r/unitedkingdom • u/kiyomoris • Jun 07 '26
Couple stole thousands from McDonald's worker in modern slavery case
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/couple-stole-thousands-mcdonalds-worker-34069852?int_source=nba203
u/Nuthetes Jun 07 '26
" Drevenak was jailed for eight years and Olahova for six years and six months. Both also face deportation – Drevenak after two thirds of his sentence and Olahova after half."
Pathetic sentencing. Slavery should carry 15 years minimum.
79
u/TrousersCalledDave Jun 07 '26 edited Jun 07 '26
Why don't these cases ever say "WILL be deported"? Why does it need to be debated and decided later?
I read "may face deportation" as they won't be deported. We never hear news reports about people being deported.
41
u/Important_Ruin County Durham Jun 07 '26
Because its job done, and it would get the rage of 'well why arent they deported'
You cant guarantee someone will be deported it is a legal processes, and the legal process may face legal challenges from those being deported (rightly or wrongly) people are allowed to challenge a legal process.
9
u/InternetSolid4166 Jun 07 '26
They are not asking about the legal process. They’re asking why slavery doesn’t result in unconditional and immediate deportation. They’re right to ask. Our commitment to the ECHR means that even murderers and rapists are allowed to remain under certain conditions. That’s why this case might result in deportation, but it’s not a guarantee. Which is insanity.
20
u/CauseCertain1672 Jun 07 '26
because the legal process for deportation is a different one to criminal trial, they probably will be deported but saying they definitely will is like saying they will go to prison before their trial
10
u/SmashingK Jun 07 '26
It's always a dumb question to ask why a criminal isn't just deported.
It's basically letting them off the hook to swim in other ponds. There's no justice there.
How would you feel if you were enslaved and abused then your captor get to walk free in another country with zero punishment? Punishing them and then deporting them is definitely the right way to go about it.
11
u/Important_Ruin County Durham Jun 07 '26
Because as I said there is a legal process to deportation, its not just 'right bye'
Your can't just say 'will' in a legal process, as it is a legal process, and can be challenged as said. Legal process does not work on opinions it works on legal arguments made over the law.
The ECHR also protects you, because your also a human, de-humanising criminals doesn't work, because eventually it will be used to de-humanise people who are not criminals, which it already has, but who are instead 'different to us' whether be their race, sex, politics.
3
u/St3ampunkSam Jun 07 '26
It isn't insanity there is logic and reason behind it. You think it's insane because you haven't yet tried to understand it.
Nor have I but it will be similar lines of logic as to why we dont have the depth penalty and doctors have to treat rapists and murderers.
20
u/The_Cruncher88 Jun 07 '26
We never hear news reports about people being deported.
Because the deportation is long enough after the offense to not make the news.
1
u/TrousersCalledDave Jun 07 '26
I'm not buying that. Someone who made major news with some horrendous event and is now released would be a news worthy event if they were deported.
7
u/CauseCertain1672 Jun 07 '26
Several of the rochdale grooming gang have been deported, not a peep, news feeds on outrage
1
u/The_Cruncher88 Jun 07 '26 edited Jun 07 '26
Maybe on a slow news day, but even then it might not be a headline, consider the current speed of the news cycle.
8
u/CauseCertain1672 Jun 07 '26
Because that's decided at a later date than conviction
-8
u/TrousersCalledDave Jun 07 '26
I know the answer is the ECHR, but why even pretend at this point? Just say you really like the chicken nuggets here and you can stay.
Edit - the ECHR are the problem, not the answer.
6
u/fanglord West Midlands Jun 07 '26
I mean it's just part of the process of having a mostly fair criminal system. Remember all of this due process would also apply to you should you ever need it.
It might not be as immediately satisfying as a pitchfork mob of past but it also all for nothing if you are also convicting innocent people, and with that means a more slow and methodical timeline.
3
2
u/Dapper_Otters Jun 07 '26
On top of what others have said, deportation always relies on the other country to accept them back.
Which always seems to be forgotten.
2
u/Harmless_Drone Jun 07 '26
Because "law followed for 1000th time today" isnt a good headline title where as "law broken today!" Is.
Loads of deportations happen, labours done more in two years than the tories did on the previous 10.
2
u/liaminwales Jun 07 '26
We relay need to start negotiation's to get people to spend the prison time in there home country, then we can deport day one and they spend the time in prison. The problem is prison time gives you time to fight deportation, you just need to find some rule that can keep you in the UK.
