Sources

• News Date: 12 August 2004
• BBC

Discussion

Apparently a convicted rapist has just won the national lottery after buying a ticket while on day release from prision. The current fuzzy thinking coming from our government is that the money should be taken from the prisoner and given to his victims. I was under, the obviously mistaken, impression that people were sent to prison to punish them for the crime they commited and once released they were supposed to have paid their due to society. Whether they have necessarly paid their due the victim is a difficult problem as each person is different. In a case such as this the damage done to the victim is obviously going to be huge and may never be repaired.

Having said that there must be some limit to the amount of punishment the state inflicts on people for a crime. I am not saying that we should shorten prison sentences but we must have a clear limit to the punishment. That limit may for instance be the rest of a persons natural life for crimes such as murder or a few months for a minor offense but it must have a limit.

In this case the perpetrator recieved a sentence of two and a half years for attempted rape which to my mind seems like a rather short sentance for this crime and ridiculous when you consider this isn't his first offence of this type. This rant isn't about sentence lengths however it is about what prisoners should and shouldn't be allowed to do. I believe it is common for long duration prisoners to be given restricted day and or weekend release towards the end of their sentence in order to help them reintergrate into society. This in itself seems like quite a good idea as it would be difficult to make the transition and a difficult transition could. to my mind, cause people to revert to their old behaviour. However we should remember that these people are still prisoners and they should be subject to certain restrictions. I would suggest that day release prisoners should not be allowed to drink (alcohol), smoke, gamble or take entertainment (such as going to the cinema or resturants) and should only be out between 8 am and 6 pm. This allows them the freedom to mix with society but still shows them they are prisoners. It is essentially a half-way house. A simple set of guidelines such as this would stop any problems such as the current situation has caused where each form of gambling has to be special-cased by simply banning all gambling.

As for what should be done with the winnings, if the victims want to sue the criminal then we should let them. If they win then congratulations they have just made a sizable amount of money however we should place a limit on the amount of time people have to issue a case in an effort to stop gold digging. For instance, if this man had won the lottery in 20 years time would it still be acceptable to sue him if you were a victim? I would have to say probably not as you have had you chance (I understand that victims may feel differently about this though and I could be convinced otherwise). I firmly believe that this in not an issue for the government though. I don't see how they have the right to take the money off this person when according to their own guidelines he did nothing wrong. Essentially, if the original sentence of two and half years wasn't long enough then he should have been given more time then. It seems unfair to inflict more punishment on someone at the end of their sentence because their circumstances have changed. What if he had only won 10 pounds or the money was inherited? Would we still take it off him? What is good in one situation must be good in other similar situations as well or we are opening our system up to hate and spite which will lead to abuse. There are a number of "out-raged" people in this country that just want to "hang-and-flog" criminals for the rest of time but we must not forget that they are still people and our government should not pander to the "out-raged" minority with knee-jerk rules.

In summary the government should leave this case alone - admit that the guidelines were wrong and to lax. They should learn to avoid at all costs special cases as they cost money and cause loop holes. Simply tighten up the guidelines and if necessary improve the chances of victims winning when they sue criminals but ensure that there is a limit on the punishment that can be inflicted.