What I read earlier says ‘life’ in prison and they’re waiting to see about about parole or early release. From The Guardian
The judge, Mrs Justice Yip, said she would sentence the pair next month, and would decide whether to lift reporting restrictions so that the killers could be named. She told the teenagers that she would have to impose a life sentence but that she needed to adjourn for further reports to decide on the minimum tariff they must serve.
Under the criminal law of England and Wales, a minimum term (formerly “tariff”) is the minimum period that a person serving an indefinite sentence must serve before that person becomes eligible for parole. The sentencing judge bears responsibility for setting the minimum term.
bad angle shot: we’re gonna know who this is when two children who knew Ghey disappear, and the idea that children can just be disappeared by the government without any transparency scares the shit out of me. I really hope they allow these kids and their (well-deserved) fate to be entered into the public record. I understand anonymity to protect people who’ve not been convicted of a crime but now that we know that they gleefully conspired to brutally murder someone just because they thought they could get away with it and wanted to know what it felt like, what are we actually protecting?
Of course people who know these people personally already know who it is. Not releasing the names of minors accused of crimes is standard practice in the US, too. It happens when minors are tried as adults, though, meaning they get sentences that last beyond 18 years of age. I’m not super familiar with UK practices but I’d expect they will release the names for a crime this serious, and since apparently they’re getting decades in prison it doesn’t really matter.
that’s the thing, the article says that at sentencing the judge “would decide whether to lift reporting restrictions so that the killers could be named.”
That implies that people can be arrested, charged, tried, sentenced and imprisoned, potentially for their whole lives, under a veil of secrecy. That’s gross and scary.
Oh, so they might not reveal it even if they are sentenced as adults to life. That’s a good point. And also true that the public could figure it out anyway from people who know the families involved.
that’s what the article seems to imply, and that’s the scary part, but I’m not a lawyer and I’m certainly not a british lawyer so idk if there’s some statute somewhere that says this all becomes public when they reach the age of majority or some other protection in place.
I’m not sure how much of a difference it makes whether the public knows their names. It’s not like their parents aren’t going to know and can’t tell people or lawyers, and they’d be the only ones who could really do anything if it was a shady situation.
What I read earlier says ‘life’ in prison and they’re waiting to see about about parole or early release. From The Guardian
Had to look it up
bad angle shot: we’re gonna know who this is when two children who knew Ghey disappear, and the idea that children can just be disappeared by the government without any transparency scares the shit out of me. I really hope they allow these kids and their (well-deserved) fate to be entered into the public record. I understand anonymity to protect people who’ve not been convicted of a crime but now that we know that they gleefully conspired to brutally murder someone just because they thought they could get away with it and wanted to know what it felt like, what are we actually protecting?
Of course people who know these people personally already know who it is. Not releasing the names of minors accused of crimes is standard practice in the US, too. It happens when minors are tried as adults, though, meaning they get sentences that last beyond 18 years of age. I’m not super familiar with UK practices but I’d expect they will release the names for a crime this serious, and since apparently they’re getting decades in prison it doesn’t really matter.
that’s the thing, the article says that at sentencing the judge “would decide whether to lift reporting restrictions so that the killers could be named.”
That implies that people can be arrested, charged, tried, sentenced and imprisoned, potentially for their whole lives, under a veil of secrecy. That’s gross and scary.
Oh, so they might not reveal it even if they are sentenced as adults to life. That’s a good point. And also true that the public could figure it out anyway from people who know the families involved.
that’s what the article seems to imply, and that’s the scary part, but I’m not a lawyer and I’m certainly not a british lawyer so idk if there’s some statute somewhere that says this all becomes public when they reach the age of majority or some other protection in place.
I’m not sure how much of a difference it makes whether the public knows their names. It’s not like their parents aren’t going to know and can’t tell people or lawyers, and they’d be the only ones who could really do anything if it was a shady situation.