A licence to criminally re-offend!

Self-explanatory.

By Stanley Collymore

It's time to scrap the existing
parole system and replace
it realistically with a truly
expedient alternative that compels all
convicted prisoners to serve their full
sentences unquestionably so and as
well actually discernibly, irrespective
of who essentially, they crucially are;
quite irrefutably and simply sensibly
in undoubted full time incarceration
considering literally undeniably that
currently most custodial sentences
aren't lengthy enough or actually fit
for purpose, simply to start with! In
obvious reality, the vast majority of
these actually, simply paltry British
custodial sentences handed down,
are in actual effect only for a short
time, essentially only a year or two
normally, and basically specifically
so in the case of females! Actually
quite prejudicially so regardless of
the severity of their heinous crime.

(C) Stanley V. Collymore
30 April 2024.


Author's Remarks:
A classic example of this being killer Sarah Davey, purportedly jailed at the conclusion of her trial, and a guilty verdict, indefinitely; but  has been allowed out seven (7) times on parole already; conditions she routinely abrogated, and was actually recalled back to prison, but is to be released again!  

Attendant with the aforementioned is the factual realization that there are simply several British women, who although not yet actually killers have the undoubted capacity to discernibly be such; and who quite preposterously having distinctly categorically found themselves in court on offences which could quite easily have effectively led to the quite callously enacted death of another person or persons, nevertheless found themselves, these specific women, being treated most leniently as if they were in effect the victims, when clearly they weren’t and were undoubtedly the perpetrators.

Far too many of them to enumerate here I’ll just mention three of them who should in all fairness have been jailed but clearly for prejudicial reasons principally connected with the fact that they are females weren’t. There’s Lavinia Woodward of course who brutally stabbed her then boyfriend almost to death, was a known drug abuser, but in court was treated most leniently by the judge. Essentially it seems because this female was white, in her case, from a well-to-do family and was a medical student at Oxford University; with the judge incredibly claiming that she was too clever essentially to be sent to jail; and if she was it was bring to an end her university studies as she would in all circumstances be expelled. So Lavinia Woodward, essentially with a minor slap on the wrist, walked free!

Then quite recently there was the case of Aneesha Khan, a criminology student, who was stopped by the police for excessive speeding and subsequently found to be well over the limit, in this case, illegal drugs which she’d taken. This woman without any sense of decency or loyalty then tried to stitch her own biological sister up and make out that it was her who had actually committed that specific offence. In his decision not to imprison her, even though she had a previous ban, and her dangerous driving could have killed someone or persons, the judge in this court case concluded that as Aneesha Khan’s sister had forgiven her for trying to pin that crime on her, that he too would be lenient and forgiving and not jail this pathetic and lying woman.

And I’m absolute sure that the entire British populace know of or have heard of the rather omnipresent Katie Price, and wonder as I’m sure the sensible and clearly not intellectually challenged ones do, what this woman with her disastrously ongoing criminal record, has to actually do in order for her to be sensibly and appropriately jailed. And what police officer worth his salt would understandably think that it’s actually worth their time and effort arresting such women, or men even though the latter aren’t treated as leniently as the women, when some guy or female sitting on a bench pathetically see equality as being something that women can obviously claim when it suits their purposes, but blithely ignore when it inconveniences them!

Author's Note

As per my previous works.