Allowing prisoners to extract retibution on other prisoners, whatever they have done, is wrong.
I agree with you in part ? it doesn?t seem very civilised to let a mob sort out a prisoner who has been tried, convicted and sentenced by his peers?
?yet all too often ?justice? seems unfairly lenient and I for one am all for certain classes of criminals receiving ?additional? punishment at the hands of their colleagues.
The 'problem' of undue leniency keeps rearing its head in high profile case but the judges are also under extreme pressure to give light sentences in line with government diktats. The real problem is IMHO the executive involves itself in the judiciary far too much to serve proper justice.
Maybe we have reached the point where juries should have the power not only to convict but also to impose or at least recommend sentence because it is they that have decided the level of guilt and accountability.
Angela Cannings et al were not so much victims of their fellow prisoners as victims of the flawed justice that allowed them to go to prison in the first place. Whenever a person goes to prison for something they did not do then clearly the law had proved something that had not happened. In the light of so many successful appeals these days, I am not convinced that people are really getting a fair legal trial, rather I strongly suspect the fiddling hands of the politicians muddying the waters and - even - perverting justice.
Thirty years ago I would never have dreamed of accusing the government of such practice. But then I was very naive in the way people handle their power.
