Ronnie biggs parole refused

[oldcro]

He deserves an ice cold bedpan for all the arguments he's caused in this forum.

 

[Smarties]

I think you are living in your own fantasy world,
You have your opinion I have mine and opinions vary, but Jack Straw's opinion is the one that matters and he has got it bang on, let scum like Biggs rot in Jail !!!!!!!!!!![/QUOTE]
No need to get personal flanai1. This is an ill and frail man whose last wish would appear to have been denied by the justice secretary, unless good sense (and a bit of humanity) prevail and that decision is overturned on appeal.
You, Jack Straw, and some other forum members, would appear to think Ronnie Biggs has got more to give…his last breath perhaps? You may get you wish sooner than you think, and can then bask in your respective glories whilst congratulating yourselves on ‘justice’ being well and truly served.

 

[ringway]

He deserves an ice cold bedpan for all the arguments he's caused in this forum.

Ha Ha!

I try hard not to get involved in this sort of debate for that very reason.

That doesn't mean to say I don't watch with interest from the dug-out though.

 

[flango]

I think you are living in your own fantasy world,
You have your opinion I have mine and opinions vary, but Jack Straw's opinion is the one that matters and he has got it bang on, let scum like Biggs rot in Jail !!!!!!!!!!![/QUOTE]
No need to get personal flanai1. This is an ill and frail man whose last wish would appear to have been denied by the justice secretary, unless good sense (and a bit of humanity) prevail and that decision is overturned on appeal.
You, Jack Straw, and some other forum members, would appear to think Ronnie Biggs has got more to give…his last breath perhaps? You may get you wish sooner than you think, and can then bask in your respective glories whilst congratulating yourselves on ‘justice’ being well and truly served.

I'm not getting personal and whilst our opinions vary I am quite happy to agree to disagree on this one. My last word on the subject!

 

[scumbag]

I bet he gets set free, and then departs to a new life within 48hrs, at some point in the future. So he will get his wish in the end, "to die a free man"


Just like the last of the Krays did.


Unless they shoot him and let God decide, obviously.

 

[glojo]

So far I have asked WHY the interest in Mr Biggs when we know that 96 prisoners died in prison last year from natural causes. Why the interest in this one person? What is so special?

I am listening to folks that say he never actually hit the driver over the head so he should not be treated in the same way asthose that commit violence.

If they are sincere inthat belief then I would respectfully suggest they are wrong... Wrong big time.

They are trying to say that Mr Biggs did not use violence so should be shown some clemency?

Did MrBiggs offer first aid? Did Mr Biggs report those that committed the assault?

If I am in a gang and I watch someone being beaten, someone being killed and I do nothing about it, and instead I revel in the publicity regarding the crime then to me, I am just as guilty. In fact if I disagreed with the violence then I am a coward for not doing the right thing, or even speaking out about it. If I condoned the violence then I am as guilty as those that committed it.

NINETY SIX prisoners died of natural causes last year and the silence regarding this fact is deafening. It could be that some of these ninety six were innocent of any crime and were wrongly convicted. It could be that some of these ninety six were in custody for trivial offences??? Who knows, but more to the point who among our vocal protestors cares??? It would appear that our protestors are jumping on the Biggs band wagon. Someone that has never done a days work for most of his adult life.

I would love to know if there is a PR company involved in this protest because it stinks. Let these protestors see if any of the ninety six are more worthy of their time and effort.

Biggs was proud of what he did, revelled in the publicity of what he did, he lived a very comfortable life-style off of what he did and perhaps he should have put funds aside for a 'rainy' day.

He made choices, he decided on a life of crime, his decision, his choice, his life.

To all those that want to defend him,then go ahead but please do not ask me to show one ounce of sympathy for his welfare. I am too busy worrying about the welfare of more deserving people

 

[Smarties]

So far I have asked WHY the interest in Mr Biggs when we know that 96 prisoners died in prison last year from natural causes. Why the interest in this one person? What is so special?
NINETY SIX prisoners died of natural causes last year and the silence regarding this fact is deafening. It could be that some of these ninety six were innocent of any crime and were wrongly convicted. It could be that some of these ninety six were in custody for trivial offences??? Who knows, but more to the point who among our vocal protestors cares??? It would appear that our protestors are jumping on the Biggs band wagon. Someone that has never done a days work for most of his adult life.