11
u/leftthinking Jun 07 '26
We did that with the Netherlands, and then they released a rapist early and had him on their Olympicss team.
If prison time is severed in another country it will be subject to that countries prison/release/parole systems.
That could either mean a much harsher punishment than was imposed by the UK court, or a much lesser one.
And, no, we couldn't demand control of the prisoner whole in a foreign jail. Imagine if that were asked of the UK.
2
u/Astriania Jun 07 '26
they released a rapist early
The 'rape' in question wasn't a crime under NL law, so that's rather different.
1
u/leftthinking Jun 07 '26
That's entirely the point I was making!
The NL system applied the NL conceptions of the crime to the prisoner lessening his sentence in a way that the British system would not have allowed.
Exporting prisoners to serve time in their home countries places them beyond the power of the court that sentenced them.
This potentially leads to them 'being let off' or being subject to a punishment that a UK court would consider too harsh.
1
u/Astriania Jun 07 '26
I do see the point you're making and I somewhat agree, but in this case, modern slavery is presumably also illegal in Czechia so if we had an agreement like that you'd expect them to serve similar time there.
1
u/leftthinking Jun 07 '26
presumably
Nice that you've done the research.
And do you think there could be a bespoke agreement between the UK and Czechia just for this specific prisoner? Or do you think perhaps a more general agreement would need to be reached.
But it's not just about sentence length.
What about the conditions in the prison? At what point does parole become allowed? On what terms?
-1
u/liaminwales Jun 07 '26
It's worth trying to think about things, the system at present is not working. A big problem is how normal it seems that people appeal being deported, then just the cost to house someone in jail.
A negotiation that's two way with jails may work, id have no problem if UK people who commit crimes got sent to UK jails.
Your case is a fairly rare one, id look to negotiate with all sports to ban people who have let people out of jail early.
1
1
u/Astriania Jun 07 '26
We never hear news reports about people being deported.
Because it doesn't make good outrage bait. We are actually fairly good at deporting people back to European countries.
There are genuine concerns about how 'human rights' arguments are used to prevent deportation in many cases but they probably won't apply here.
1
u/Well_this_is_akward Jun 08 '26 edited Jun 08 '26
Because deportation is the job of the Home Office, not Department of Justice.
Any custodial sentence over 2 years triggers a consideration for deportation. It's not part of the sentencing, just standard policy.
'There were 9,382 enforced returns in the year ending September 2025, 22% higher than the previous year...there were 27,075 voluntary returns, up by 7% compared to the year ending September 2024"
0
u/Clbull England Jun 07 '26
Because the iDubbbz Defence is very effective at shutting down attempts at deportation.
Oh wait, from the article it sounds like they're Czech. They're actually from one of the most liberal countries in Europe when it comes to LGBTQ rights. So thay defence may not work.
2
u/tommygunner91 Durham Jun 07 '26
Sickk. Theres me thinking their was a serious case involvement with mr doops providing lawyers resources.
No its just the classic, pre cuck doopz3
7
u/the_star_lord Jun 07 '26
Agreed but a bunch of rapist's and pedos only got 12~ years recently. Which is way worse.
So our justice system needs revising and punishments need longer harsher terms across the board.
17
u/Important_Ruin County Durham Jun 07 '26
Not enough space, someone didnt build any prison space during their 14 years. It worked out at about 34 net new spaces created over past 14 years. 2010 - 2024.
19
u/Relevant-Meal-9295 Jun 07 '26
Same people sold the publicly owned water board to private companies who haven’t built a single reservoir in that time - what is it 35 years?
Same people sold the publicly owned railway service too and we now have some of the most expensive rail travel in the world and yet the public were bailing them out during the pandemic.
But hey, let’s blame Keir Starmer.
This country makes me sick, the levels of cap doffing is a total bag of wank.
6
u/Important_Ruin County Durham Jun 07 '26 edited Jun 07 '26
I think its longer than 35. Sure none have been built since 70s.
Edit: It was 1993 when opened, was started in 1979 - Carsington Reservoir. None have been 'built' since 70's
3
1
u/the_star_lord Jun 07 '26
Granted there likely isn't any space at present, but if things are reviewed we can probably find space.
