windfarm. .
Edit: this is for FPTP GEs of course, and the Holyrood constituency vote; quite different for the Holyrood list where your SG list vote is much less likely to be wasted. Though Slab have vocally opposed tthe Cambo oilfield, tbf.
Zemmour isn't a confirmed candidate but he is really eating into Le Pen's vote so somebody who could actually beat Macron might make the final two (unless it's Zemmour himself).
Starmer only lied to lunatics, trots and entryists in order to take over the party. He will be practically applauded by ex-Labour voters for having now told said trots where to get off.
Depends on the policies. If they are timid, small, insubstantial, he will have lied to the whole party and people will be entitled to be pissed off. And if he loses the election on top of that, to be VERY pissed off.
But hopefully neither of these things will happen. My hunch is he knows what he's doing and he's serious both about becoming PM and doing something with the job if he makes it.
The government is writing to everyone licenced to drive 7.5t+ vehicles.
If they're licenced to do so and decline the invitation, so be it. But some of those who read the letter will think "I'd like the opportunity actually" and take it up. Especially if the pay on offer is good.
Yes some caught up in a mass mailing may not be interested, but so frigging what?
The German licences are up to 7.5 tons in the article, not over that.
Quite an innocent explanation:
The Department of Transport has said that data protection rules meant they were unable to filter the results, so as to remove ambulance drivers or in this case, Germans.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
This may seem a strange thing to say, but I suspect the average murderer is not an especially bad person. I think that in the wrong circumstances, many of us could do the same.
But, there are people who are truly wicked, soulless really, and a real danger to the public, and not necessarily murderers, either.
I see SKS said he thinks the next James Bond should be a woman
Dont tell Rosie Duffield
Isn't that just the easiest laziest answer to a completely irrelevant question for a politician to be asked.
My answer would be more circumspect: "I'm excited to find out who the next Bond will be, it would be fun to see what they could do with a woman in the role, but I'm sure there are many male actors who would also be great choices."
Irvine Welch is looking like a prescient novelist. The main character in 'Filth' now seems far less cartoonish, and didn't Welch also have a Jimmy Savile-esque character long before that truth came out?
Wasn't the main character in Filth a tapeworm? (great book, BTW. Welsh is a genius).
Irvine Welch is looking like a prescient novelist. The main character in 'Filth' now seems far less cartoonish, and didn't Welch also have a Jimmy Savile-esque character long before that truth came out?
Short story. "Lorraine goes to Livingston." Welch denies having had any knowledge, or even heard rumours, about Savile. Filth is very much how the Police have always been viewed amongst those on the edges of legality. That this view is spreading to the general public ought to concern them.
Irvine Welch is looking like a prescient novelist. The main character in 'Filth' now seems far less cartoonish, and didn't Welch also have a Jimmy Savile-esque character long before that truth came out?
Wasn't the main character in Filth a tapeworm? (great book, BTW. Welsh is a genius).
Ingteresting thing about tapeworms - they have a set of genitalia on each segment. IIRC the 'younger' sewgments near the head are male and the older ones near the end female, so after fertilisation between segments of the same or other worms cohabiting the gut, the final segments drop off and pass aweay into the faeces. I can't remember if Mr Irvine, or indeed any other artist, has riffed on this, though.
I see SKS said he thinks the next James Bond should be a woman
Dont tell Rosie Duffield
Isn't that just the easiest laziest answer to a completely irrelevant question for a politician to be asked.
My answer would be more circumspect: "I'm excited to find out who the next Bond will be, it would be fun to see what they could do with a woman in the role, but I'm sure there are many male actors who would also be great choices."
My answer would be that being a politician doesn't qualify me as a movie director, and I am happy to leave the task to the experts.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
This may seem a strange thing to say, but I suspect the average murderer is not an especially bad person. I think that in the wrong circumstances, many of us could do the same.
But, there are people who are truly wicked, soulless really, and a real danger to the public, and not necessarily murderers, either.
A friend of mine nearly murdered someone. He’s a big chap, 6 foot 5, genial, clever, engineering type. Likes cricket.
