Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Baby P. Chris Lewis


shindigger

Recommended Posts

0
HOLA441
1
HOLA442
2
HOLA443
Guest X-QUORK

Brings out the latent Daily Mail Reader in me this story. Here's hoping they all get their dropped soap loving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3
HOLA444
They've been jailed for longer than that. The mother and lodger have been jailed indefinitely, and the boyfriend has been jailed for life.

except, that life does not mean life. And indefinitely definitely does not mean that.

the prisons are full - they will be released very quickly - she'll be out in 3 (time served on remand plus she would only have served 5 anyway). His sentences run concurrently.

Then we will pay millions to protect them from the public.

All this horseshit about being sorry - she's only sorry when it comes to sentencing - she pleaded not guilty and maintained she was not guilty till just before the trial (to get the benefits of being a remand prisoner) - she played the system then, she's playing it now too....

The answer is simple, because she's a liar and is saying anything to get her sentence reduced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4
HOLA445
Guest AuntJess
Brings out the latent Daily Mail Reader in me this story. Here's hoping they all get their dropped soap loving.

That's getting off too easy. A pasting with a baseball bat would not go amiss - considering their infamous and sadistic behaviour. :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5
HOLA446
6
HOLA447
Lewis 13 years. Coke running.

Baby torturers and killers. The mother gets 5 years.

Truly outrageous.

im with u on this one, heres what should happen.

Lewis gets a place on the Apprentice for his entrepreneurial skills

baby killers get death sentence via red hot anus poker and starvation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7
HOLA448
except, that life does not mean life. And indefinitely definitely does not mean that.

the prisons are full - they will be released very quickly - she'll be out in 3 (time served on remand plus she would only have served 5 anyway). His sentences run concurrently.

Then we will pay millions to protect them from the public.

I totally disagree with this business of giving crims new identities and protecting them.

Why should the taxpayer pay for this?

It's their problem, they are the one who committed the kind of crime that makes people hate them, they should deal with it themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8
HOLA449
All this horseshit about being sorry - she's only sorry when it comes to sentencing - she pleaded not guilty and maintained she was not guilty till just before the trial (to get the benefits of being a remand prisoner) - she played the system then, she's playing it now too....

The answer is simple, because she's a liar and is saying anything to get her sentence reduced.

yeah and it's funny how it was taken into account as part of the sentencing, when it's patently obvious to anyone with half a brain that she only said it cos her lawyer told her to in order to get a lesser sentence. It stands to reason that someone so utterly cynical cannot truly be sorry.

This sentencing is probably in line with guidelines for those crimes, but that doesn't make it any less of a disgrace IMO. Probably worse is how the boyfriend can only have got 13 years for the crimes he committed against this baby boy.

When they get released, they should be put back into the same house, with no police protection paid for by the taxpayer. I try and remain as liberal as possible but things like this just defy common sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information