General Chat

Yes,it is Keith,I agree but hanging is not the way forward.
In my opinion and the opinions of a lot more people too,too many innocent men and women went to their deaths innocent or wrongly sentenced.

All killing is barbaric killing an Innocent child is is barbaric

That's a whole different debate Dermot and nothing to do with prisoners voting or not.

They lost any rights when they killed an Innocent child!

Hanging will never come back,I for one am glad about that,hanging is barbaric and should stay In our History!

I say hang him....by the goolies...then let me at him.

let him have the right to vote



if we can have a vote on hanging

It's when you live in a country where Human Rights are ignored you realize the need for them, which has little to do with this case, most countries including many with Human Rights laws much broader than the UK's do not allow prisoners to vote, the right to vote being seen as something reserved for those citizens who do not break the law

I wonder who,s paying the costs involved in this case? or is the Legal Eagle concerned doing it for free? **M**.

It's a shame that many who are not in prison don't bother to vote.

I believe that no person serving a prison sentence should have voting rights... this is part of the forfeit they have to make for committing the crimes. As has been said, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime!!

I don't really much care what the Human Rights thingy says on this... this Act was sneaked in through the back door, and ratified, by our politicians, and the media barely mentioned it... probably far too interested in the antics of some reality character at the time.... so if I won the lottery big time, I would set up a fund to challenge the legality of the introduction of this Act.... see if it could be overturned, or significantly reduced.

And make sure that not one prisoner has the right to vote..... oh, and I would extend that to people out on remand (not those who are out on bail pending trial... they are innocent until proven otherwise) or license. They have to prove that they can *go straight*!!

Love

Daff xxxx

ps... I'd take away all their other privileges, too... more money for food per prisoner is allocated, than is allocated for patients in hospitals, and people living in residential homes... so I'd bring the latter up a bit, and reduce the former... no telly, or video except in the library or educational centres...

Love (again!) Daff xxxx

I don't agree with capital punishment Joy but I I think voting is a privilege that people in prison don't deserve.

this animal doesn't deserve to live let alone vote

I tend to agree with you TW. Will they say freedom violates their human rights next?

Also, as you say, what about the victim?

We seem to be going through strange times at present.

In my view, if you commit a crime and you are imprisoned for it, then you are removed from society. The right to vote is part of society, and if you are removed from society you lose your right to vote.

Tough luck on him, he deserves to have that right, and others, removed. He removed that child's right to LIVE!

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

A convicted child killer is to take the Government to court over its refusal to let him vote.

Peter Chester, 54, was jailed for life in the 1978 for raping and strangling his seven-year-old niece Donna Marie Gillbanks, in her bed in Blackpool.

He was ordered to serve a minimum of 20 years at Wakefield prison, but has now been behind bars for 12 years longer than his tariff, having been repeatedly turned down for release.

He is now challenging the law that bans serving prisoners in the UK from taking part in elections, claiming it violates his human rights.

Serving prisoners are banned from voting under the Representation of the People Act, 1969, but legislation forfeiting prisoner's right to take part in elections stretched back as far as 1876.

Chester, also known as Peter Chester Speakman, has filed a claim against Wakefield council and Secretary of State for Justice Jack Straw, which is due to be heard by the High Court in London in October.

He claims that the statutes preventing him from voting conflict with the Human Rights Act, by preventing him from taking part in free and fair elections.

Chester's lawyer, Marcus Farrar said he should be able to vote as he has served the punitive part of his sentence. Mr Farrar told the Yorkshire Post that Chester was "hopeful of voting in an election some time."

But June Gillbanks, Donna Marie's mother said the killer gave up any rights he had when he murdered her daughter. "I think prisoners have enough rights and victims very little," she told the Yorkshire Post. "The scales of justice are balanced more towards murderers."

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: "We can't comment on ongoing court proceedings."

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20090711/tuk-child-killer-demands-right-to-vote-6323e80.html

Do you agree that it violates his Human Rights?

Do you think he should have the right to vote from prison or do you think it is part of his punishment?