You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Not really, stabbings in London are a daily occurrence, why should the latest one deserve a multi-page thread? Any particular reason?
A daily occurrence? You don’t think that deserves a thread? Wow! I would have thought you’d be all over that.
It’s a daily occurrence across a fair part of the country, particularly in my part, but I’m not entirely sure what a thread about it would actually accomplish, because it’s not easy to explain quite why it’s happening. There have been stabbings resulting in death in Swindon, Bath, Bristol and other towns around the South West, some involving young teens, some adults, some victims seem to have been complete strangers, others known to the perpetrator/s. Some are clearly family members. Knives are a readily available weapon, guns aren’t, thankfully.
It was on the news recently where a car was stopped by the police, none of the occupants had licences, and they had weapons like machetes, large knives, etc, none of which are legal carry. Many of the weapons used though are just household items, like large kitchen knives, taken from their own home or shop-lifted. One murder of a teenager in Bath involved a bunch of kids from Corsham, who caught a bus to Bath to a party, and CCTV from the bus showed one of them showing the knife to their friends, they were carrying it down the front of their traccy bottoms! A dangerous thing to do just by itself. The usual excuse is ‘it’s for protection’…
And it's not a 'problem' now. I think a few people are wondering why a nonfatal stabbing in London yesterday might be worthy of a multi page thread something which you appear unable to explain, despite suggesting it.
The other mystery is what has it got to do with rioting in UK cities? You seem to resent the fact that there is no thread on a recent stabbing in London on the grounds, it would appear, that there is one on rioting.
There is an obvious interest in the recent rioting because riots in UK cities are fairly unusual. In contrast stabbings in major UK cities are not.
I’m trying to understand how if every year this carnival needs thousands to police, always ends in violence and stabbing is allowed to happen every year. I would have thought it would be banned in the grounds of public safety by now.
A daily occurrence? You don’t think that deserves a thread?
Just a wild stab in the dark here, but I'm guessing ernie was querying why each individual stabbing should have its own thread.
I’m trying to understand how if every year this carnival needs thousands to police,
You could apply that logic to pretty much every major football match in the country. The reality is for such a big event there relatively little trouble, to be honest there would probably have been a stabbing in the area this weekend regardless of whether the carnival was on.
The reality is for such a big event there relatively little trouble
Sunday:
Monday:
How does that ^^ compare to Glastonbury?
Glastonbury has considerably more crime than the average for Somerset. Ban Glastonbury?
How does that compare with a normal weekend in Brixton?
Try again.
According to a July 2024 Somerset County Gazette article, the 2024 Glastonbury Festival saw 121 offenses reported to the police between June 26 and July 1, which is considered "very safe". The offenses included:
Burglary: 1
Criminal damage: 3
Crime-related incidents: 27
Drug offenses: 19
Fraud: 4
Public order offenses: 7
Robbery: 1
Sexual offenses: 2
Theft: 26
Vehicle offenses: 1
Violence against a person: 30
How does that compare with a normal weekend in Brixton?
Right. So we're moving the goal posts?
The reality is that most people don't care about black on black crime, same with war in Africa, they're not the chosen demographic of the white knights of STW.
Well this is 5 years old so I guess things might have changed :
Arrest rates at Notting Hill over three years since 2016 are almost identical to Glastonbury when the number of people attending is taken into account.
- There were 3.76 arrests per 10,000 people at Notting Hill Carnival compared to 3.1 arrests per 10,000 people at Glastonbury.
This is interesting too :
“It is the only festival, the only event the Met do where they automatically put out the crime stats,”
So anyway.......... Notting Hill is just like a hate-fueled riot?
The reality is that most people don’t care about black on black crime
Who's reality is that?
I’m trying to understand how if every year this carnival needs thousands to police, always ends in violence and stabbing is allowed to happen every year. I would have thought it would be banned in the grounds of public safety by now.
Wait until you find out how many football matches there are each Saturday and the policing required at a national level...
