They will be sentenced later this week.

[merehazle]

As it seems nothing will deter them what should that sentence be?

'Silent bomber' couple guilty of plot.

A husband and wife have been found guilty of plotting a terror attack in London ahead of the 10th anniversary of the 7 July bombings.

Mohammed Rehman, 25, discussed targeting the London Underground and Westfield shopping centre on social media under the name of 'Silent Bomber'.

Chemicals for bomb making were found at his Reading home, the Old Bailey heard. He and his wife Sana Ahmed Khan were convicted of preparing  terrorist acts. They will be sentenced on Wednesday.

Mohammed Rehman has said: ''I've rigged my house to blow up at the push of a button at my bedside if the popo try to raid man. NOBODY gets in the way of my Jihad!''.

And at a push of a button! That's a new one. The mind boggles at the fear he has now introduced. And on that comment alone how the hell can he ever be released? Our laws have long since needed updating.  

[merehazle]

Hello busty.

'keeping them under lock and key and isolation'

Yes, I agree. ''isolation'' is crucial. And no doubt any communications will be recorded and watching that no notes are passed. No security measures will be too harsh. They were going to deny innocent people their right to get on with their lives. 

''

Deputy Assistant Commissioner Stuart  Osborne had said:  ''Police are foiling a terrorism plot as big as the 7 July every year''. That's the gravity of the situation.  

Well done the security services, and the police, for detecting these cowards and building a  robust case against them which allowed the CPS to successfully prosecute them. A decent sentence for once. Well done the judge. And at last others that may be like minded will know it will almost certainly mean a whole life term.

IMO he will never be released. He went too far when he said:  ''I've rigged up my house to blow up at the push of a button at my beside if the popo try to raid man. NOBODY gets in the way of my Jihad''. I wonder how long will he regret saying that? For the rest of his life in prison IMO.

The judges and the parole board will remember that. Would any decent law biding citizen (unknowing) deserve him/her living next door?  No, of course not.  Hard labour for most prisoners should have been reintroduced long, long ago. Though with him I suspect he would go on a starvation diet. Good, job done!

[joe_bloggs*]

"Deputy Assistant Commissioner Stuart  Osborne had said:  ''Police are foiling a terrorism plot as big as the 7 July every year''. That's the gravity of the situation"

I wonder how many,if any have been charged with all these "terrorist plots" Bit strange,you would think it would make the headlines wouldn't you?

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@artful_dodgings wrote:

@upthecreekyetagain wrote:

'You miss the point - create a martyr and you don't get fewer of these barbaric savages but more!'

No, you miss the point. The point was that was my opinion. Nothing would give me greater satisfaction than seeing terrorists and would be suicide bombers and those of that ilk, given the long drop. In such cases I think an exception should be made. Not sure I buy into your theory that for every one disposed of, others will take their place. That's your opinion. It's not necessarily mine.

'As for cost the the same argument can be made, whatever the crime'.

This thread is concerning Rehman and Khan, and not to anyone else who, for whatever reason, happens to be incarcerated. Do pay attention, Creeky..

---

And a Happy New Year to you too

A little case of double standards? 🙂 - You refer to JDL's post to support your stance and try to diminish mine by saying, "This thread is concerning Rehman and Khan, and not to anyone else"

You need to reread what JDL posted - just in case you can't be bothered then here's an extract "Moors murderer Ian Brady has been in various institutions for close on 50 years now, the cost to the taxpayer has been £14 million so far. This is nonsense."

. . . . .

[merehazle]

---

@joe_bloggs* wrote:

"Deputy Assistant Commissioner Stuart  Osborne had said:  ''Police are foiling a terrorism plot as big as the 7 July every year''. That's the gravity of the situation"

I wonder how many,if any have been charged with all these "terrorist plots" Bit strange,you would think it would make the headlines wouldn't you?

---

 You wonder. Now that's a surprise?

Google these words: 'Deputy Assistant Commissioner Stuart Osborne'  Story 6 down.  And anywhere else you wish

[joe_bloggs*]

I'm sure others will be wondering as well,as someone once said a frightened population is easily controlled,people will be wary of setting off fireworks in the back garden next in fear of being reported by Frank Garner on the news as another suspected terrorist incident !

What the police do catch  are fantasists, often kids, boasting and “plotting” online about being terrorists, thats quite a different thing from preventing terrorist attacks.

