VERSION|0.5.1|SUBJECT|Rev Dr Michael Banner, Dean and Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge   |CONTENT|[b]Rating[/b] 3 out of 5 (Fairly platitudinous)

[url=http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap130711.html][img=images/2013/07/pic130711.jpg popup=false float=right][/url]The European Court of Human rights has ruled that whole life sentences [url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/jeremy-bamber-case-wholelife-jail-terms-with-no-review-breach-human-rights-european-court-rules-8697317.html]without review[/url] breach a convict's human rights. This has caused predictable outrage in some quarters, but the ruling does not ban whole life sentences, it does not demand that any prisoners should be released, it simply requires that after say, 25 years, the sentence must be reviewed.

I know what you're thinking, you're thinking of the parable of the prodigal son. Just in case you've forgotten what you're thinking about, the prodigal son took his inheritance, spent it and then when he was broke came home again. That's [i]exactly[/i] like the case of serial killers having their sentence reviewed after 25 years. I can't think why the ECHR never thought to mention it in their ruling. It really is the perfect analogy, or at least, the best I could find in the New Tasty mint.

[url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01clc90]Listen/Read[/url]|CATEGORIES|69,91,77|IP-ADDRESS|94.168.119.214|DATE|1373526313|CREATEDBY|admin
