Powers of the courts - tariffs for murder

Murder and dangerous offenders
Murder	The release of prisoners serving life has caused much controversy in recent years. R v Anderson (2002) established that the Home Secretary’s involvement in whether prisoners should be released was contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights. It was argued that a Home Secretary might be influenced by public opinion rather than justice. The CJA 2003 requires judges to slot murderers into one of three categories depending on the severity of their crime. Category 1 – actual life for e.g. multiple murderers, terrorist murderers etc Category 2 – starting point of 30 years for e.g. murderers of police, sexually related etc Category 3 – starting point of 15 years. In addition there are 14 aggravating and mitigating factors which can affect sentence. Once the minimum term has been served, the Parole Board will consider the person’s suitability for release.
The Criminal Justice Act 2003 requires the courts to apply the following sentencing principles to any murders:
Whole life will be the starting point for murderers aged 21 or over in respect of:	Multiple murders (two or more) that show a substantial degree of premeditation, involve abduction of the victim prior to the killing or are sexual or sadistic; murder of a child following abduction or involving sexual or sadistic conduct; terrorist murder; and murder where the offender has been previously convicted of murder.
Second level attracting a starting point of 30 years for:	Murders of police and prison officers during course of duty; murder involving the use of a firearm or explosive; killing done for gain (burglary, robbery etc includes professional or contract killing); killing intended to defeat ends of justice (killing witness); race/religion/sexual orientation motivated; single sadistic or sexual murder of an adult; and multiple murders (other than those above).
Any other murders	Any other murders will have a 15 year starting point.
Whole-life sentence	More than one in ten of the jail population are serving life, the highest number for any country in Western Europe. About thirty-five prisoners have been told that they will die in jail but one of Britain’s most notorious killers is not on the official list. Peter Sutcliffe, the Yorkshire Ripper, convicted of murdering 13 women, has not been told that he must spend the rest of his life in detention. Nor has Ian Huntley who murdered 10-year-olds Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman in 2003, he will serve a minimum of 40 years. List of 'whole-lifers' here Newspaper article here. Added to the list: 2008: Levi Bellfield murdered two young women and tried to kill a third. 2008: Steve Wright murdered five women in Ipswich. 2008: Jeremy Bamber murdered his adoptive parents, his sister, and her six-year-old twin sons in 1985. BBC report, here.
"Life means life" to the Home Secretary, but not to judges.	In a dispute with judges that has continued since 2002, David Blunkett reminded judges of their place. "I'm putting the situation back to what most sensible people thought it should be, which is that Parliament lays down the rules and the judges apply them," The Bar Council put it even more bluntly when they accused him of "trying to institutionalise the grip of the executive around the neck of the judiciary". In a letter to The Times, retired Law Lord Lord Ackner warned that the Home Secretary's attempts to "bludgeon" judges was "doomed to failure", as they would retain the last word in sentencing. What would happen, when push came to shove and the Home Office demanded that a murder should carry 30 years and the judges impose 10? All that ministers could do was put pressure on the Attorney-General to appeal to the Court of Appeal, which Lord Ackner believed would back the judge anyway. The Law Lord also predicted that judges would ignore the new guidelines. "They can, and I think they should, and they would," he predicted.