But he has this terrible temper which, about every 15 years, descends into lunatic rage. I once saw him pick up a deeply irritating stupid person by the neck and ram him against a wall. Because of my friend’s size and strength he nearly strangled the fool to death. It’s only coz others pulled him away that he didn’t commit murder. Instead the victim meekly slipped away, my friend had a few days of mortified shame, and life went on
Otherwise he’s a fine upstanding member of society. Father, hard worker, pays his taxes, etc
Irvine Welch is looking like a prescient novelist. The main character in 'Filth' now seems far less cartoonish, and didn't Welch also have a Jimmy Savile-esque character long before that truth came out?
Short story. "Lorraine goes to Livingston." Welch denies having had any knowledge, or even heard rumours, about Savile. Filth is very much how the Police have always been viewed amongst those on the edges of legality. That this view is spreading to the general public ought to concern them.
The government is writing to everyone licenced to drive 7.5t+ vehicles.
If they're licenced to do so and decline the invitation, so be it. But some of those who read the letter will think "I'd like the opportunity actually" and take it up. Especially if the pay on offer is good.
Yes some caught up in a mass mailing may not be interested, but so frigging what?
The German licences are up to 7.5 tons in the article, not over that.
7.5t counts within 7.5t+ does it not?
If a bookie says 18+ then they don't exclude 18 year olds.
Disagree. It's weak stuff from him and much less thoughtful than what he normally produces. What are the promises that Starmer has broken? He doesn't really say.
All it amounts to is complaints that the left have been frozen out of certain positions and some desperately dull internal rule changes. Then he restates criticisms of whether Starmer is electable.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
Did his Dad get anything ?
He fled the country, unfortunately. The man was a complete arsehole.
I can think of a chap, who after getting out of prison for manslaughter... well, he organised the drugs trade in half of Oxford.
It was very quiet, orderly and no-one sold anything strong to the middle class kids or the university students.
The police seemed happy with him - they arrested his rivals (including quite a number of students) but never him. Opinion is divided on the reason for that - corruption or an acceptance of stable situation.....
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
This may seem a strange thing to say, but I suspect the average murderer is not an especially bad person. I think that in the wrong circumstances, many of us could do the same.
But, there are people who are truly wicked, soulless really, and a real danger to the public, and not necessarily murderers, either.
Yes the ones that I have met are mostly fairly dim and easily led, impulsive and often illiterate. The TV idea of intelligent super villains is not very close to reality. Or possibly those ones don't get caught.
The government is writing to everyone licenced to drive 7.5t+ vehicles.
If they're licenced to do so and decline the invitation, so be it. But some of those who read the letter will think "I'd like the opportunity actually" and take it up. Especially if the pay on offer is good.
Yes some caught up in a mass mailing may not be interested, but so frigging what?
Its not news, it is just more FBPE lunatics making everything about Brexit.
I don't get it. There's a shortage of HGV drivers and the government is being criticised for trying to address that shortage.
Because Scott is so desperate to see us fail, as he wants vindication and the UK back in Europe.
So fixing the issue without us failing is a disaster for Scott.
Irvine Welch is looking like a prescient novelist. The main character in 'Filth' now seems far less cartoonish, and didn't Welch also have a Jimmy Savile-esque character long before that truth came out?
Wasn't the main character in Filth a tapeworm? (great book, BTW. Welsh is a genius).
Not only that.
MASSIVE SPOILER ALERT!!!!!
Doesn't he dress as a woman to commit his crimes ISTR?
The Jungian view would be a man unable to acknowledge, let alone integrate his anima. So he goes to War with it. Hence the tapeworm.
Zemmour isn't a confirmed candidate but he is really eating into Le Pen's vote so somebody who could actually beat Macron might make the final two (unless it's Zemmour himself).
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
This may seem a strange thing to say, but I suspect the average murderer is not an especially bad person. I think that in the wrong circumstances, many of us could do the same.
But, there are people who are truly wicked, soulless really, and a real danger to the public, and not necessarily murderers, either.
A friend of mine nearly murdered someone. He’s a big chap, 6 foot 5, genial, clever, engineering type. Likes cricket.
But he has this terrible temper which, about every 15 years, descends into lunatic rage. I once saw him pick up a deeply irritating stupid person by the neck and ram him against a wall. Because of my friend’s size and strength he nearly strangled the fool to death. It’s only coz others pulled him away that he didn’t commit murder. Instead the victim meekly slipped away, my friend had a few days of mortified shame, and life went on
Otherwise he’s a fine upstanding member of society. Father, hard worker, pays his taxes, etc
What did this guy do to irritate him, out of interest?