I’m trying to understand how if every year this carnival needs thousands to police, always ends in violence and stabbing is allowed to happen every year. I would have thought it would be banned in the grounds of public safety by now.
To our resident 'edgelord'/'racist' (delete as applicable) you seem to have issue with certain events, but not others. Why is that?
Just a note on refugees not stopping at the first safe country - your house has been bombed. Is your immediate thought, oh I must get my passport out before I leave the building?
If you had family in Japan & spoke Japanese, would you get to Russia & think phew job done, or would you continue to Japan?
Tory politician's wife jailed for race hate post
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp3wkzgpjxvo
That's a hefty sentence.
I'm lovin how judging by their name the prosecution doesn't sound very Anglo-Saxon, that must have added to her pain.
I'm mindful as the perpetrator is sentenced, that these events are very rare. That in terms of death toll and suffering, there are sadly many, many events that eclipse it, happening all the time. But still. It is utterly grim and almost beyond belief that someone could choose to do what he did. That an individual's upbringing, environment, mental health issues or whatever could lead to them deciding to act in this way. It's beyond my comprehension, but I kind of want to comprehend - because if we don't, how is there any chance of preventing it?
I am not going to comment on the sentencing other than hoping the families feel some sort of justice has been done. But sentencing an individual, 'tougher controls' on knives, more enquiries which likely won't be acted upon, are pissing in the wind. I don't have any answers, but it seems no one else does either. It is the big societal issues such as poverty, social care, mental health care provision etc, which really need to be fixed if there is any hope. And it's all too difficult, expensive or there is no real will to do it. Instead we get quick fixes doomed to fail and sound bites. Utterly depressing.
The details of the incident revealed today are absolutely harrowing. Beyond grim! How the hell do you end up being capable of doing something like that at 17? In such a calculated and pre-planned manner? It just defies comprehension
The most worrying thing about all of it is that his behaviour was flagged up to the authorities on multiple occasions, from the age of 13 onwards, yet absolutely nothing was done.
Once again we’ll be told ‘lessons will be learned’, but they never ever seem to be, do they?
Once again we’ll be told ‘lessons will be learned’, but they never ever seem to be, do they?
Nope. I cringe whenever that phrase is trotted out. It's value is on a par with 'thoughts and prayers' 🙁
The thing that stood out for me about his background was the racism he received at school. So that may be what started his dark journey. This should be pointed out to the racists trying to gain traction from his actions.
Once again we’ll be told ‘lessons will be learned’, but they never ever seem to be, do they?
And yet under the last government the youth services, youth justice, education and youth mental health were all hollowed out under budget cuts.
While I can't say with any kind of certainty that this is the issue here, it's surely got to be a factor?
We reap what we voted for.
The thing that stood out for me about his background was the racism he received at school.
There are no excuses for his behaviour. So trying to make excuses for him.
I it’s a shame he couldn’t be tried as an adult and given a whole life sentence. He will be released before he is 45 if he behaves.
but I kind of want to comprehend – because if we don’t, how is there any chance of preventing it?
I am not sure that it is possible to comprehend but I am sadly absolutely certain no society can guarantee that such cases of extreme evil, or whatever you want to call it, will never happen.
Obviously you can take steps to reduce the possibility but I cannot see how you can remove all risks of it happening. Thankfully such extreme cases are extraordinarily rare.
There are no excuses for his behaviour. So [stop] trying to make excuses for him.
Well that didn't take long. Do you honestly believe that anyone is trying to make "excuses" for his behaviour?
There will definitely be reasons for his behaviour because there is a reason for everything.
There are no excuses for his behaviour.
No one is doing that. FFS!
I it’s a shame he couldn’t be tried as an adult and given a whole life sentence. He will be released before he is 45 if he behaves
No, he wont. Minimum term set at 52 years, so he'll be 70.
I am not sure that it is possible to comprehend but I am sadly absolutely certain no society can guarantee that such cases of extreme evil, or whatever you want to call it, will never happen.
Yup he seems to fall through the gaps.
Not mentally ill so cant be sectioned.