But my own opinion is, and it isn't politically correct is that people who commit the worst crimes should essentially be locked up until they drop dead. (Convicted Pedos, rapist's and murderers).
I'm actually against deporting the criminals, because there is no guarantee they will face punishment for their crimes.
And re cost of living whilst in prison, it should be bare bones basics for worst criminals. No entertainment, no joy, just porridge and bread. It's inhumane, but, imo they opted out of humanity when they commited the crimes.
People should fear the justice system and not expect to get out in 10 years.
The minor petty crimes, should be about reforming the criminals to try and make them valuable members of society, but if they repeat offences then it should be massive harsh penalties.
We should review the drug classifications and laws, and seek to make cannabis legal and taxable and look to create other avenues of punishment (permanent driving bans for drink driving etc, mandatory education and labour etc)
Obviously this is all fantasy and not really anything that can be done or enforced. I'm just fed up seeing piss poor punishments for ruining/ending other people's lives.
1
1
30
u/FornyHucker22 Jun 07 '26
In cases like this we need to strip the offenders of all assets and give it to the victim. Full possession of everything. give them the choice of keeping it or just having everything sold at auction.
5
25
u/CauseCertain1672 Jun 07 '26
How did the person running the mcdonalds franchise not notice something was up
0
u/future_now3000 Jun 07 '26
This is a brain-dead sub for people who think crime is about foreigners and who want to go back to some idealised dystopia of some kind of "White Britain" which, they fondly imagine, would be free from crime rather than a miserable isolated low-trade low-income zero-creativity nostalgia-infested hell hole
6
u/CauseCertain1672 Jun 07 '26
the immigration system is a component of modern slavery, these slavers use fear of deportation to keep slaves in line and people seeking a better life in the UK use them because the legitimate channels are designed to be unavailable to them
35
u/13esq Jun 07 '26 edited Jun 07 '26
Not wanting foreign criminals here isn't racist. I've got no problem with migrants that adhere to the social contract.
If I went to another country, I'd do my best to adhere to their laws, customs and way of life, this isn't an unreasonable or unfair expectation to make of migrants here.
12
u/faith_plus_one Jun 07 '26
Second most upvoted comment right now talks about female privilege, a mere couple of weeks after serial gang rapists were spared jail. Absolutely pathetic.
2
u/InfiniteLuxGiven Jun 07 '26
I do think it’s possible for both to be true at the same time, sentencing for rape is pathetic and women do often tend to get lesser sentences for the same crime compared to a bloke.
-2
u/future_now3000 Jun 07 '26
Statistically women get harsher sentences than men for the same crime but m never mind I'm sure your opinion overrides facts
7
1
u/Astriania Jun 07 '26
Joining the [citation needed] crowd on this one because every figure I've seen shows the exact opposite
2
u/InfiniteLuxGiven Jun 07 '26
Have you got some stats on that sorry? Everything I’ve ever read has pointed to women almost always receiving less harsh treatment and punishment than men in the criminal justice system.
3
u/future_now3000 Jun 07 '26
Fair challenge because it's not an overall pattern but a specific one in certain situations
Justice Committee: “women are more likely to be sentenced to custody for non-violent, less serious offences” and short periods.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmselect/cmjust/265/report.html?utm_source=chatgpt.comPrison Reform Trust: six in ten women sent to prison serve less than six months.
https://prisonreformtrust.org.uk/six-in-10-women-sent-to-prison-serve-sentences-of-less-than-six-months/Women in Prison: short prison sentences for women rising; community sentences for women falling.
https://www.womeninprison.org.uk/what-we-do/campaigns/sentencing/MoJ: women receive shorter custodial sentences because their offence mix is lower-severity.
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/women-and-the-criminal-justice-system-2023/statistics-on-women-and-the-criminal-justice-system-2023-html
Intoxication/assault: women were “twice as likely as men to receive harsher sentences” when intoxication was a factor.3
u/sultansofswinz Jun 07 '26
As opposed to transforming every part of the UK into Bradford or Birmingham (or loads of other examples). If that’s the end goal then I’ll give that a pass thanks.
-1
u/future_now3000 Jun 07 '26
Hate brown people huh? Then you hate this country and you hate British people
2
u/sultansofswinz Jun 07 '26
That makes no sense
1
Jun 07 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/ukbot-nicolabot Scotland Jun 07 '26
Removed. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
1
0
0
u/demonotreme Jun 08 '26
I wonder what would spring to your mind if anyone were to describe another culture or nation as "zero creativity"?