Starmer only lied to lunatics, trots and entryists in order to take over the party. He will be practically applauded by ex-Labour voters for having now told said trots where to get off.
Depends on the policies. If they are timid, small, insubstantial, he will have lied to the whole party and people will be entitled to be pissed off. And if he loses the election on top of that, to be VERY pissed off.
But hopefully neither of these things will happen. My hunch is he knows what he's doing and he's serious both about becoming PM and doing something with the job if he makes it.
Trouble is, Starmer has given a shield to the Prime Minister. CCHQ will be taking notes to repel a charge that Boris is a pathological liar, or simply that the government broke several manifesto pledges. Starmer can't be trusted either, they will say.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
In prison parlance, people given a life sentence are said to have been ‘lifed away’. They have dead eyes and grey skin. They are inert. All hope is extinguished. Psychopaths aside they lose any sense of menace after a decade or so, and turn to human dust
I have a friend who does NA meetings in HMP Dartmoor (which now houses just the saddest old cases, the prison is due to shut entirely, soon). He says the lifers there are absolutely pitiful. They often look 10-20 years older than their actual age
A life sentence is a pretty scary thing
Which is why I think there's no need for the death penalty.
A life sentence also takes your life but forces you to live it as well - arguably worse.
Irvine Welch is looking like a prescient novelist. The main character in 'Filth' now seems far less cartoonish, and didn't Welch also have a Jimmy Savile-esque character long before that truth came out?
Wasn't the main character in Filth a tapeworm? (great book, BTW. Welsh is a genius).
Not only that.
MASSIVE SPOILER ALERT!!!!!
Doesn't he dress as a woman to commit his crimes ISTR?
On the excellent header, I'm inclined to agree that Cressida Dick needs to go, and quickly. This is a necessary, but not sufficient, start to reforming the Met.
Obviously top leadership is crucial to shaping organisational culture. But so also is the leadership provided by second and third tier managers/leaders, who have to give expression to the values and behaviours demanded by The Leader.
Now I'm only guessing, so apologies for that, but I have a strong suspicion that in an organisation as large as, and with the history of, the Met, the problem lies as much with other leaders as it does with the Top Leader. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Met needs a root and branch clear-out of all those managers/leaders that are more supportive of the Met's dodgy canteen culture than they are of the values and behaviours demanded by the top.
Starmer only lied to lunatics, trots and entryists in order to take over the party. He will be practically applauded by ex-Labour voters for having now told said trots where to get off.
I am no fan of Starmer but he has had a decent week, his speech was too long, but if he is antagonising the likes of Owen Jones he cannot be doing anything wrong.
This is the sentiment I was referring to. The more the left complains the better, is how I think he's looking at things. I don't like it myself, then again what I'd like even less is several more years of Boris Johnson, so if Keir is calling this right, electorally, and so long as the policies are not insipid, I'm happy enough. Didn't vote for him as leader, my pref was Nandy, but I hope he can succeed, pull off the trick of winning on a platform worth winning on.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
This may seem a strange thing to say, but I suspect the average murderer is not an especially bad person. I think that in the wrong circumstances, many of us could do the same.
But, there are people who are truly wicked, soulless really, and a real danger to the public, and not necessarily murderers, either.
A friend of mine nearly murdered someone. He’s a big chap, 6 foot 5, genial, clever, engineering type. Likes cricket.
But he has this terrible temper which, about every 15 years, descends into lunatic rage. I once saw him pick up a deeply irritating stupid person by the neck and ram him against a wall. Because of my friend’s size and strength he nearly strangled the fool to death. It’s only coz others pulled him away that he didn’t commit murder. Instead the victim meekly slipped away, my friend had a few days of mortified shame, and life went on
Otherwise he’s a fine upstanding member of society. Father, hard worker, pays his taxes, etc
What did this guy do to irritate him, out of interest?
Its a long time back but IIRC he cheated at cricket, and was then loutishly smug about it. No joke
My friend is a stickler for fair play. So decided to throttle him
I see SKS said he thinks the next James Bond should be a woman
Dont tell Rosie Duffield
Isn't that just the easiest laziest answer to a completely irrelevant question for a politician to be asked.
My answer would be more circumspect: "I'm excited to find out who the next Bond will be, it would be fun to see what they could do with a woman in the role, but I'm sure there are many male actors who would also be great choices."