Doesnt really fit Prevents remit since they are for tackling ideologies and preventing people becoming terrorists in the cause of that ideology vs someone who just wanted to kill.
Could have been jailed for the knife offences but question is how many other kids get similar treatment and what happens if they are all jailed.
If social services etc erred on the side of caution we would soon have the heil and co publishing articles about how kids are being locked up for thought crimes.
Once again we’ll be told ‘lessons will be learned’, but they never ever seem to be, do they?
Basically, that is code for, give it a couple of weeks and this will all but be forgotton *
* obviously not by those closely linked to it, those poor souls will live with what happened for the rest of their lives
Of course it won't be forgotten in a couple of weeks time. It will remain in the public mind for decades to come. Just like Ian Brady, Peter Sutcliff, Jon Venables, Ian Huntley, etc. and the Dunblane and Hungerford Massacres have.
Stuff like that haunts society indefinitely precisely because it is horrific beyond comprehension.
The problem with "lessons learned" is that they're all superficial window dressing rather than fundamental change.
In healthcare, it's always that various agencies should have talked to each other, and the onus is then put on individuals to do so, sometimes on pain of legal consequences.
The problem isn't individuals, it's friction in an under-resourced system and opportunity cost. If I spend forty-five minutes on the phone to social services, then that time has to be found from somewhere. I'm even less likely to spend the time if I know that it is going to be fruitless, which it often is.
Politicians of all ilks are fixated on the idea that you can effectively identify high risk individuals and intervene. You can't, there are just too many of them around, and fortunately the vast majority of them don't go on to do very much, and we don't have any effective tools to identify those who do.
And yet under the last government the youth services, youth justice, education and youth mental health were all hollowed out under budget cuts.
I think is a big factor. Lack of resources - time and money - must have been a factor when he was flagged up.
Access to knives is an impossible situation, as every house has some.
Starmer talking of changing the definition of terrorism is bollocks. To my untrained eye, this was a mental health problem not a terrorist problem.
The key factor is how far do we, as a free country where you are innocent until proven guilty, identify and deal with people showing the warning signs he did. How much of our freedom are we prepared to give up to allow the surveillance and potential incarceration of people who haven't quite met the criminal/psychological threshold?
As a parent I'm horrified by this case, but do I want to risk the tiny chance my kids will be caught up in something similar if it means they live in a less "free" world, where over reach by the authorities could be abused? I don't know.
And, to further put it in context, are we having a public enquiry to find out how the state failed to protect all those killed and seriously injured in road collisions? No, we're not.
I don't pretend to have the answer, it's way too complicated. I suspect that there isn't one.
Starmer talking of changing the definition of terrorism is bollocks. To my untrained eye, this was a mental health problem not a terrorist problem.
The detective who led the criminal investigation is clear that there is no evidence Rudakubana was motivated by ideology. According to a Guardian report :
But he added that there was nothing in the more-than 160,000 documents seized from Rudakabana’s devices that suggested he had any coherent religious, political or ideological motive.
It would actually have made it easier for the police if they had been able to declare it a terrorist incident as it would have given them more time to carry out their investigations.
However there was nothing to suggest an ideological motive or angle, just an extremely unhealthy obsession with all forms of violence apparently. And if Starmer wants to back the inevitable knee-jerk reaction that there "must" be a terrorist angle to the truly horrific murders then he is playing straight into the hands of Nigel Farage, Yaxley-Lennon, and all the others who want to exploit this tragic event for their own agenda.
He will be released before he is 45 if he behaves.
That's the "feeling" out there at the moment, isn't it. Hence all the chatter about undue leniency. The "fact" is he not able to be considered for release before he's in his last days of being 69. That's the law. Realistically, even if he's a changed man by that point, the process means he'll be well into his 70s when released... and if not rehabilitated, he's never getting out.
He will be released before he is 45 if he behaves.
As others have said it's a minimum of 52 years before he's considered for parole.