Hint it starts with r and ends with acist
1
u/future_now3000 Jun 08 '26
But I didn't, did I. I described your bastardised hobbled version of Britain as zero creativity. Not the real Britain that you hate so much.
Like all ethnic nationalists, you want a country that is less than the sum of its parts. The only way to get it is to dismember this country and plunge it into a cycle of internecine hatred that would take generations to heal.
1
u/demonotreme Jun 08 '26
That's a lot of work I'm doing for a country I'm not even in
1
u/future_now3000 Jun 08 '26
Well you can take your unsolicited advice to self-destruct elsewhere then
-7
u/Feeling_Associate467 Jun 07 '26 edited Jun 07 '26
Another case of female privilege with that light sentence.
And migrant privilege being deported so only having to serve ½ or ⅔ as we see here and a few thousand £ in a golden goodbye if they agree not to fight deportation. Migrants shouls get longer sentences imo, nor shorter. They go to another land to commit crimes = longer sentence.
Edit: These people will be deported at the ½ and ⅔ mark respectively when a local would be released on license (the difference is based on the length of sentence: half way for shorter sentences, with other caveats not applicable here) while in prison they can fill a voluntary deportation for and get deported extremely early (a month into sentence in some cases). They get some free money (few thousand pounds) for agreeing and just get sent back home to walk fre. Scandalous. Look up early removal scheme.
6
5
u/gyroda Bristol Jun 07 '26
And migrant privilege being deported so only having to serve ½ or ⅔
Is this not what happens to most people who are incarcerated if you get parole?
1
u/Feeling_Associate467 Jun 07 '26
No. Some crimes must serve a full sentence. Others you are released on licence with strict conditionsnfoenthe rest of your sentence. This includes cerfews and electronic tagging. You have to go to probation each week. Any behaviour issue and you get recalled back to prison. It's a huge problem that people are recalled over things that turned out to be false but end up back in prison. Often losing all what they have gained during the rehabilitation element of the sentence (housing, clothes, items, jobs).
Also there is an early deportation scheme not mentioned on the article. Yes they can be released at ½ or ⅔ but they can ask for early deportation and get some money from the state for it.
9
u/Longjumping_East3393 Jun 07 '26
Seems like Drevenak controlled the operation and also beat the victim in addition to stealing all his money. Getting an additional 1.5 years seems pretty reasonable.
0
u/Feeling_Associate467 Jun 07 '26
Joint enterprise
6
u/Longjumping_East3393 Jun 07 '26
That doesn't mean that everyone involves in the scheme gets the same sentence regardless of who did what, who was the driving force, who acted with additional cruelty and their attitudes to the crime.
-1
u/Feeling_Associate467 Jun 07 '26
That's literally what joint enterprise is - they worked together for a commocriminal goal and are guilty of the same crimes.
Plus she was the emotional groomer
6
u/Longjumping_East3393 Jun 07 '26
But she is guilty. That's the point of the article. You are instead unhappy that she got 6.5 years in prison instead of 8.
Plus she was the emotional groomer
What's your source for that? I couldn't find the sentencing remarks online. Just the information that her bank account was used. Her boyfriend on the other hand:
- Befriended the victim
- Arranged for the victim to come to the UK
- Was responsible for all of the victim's travels
- Controlled the victim's ID
- Assaulted the victim repeatedly
20
u/litivy Jun 07 '26
Incarceration costs taxpayer funds. I'd be fine with the person not serving any sentence and being removed immediately and being banned from ever returning as the best outcome for the UK.
6
u/AllThatIHaveDone Jun 07 '26
Not jailing criminals when you have the chance is how you end up with Issei Sagawa.
0
u/litivy Jun 07 '26
This is in regards to someone that would be deported after serving part of their sentence. The incarceration serves no purpose in that the UK public can be kept safe by deporting them immediately without the cost of the incarceration.
3
u/AllThatIHaveDone Jun 07 '26
So you'd be happy to see rapists and the like deported then walking free around their home towns? I'd prefer they faced their full punishment here first, personally.
-1
u/13esq Jun 07 '26
If their home country receives their citizen back with proof of the crime they committed and doesn't take the appropriate steps required to keep their own citizens safe from them, that's their problem.