The trouble with these sorts of questions is that they get column inches and people end up saying "hasn't Keir Starmer got bigger things to worry about than the next Bond?!?" And, of course, he has - but he was just answering the question given.
Incidentally, I absolutely don't think there should be a female Bond.
Firstly, film makers should be creating new, strong female leads - not some sort of novelty hand-me-down of a six decade old franchise.
Secondly, James Bond is not Dr Who - it is not, in the story, a pseudonym, and he does not regenerate. It is just a different actor playing exactly the same character. Indeed, there are occasional back-references. Of course, the huge plot hole is that Bond should now be in his 90s. But the premise of the story is simply not that Daniel Craig was given the Bond name and 007 number when Piers Brosnan retired - it is that Craig IS Brosnan etc.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
In prison parlance, people given a life sentence are said to have been ‘lifed away’. They have dead eyes and grey skin. They are inert. All hope is extinguished. Psychopaths aside they lose any sense of menace after a decade or so, and turn to human dust
I have a friend who does NA meetings in HMP Dartmoor (which now houses just the saddest old cases, the prison is due to shut entirely, soon). He says the lifers there are absolutely pitiful. They often look 10-20 years older than their actual age
A life sentence is a pretty scary thing
Which is why I think there's no need for the death penalty.
A life sentence also takes your life but forces you to live it as well - arguably worse.
I think that being forced to stew with your own regrets for years on end is an underrated punishment.
I think I'd opt for execution in preference to life in a US Super-Max prison.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
This may seem a strange thing to say, but I suspect the average murderer is not an especially bad person. I think that in the wrong circumstances, many of us could do the same.
But, there are people who are truly wicked, soulless really, and a real danger to the public, and not necessarily murderers, either.
A friend of mine nearly murdered someone. He’s a big chap, 6 foot 5, genial, clever, engineering type. Likes cricket.
But he has this terrible temper which, about every 15 years, descends into lunatic rage. I once saw him pick up a deeply irritating stupid person by the neck and ram him against a wall. Because of my friend’s size and strength he nearly strangled the fool to death. It’s only coz others pulled him away that he didn’t commit murder. Instead the victim meekly slipped away, my friend had a few days of mortified shame, and life went on
Otherwise he’s a fine upstanding member of society. Father, hard worker, pays his taxes, etc
What did this guy do to irritate him, out of interest?
Its a long time back but IIRC he cheated at cricket, and was then loutishly smug about it. No joke
My friend is a stickler for fair play. So decided to throttle him
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
In prison parlance, people given a life sentence are said to have been ‘lifed away’. They have dead eyes and grey skin. They are inert. All hope is extinguished. Psychopaths aside they lose any sense of menace after a decade or so, and turn to human dust
I have a friend who does NA meetings in HMP Dartmoor (which now houses just the saddest old cases, the prison is due to shut entirely, soon). He says the lifers there are absolutely pitiful. They often look 10-20 years older than their actual age
A life sentence is a pretty scary thing
One of the reasons I'm against the death penalty. I think life can be a harsher sentence.
Starmer only lied to lunatics, trots and entryists in order to take over the party. He will be practically applauded by ex-Labour voters for having now told said trots where to get off.
Depends on the policies. If they are timid, small, insubstantial, he will have lied to the whole party and people will be entitled to be pissed off. And if he loses the election on top of that, to be VERY pissed off.
But hopefully neither of these things will happen. My hunch is he knows what he's doing and he's serious both about becoming PM and doing something with the job if he makes it.
Trouble is, Starmer has given a shield to the Prime Minister. CCHQ will be taking notes to repel a charge that Boris is a pathological liar, or simply that the government broke several manifesto pledges. Starmer can't be trusted either, they will say.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
This may seem a strange thing to say, but I suspect the average murderer is not an especially bad person. I think that in the wrong circumstances, many of us could do the same.
But, there are people who are truly wicked, soulless really, and a real danger to the public, and not necessarily murderers, either.
Yes the ones that I have met are mostly fairly dim and easily led, impulsive and often illiterate. The TV idea of intelligent super villains is not very close to reality. Or possibly those ones don't get caught.
The stats for brain injuries are quite shocking from what I am told.
Starmer only lied to lunatics, trots and entryists in order to take over the party. He will be practically applauded by ex-Labour voters for having now told said trots where to get off.
