London mayor attacks decision not to challenge release of black-cab rapist

What were the parole board thinking, he should never be released. Two of his victims are crowdfunding a legal challenge against the decision, all the victims have been treated appallingly.

These parole boards need to be more transparent and accountable to the public.

He was ordered to serve 8 years in jail and he served 10, what’s the issue? Why wouldn’t he be released? His sentence may seem lenient but that is his sentence.

If we start to reevaluate sentences after time served, we enter very grey areas and slippery slopes.

@dcog9065 You're wrong, he wasn't ordered to serve eight years, he was jailed indefinitely with the judge recommending he serves at least eight years, which means parole couldn't be considered unril then, but his sentence was an indefinite one. The sentence is not being 're evaluated' it's the parole process that is under scrutiny.

Perhaps the parole board got this decision wrong, but it was their mistake to make. They are the authority which we entrust to make these decisions. Unless it's clear that they failed to consider all the evidence or that they abused their power in some way, there is really no justification and no prospect of success in challenging the decision. The government cannot challenge the decision by arguing the merits (ie. he is still dangerous and should not be released)

He should be in a mental institution forever or castrated and released.

Serial rapists cannot be cured or rehabbed.

After ten years in the nick he may well be anticipating "more of the same". Unless he's been de-knackered,that is!

Can society except a deviously cunning sexual predator back into to the community

Well no, this freak of nature should and must be electronically tethered, twenty four seven, utilising the latest under the skin tracking technology.

Professor Hardwick, chair of the Parole Board is clear about one point

“I share the concerns that victims say they were not kept informed or consulted about licence conditions,the Parole Board sought and received assurance on a number of occasions that victims who wanted to make a victim statement had the opportunity to do so and were informed about the outcome of the hearing, there are very serious allegations that some victims who should have been kept informed were not and victims and the public deserve to know exactly what happened.”

Also and importantly

“I would not be honest if I pretended risk could be eliminated completely. Parole Board members need to be confident a prisoner will not reoffend - but they cannot be certain. If certainty is required that needs to be reflected in the length of the original sentence.”.......

This menace to society, callously planned his assaults, a dangerous deviant and still cannot be deemed safe.

Chemical or surgical castration needs to be debated and ultimately considered.

Now he will drive Uber.

Castration is ineffective - these people are sick, Crazy is correct.

dcog9065Today  09:03 am JST

If we start to reevaluate sentences after time served, we enter very grey areas and slippery slopes.

To a degree you're right - but all medical evidence and history show this man will re-offend.

He wants one through his brain if you ask me. Save a whole load of taxpayer funds and clearly in the publics interest.

As a matter of interest......

The Parole Board Rules 2016......

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/1041/contents/made

Part 5 - 25/26/27 could be of interest to some contributors..

Clearly all the medical evidence did not show this despicable man will re-offend. Were that the case the parole board would not have agreed to his release.

As foul as Warboys is, he was convicted of one rape and several sexual assaults and druggings. For him to get a full life tariff, he would need to have been convicted of many more of the crimes he’s been accused of.

He got an indeterminate sentence and was ordered to serve at least 8 years, he served 10. His release will be under strict license for at least 10 years by which time he’ll be 70. He’s banned from driving a taxi, his criminal record and infamy will see to it that he’s unlikely to work again. On top of that his movements will be restricted, and any credible reports of criminal activity will have him in breach of his license and back in prison.

The UK is thankfully a country of laws where politicians the sentence of the courts cant be changed on the whim of a politician, particularly one looking to gain favour by appeasing a baying public. Considering the charges he was actually convicted of, and that the UK criminal courts don’t administer street justice, I don’t see what more could be expected.

Hi SwissToni, That is a well balanced comment, I lack confidence because of the ambiguous nature expert Psychologists use to interpret risk.

From the Parole Board rules, the decision to grant parole must be in accordance with the law and the evidence, focused not on the prisoner’s guilt  or presumed injustice, i.e. the alleged additional 100 or victims, or the so called appropriateness of the sentence, but on his future risk to society.

Professor Nick Hardwick ,“The burden is on the prisoner to demonstrate they are safe to release, not the panel to demonstrate they are too dangerous to do so". Without process transparency the victims are left to trust the assurance of certitude. That is a huge ask.

Itsonlyroclnroll, I’m pretty sure the parole board make no guarantees. Like the court, they do the best they can with the information they have.

It’s important you mention the victims. They’ve been kept completely in the dark and that is unforgivable.