It's very likely he will die in prison as not many people have ever survived such long sentences. Despite what the Daily Mail claims, the UK prison system is not a pleasant environment and average life expectancy is significantly reduced when inside. Be it violence, suicide or just poor health.
He will be released before he is 45 if he behaves
Jeez. Go and do some simple reading of the news and stop embarrassing yourself.
It’s very likely he will die in prison as not many people have ever survived such long sentences.
Makes you wonder what the point is of keeping him in prison with all the complexity and expense involved with no hope of rehabilitation. I suppose he'll make a good case study for criminologists and psychologists to research for years to come but after that what's the point?
Will he be segregated from the main prison population? I suppose his incarceration might have been easier for him if he had claimed to have acted in the name of some ideology or other. If there were others from the same mindset there who could 'claim' him and look out for him. But having (seemingly) committed acts of extreme violence on children with no ideological motivation, surely he's at risk from other inmates? Or will there be some kind of psychological assessment which puts him in a Broadmoor style secure facility?
some simple reading
A good place to start would be the "Indeterminate sentences" section here : https://prisonreformtrust.org.uk/adviceguide/understanding-your-sentence/
what’s the point?
Public safety. This kind of sentence isn't just about penalising the criminal.
Makes you wonder what the point is of keeping him in prison with all the complexity and expense involved with no hope of rehabilitation.
To stop him killing people? I suppose that execution would also achieve that but the UK along with most other countries no longer see executing people, however horrific their crimes, as acceptable.
Makes you wonder what the point is of keeping him in prison with all the complexity and expense involved with no hope of rehabilitation.
Public protection for starters. Chances of him committing more violent acts? Pretty high I reckon.
To stop him killing people?
Obviously I'm not talking about releasing him.
I suppose that execution would also achieve that
Yes that's what I'm referring to. We don't need to rehash all the arguments about capital punishment as we all know them, but in clearcut cases like this what's the point in keeping him alive in prison long after we're all dead when there's nothing to be gained by it?
Because killing solves nothing?
Well it solves the problem of him being alive and fed and housed by the state for 60+ years at great expense. Just my opinion but in cases like these I'd leave his fate to the families and victims to decide. Pretty sure I know what I would want if I was in that position.
It's cheaper to incarcerate than execute, personally I have no problem with him living a long life with no freedom.
Well it solves the problem of him being alive and being fed and housed by the state at great expense.
Vote Reform. You seem aligned with them on this. Which surprises me.
It’s cheaper to incarcerate than execute
I'd like to see your working on that one.
Vote Reform. You seem aligned with them on this.
Oh give over. I'm not arguing for capital punishment to be brought back, just trying to be honest on what the point is in keeping him in prison for the best part of a century when he'll never be released or rehabbed. Also trying to be honest about what I would want if it was one of my kids.
It's all probably academic anyway. He'll kill himself or be killed by someone else as soon as he's out of solitary confinement.
just trying to be honest on what the point is in keeping him in prison for the best part of a century when he’ll never be released or rehabbed
Well if you accept he can't be released in case he kills again and you're not arguing for a return to capital punishment, haven't you answered your own question? In the absence of those two, what other options are there?
Well if you accept he can’t be released in case he kills again and you’re not arguing for a return to capital punishment
Well maybe I am for very isolated and clear cut cases such as this. LIke I said I'd leave it to the families and victims to decide what to do with him. I guess I don't see the benefit in passing on the problem to future generations. This guy is a product of the society we have constructed so it only feels right for us to deal with him rather than leave it to our kids and grandkids to sort out.
In the absence of those two, what other options are there?
I'm not sure I'd like to go down that rabbit hole. Dump him on an uninhabited island and let nature take its course?
LIke I said I’d leave it to the families and victims to decide what to do with him.
I think they do something like that in Saudi Arabia don't they? Are you really arguing for that? I get it. Honestly at an emotional level in cases like this, I sometimes find myself thinking the same. But objectively when the red mist clears, having emotion and victim desire for vengeance driving the justice system is not a good thing.