Depends on the policies. If they are timid, small, insubstantial, he will have lied to the whole party and people will be entitled to be pissed off. And if he loses the election on top of that, to be VERY pissed off.
But hopefully neither of these things will happen. My hunch is he knows what he's doing and he's serious both about becoming PM and doing something with the job if he makes it.
Trouble is, Starmer has given a shield to the Prime Minister. CCHQ will be taking notes to repel a charge that Boris is a pathological liar, or simply that the government broke several manifesto pledges. Starmer can't be trusted either, they will say.
"Vote Boris! He's no worse a liar than Starmer!"
The opinion polls frequently have the public rating Boris as more honest than Starmer.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
In prison parlance, people given a life sentence are said to have been ‘lifed away’. They have dead eyes and grey skin. They are inert. All hope is extinguished. Psychopaths aside they lose any sense of menace after a decade or so, and turn to human dust
I have a friend who does NA meetings in HMP Dartmoor (which now houses just the saddest old cases, the prison is due to shut entirely, soon). He says the lifers there are absolutely pitiful. They often look 10-20 years older than their actual age
A life sentence is a pretty scary thing
Which is why I think there's no need for the death penalty.
A life sentence also takes your life but forces you to live it as well - arguably worse.
I think that being forced to stew with your own regrets for years on end is an underrated punishment.
I think I'd opt for execution in preference to life in a US Super-Max prison.
I don't think we should have the death penalty. But if a prisoner opted to end their own live, Dignitas-style, then I think that should be facilated as their own free choice.
Zemmour isn't a confirmed candidate but he is really eating into Le Pen's vote so somebody who could actually beat Macron might make the final two (unless it's Zemmour himself).
Barnier?
poll offered 3 different options for the LR candidate assuming only 1 stood.. Bertrand scored 14%, Pecresse 12%, Barnier 8%. I only gave the Bertrand numbers above as he scored most and the selection method they have chosen is thought to favour him getting the nod.
On the excellent header, I'm inclined to agree that Cressida Dick needs to go, and quickly. This is a necessary, but not sufficient, start to reforming the Met.
Obviously top leadership is crucial to shaping organisational culture. But so also is the leadership provided by second and third tier managers/leaders, who have to give expression to the values and behaviours demanded by The Leader.
Now I'm only guessing, so apologies for that, but I have a strong suspicion that in an organisation as large as, and with the history of, the Met, the problem lies as much with other leaders as it does with the Top Leader. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Met needs a root and branch clear-out of all those managers/leaders that are more supportive of the Met's dodgy canteen culture than they are of the values and behaviours demanded by the top.
Yes - one issue with binning Dick is that people will say "Well we had the big resignation. Job jobbed. Onward!".
We need a full enquiry, independent. For example - Who was doing his annual security checks? Why didn't anything get flagged? Who was his boss? Who did his performance appraisals?
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
This may seem a strange thing to say, but I suspect the average murderer is not an especially bad person. I think that in the wrong circumstances, many of us could do the same.
But, there are people who are truly wicked, soulless really, and a real danger to the public, and not necessarily murderers, either.
A friend of mine nearly murdered someone. He’s a big chap, 6 foot 5, genial, clever, engineering type. Likes cricket.
But he has this terrible temper which, about every 15 years, descends into lunatic rage. I once saw him pick up a deeply irritating stupid person by the neck and ram him against a wall. Because of my friend’s size and strength he nearly strangled the fool to death. It’s only coz others pulled him away that he didn’t commit murder. Instead the victim meekly slipped away, my friend had a few days of mortified shame, and life went on
Otherwise he’s a fine upstanding member of society. Father, hard worker, pays his taxes, etc
What did this guy do to irritate him, out of interest?
Its a long time back but IIRC he cheated at cricket, and was then loutishly smug about it. No joke
My friend is a stickler for fair play. So decided to throttle him
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
This may seem a strange thing to say, but I suspect the average murderer is not an especially bad person. I think that in the wrong circumstances, many of us could do the same.
But, there are people who are truly wicked, soulless really, and a real danger to the public, and not necessarily murderers, either.
Yes the ones that I have met are mostly fairly dim and easily led, impulsive and often illiterate. The TV idea of intelligent super villains is not very close to reality. Or possibly those ones don't get caught.
