OK, this is a UK law issue, but it’s something that’s been bugging me for quite a while, and it’s this. Does the government (in the shape of the Home Secretary, in this case) have the right to alter sentences based on public opinion?
The two specific cases are
-
The Jamie Bolger case.
Two kids kill another, younger kid. Massive media furore over this, hysterical ranting. Judge passes sentence. People complain bitterly that these kid will be free when they’re in their twenties. Home secretary doubles sentences. (Case is currently in European Court of Human Rights, if I recall correctly.) -
Myra Hindly. Very nasty, multiple murder case - children are again involved. Sentenced to life - Home Secretary intervenes (based on public opinion again) and basically ensures she will never be free again.
Now I’m not discussing the pros and cons of these sentences - what I want to know is if you think it’s right that politicians should alter a judge’s decision based on public opinion? In a country where the Prime Minister discusses in Parliament the fate of a soap character wrongfully accused of fraud, does public opinion (King Mob, if you will) have far too much sway?
Luther Blisset is Everyman.
So Smile.