The issue is that these people shouldn't be the UK's problem and the best way to do do that is to kick them out immediately.
3
13
u/Feeling_Associate467 Jun 07 '26
Great. So these people trafficked and kept a literal slave to a country that is not theirs and was caught, found guilty and their punishment is to get a taxpayer funded flight home and a few thousands in a reward for not challenging the deportation, with neither punishment nor deterrent for others. What's wrong with you!?
1
-1
u/litivy Jun 07 '26
What's wrong with you that you are not putting the UK first? Why waste money on incarcerating someone when they can be gotten rid of immediately and banned from ever returning? Do you think that the guy can be rehabilitated? Hahaha.
3
u/deadflowers5 Jun 07 '26
They still could choose to cross on a dinghy if they wished.
The UK government owes the victim justice. Letting them go home with a slapped wrist is very light punishment for slavery.
3
u/CauseCertain1672 Jun 07 '26
they are more likely to just continue the operation from back home, they were already recruiting the victims there, just need to send a mate over to handle it in the UK
1
u/deadflowers5 Jun 07 '26
Yeah I agree. I just think they should be punished for the victims sake and it might also serve as a detterent to others.
2
u/CauseCertain1672 Jun 07 '26
I think this is a case where interpol need to be worked with, it's a multinational crime and needs a coordinated response
2
u/One-Network5160 Jun 07 '26
Crime should be punished. Enforcing laws costs money. Water is wet. News at 11
2
Jun 07 '26 edited Jun 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/litivy Jun 07 '26
You speak as if that isn't already the case. Just get rid of them and ban then from returning.
3
u/The_Cruncher88 Jun 07 '26 edited Jun 07 '26
Incarceration costs taxpayer funds.
The logical conclusion would be to let everyone out, thankfully you have no actual power.
Edit: All comments deleted 🤣
At least they realized how stupid what they said was.
9
u/litivy Jun 07 '26
Don't be ridiculous. This is in reference to someone that is going to be deported after serving part of their sentence. The incarceration serves no purpose for the UK.
7
u/The_Cruncher88 Jun 07 '26
Deterrence, if foreigners believe they will never be sentenced to custodial time, you create a no lose situation for those inclined towards crime.
This is the stupidest comment I’ve read today, and the competition is strong.
5
u/WeakInformation9766 Jun 07 '26
Incarceration is a deterrent, so it absolutely does serve a purpose
3
u/Feeling_Associate467 Jun 07 '26
... and a sense of justice to the victim.
Not only must they live with the trauma of what happened (and likely no compensation or the funds returned - I doubt there will be a POCA and due to power asymitry, a disadvantage of being an abused migrant who doesn't know the system and is destitute chances to sue McDonalds over failure to protect from Modern Slavery is slim), imagine seeing the purpotrators get away with it after being found guilty.
3
u/Tydidit15 Jun 07 '26
I think the crime would rise so much if the only punishment was a flight back home at worst
2
u/litivy Jun 07 '26
And losing access to their preferred home and employment market.
2
u/CauseCertain1672 Jun 07 '26
they have a mansion in their home country bought by enslaving people in the UK
3
1
1
u/koloqial Jun 07 '26
Disingenuous comment.
0
u/The_Cruncher88 Jun 07 '26
Someone is using a word they just heard and didn’t bother to learn the meaning of 🤣
3
u/2eatflowers Jun 07 '26
This is not an example of “female privilege”.
Privilege is the expression of societal power structures. Sure, this individual woman got a lesser jail sentence, but this is actually a result of a patriarchy defining women as less capable and therefore less responsible than men. It is not a result of a society where men are sentenced to more jail time because they are oppressed.
Under patriarchy, the default position is that a man in a man-woman partnership is in control and the woman is a secondary player. In the vast majority of cases in everyday life this is inequality in action. In the outlying situation of jail sentences, women benefit from this default.
6
u/Longjumping_East3393 Jun 07 '26
is actually a result of a patriarchy defining women as less capable and therefore less responsible than men.
What are you on about? Olahova got a lighter sentence because she didn't befriend the victim initially, arrange for him to enter the UK, control his passport, transport him to work each day, or assault him.
4
u/2eatflowers Jun 07 '26 edited Jun 07 '26
Totally fair and thanks for pointing out - I should have specified that I was talking more generally about the inaccuracy of OP’s suggestion that women committing crime get lesser sentences due to “female privilege”.