In the last Inspector Morse, another copper decries Morse's over-elaborate theorising, saying murder comes down to "stupid people doing stupid things to each other".
On the excellent header, I'm inclined to agree that Cressida Dick needs to go, and quickly. This is a necessary, but not sufficient, start to reforming the Met.
Obviously top leadership is crucial to shaping organisational culture. But so also is the leadership provided by second and third tier managers/leaders, who have to give expression to the values and behaviours demanded by The Leader.
Now I'm only guessing, so apologies for that, but I have a strong suspicion that in an organisation as large as, and with the history of, the Met, the problem lies as much with other leaders as it does with the Top Leader. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Met needs a root and branch clear-out of all those managers/leaders that are more supportive of the Met's dodgy canteen culture than they are of the values and behaviours demanded by the top.
Trouble is. That is a decades long process. Unless you bring in leaders outwith the Police force. And I can't see that being practically feasible.
Zemmour isn't a confirmed candidate but he is really eating into Le Pen's vote so somebody who could actually beat Macron might make the final two (unless it's Zemmour himself).
Barnier?
Likely won't get the centre right nomination, Bertrand will likely win the support of Les Republicains in their party convention to pick their candidate in December.
Bertrand v Macron would be neck and neck in the second round, whereas Le Pen v Macron would still see Macron win by about 10%
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
In prison parlance, people given a life sentence are said to have been ‘lifed away’. They have dead eyes and grey skin. They are inert. All hope is extinguished. Psychopaths aside they lose any sense of menace after a decade or so, and turn to human dust
I have a friend who does NA meetings in HMP Dartmoor (which now houses just the saddest old cases, the prison is due to shut entirely, soon). He says the lifers there are absolutely pitiful. They often look 10-20 years older than their actual age
A life sentence is a pretty scary thing
One of the reasons I'm against the death penalty. I think life can be a harsher sentence.
Especially in Dartmoor. What a depressing place.
It’s due to shut forever in 2023. God knows what they will do with it. The architecture is kind of imperious, in a 200-year-old, Satanic way. And it’s listed. So they can’t knock it down. A hotel?!
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I don't think 16.5 years is inappropriate for an "ordinary" murder. To give one example, my wife knows a man who will shortly be released after 18 years. He stabbed a man to death, after being worked up to it, over the course of several weeks, by his father. He did something terrible, but he's not irredeemable, IMHO. He was 19 when he did it, so he's lost a fair chunk of his life.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
I have a number of patients in Gartree Prison, which is entirely lifers.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
In prison parlance, people given a life sentence are said to have been ‘lifed away’. They have dead eyes and grey skin. They are inert. All hope is extinguished. Psychopaths aside they lose any sense of menace after a decade or so, and turn to human dust
I have a friend who does NA meetings in HMP Dartmoor (which now houses just the saddest old cases, the prison is due to shut entirely, soon). He says the lifers there are absolutely pitiful. They often look 10-20 years older than their actual age
A life sentence is a pretty scary thing
One of the reasons I'm against the death penalty. I think life can be a harsher sentence.
Especially in Dartmoor. What a depressing place.
It’s due to shut forever in 2023. God knows what they will do with it. The architecture is kind of imperious, in a 200-year-old, Satanic way. And it’s listed. So they can’t knock it down. A hotel?!
Comments
Donald Andrews had received a whole-life term for rape and kidnapping in 2012, while having two previous convictions for manslaughter. This was reduced to a twelve-year minimum when he appealed in 2015, making him eligible for release in 2024.
Also, I didn't say the MP would be "crap". Councillors might well chose a diligent, personable individual... who they consider, when push comes to shove, likely to act in the best interests of their electorate (i.e. councillors).
I also just don't think it would play out as you describe in terms of local links. I suspect non-local candidates would do extremely well in the system you describe, as they will have avoided becoming embroiled in local rivalries and disputes.
Also worth noting how many of these ‘whole life’ prisoners end up committing suicide, or die at the hands of other convicts, or die weirdly young ‘after a fall in prison’
That’s what awaits Couzens
Of course, that does mean a pretty Conservative area may well have been returning an independent who was actually to the left of the electorate. But that's no great shock - West Sussex is very safe Tory territory, so the area could pretty safely choose a "local champion" who was no doubt personally popular and would make some noise to get their slice of the Council pie, without needing to worry too much about it fundamentally changing who was in charge.