I remember we were assured that various police sources and eye witnesses had confirmed that Jean Charles Menendez leapt the barriers and ran through the tunnels, wearing a bulky jacket with wires sticking out,all of that was deliberate lies spread by the police,even the recent knifing in London by some bloke shouting "this is for Syria" was reported as an act of terrorism,

personally i think he was an unstable person,who maybe should have been locked up securely a while ago.I wonder how many stabbing there are in London every year?

[suzieseaside]

Maybe the death sentence for terrorists will make a martyr out of them but there are plenty of other ways that crazy people become radicalised, so it may not make a huge difference overall.
Weighed against the cost of keeping these scum for decades in our overcrowded prisons, with our hard-earned taxes, I would advocate giving them their expected paradise asap. 72 virgins or another misinterpretation - a 72 year old virgin?

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@suzieseaside wrote:
Maybe the death sentence for terrorists will make a martyr out of them but there are plenty of other ways that crazy people become radicalised, so it may not make a huge difference overall.
Weighed against the cost of keeping these scum for decades in our overcrowded prisons, with our hard-earned taxes, I would advocate giving them their expected paradise asap. 72 virgins or another misinterpretation - a 72 year old virgin?

---

Suzie - the cost element really is a total red herring unless the death penalty is being advocated for all crimes!

If we are going to imprison criminals then there is going to be a cost - are you less annoyed at the cost of imprisonment for a car thief, drug dealer, rapist or murderer than you are over the cost for a terrorist?

Personally if it came down to a choice then I'd rather the money was spent on locking up the terrorist than the car thief.

[artful_dodgings]

---

@upthecreekyetagain wrote:

---

---

And a Happy New Year to you too

A little case of double standards? 🙂 - You refer to JDL's post to support your stance and try to diminish mine by saying, "This thread is concerning Rehman and Khan, and not to anyone else"

You need to reread what JDL posted - just in case you can't be bothered then here's an extract "Moors murderer Ian Brady has been in various institutions for close on 50 years now, the cost to the taxpayer has been £14 million so far. This is nonsense."

. . . . .

---

What on earth are you wittering on about, Creeky ? I have read and reread your diatribe and since I haven't got the benefit of an Oxford education behind me, I am at a loss to ascertain your implications. Your response makes no sense to me what-so-ever. How does JDL's contribution, or Ian Brady come into the equation ?  I never mentioned Brady.

Let me try, anyway. If you are implying that I am suggesting that it's fine for Brady to spend a lifetime banged up, as you appear to be, let me assure you I an not, nor his concubine. Brady should have had his neck stretched - along with his girlfriend - in the beginning. 50 years is much too long to wait on him hand and foot, same for Hindley, but she finally departed this earth permanently 15 years ago. And before you ask, ditto another mass murderer, Shippman. Fortunately he done the state a service financially by topping himself, almost immediately. To outline, crimes of mass murder and terrorism, that are likely to be handed an exceptionally long or lifetime sentence, whether they've killed over a period by stealth, cunning, and guile, or gone on the rampage killing people randomly and haphazardly with a gun, should lose their life. Is that clear ? (Sometimes in the case of the latter, they do this themselves by turning their weapon on themselves. Jolly good show in that case).

Save your fingers the effort of tapping out a reply Creeky, because I have said all I wish to say on this subject and will not be opening this particular thread up again. In any case I will be swanning off for a week later today, and fully intend putting as much distance between myself and a computer as is humanely possible. Maybe now this thread can get back on track after you have kindly succeeded in derailing it as per usual, and people can return to discussing the two degenerates to whom it was directed. Oh HNY to you also.

Wha, Wha, Wha, Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa !

[jd.linklater]

The only reason I mentioned the Ian Brady case in post #11 was not to make comparisons between the two cases but to illustrate how much it can ultimately cost the country to keep these low lifes incarcerated long term. We not only have to keep them fed and watered but also to keep them healthy and prevent them doing themselves harm.

In Brady's case the cost of his medical supervision for 28 years in a high security psychiatric unit  was an estimated £7.6 million, including the 14 years he spent on hunger strike. Brady was 25 when sentenced, roughly the same age as the two terrorists who've just been jailed. There is every chance that at least the same amount will be spent keeping them locked up until the end of their lives as they are very unlikely to be released. It's £40k per annum to keep a prisoner at present, who knows what the cost will be in 40 - 50 years time. Whatever it amounts to is a scandalous waste of public resources.