Im in 2 minds about this. One is simple economics, this guy is going to cost fortune whilst he is in prison and then more money if and when he is released as it’s not like he is going to be able to get a job assuming he is released whist still close to working age
Equally the death penalty in principle is fine, I have lots of concerns about miscarriages and making sure the conviction is sound so dont think that it can be reintroduced for those reasons. Perhaps there is a middle ground around a reasonable time period to pass to allow for vengeance and emotion to have subsided and for reasonable legal challenges to ensure the conviction is sound? Im not sure
Well maybe I am for very isolated and clear cut cases such as this
this person has killed people which is bad and wrong, so in order to deter others and punish this man for what he did, we're going to kill him.
it doesn't feel like a great argument if i'm honest.whereas locking him up effectively forever at least feels like it's punishment and keeping the public safe from him at the same time at least?
The death penalty is massively more expensive than life time incarceration, up to ten times more, do a quick Google. It's all the additional legal wrangling that puts up the cost.
I am against the death penalty in principle, even in seemingly clear cut cases, where do you draw the line? Then there's the economic argument as above. I'm happy for this individual to rot in jail for the rest of his life, in some respects that's a harsher penalty than death, all those years with no hope of release.
I'll say it again - execution is more expensive than incarceration. A quick Google finds a ton of studies, here's a precis of one -
There's no justification for the death penalty beyond emotion, I don't think. It occasionally kills the innocent, too, which makes pardons a bit pointless.
Edit - and if we're concerned about the financial aspect, a prisoner can work but a dead person can't.
The cost balance might be different when looking at a child effectively sentenced to spent their whole adult life in jail. But on average, imprisonment is cheaper.
Costs aside, courts should not be sentencing someone to be executed, whether an adult or a child, no matter how evil and damaging their crime... especially not at the whim of those effected by the crime... it completely changes what the criminal justice system is.
Equally the death penalty in principle is fine
I don't think it is fine.
LIke I said I’d leave it to the families and victims to decide what to do with him
Nor is this.
We have a perfectly sensible legal system and in this case the maximum available sentence has quite rightly been handed down. As has been suggested earlier I suspect Rudakubana may be heading for an institution like Broadmoor.
One is simple economics, this guy is going to cost fortune whilst he is in prison
Even if there were an argument for capital punishment as a cost saving measure (which from the evidence linked above there isn't), it's a very bleak moral position to take. One with sinister implications for other vulnerable people whose needs are a net cost to society.
In reality with what's going to happen to him in prison the death penalty is probably more humane in a weird way. Every meal he eats will likely have poo or pee in whilst in solitary and that will be the least of his issues. Someone I know has just been released from prison, one of the last things he saw was a convicted peadophile being held down and having a kettle of boiling water poured over his face before being cut with a homemade knife from chin to forehead. My "friend" is a big unit of a guy and a good amateur boxer and was scared in prison most of the time. I can't imagine underpaid harassed prison guards rushing to save the guy. Not nice but reality.
Offenders like this are likely influenced by how brutalised they feel living in their society.
Executing offenders only adds to the brutality of a society. See America.
There's always going to be someone who does something like this, all we can do is minimise how often it happens and the more people feel part of society the less often it will. Again, see American school shooting etc.
People aren't born evil, but very, very occasionally they will try to think of the most evil thing they can do, then do it.
I have no problem with a lifetime sentence for offenders like this, it should be available to judges in extreme cases.
I’ll say it again – execution is more expensive than incarceration.
That is because they are not doing it very well. The minimum 52 years will cost £2.2MM (ignoring inflation)
Execution should only be used for special cases, such as this one, and not as a deterrent as he wasn't thinking about deterrents. There is simply no point in keeping someone alive in prison for 60 years. Even if he becomes a model citizen after 50 years he has really already blown it with his actions.
I am using liberally minded with offenders, second chance and so on but some cases really don't deserve that.
Dump him on an uninhabited island and let nature take its course?
we tried that, their descendants come back and beat us at cricket
In reality with what’s going to happen to him in prison the death penalty is probably more humane in a weird way.