I would love to know if there is a PR company involved in this protest because it stinks. Let these protestors see if any of the ninety six are more worthy of their time and effort.

Biggs was proud of what he did, revelled in the publicity of what he did, he lived a very comfortable life-style off of what he did and perhaps he should have put funds aside for a 'rainy' day.

He made choices, he decided on a life of crime, his decision, his choice, his life.

To all those that want to defend him,then go ahead but please do not ask me to show one ounce of sympathy for his welfare. I am too busy worrying about the welfare of more deserving people

That you are busy worrying about the welfare of deserving people is truly noble and worthwile, people that look after and care for the needy are unsung heroes.
As for the ‘silent’ 96, I cant speak for them, we can only hope that they truly deserve to be there. If they are 80 years old, with failing health and have served a reasonable time proportionate to their crime, and pose no threat to the public given the nature of their recorded crime (in my opinion a paedophile can still be dangerous at this age, even if infirm) then they to should be released. The fact that 96 people passed away whilst in prison, does not I’m afraid give the whole picture, what were their crimes?, what ages are they?, (people can die at any age for many different reasons), are we talking about ‘lifers’ the Brady’s, Hindley’s and Peter Sutcliffe’s? We can digress and study the bigger picture, but for the sake of simplicity, this thread focuses on 1 individual, whose crimes, history and current status are well documented and known.
Does he deserve all the public attention and notoriety? Probably not.
Does he deserve to be made a scapegoat by this government’s justice secretary? No.
Does he deserve to be made to serve a sentence greater than handed down to Murderers, Paedophiles, and the like? No.
Should he be ‘released’ into the care of the hospital and allowed to spend his final days, weeks or months as a ‘free’ man that has done his time? In my opinion, DEFINITELY!

 

[glojo]

That you are busy worrying about the welfare of deserving people is truly noble and worthwile, people that look after and care for the needy are unsung heroes.
As for the ‘silent’ 96, I cant speak for them, we can only hope that they truly deserve to be there. If they are 80 years old, with failing health and have served a reasonable time proportionate to their crime, and pose no threat to the public given the nature of their recorded crime (in my opinion a paedophile can still be dangerous at this age, even if infirm) then they to should be released. The fact that 96 people passed away whilst in prison, does not I’m afraid give the whole picture, what were their crimes?, what ages are they?, (people can die at any age for many different reasons), are we talking about ‘lifers’ the Brady’s, Hindley’s and Peter Sutcliffe’s? We can digress and study the bigger picture, but for the sake of simplicity, this thread focuses on 1 individual, whose crimes, history and current status are well documented and known.
Does he deserve all the public attention and notoriety? Probably not.
Does he deserve to be made a scapegoat by this government’s justice secretary? No.
Does he deserve to be made to serve a sentence greater than handed down to Murderers, Paedophiles, and the like? No.
Should he be ‘released’ into the care of the hospital and allowed to spend his final days, weeks or months as a ‘free’ man that has done his time, in my opinion, DEFINITLY!

I keep asking does this person deserve special treatment? Does he deserve to be given all this publicity? Quite clearly none of those that are crying for his release care two jots for any other sick or dying prisoner. They are solely interested in this one person. WHY?

I do not give one jot for those that die in prison.. They are in prison and that is their choice, I am saying it looks like crocodile tears when folks are shouting about Biggs but do not care for anyone else why, why are they so obsessedwith one individual.

No doubt some of those that dies will be the dregs of society... They are not in prison for being nice people, but are they more guilty than Biggs?

 

[Apial]

Ask Jack Straw why he is given special treatment. The Parole Board were over-ruled by him. Politicians should not meddle with the judicial process for there own political purposes. Anybody else under similar circumsatances would have been released.

 

[andy_k]

Anybody else under similar circumsatances would have been released.

what similar circumstances would these be?


a member of one of the most violent and active gangs of the time
took part in the biggest robbery in British history
escaped and went on the run living a very public lifestyle for 35 years
came back to 'finish' his sentence only when his health had deteriorated

yeah, lots of people fit that description

 

[steptoe]

Ask Jack Straw why he is given special treatment. The Parole Board were over-ruled by him. Politicians should not meddle with the judicial process for there own political purposes. Anybody else under similar circumsatances would have been released.

