They’ll be on parole for life if released after the minimum sentence and there’s no guarantee they get released after the minimum sentence but the burden of proof would then be on them still being a risk, there’s a handful of prisoners (maybe most famously Charles Bronson) who never get released
In the UK we have minimum terms. Basically the life sentence stands and if released on parole (after the minimum term) then they will be on licence which means they can be returned to prison at any time if it is believed they present a danger in general or break the terms of their licence, without trial.
We do have whole life terms but they are reserved for the most serious murders, such as serial killers
I know it’s an official govt link you’ve provided, but it’s a little misleading. I think in this case the 20 / 22 years is the minimum they will serve.
When a judge passes a life sentence, they must specify the minimum term an offender must spend in prison before becoming eligible to apply for parole (sometimes called the tariff).
It seems the life part means they can’t be put back in prison for life. That’s how I read it. I’m not overly familiar with UK law and that seems to be the difference
They’ll be on license for life, which means if they break the terms of their release (parole) they can be returned to prison.
If released, an offender serving a life sentence will remain on licence for the rest of their life. If they are ever thought to be a risk to the public they could be recalled to prison. They do not need to have committed another offence in order to be recalled.
Murder is murder and this was clearly premeditated, with 3 other potential victims mentioned. However 15 and 16 is relatively young, and 20 years is longer than they’ve both been alive. Maybe people change, maybe they don’t.
22 and 20 years, not sure where “life sentences” came from
UK law is different
They’ll be on parole for life if released after the minimum sentence and there’s no guarantee they get released after the minimum sentence but the burden of proof would then be on them still being a risk, there’s a handful of prisoners (maybe most famously Charles Bronson) who never get released
In the UK we have minimum terms. Basically the life sentence stands and if released on parole (after the minimum term) then they will be on licence which means they can be returned to prison at any time if it is believed they present a danger in general or break the terms of their licence, without trial.
We do have whole life terms but they are reserved for the most serious murders, such as serial killers
https://www.gov.uk/types-of-prison-sentence/life-sentences#:~:text=If you’re found guilty,the rest of your life.
I know it’s an official govt link you’ve provided, but it’s a little misleading. I think in this case the 20 / 22 years is the minimum they will serve.
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/sentencing-and-the-council/types-of-sentence/life-sentences/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_imprisonment_in_England_and_Wales
It seems the life part means they can’t be put back in prison for life. That’s how I read it. I’m not overly familiar with UK law and that seems to be the difference
They’ll be on license for life, which means if they break the terms of their release (parole) they can be returned to prison.
That’s very different about the American system. I’m all for reform but I worry about people who murder.
Murder is murder and this was clearly premeditated, with 3 other potential victims mentioned. However 15 and 16 is relatively young, and 20 years is longer than they’ve both been alive. Maybe people change, maybe they don’t.