Cop killer has sentence reduced

metman

Something that sickened me this weekend was the discovery that the murderer of PC Ian Broadhurst, ex-US Marine David Bieber, has had his sentence reduced on account of the original tariff breaching his human rights. What an absolute farce. Human rights weren't high on his agenda when he murdered Ian Broadhurst and attempted to murder two of Broadhurst's colleagues. This decision lets police officers everywhere down, and sends the wrong signal to scum like Bieber.

I also find it disturbing that this news has not been widely reported but instead has been kept relatively low-key.

The story below, and a clip of a documentary on the murder here.

Sentence reduced for PC's killer



Wednesday 23rd July 2008
By Steve Wright

The cold-blooded murderer who shot Bradford policeman Ian Broadhurst at point-blank range as he pleaded for his life may not spend the rest of his days behind bars. Bodybuilder David Bieber today won an appeal against his “life means life” prison sentence for the Boxing Day murder of the traffic officer in 2003. Three Court of Appeal judges decided that the facts of the case, “horrifying though they were”, did not justify a whole-life jail term on the former US Marine.

The court substituted a minimum term of 37 years – which still means 42-year-old Bieber might die in prison. He was found guilty by a jury at Newcastle Crown Court in 2004 of the murder of the officer in Leeds.

PC Broadhurst, 34, of Birkenshaw, was shot during a routine check on a stolen vehicle. Bieber was also convicted of the attempted murders of PC Broadhurst’s colleagues, PCs Neil Roper and James Banks. The sentencing judge said Bieber executed PC Broadhurst in cold blood by a shot to the head when he already lay wounded on the ground.

Yesterday West Yorkshire Police Federation chairman Tom McGhie said the appeal judges had sent out the wrong message.

“David Bieber murdered a police officer who had to plead for his life,” said Mr McGhie. “It was a cold-blooded murder by a callous killer who should never ever be released from prison.

“The judges have let police officers down and it gives the wrong message to those people who are prepared to use extreme violence against police officers that they can murder in cold blood and be released after a period in prison. I don’t think they should ever be released.

“One of the grounds of Bieber’s appeal was that his human rights had been breached. What is more important – the human rights of the law-abiding majority and the people who are there to protect the public from these types of crimes, or someone who doesn’t care about the human rights of others and is prepared to take a life.

“Ian’s mum, Cindy, and widow Eilisa, will be extremely upset by this. It will do nothing for them except to open old wounds.”

Bieber became one of only 25 people at the time to have been given a whole-life sentence in England and Wales. He claimed a friend, a fellow US national from Florida, was the gunman, but refused to name him.

In October 2006, the Court of Appeal rejected Bieber’s appeal against his convictions, saying the evidence against him was “overwhelming”.

Today, the appeal judges headed by the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Phillips, rejected an argument by defence lawyers that whole-life jail terms in principle amounted to a breach of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which states that no one shall be subjected to “inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”.

Lord Phillips, sitting with Mr Justice Pitchford and Mrs Justice Dobbs, said Bieber’s lawyers argued that an irreducible life sentence, with no prospect of release and regardless of any progress made by the prisoner towards rehabilitation, amounted to inhuman treatment. The judge said the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg had so far not held that an irreducible life sentence breached Article 3, although its approach to the issue might change in future.

In any event, a whole-life term should not be regarded as irreducible because the Home Secretary had the power to order a prisoner’s release on compassionate grounds – for instance, when an inmate was terminally ill or incapacitated.

This power was used sparingly, but if the stage was reached where continued imprisonment was held to be inhuman or degrading, “we can see no reason why the Secretary of State should not use that power to release the prisoner.”

Source.

civdef

I remember hearing the recording of the radio messages of the incident - absolutely chilling, and one of the most cold-blooded killings of an officer I've ever heared of.
Having got to know a good few of PC Broadhurst's former Holbeck division colleagues in WYP, I can only imagine how much of a blow this appeal decision must be to them.

At the time, many officers felt this incident was the final blow for unarmed policing in the UK, the original sentence at least indicated the court system would deal as harshly as possible with people who murdered police officers going about their duty, even that cold comfort is gone now.