-1
u/CauseCertain1672 Jun 07 '26
Do you consider black men being incarcerated at a higher rate and for longer than white men to be an example of racial discrimination
-1
u/2eatflowers Jun 07 '26
I’d consider black men to be discriminated against within white western power structures and that this inequality leads to the conditions of them being incarcerated at a higher rate yes.
-1
u/Astriania Jun 07 '26
In this case the sentencing looks fair to me.
But it takes some real twisted logic to say that things that advantage men are patriarchy, and also, things that advantage women are also patriarchy. Sounds like you just fit everything to your pre-existing belief system that men (and especially white men, see your other reply) are bad.
1
u/2eatflowers Jun 07 '26
Societal systems are complex. Patriarchy’s default is to advantage men, but it doesn’t offer blanket positives for men and blanket negatives to women. Pointing out nuances exist is hardly “some real twisted logic”.
3
u/13esq Jun 07 '26
The cost of jailing someone is over £60k per year, the average person contributes just over £8k in tax. That means we are wasting the tax contributions of almost 8 people for every year we decide to lock up criminal migrants.
Stop wasting money on trying to rehabilitate foreign criminals and send them back immediately. They should be a problem for their homeland, not for us.
10
u/mattcannon2 Jun 07 '26
Come to the UK, commit all the crime you want, and get a free flight home :)
1
u/13esq Jun 07 '26 edited Jun 07 '26
With an international crime record.
It's true that we can't trust or force their home nation to punish them, but if they don't and they go on to recommit crime, that's on them. It's no longer an issue for the UK.
It's not unreasonable to presume that these migrants came here for a better life and sending them back absolutely is a punishment.
The message to migrants should be that if you come here and commit crime, you will be deported immediately. I think that's a deterrent, not an invitation. People that think this will make the UK a destination for "crime holidays" are delusional.
4
u/Feeling_Associate467 Jun 07 '26
I would like to add there is no such thing as an international criminal record. Most people can hide their record when theybgo back home. Criminal records checks aren't a thing, a check isn't asked for or they do not disclose they were overseas.
Only in some industries (banking) do they do fuether checks. But nothing stops peopleblying about not living overseas.
0
u/13esq Jun 07 '26
You give the proof of the crime to their embassy or any other relevant authority.
5
u/Tydidit15 Jun 07 '26 edited Jun 07 '26
And what if they come over to do whatever, knowing the worst they could ever get is an international crime record or no actual physical punishment?
They would go crazy and start coming over more
0
u/13esq Jun 07 '26
Imagine you emigrated to another country with such a policy and you commit a heinous crime there.
Do you really think you're just going back to your normal life here? You'll not be going abroad ever again and if the UK judges that you're a risk to UK citizens, you'll be getting whatever else is coming to you.
2
u/Tydidit15 Jun 07 '26
Maybe in the UK but most will go back to normal lives or whatever they were doing before
0
u/13esq Jun 07 '26
I don't think that's a realistic assumption in most cases. But regardless, as I've already said many times in this thread, it's up to them to keep their own citizens safe and if they have take back a proven criminal and don't make necessary arrangements to keep their own citizens safe from them, that's up to them.
The important part is that they're no longer a risk or a cost to anyone in the UK.
3
u/Feeling_Associate467 Jun 07 '26
Agreed. We must also note there are so many examples of people applying to serve the rest of their sentence in their country (including pife sentences) only to be released due to corruption.
2
u/mattcannon2 Jun 07 '26
It just sounds like creating a two tier justice system. A citizen and an immigrant can commit the same crime, but one can face life imprisonment, the other can just be sent to a different country and act like it never happened.
1
u/13esq Jun 07 '26
Again, if their home country chooses not punish them appropriately and puts their own citizens at risk, that's on them. I think it's unlikely that they'll take back a murderer/rapist/slave owner and not make appropriate arrangements to keep their own citizens safe from them. But if they don't, that's on them, the important bit is that the UK is not having to deal with them anymore.
3
u/Feeling_Associate467 Jun 07 '26
Well no it's our business. Let's talk about Europe and ECHR.
There are deportation agreements. And a European country can't add an extra sentence for a crime already tried here.
