Scarlett Jenkinson had a "deep desire to kill" and Eddie Ratcliffe was partly driven by his transphobia.

Brianna Ghey’s killers have been given life sentences for her “brutal, planned and sadistic” murder.

Scarlett Jenkinson and Eddie Ratcliffe murdered the 16-year-old in a park in Cheshire in February 2023.

Mrs Justice Yip said Jenkinson was motivated by a “deep desire to kill” while Ratcliffe’s motivation was in part hostility to Brianna’s transgender identity.

She was given 22 years, while Ratcliffe was detained for 20 years.

Both teenagers, who were 15 at the time of the murder and are now 16, could be seen staring ahead towards the judge and showed no visible reaction as they were sentenced.

  • Shadow@lemmy.ca
    534·
    11 months ago

    Huh? 22 years is life? That’s like 1/4 of a life.

    Not advocating either way, just confused.

    • LargoData@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      49·
      11 months ago

      In the UK we give life sentences on all murders, but they include minimum terms. After the minimum term a person is eligible for parole (which means they could be released but only if a parole board says it’s safe to do so). If they are released, they’ll be on licence which means they can be returned to prison without trial if it is believed they pose a danger or break other license conditions.

      We do have whole life terms but they are reserved for serial killers, acts of terror etc. Anyone on these will never be released (unless on appeal the minimum term is reduced)

    • ThenThreeMore@startrek.websiteEnglish
      33·
      11 months ago

      22 years is the minimum custodial part of the sentence, the rest will be ‘on licence’ so out of prison under set conditions like reporting in at a police station every week. Breach of any of the conditions or breaking any other laws is basically back to prison do not pass go.

        • martino@lemmy.world
          9·
          11 months ago

          That’s exactly what it is yeah. 22 years (or 20 for the boy) before they’ll be eligible for parole. If they’re deemed to still be a risk to the public then they won’t be released.

          The UK doesn’t do life sentences with no eligibility for parole. Every sentence will include eligibility for parole, with the maximum period for eligibility being around 25 years. But obviously there are still plenty of prisoners who don’t get parole and spend their entire life behind bars.

          • LargoData@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            5·
            11 months ago

            There are a handful of Whole Life Tariffs but they are exceptionally rare (e.g. Lucy Letby) and it used to be that it had to be given by the home secretary but that’s changed since

            • funkless_eck
              3·
              11 months ago

              Letby was also in Cheshire. What are they putting in the cheese?

          • ThenThreeMore@startrek.websiteEnglish
            5·
            11 months ago

            The UK doesn’t do life sentences with no eligibility for parole. Every sentence will include eligibility for parole, with the maximum period for eligibility being around 25 years.

            That’s not entirely true. Full life orders do exist.

            That nurse who killed all those babies got one last year, that police officer who kidnapped raped and murdered Sarah Everard has one, Dr Harold Shipman had one, and probably most famously Mira Hindley and Ian Brady had them.

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prisoners_with_whole_life_orders

    • Chainweasel@lemmy.worldEnglish
      18·
      11 months ago

      That’s when they’re eligible for parole with the life sentence, it’s not a guarantee they’ll get out then.

    • ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world
      9·
      11 months ago

      They’re never free. They can be sent back to jail for the rest of their life for any minor crime or suspicion.

      There is a different sentence of life imprisonment which is where someone is in prison for life. This is often what people expect when they hear life sentence.

      It is clear from the conversations these two murders had, they were very motivated to kill someone. If they got away with this murder they would likely do it again. So a 20 year sentence is needed. Because they are young they may change and come to genuinely regret these crimes, they also may not change. This type of sentence gives some flexibility - they can be let of jail in 20 years or kept in even longer.

      I would expect they stay in prison for a longer time. A patrol board is going to have a hard time trusting them.

    • foggy@lemmy.world
      3·
      11 months ago

      This varies a lot all over the world, and in the United States state by state…

      But generally, life sentences are given as a life sentence, but with a number of years and a possibility for parole

      So you’ll hear things like 20 to life. This is a life sentence.

      You might hear life without parole.

      Again, this varies wildly all over the place, but this might explain why this appears as a discrepancy

      I’m assuming that these individuals both received life sentences, one with the possibility for parole after 20 years, and one with the possibility for parole after 22. But, I also have no idea.

    • jwt@programming.dev
      2·
      11 months ago

      People are not being sentenced when they are 0 years old, so it doesn’t make much sense comparing those numbers.

  • swiffswaffplop@lemmy.world
    8·
    11 months ago

    In Ratcliffe’s case, another consultant forensic psychiatrist found he has a mild form of autism and selective mutism

    Never heard it put quite like that.