[joe_bloggs*]

Theres been an ongoing debate in the US about death penalty V life imprisonment costs

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2014/05/01/considering-the-death-penalty-your-tax-dolla...

"While those complex debates rage on, some like to point fingers at perhaps the most simple reason to support the death penalty: It’s cheaper to kill an inmate than to keep an inmate alive."

"That may not, however, be true. “It’s 10 times more expensive to kill them than to keep them alive,”says Donald McCartin, known as The Hanging Judge of Orange County. McCartin knows a little bit about executions: he has sent nine men to death row"

[suzieseaside]

---

@upthecreekyetagain wrote:

---

@suzieseaside wrote:
Maybe the death sentence for terrorists will make a martyr out of them but there are plenty of other ways that crazy people become radicalised, so it may not make a huge difference overall.
Weighed against the cost of keeping these scum for decades in our overcrowded prisons, with our hard-earned taxes, I would advocate giving them their expected paradise asap. 72 virgins or another misinterpretation - a 72 year old virgin?

---

Suzie - the cost element really is a total red herring unless the death penalty is being advocated for all crimes!

If we are going to imprison criminals then there is going to be a cost - are you less annoyed at the cost of imprisonment for a car thief, drug dealer, rapist or murderer than you are over the cost for a terrorist?

Personally if it came down to a choice then I'd rather the money was spent on locking up the terrorist than the car thief.

---

The cost element may be a total red herring to you, creeky, but it’s only a partial pink mackerel to me.

And yes I am less annoyed at the cost of imprisonment for more minor crimes, and for one-off murderers whose crime may not have been pre-meditated. For those there is a chance that prison will serve its purpose.

The point of prison is punishment, incapacitation (protection for the public), deterrence and rehabilitation. All of these may be effective for these crimes and the cost per individual is significantly less.

For treason, pre-meditated mass murderers and cold-blooded serial killers (like Brady) who are without doubt guilty of directly taking human lives, knowingly and purposefully, and who will have to be in for life or several decades, the cost of incarceration for these individuals, as JD pointed out, is huge.

The deterrence aspect of prison is irrelevant to terrorists imo. IS terrorists would, presumably, rather blow themselves up at the time of acting out their heinous crimes, but I seriously doubt that the possibility of being caught and banged up for life is any deterrent to them carrying out mass murder. As for remorse and rehabilitation – is that really likely?  I'm not convinced that terrorists (or mass murderers/serial killers) deserve that opportunity once they have stepped way over that line that keeps the rest of society relatively civilised.

[suzieseaside]

I was about to mention that the cost in the US of imposing the death penalty is considered to be higher than imprisonment, but I think that is because of the endless appeals that are allowed.  I haven't read your link yet so maybe it says that.

I would only be for the death penalty in the cases I mentioned above (terrorists and mass murderers), and only if there is no conceivable doubt about their crimes. If there is no doubt, why not get on with it instead of leaving people on death row for decades? Who benefits, other than lawyers?

[cee-dee]

The point of prison is punishment, incapacitation (protection for the public), deterrence and rehabilitation. Oh? Does that happen?

If it was punishment, would they go back for another dose? Incapacitation? Some criminals carry on from behind bars. They're not deterred are they?

Finally, rehabilitation. How many are genuinely rehabilitated? You have to wonder when you see prolific offenders back in Court again and again.

What do cops think when they've spent ages catching some of the criminals only to see them let off with a paltry sentence?

It's high time the cost of catching them is properly costed and properly paid for by the criminals themselves. It's sickening to see half a dozen cop cars and a helicopter chasing a stolen car which finally gets trashed and the driver (and passengers) literally escaping with little more than a telling off.

It's time to bring back WORK in prisons, work (to pay for all the catching costs) which lasts all day so they're too tired to cause any trouble.

[suzieseaside]

I agree with work in prisons.

Otherwise I was just saying what the point of prison is supposed to be. 

No, it doesn't work in some, or perhaps many, cases.  Some sentences are too short and there may be too many privileges for prison to be a punishment. The only punishent seems to be lack of liberty.  That's a different question from how to deal with terrorists.

