Ripper in legal bid for freedom
"Yorkshire Ripper Peter Sutcliffe is aiming to win his freedom by claiming his human rights have been breached, a leading law firm has confirmed".
I think that the BBC headline is misleading. And I think that his lawyer is misusing the Legal Aid fund for pursuing a pointless case. As I understand it, Sutcliffe was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment with a recommendation that he serve a minimum 30 years. That is the tariff, what part of that does Miss Smarty-Pants, Saimo Chahal, fail to understand? Bindman & Partners have a good reputation, I don't think this case reflects that.
I disagree with Jacqui Smith on two points, dead people do not have human rights, and you don't keep the country safe by pressing for 42 days internment.
I suspect if push came to shove, the State would be more than happy to accommodate Sutcliffe's desire for the maximum sentence he must serve by announcing he will serve natural life.
I do believe that Sutcliffe has human rights and is entitled to them. I do not believe a successful challenge can be mounted in his case under Article 5 of the Convention.
No comments:
Post a Comment