OTOH, sex killers, torture killers, contract killers should be inside for decades IMHO.
Macron 23%
Le Pen 16%
Bertrand 14%
Melenchon 13%
Zemmour 13%
(Harris 24-27th Sept.)
https://harris-interactive.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/09/Rapport-Harris-Vague-15-Intentions-de-vote-Presidentielle-2022-Challenges.pdf
Zemmour isn't a confirmed candidate but he is really eating into Le Pen's vote so somebody who could actually beat Macron might make the final two (unless it's Zemmour himself).
Floating voter: "Hmm, if all those types are mad at him, maybe he's on the right track."
This sort of thing. Not that I support doing this, I find it a bit sad and am skeptical of the benefit. We don't want to lose a ton of support to the Greens or Abstain. Still, the mood music on policy from the Conf was pretty encouraging. I think it could be a good manifesto that will score mid to high 30s at the GE.
There have been attempts to get these sentences deemed inhumane: at the ECHR
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/fs_life_sentences_eng.pdf
And is that Plastic Bertrand in third place?
The choice in the 2020 leadership election was really clear. Want continuity Corbyn? Vote RLB. Sure, Starmer has hardened the language and approach since then, but nobody was under any illusion that Starmer was going to stick with the approach of the previous four years - a period which had ended in very decisive failure.
Dont tell Rosie Duffield
As an aside, I’ve been struck by the outpouring of posts on Twitter from people detailing their own personal disturbing experiences with the police. It’s clear that the utterly tone-death response of the MET to this case has aroused a lot of anger.
(Edit: tone-deaf!)
Maybe we should take another look at countries in Europe and see how they do things.
More important than sentencing is detection and conviction and it is there that things have got far worse in recent years.
There is a 2-year backlog of criminal cases, and detectives are increasingly bogged down by the huge amount of data that surrounds every crime. Get murdered and in the old days, it was a few hours' door-to-door and a quick sweep of the ground. Now, it is that plus a call for cctv images for weeks before and from dozens of cameras, and umpteen mobile phones. Just think of the amount of police manpower taken up searching through all those images. Cctv does not watch itself (though I dare say the AI boffins are working on it).
The government has written to thousands of Germans in the UK, begging them to ‘return’ to HGV driving, even if they’ve never driven one before.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/hgv-lorry-driver-shortage-germans-b1930558.html https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1443890011116613635/photo/1
I hope Owen stays onboard though. The tent should be big enough. And the left is needed for ideas.
Generally the prison officers like it there as lifers tend to behave, as major misbehaviour means that they stay inside. Someone on say a 3 year tariff can get away with much more, short of being convicted again, once they have done their time they are out.
Most of the lifers I meet are rather pathetic individuals, and don't ooze threat. If you sat next to them at the bus stop you wouldn't know what they have done. Mind you, when I see them, they are chained to an escort, with a second one to hand.
Oh dear how sad never mind
Last 2 polls had Macron narrowly beating Bertrand in round 2 but a couple of earlier ones had the reverse.
Any murder accompanied by, say, rape, should be 25 years minimum. Likewise terrorism
I remember reading a study of jail sentences. There is a length of sentence after which almost no one ever reoffends, I believe it is about 15 years (but I need to check). In essence, if you spend that long in prison it changes you - breaks you, perhaps. You never want to go back inside. Psychos are different of course, they cannot be helped
That’s why I was surprised by the guy who did 18 years then murdered again. Incredibly unusual
The government is writing to everyone licenced to drive 7.5t+ vehicles.
If they're licenced to do so and decline the invitation, so be it. But some of those who read the letter will think "I'd like the opportunity actually" and take it up. Especially if the pay on offer is good.
Yes some caught up in a mass mailing may not be interested, but so frigging what?
Though even a LWB Transit was enough for me when collecting Grandma's furniture!
1. He lied through his teeth.
2. He did what he needed to do to win (i.e. not alienate the left too much).
I'm not comfortable with either, but the proof of the pudding..... He won.
I have a friend who does NA meetings in HMP Dartmoor (which now houses just the saddest old cases, the prison is due to shut entirely, soon). He says the lifers there are absolutely pitiful. They often look 10-20 years older than their actual age
A life sentence is a pretty scary thing
Edit: this is for FPTP GEs of course, and the Holyrood constituency vote; quite different for the Holyrood list where your SG list vote is much less likely to be wasted. Though Slab have vocally opposed tthe Cambo oilfield, tbf.
