"Cop Killer" Harry Roberts to be freed from prison

[Gramaisc]

Was he not part of the same gang though and therefore, in law, culpable by association?

Indeed, even Witney, who killed nobody on this occasion, apparently, was convicted of the three murders. Roberts was convicted of all three murders, but only was responsible for two killings*.

*On that occasion - he was not charged with murder on the occasion of a previous death at his hands, as the victim didn't die for a year and three days, when the law required death by a year and a day for a murder charge to be laid.

So, we're back the three killings on his score, anyway...

 

[Gramaisc]

Still remembered - https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=Br...=7zTPeTq6zfmkYdTWPZeb7Q&cbp=12,16.84,,2,19.37 .

 

[Withnail]

Interesting one for the disinterested, if that is not too oxymoronic - or simply moronic.

Listening earlier on Radio 5 to reactions about it, from a base level of knowing nothing about the case, you do tend to think along the lines of

... on one hand the bloke is 78 now & how much of a threat can he be to people...

and that 45 years is not exactly what could be described as lenient - even in a book co-authored by shoes & tek-monkey.

Subsequent info on the fellow rather lends support to the charge that he is actually a rather terrible c*nt - the reasons behind his refusal from his first parole board hearing don't exactly inspire confidence.

Maybe the question should be 'why aren't all killers given proper life sentences, not just cop-killers'?

With this one i tend to agree with the police representative/s that i've heard - in short, if we are to continue to 'enjoy' an unarmed police presence, it must be explicitly clear, at a cultural level, that firearm use against the police will be dealt with with extreme severity.

You could realistically argue that the thought of not getting out until you were at death's door would be quite compelling - ultimately it would probably be better all round if someone who found themselves in the same circumstances today knew that they would never get out.

 

[littleme]

Subsequent info on the fellow rather lends support to the charge that he is actually a rather terrible c*nt - the reasons behind his refusal from his first parole board hearing don't exactly inspire confidence.

He MUST be a particularly nasty pasty, he served his 30 years, so should have been up for parole fairly regularly in the following 18 years - to not be paroled he must of shown no remorse whatsoever & the capacity or want/ability to cause further harm...

 

[Maryland]

He MUST be a particularly nasty pasty, he served his 30 years, so should have been up for parole fairly regularly in the following 18 years - to not be paroled he must of shown no remorse whatsoever & the capacity or want/ability to cause further harm...

Indeed. One would hope that the reason/s he served the full term went further than the sentiment that used to surround the killing of police officers. On the assumption that this was the case, and that he was denied parole for reasons including being a nasty piece of work and likely to remain dangerous if released, I do think that the community into which he's going to be released, ie us, should be told why it's now considered safe to let him live amongst us.

And I have to admit that the relatively recent enthusiasm shown by the police and their masters to expose and to deal with corruption and criminality within the police does rather dilute the argument that the murder of a police officer should automatically be regarded as a more serious sort of murder than the murder of a mere civilian. But it's a question too difficult for my small brain to get to grips with. Once we accept that all coppers are not saints, and that many more of them than we feel comfortable with are dishonest, and that police culture has contributed hugely to this state of affairs, where does that leave the police in terms of public respect and our willingness to see them accorded special treatment?

How should we regard a copper who gets shot in the line of duty, quite possibly while not doing anything at all heroic, and who also has, perhaps, as a matter of routine manipulated his/her account of events, who may have colluded with colleagues to try and achieve a desired outcome, who may have colluded with colleagues to manufacture a spurious version of events with the intention to discredit a cabinet minister, petty criminal, member of an ethnic minority, or member of the public who has failed to demonstrate subservience, who may have frequently bullied, assaulted and persecuted members of the public, who may have taken bribes, who may have sold information, who may have stolen, who may have used the office of constable to serve personal ends and for criminal purpose, and who may have expected that he or she would get away with this behaviour because they belong to a group which protects its own against the outside world, always has and awways will? Does being brave as a lion automatically negate being rotten to the core? I don't know.

 

[littleme]

I have a friend that works with the Seargent that was shot in Rugeley last weekend, & they seem largely surprised that such a thing could happen. I said that surely you must think & be prepared that something like that might happen - but aparently not. I thought it was all part of the job.