egafd.com

Hi

I read in the paper today that the mandatory life sentence is to be abolished. It will be up to the judge to place the homicide into a category of seriousness. Degrees of homicide. Only the most serious killings,like those of children would receive natural life.

A "life" sentence at the moment is an indeterminate sentence to be decided in the future and mainly based on one's behaviour in prison. The sentence should always be passed at the time of the finding of guilt when the case and evidence are fresh in everyone's mind.

If you have a good QC he always has a word with the judge to see how long you are to get if found guilty. "Three to four years" he told me. The man I killed was a gangster who in the Sixties slashed Bobby Cannon owner of the rehearsal club in Archer street and cut the tatoos of Bobby's minder! Gerry Hawley was a feared man in Soho for incidents like this.
The man I killed was never a member of the public.

While I served life I was forced to sit at a dinner table in the open prison with a man who had raped, tortured and murdered a little girl. If I had touched him he would have informed on me and I would have my release date moved back four or five years. One could have no honour.

All lifers can be recalled for the most petty things. I have been recalled twice since being released in 1979 for engaging in criminal activity, namely pornography. When I came to the end of my sentence for publishing Adult films I was kept in for another couple of years because I was a pornographer and not because I was a danger to the public.
Mike Freeman

I see your point.

When I was in prison the bloke in the cell next to me got the chance to appeal his sentence, after serving 7 years, after evidence from a key witnesses in his trial had been deemed to be "maybe" unsafe.

He was given bail until the outcome of his appeal was known and hence was let out on a Tuesday afternoon. He was back in again on the Sunday as part of his bail conditions was that he had to stay at halfway house and therefore share a room with somebody else which in his case was a child rapist.

When he refused to do this (for his own fear that he would have hurt the paedo) then he was told he was in breach of his bail and taken back to prison until his appeal was heard which was ultimately successful.

But why should he have had to room with a child rapist? He shouldn't.

Hi Eduardo,

The state guards its monopoly of violence jealously although in war (mass killing) it can carry out "pre-emptive strikes" and bomb civilians to "destroy the moral of the people."

Mike Freeman