[cee-dee]

Well, I thought the terrorist angle had been well dealt with? Terrorise the general public and we'll make sure you never have the chance to do it again OR corrupt others.

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@suzieseaside wrote:

I was about to mention that the cost in the US of imposing the death penalty is considered to be higher than imprisonment, but I think that is because of the endless appeals that are allowed.  I haven't read your link yet so maybe it says that.

I would only be for the death penalty in the cases I mentioned above (terrorists and mass murderers), and only if there is no conceivable doubt about their crimes. If there is no doubt, why not get on with it instead of leaving people on death row for decades? Who benefits, other than lawyers?

---

There are very few cases where there is no conceivable doubt - the murder of Lee Rigby for example.

In the case under discussion the jury has decided the couple are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, reading the reports I have no reason to believe they got it wrong.

However the most serious crime they have been found guilty of is planning to carry out a terrorist attack and the intention to do so.  In such a case there can never be 100% certainty.

[upthecreekyetagain]

[suzieseaside]

---

@upthecreekyetagain wrote:

---

@suzieseaside wrote:

I was about to mention that the cost in the US of imposing the death penalty is considered to be higher than imprisonment, but I think that is because of the endless appeals that are allowed.  I haven't read your link yet so maybe it says that.

I would only be for the death penalty in the cases I mentioned above (terrorists and mass murderers), and only if there is no conceivable doubt about their crimes. If there is no doubt, why not get on with it instead of leaving people on death row for decades? Who benefits, other than lawyers?

---

There are very few cases where there is no conceivable doubt - the murder of Lee Rigby for example.

In the case under discussion the jury has decided the couple are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, reading the reports I have no reason to believe they got it wrong.

However the most serious crime they have been found guilty of is planning to carry out a terrorist attack and the intention to do so.  In such a case there can never be 100% certainty.

---

Yes, and I have said repeatedly that I would not advocate a death penalty where there might be doubt. But there are cases where there is no doubt, and advances in forensic science have helped compared with decades ago. Do you doubt that the West’s or Christie were guilty (bodies buried around the properties), Brady (admitted it and told where some of the bodies were), Sutcliffe?

Thank heavens the most serious crime that Rehman and Khan actually committed was the planning stage, fortunately being caught before they caused mass murder. Rehman tweeted about it, discussed London Underground as targets vs Westfield Shopping Centre, had a house full of explosives, filmed a test explosion, and said "I have rigged my house to blow at the push of a button by my bedside if the popo [police] try to raid man. Nobody gets in the way of my jihad."

You say there can never be 100% certainty in such a case. About what? Do you think all that preparation and posts on social media might have just been a sick joke, and not intended?

Do you think that terrorists should be given more lenience if they are caught before they carry out their planned atrocities? I think you are nit-picking, or being devil’s advocate in this example. Conspiracy and planning a terrorist attack is treason and extremely serious and in my opinion deserves the same sentence as if they had carried out their threats. If we had capital punishment for Daesh terrorists I don’t feel that being caught in the planning stage should allow them any more favourable treatment.

[cee-dee]

Athough I think that some covicted of terrible crimes should face execution, I wouldn't go this far:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-35213244

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@suzieseaside wrote:

---

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

You say there can never be 100% certainty in such a case. About what? Do you think all that preparation and posts on social media might have just been a sick joke, and not intended?

Do you think that terrorists should be given more lenience if they are caught before they carry out their planned atrocities? I think you are nit-picking, or being devil’s advocate in this example. Conspiracy and planning a terrorist attack is treason and extremely serious and in my opinion deserves the same sentence as if they had carried out their threats. If we had capital punishment for Daesh terrorists I don’t feel that being caught in the planning stage should allow them any more favourable treatment.

---

Do I think that all the 'preparations' this pair carried out was joke, sick or otherwise - no I don't.

Do I think there is a possibility, no matter how tiny, that it was - yes I do.

As I mentioned in my earlier post, the guilt of some is beyond doubt - the murder of Lee Rigby being a case in point where there were numerous eye witnesses as well as photographic evidence - although these are very few and far between - off the top of my head I'm struggling to think of another.

Interesting that you should mention John Christie amongst the list of murderers who you consider were 'guilty beyond doubt' as Timothy Evans was wrongly hanged for the murder of two of his victims.  Therein lies the problem - capital punishment as a penalty for crime is one that can never be rescinded if it is found that the court has made an error.