Someone with a knowledge of the prison system pointed out that he’s now the undisputed number one target on the hit list of the entire UK prison population and every terrifying lunatic is going to gunning to see who can get to him first.
For someone who has been repeatedly described as being ‘obsessed with violence’, he’s going to be spending the rest of his life being educated in it by some of its most enthusiastic exponents
By being more efficient and having better/tighter laws around it bringing the cost down to under £2.2MM (ignoring inflation which is clearly considerable over 52 years)
Oh give over. I’m not arguing for capital punishment to be brought back, just trying to be honest on what the point is in keeping him in prison for the best part of a century when he’ll never be released or rehabbed.
Yes you are arguing for capital punishment to be brought back, unless you believe that he should be illegally executed, or maybe just have his food stopped?
Otherwise how do you propose "not keeping him in prison for the best part of a century"?
I think this argument was mostly settled globally last century. Only 27% of the world's countries still have capital punishment on their statute books, about 55, and generally they tend to be not very nice countries - which also have a poor record on respecting basic human rights. And out of those 55 countries only about 10 regularly execute people.
I am surprised that it is still even a topic of discussion in 2025 in a Europe. The only European which still has capital punishment is Belarus. Perhaps we should also be discussing the pros and cons of 'trial by ordeal' to establish someone's guilt or innocence, if we are going to look for solutions from the Dark Ages?
By being more efficient
Tesco value rope and last meal requests limited to "what flavour crisps"?
A quick Google finds a ton of studies, here’s a precis of one
They are American studies with a very different economic model for both the lawyers, courts and prison system.
The average cost of an average prisoner in the U.K. was £51724 per year in 22/23. That’s £2.7m with no inflation from 22/23 costs and he will cost more than the average prisoner
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1202172/cost-per-prisoner-england-and-wales/
Tesco value rope and last meal requests limited to “what flavour crisps”?
Your representation when appealing your place on death row...
They are American studies with a very different economic model for both the lawyers, courts and prison system.
When I find a UK study on the UK model of capitsl punishment, I'll let you know.
The average cost of an average prisoner in the U.K. was £51724 per year in 22/23. That’s £2.7m with no inflation from 22/23 costs and he will cost more than the average prisoner
And what?
I am genuinely gobsmacked that people on here would make the argument that judicial killing is better than incarceration, because <checks notes> "it's cheaper" 🙁
Spare us your thoughts on state funding of social care for vulnerable adults, children at risk, the elderly.
People saying it's for x y and z, but seems to be not mentioning they don't get to choose how it's used.
Spare us your thoughts on state funding of social care for vulnerable adults, children at risk, the elderly.
All of whom would be infinitely more deserving of having huge amounts of taxpayers money spent on them.
And what?
It means with even a conservative estimate for inflation of 2.5% we are going to spend £6m on his prison stay.
I'm loving the mental gymnastics involved in calling for this guy to be killed, and then a few posts later claiming that you're not calling for a return of the death penalty! Peak internet logic right there!
It means with even a conservative estimate for inflation of 2.5% we are going to spend £6m on his prison stay.
I am actually surprised that it costs as little as £1k a week to keep someone in a maximum security prison, it sounds like a small price to pay to help keep the public safe. costs more than that to employ 1 police officer.
But be that as it may if you add up all the costs of keeping the 65 individuals currently serving whole life tariffs in UK prisons that's a fair wad of cash *strokes chin*
All of whom would be infinitely more deserving of having huge amounts of taxpayers money spent on them.
The trouble is, once you've set the moral precedent of saying it's too costly to house and feed people at taxpayers expense, some people will try to expand that arguement beyond just prisoners.
Oh give over. I’m not arguing for capital punishment to be brought back, just trying to be honest on what the point is in keeping him in prison for the best part of a century when he’ll never be released or rehabbed.
Still trying to figure out what it is you are arguing for, because it’s clear there’s only one actual option, you just won’t state what it is. Go ahead, don’t be coy, we won’t take you out and stone you.