But hopefully neither of these things will happen. My hunch is he knows what he's doing and he's serious both about becoming PM and doing something with the job if he makes it.
The Department of Transport has said that data protection rules meant they were unable to filter the results, so as to remove ambulance drivers or in this case, Germans.
So it was either no mailshot, or everyone got it.
But, there are people who are truly wicked, soulless really, and a real danger to the public, and not necessarily murderers, either.
Welch denies having had any knowledge, or even heard rumours, about Savile. Filth is very much how the Police have always been viewed amongst those on the edges of legality.
That this view is spreading to the general public ought to concern them.
But he has this terrible temper which, about every 15 years, descends into lunatic rage. I once saw him pick up a deeply irritating stupid person by the neck and ram him against a wall. Because of my friend’s size and strength he nearly strangled the fool to death. It’s only coz others pulled him away that he didn’t commit murder. Instead the victim meekly slipped away, my friend had a few days of mortified shame, and life went on
Otherwise he’s a fine upstanding member of society. Father, hard worker, pays his taxes, etc
If a bookie says 18+ then they don't exclude 18 year olds.
What are the promises that Starmer has broken? He doesn't really say.
All it amounts to is complaints that the left have been frozen out of certain positions and some desperately dull internal rule changes. Then he restates criticisms of whether Starmer is electable.
It was very quiet, orderly and no-one sold anything strong to the middle class kids or the university students.
The police seemed happy with him - they arrested his rivals (including quite a number of students) but never him. Opinion is divided on the reason for that - corruption or an acceptance of stable situation.....
Reformed or what?
So fixing the issue without us failing is a disaster for Scott.
MASSIVE SPOILER ALERT!!!!!
Doesn't he dress as a woman to commit his crimes ISTR?
The Jungian view would be a man unable to acknowledge, let alone integrate his anima. So he goes to War with it.
Hence the tapeworm.
A life sentence also takes your life but forces you to live it as well - arguably worse.
Obviously top leadership is crucial to shaping organisational culture. But so also is the leadership provided by second and third tier managers/leaders, who have to give expression to the values and behaviours demanded by The Leader.
Now I'm only guessing, so apologies for that, but I have a strong suspicion that in an organisation as large as, and with the history of, the Met, the problem lies as much with other leaders as it does with the Top Leader. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Met needs a root and branch clear-out of all those managers/leaders that are more supportive of the Met's dodgy canteen culture than they are of the values and behaviours demanded by the top.
My friend is a stickler for fair play. So decided to throttle him
Incidentally, I absolutely don't think there should be a female Bond.
Firstly, film makers should be creating new, strong female leads - not some sort of novelty hand-me-down of a six decade old franchise.
Secondly, James Bond is not Dr Who - it is not, in the story, a pseudonym, and he does not regenerate. It is just a different actor playing exactly the same character. Indeed, there are occasional back-references. Of course, the huge plot hole is that Bond should now be in his 90s. But the premise of the story is simply not that Daniel Craig was given the Bond name and 007 number when Piers Brosnan retired - it is that Craig IS Brosnan etc.
I think I'd opt for execution in preference to life in a US Super-Max prison.
Quite right too.
Bentura Ruiz Flores
1971
1,800 years
United States
Convicted of selling $20 worth of heroin to an undercover narcotics agent in Odessa, Texas
Seems a bit harsh
We need a full enquiry, independent. For example - Who was doing his annual security checks? Why didn't anything get flagged? Who was his boss? Who did his performance appraisals?
Lots of blame to share around....
Unless you bring in leaders outwith the Police force. And I can't see that being practically feasible.
Bertrand v Macron would be neck and neck in the second round, whereas Le Pen v Macron would still see Macron win by about 10%
It’s due to shut forever in 2023. God knows what they will do with it. The architecture is kind of imperious, in a 200-year-old, Satanic way. And it’s listed. So they can’t knock it down. A hotel?!
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/01/covid-antiviral-pill-halves-hospitalisations-and-deaths-maker-says
Sending letters to Germans who are not going to drive HGVs doesn't solve the problem.
“Global Britain” https://twitter.com/daantjehug/status/1443695175600050176