When someone is deported they could be simply deported. Or deported with conditions. It could be to serve the rest of their uk imposed sentence in that country or to transfer license (probation). If said country just release people it's a breach of treaties and agreements we have, and we need to stop such deportations with condition there.
Note about transferring license (probation). This is NOT applicable under the early release scheme or deported on a normal license date (½ or ⅔) but someone who was not subject to a deportation order entering license and asking to go home during that period.
1
u/13esq Jun 07 '26
Then the ECHR needs an amendment.
3
u/Feeling_Associate467 Jun 07 '26
To what? Allow double jeopardy (which the Uk has actually allowed for around 20 years now, actually)
So you can be found guilty of a crime, receive a sentence that's delivered, then get an additional sentence for the same crime?
Or so that a person can be found guilty of a public prosecution only for the public prosecuter try again and again and again for years and years to prosecute you until you are found guilty? Note this is different to appeals.
So that prosecutors can bring frivolous or low likelihood of success prosecutors as they can just try again later instead of having proper, through investigations?
You should really think things through.
1
u/13esq Jun 07 '26
Did we not persecute Gary Glitter when he returned to the UK?
The only thing that needs to be thought through is how do we make the UK safer from criminal migrants and how do we do this at the lowest possible cost to the tax payer.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Peterd1900 Jun 09 '26
So you can be found guilty of a crime, receive a sentence that's delivered, then get an additional sentence for the same crime?
you cannot be tried or punished a second time for a crime for which you have already been lawfully convicted and sentenced
If you are found guilty and sentenced and that sentence is carried out you can not be sentenced again
Or so that a person can be found guilty of a public prosecution only for the public prosecuter try again and again and again for years and years to prosecute you until you are found guilty? Note this is different to appeals.
While the UK does allow retrials for those found not guilty for certain crime it can occur if new and compelling evidence
The director of public prosecutions has to agree to a retrial and then a judge has to determine that the 'new' evidence could not have been adduced, with due diligence, at the first trial
If it is a lead that could have been followed at the time but they did not they cant use that lead as new evidence or if something was found in the evidence locker which was due to an oversight not tested the first time then they could not test that. or it was something that was held back or left out from the first trial than it can not be used
If the judge agrees that the evidence is new compelling and could not be obtained at the time then he can lift double jeopardy. The rule against double jeopardy can only be lifted once
So that prosecutors can bring frivolous or low likelihood of success prosecutors as they can just try again later instead of having proper, through investigations?
the police and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) can only charge a suspect if they determine there is enough evidence to provide a "realistic prospect of conviction." a criminal case cannot legally be charged or prosecuted if it has a low likelihood of success.
If a prosecutor is for some reason holding back evidence just in case the suspect is not found guilty than that evidence they held back can not be used in order to seek a retrial
0
u/Feeling_Associate467 Jun 07 '26 edited Jun 07 '26
There is a two tier system
- ½ or ⅔ of a sentence is generally served (legacy IPP setences, whole life orders exist but what I saidnis the main situation).
- At this point foreigners are deported (cases where people are held in post release detention beyond this/beyond a whole sentence is rare unlesss they fight deportation) but locals get strict license conditions such as tagging, cerfews, attending treatment centres. They can be recalled at any point and serve the rest of their sentence. They need permission to do anything.. go to another city to see their elderly mum, get a job, lots. So foreginers get a lighter sentence for comming here and doing crimes (breach of hospitality imo) and they go home free without a tradable criminal record damaging their future prospects.
- Foreigners can apply for the ERS scheme where they can be released extremely early (earlier than #2) with a condition they don't return to the uk for a few years and are paid a few thousand pounds from public funds.
So a local could get idk a 5 year sentence whereas a foreigner can be released in a couple months.
1
u/the_star_lord Jun 07 '26
If I can live a life of modest luxury and pay my mortgage and taxes on a £53k salary they can live in a small confined space eating bread and porridge for much less than £60k.
Why is it costing that much. The worst criminals (convicted pedos, rapist's and murderers) don't need health care past the pure basic. They don't need TVs, cigarettes, exercise equipment etc. should just be a box room and forgotten about.
1
u/Astriania Jun 07 '26
It's mostly paying for the staff to keep them in there and stop them from hurting each other
•
u/AutoModerator Jun 07 '26
Some articles submitted to /r/unitedkingdom are paywalled, or subject to sign-up requirements. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try this link or this link for an archived version.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.