Vocal Voices

Just a quick one on the death penalty.
Ian McLoughlin was sentenced to 40 years this week for the murder of Graham Buck. But Mr McLoughlin has been here before.
In 1984 he was jailed for the "manslaughter" of Len Delgetty, whom he killed with a hammer before hiding the body in a cupboard. Sentence, 10 years reduced to 8 on appeal.
He was jailed again in 1992 for 21 years for stabbing Peter Halls to death. He had been out for one day before he murdered Graham Buck.
So as a counter to the "you might hang the wrong man" argument, if Ian McLoughlin had been hung after his first killing, two more innocent people would be alive today.


eta - It's not as if he's the only one. In the last four years there have been at least five other cases where convicted killers have been released to kill again - Ernest Wright, David Cook, Desmond Lee, Andrew Dawson and George Johnson.

McLoughlin has been know to the police and authorities since his childhood so why he was given only a) a short sentence for manslaughter, and b) released after only five years are mysteries. Those who authorised his release share the blame for his subsequent crimes.

That earlier easy ride led to murder for which he was given a minimum term of 25 years in 1992. Had that been served in full he would still be safely locked up.

But no! Some bleeding hearts decided once again that he was safe to be released. And so we get murder number three.

Given that we cannot get the death penalty back I would have those who sit on panels and decide to release these monsters held to account for their actions. Charges of aiding and abetting manslaughter/murder should concentrate their minds somewhat.

Human Rights legislation doesn't help keep dangerous people locked up nowadays, either ....

I don't believe in the death penalty but I do believe that life should mean life! Nobody who commits murder should see the light of day ever again IMO.....

Workingman wrote:Given that we cannot get the death penalty back I would have those who sit on
panels and decide to release these monsters held to account for their actions.

Those who decide that a convicted murderer is safe to be released, should be forced to
draw lots for one of them to take him in as a lodger for a few months.

I'll bet they wouldn't then be so keen to recommend his release.

Surely there must be some way to take legal action in these cases? It is sheer incompetence.

Authorities find it very acceptable and easy to put down the elderly and aged. Why all this compassion for killers?