Murder: Life sentence unjust, says lawyers' group

A prison door Mandatory life sentences for murder replaced the death penalty in 1965

Related Stories

Mandatory life sentences for murder in England and Wales and the system for setting minimum terms are unjust and outdated, a legal experts' group says.

The Homicide Review Advisory Group, made up of judges, academics and former QCs, says the system does not allow for sentences to match individual crimes.

The mandatory life sentence replaced the death penalty in 1965.

But Peter Neyroud, a former chief constable, said the public did not want killers treated with more leniency.

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said it had no plans to abolish the mandatory life sentence for murder. "The most serious crimes deserve the most serious sentences," he said.

The Homicide Review Advisory Group said a so-called mercy killing attracted the same mandatory life penalty as serial killings and it said it wanted sentencing for murder to be discretionary.

Its report builds on research last year which claims the public may support reforming the penalty for murder to make life imprisonment the maximum sentence rather than mandatory.


It claims that "with appropriate education" the public could develop "in the general direction long favoured by legal experts and the judiciary".

But Mr Neyroud, a former member of the sentencing guidelines council, said: "The public were very confused about murder sentencing and in fact regularly thought that the sentences for murder were too lenient, so I'm not sure that you can then leap to the conclusion that they're then ready for what would be quite a dramatic... and I suspect viewed as a reduction in seriousness."

The Homicide Review Advisory Group claim the mandatory life sentence was a compromise arrived at to ensure the abolition of the death penalty made its way through both Houses of Parliament.

It argues that the indefinite nature of a life sentence - which may or may not involve a life behind bars - is unfair and incomprehensible.

The starting point for a minimum term to be served for less serious murders is 15 years.

Offenders are released on life licence, which means they can be recalled to prison at any time during the rest of their life, if they breach the terms of their licence.

The report urges that the time has come for a move to fixed sentences for murder as with any other individual crime.

That would allow the exact circumstances of offences to be properly reflected by the courts, it says.

The Justice Secretary Ken Clarke recently announced plans to extend mandatory life sentences for many other crimes as part of a plan to do away with indeterminate sentences.


More on This Story

Related Stories

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 345.

    The only suitable sentence for murder is the death sentence, but people may be wrongly convicted, so it cannot be used in practice. Life sentence is simply the next best thing. Life sentence for murder should be view as execution by life time imprisonment not normal custodial sentence. Serial murderer should be in solitary confinement and not be allow to see another soul for the rest of its life.

  • rate this

    Comment number 314.

    I can't help but think, that however wrong and ghastly a crime murder is, it is, on the other had, more natural than the power to lock up another human being forevermore. That, somehow, seems very wrong indeed.

  • rate this

    Comment number 87.

    The mental element for murder is either intent to kill or intent to cause GBH which results in death. So if I hit you in the stomach, intending to hurt you, and by accident your appendix is ruptured and you die, that is murder and an automatic life sentence. It has been estimated that half or more of all people in prison for murder had no intent to kill. Which is why the system must change.

  • rate this

    Comment number 71.

    Unjust? Oh please. You get sentenced to life in this country and you're out in 15-20 years. Disgraceful. If you take a life you don't deserve to have your own. Mercy killings are completely different; taking a life because someone asked you to or because they are in immense pain should be handled differently. Killing someone because you could? Sorry, I don't want you wandering the streets anymore.

  • rate this

    Comment number 51.

    I don't understand why we can't move to a system like they have in America where they recognise degrees of murder depending on the circumstances of the crime. Then an approriate sentence level can be set for each offence. That way we could distinguish between mercy killing, serial killing and everything in between.


Comments 5 of 6


More UK stories



BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.