Strange that last year in an interview Jack Straw was asked about parole for Biggs and he replied he didn't have a problem with him having parole.

This latest decision is political and nothing to do with judical process. Along with the sentances passed in the first place.

Ernest Saunders fiddles millions, gets a long prison sentance and is then released after serving two years because of the onset of ahlziemers.
Upon his release he makes a miraculous recovery, and is now on the after dinner circuit giving talks - How's that for a perfect example of celebrity and showing remorse.

 

[LTD]

If Biggs served his sentence as intended and showed remorse at his parole hearing then he would no doubt have been a free man long ago.

He decided to go along a different route and enjoy the fruits of his ill-gotten gains without a second thought.

He took the silver coin from Judas and drank from the poisoned chalice.

I'd rather see the money spent on treating Biggs go to a tax-payer or their dependent who needs dialysis or some other costly medical treatment that is provided for by the people in society that actually pay NI contributions.

Biggs is no more than a parasite leaching until his dying day.

 

[Colin_b]

I keep asking does this person deserve special treatment? Does he deserve to be given all this publicity? Quite clearly none of those that are crying for his release care two jots for any other sick or dying prisoner. They are solely interested in this one person. WHY?

I do not give one jot for those that die in prison.. They are in prison and that is their choice, I am saying it looks like crocodile tears when folks are shouting about Biggs but do not care for anyone else why, why are they so obsessedwith one individual.

No doubt some of those that dies will be the dregs of society... They are not in prison for being nice people, but are they more guilty than Biggs?

To answer your questions, well some of them.... Biggs doesn't deserve special treatment, but the press have latched to to a combination of things to elevate him.

The reason that Biggs is mentioned is he is the subject of the thread, so it tends to focus on him and that robbery.

On the 96 that died in prison, I would make one distinction - did they deliberately kill someone? Yes, they can rot in prison, I'm with you there.

If they didn't, and are incapable of presenting any threat to society and in poor health, I see no reason to spend good money in keeping them in prison ( be that Biggs or anyone else)

If you look at the prison service statement of purpose
HM Prison Service - Statement of Purpose

"Providing safe and well-ordered establishments in which we treat prisoners humanely, decently and lawfully." is an objective.

The confinement of people incapable of looking after themselves (again, Biggs or any other prisoner) due to severe physical or mental distress may well be legal, but I'm not convinced the Prison service is the appropriate route for the "humane and decent", part. Their job is locking people up, not providing specialist medical care.

 

[Mark300SL]

Ernest Saunders fiddles millions, gets a long prison sentance and is then released after serving two years because of the onset of ahlziemers.
Upon his release he makes a miraculous recovery, and is now on the after dinner circuit giving talks - How's that for a perfect example of a celebrity and showing remorse.

Once bitten ........... ?

Maybe that is one of the reasons he wont be released - IF he does die in prison at least any miraculous recovery can't be used to embarass the British government in the same fashion that he did last time

 

[Apial]

what similar circumstances would these be?


a member of one of the most violent and active gangs of the time
took part in the biggest robbery in British history
escaped and went on the run living a very public lifestyle for 35 years
came back to 'finish' his sentence only when his health had deteriorated

yeah, lots of people fit that description

Similar circumstances? The Parole Board recommended his release of course!

 

[Apial]

I wonder how fair it is when comparing Bigg's case to Jeffrey Archer's? Mr Archer was treated in a completely different manner. The amount of money involved was much larger. Yet Mr Archer spent his time not in the operating theatre, but at the other theatre, The Theatre Royal, Lincoln.

Just to remind you, the following is from Wikipedia:

"Perjury and downfall
Archer had been selected by the Conservative Party as candidate for the London mayoral election of 2000. He was forced to withdraw when it was revealed that he was facing a charge of perjury.[15]

In November 1999 Ted Francis, a friend (who claimed Archer owed him money) and Archer's former personal assistant Angela Peppiatt claimed he had fabricated an alibi in the 1987 trial. They were concerned that Archer was standing as Mayor of London and doubted that he was suitable. Peppiatt had kept a diary of Archer's movements, which contradicted evidence given during the 1987 trial. This formed the basis of the case against Archer.[16]

The News of the World published the allegations on 21 November 1999 and Archer withdrew his candidacy the following day. Conservative leader William Hague said "This is the end of politics for Jeffrey Archer. I will not tolerate such behaviour in my party".[17] On 8 October he had described Archer as a candidate of "probity and integrity. I'm going to back him all the way" at the Conservative party conference.