Shield

+1

Good post. I share the sentiment.

Random

I remember hearing the recording of the radio messages of the incident - absolutely chilling, and one of the most cold-blooded killings of an officer I've ever heared of.

Are these public or did you hear them because you're on the force?

civdef

Was broadcast on a documentary called Death of a Policeman

http://www.crimeandinvestigation.co.uk/crime_video_listing/125/Death_of_a_Policeman.htm

metman

There's more of the same documentary on a CBS broadcast here.

CO19

Yep it's bad that he's got it reduced but this sort of thing i.e murderers getting their sentences reduced happens all the time I'd say that's why it was/is kept fairly quiet.

Eru

It would be a joke if it werent so serious, I always admired the 'life means life' sentence the UK had but sadly criminals are given more rights and protection than their victims in modern times. I mean, how can any judge think its ever going to be safe to let someone like that out of prison?

37 years minimum is still a lot higher than they get in most european countries though so theres some comfort knowing he stands a good chance of dropping while inside.

Perhaps a new minimum sentence of murdering a police officer / peace officer needs too be introduced now to stop this from happening again? Say 50 years MANDATORY

TheNog

I agree with Karlito on this one and I'd imagine so does everyone. If it were to happen in Ireland I reckon the offender would get the same reduced sentence but that original sentence would be alot shorter, say 25-30 yrs. Even though it is supposed to be a mandatory 40 years for killing a member of An Garda Siochana or a member of the Defence Forces (I think, anyone know?)

I'm sorry to say that I feel it is only a matter of short time before a member is killed here.

CO19

TheNog wrote: »

a mandatory 40 years for killing a member of An Garda Siochana or a member of the Defence Forces (I think, anyone know?)

Why doesn't that apply to everyone though ? why just police ?

metman

CO19 wrote: »

Why doesn't that apply to everyone though ? why just police ?

There used to be an offence of 'capital murder' wherein a soldier, police officer or prison officer was murdered. Why doesn't it apply to everyone? Everyone doesn't put everyone's life at risk every time everyone goes to work.

It used to afford additional protection for those that placed themselves in harms way ensuring the security of the State. Funnily enough it was done away as judges were felt capable of making the right decision without mandatory sentences. Glad to see they got that one right :rolleyes:

CO19

So is that saying then by having a higher sentence for killing a police man etc that they are more important than another persons life ?

metman

What it meant was that the law took an especially dim view of those who murdered people who dedicated themselves to ensuring the security of the State, as I already said.

Turner

And the death penalty used to apply.

I would love to see it brought back for cop killers.

Chain gang for a few years (death row) and then firing squad or stoning.

metman

Have to agree with that. The likes of Bieber shouldn't be in a position to waste even more taxpayers money filing appeals while a good man's wife and kids forever mourn the loss of their husband and father.

Bieber and his ilk are oxygen thieves, nothing more. That vermin like him saw fit to execute an already incapacitated unarmed police officer displays an utter contempt for everything that law abiding people hold dear.

Take him out and hang him. That's the way forward.

CO19

metman wrote: »

What it meant was that the law took an especially dim view of those who murdered people who dedicated themselves to ensuring the security of the State, as I already said.

Sorry , I see now.

metman wrote: »

Take him out and hang him. That's the way forward.

Yep indeed,it should be done for anyone who kills anyone ,no special rules for killing certain people.

Eru

I disagree, Im not in favour of the death penalty for a number of reasons and not all of them a nice.

There is, when all is said and done, the possibility of a miscarraige of justice taking place however primarily I believe West, Brady and Hyndly are prime examples of why life inside is a better punishment. 1 Killed himself because he felt it was the better and easier option and the Moors murderers openly begged too be allowed die. Death was their prefered choice and thats reason enough not too give it too them. It may not be compassionate or humane on my part but Im glad they suffered.

I do however agree with higher 'capital murder' sentencing for the murder of servants of the state. Seeing this as making one life more important than another is an error in judgement, all life is worth more than 40 years.