On 4 February 2000 Archer was expelled from the Conservative Party for five years. On 26 September 2000 he was charged with perjury and perverting the course of justice during the 1987 libel trial.[18]

A few months before the beginning of the perjury trial, Archer began in the star role in a courtroom play (which he also wrote) called The Accused. The play was staged at London's Theatre Royal Haymarket and concerned the court trial of an alleged murderer from beginning to end. The play used the technique of assigning the role of jury in the trial to the audience, theatre-goers voting on whether Archer's character was guilty at the end of each performance. Archer would attend his real trial during the day and be judged in his fictional trial in the evening.[19]

The real trial began on 30 May 2001, a month after Monica Coghlan's death. On 19 July 2001, Archer was found guilty of perjury and perverting the course of justice at the 1987 trial. He was sentenced to four years' imprisonment by Mr Justice Potts. Archer never spoke during the trial, though his wife Mary again gave evidence as she had done during the 1987 trial. Ted Francis was found not guilty of perverting the course of justice. Archer's mother died on 11 July 2001 aged 87, and he was released for the day on 21 July to attend the funeral.[20]

Archer was sent to Belmarsh Prison, but was moved to the category "C" Wayland Prison in Norfolk on 9 August 2001, and to HMP North Sea Camp, an open prison in October 2001. From there he was let out to work at the Theatre Royal in Lincoln, England, and was allowed occasional home visits. Reports in the media claimed he had been abusing this privilege by attending lunches with friends, including former Education Secretary Gillian Shephard and in September 2002 he was transferred to Lincoln Prison for a month. While in prison, he wrote the three-volume memoir A Prison Diary. During his time in prison, he was visited by a number of high-profile friends, including the actor Donald Sinden[21] and the performer Barry Humphries.[22][23]

In October 2002 Archer repaid the Daily Star the £500,000 damages he had received in 1987, as well as legal costs and interest of £1.3 million.[24] That month, he was suspended from Marylebone Cricket Club for seven years.[25]

On 21 July 2003 he was released on licence, after serving half of his sentence, from HMP Hollesley Bay, Suffolk.[26]"

 

[Dryce]

I wonder how fair it is when comparing Bigg's case to Jeffrey Archer's? Mr Archer was treated in a completely different manner. The amount of money involved was much larger.

I'm trying hard to find something worth comparing between these two cases?

Perjurer vs. violent robber.

One paid back monies vs. one who went on the run and thumbed nose up at UK authorities

And as for the sums involved there were two decades of massive inflation between their respective crimes.

Biggs should have had his citizenship stripped and not been allowed back in to the country. Then we wouldn't have this waste of bandwidth discussing him.

 

[Colin_b]

Then we wouldn't have this waste of bandwidth discussing him.

Seems to me that

a) This thread is about Biggs, yes, but also about the criminal justice system and how it works, and about history. I've found it interesting, with a lot of different views.

b) If its a waste of bandwidth, why contribute to that waste? I'd venture it isn't a waste, compared to some threads, and wouldn't rate your contribution as a waste.

 

[glojo]

Seems to me that

a) This thread is about Biggs, yes, but also about the criminal justice system and how it works, and about history. I've found it interesting, with a lot of different views.

b) If its a waste of bandwidth, why contribute to that waste? I'd venture it isn't a waste, compared to some threads, and wouldn't rate your contribution as a waste.

I agree,
My observationon this is that whilst Biggs is in hospital, heshould be released on licence and if he ever gets well enough to leave hospital then the licence should be revoked.

I am wondering if there are exceptional reasons why this is not being done?

 

[Mudster]

I guess this comes down to a question of human rights.

I've always felt that if you choose to break the law and are aware of the consequences of doing so then I question what right you have to bleat about your human rights?

By default, (in my opinion of course) by knowingly commiting a crime you are choosing to waive at least a reasonable proportion of your human rights.