text:
Here's to You (song)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"Here's to You"
Single by Joan Baez and Ennio Morricone
from the album The Ballad of Sacco and Vanzetti
Released
1971
Recorded
1971
Genre
Folk
Songwriter(s)
Joan Baez (lyrics)
Ennio Morricone (music)
"Here's to You" is a song by Ennio Morricone and Joan Baez, released in 1971 as part of the soundtrack of the film Sacco e Vanzetti, directed by Giuliano Montaldo. The lyrics are by Baez herself and the music is by Ennio Morricone.
Contents
[hide]
1 Background
2 Use in other media
3 Covers
4 Lyrics
5 References
Background[edit]
The song is a tribute to two anarchists of Italian origin, Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti who were sentenced to death by a United States court in the 1920s. The consensus of critical opinion has concluded since that the ruling was based on abhorrence to their anarchist political beliefs rather than on any proof that they committed the robbery and murders of which they were accused.[1][2]
Despite the weaknesses of the jury's decision, correspondence by the novelist Upton Sinclair to his lawyer John Beardsley (penned in 1929 and unearthed in 2005) corroborated the guilty verdict against Sacco and Vanzetti in the murder of a payroll clerk and his guard. Sinclair told Beardsley that he had met with Sacco and Vanzetti's defense attorney, Fred Moore, and Moore informed the famous author that his clients were guilty as charged.[3] Moreover, several forensic experts agreed that Sacco fired a shot from his Colt pistol at the scene of the crime.[4][5] Thus, "Here's to You" contributes to the popular but questionable notion of the pair's innocence in the face of a supposedly bigoted American public.[6] The case is known as the Sacco and Vanzetti Affair.
The lyrics for Here's to You make use of a statement attributed to Vanzetti by Philip D. Strong, a reporter for the North American Newspaper Alliance who visited him in prison in May 1927, three months before his execution.[7]
If it had not been for these things, I might have live out my life talking at street corners to scorning men. I might have die, unmarked, unknown, a failure. Now we are not a failure. This is our career and our triumph. Never in our full life could we hope to do such work for tolerance, for justice, for man's understanding of man as we now do by accident. Our words—our lives—our pains—nothing! The taking of our lives—lives of a good shoemaker and a poor fish peddler—all! That last moment belongs to us—that agony is our triumph.
Use in other media[edit]
The song is also used in the 1977 quasi-documentary film Deutschland im Herbst, accompanying footage of the 1977 funeral march for Red Army Faction members Andreas Baader, Gudrun Ensslin, and Jan-Carl Raspe who had committed suicide in prison (see German Autumn). Besides the film Sacco e Vanzetti, the song also appears in the 2004 film The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou.[8][9]
The song became known for its appearance in the Metal Gear Solid series where it was featured in Metal Gear Solid 4 and Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes, where it is featured within the latter game's story.[10]
Covers[edit]
In the United States and worldwide, the song became a veritable human rights movement in the 1970s.[citation needed] In 1972 the German songwriter Franz Josef Degenhardt sang the song under the title "Sacco und Vanzetti" with five verses. The Israeli singer Daliah Lavi sang it in English, French and German.[11] Swedish singer-songwriter Agnetha Fältskog recorded the song in German and released it as a single in 1972, entitled Geh' mit Gott. In 1997, Nana Mouskouri interpreted it with Les Enfoirés starting with a classical rendering that develops into a blues song, intermittent with versions of Georges Moustaki in French and finally in English.[citation needed]. In 2011, Bandista covered the song with the name "Selam size" in their album "Daima!".
For its appearance in the end credits of Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots, the song was arranged by longtime series composer Harry Gregson-Williams and sung by Lisbeth Scott.
Hayley Westenra and Ennio Morricone perform Here's To You on the album Paradiso released 2011 and nominated for the Classic Brit Award 2012.
Corsica-based band L'Arcusgi used Here's to You music in their 2011 song Alba Nova (in Corsican A New Dawn).
Lyrics[edit]
Here's to you, Nicola and Bart
Rest forever here in our hearts
The last and final moment is yours
That agony is your triumph.[12]
References[edit]
Jump up ^ Montgomery 1960 p. v.
Jump up ^ Young & Kaiser 1985 preface.
Jump up ^ Los Angeles Times "Sinclair Letter Turns Out to Be Another Expose"
Jump up ^ University of Missouri "Summary of Evidence in the Sacco & Vanzetti Case"
Jump up ^ Jim Fisher - Edinboro University of Pennsylvania "Firearms Identification in the Sacco-Vanzetti Case"
Jump up ^ National Public Radio "Sacco and Vanzetti: Guilty After All?"
Jump up ^ Sacco, Nicola; Vanzetti, Bartolomeo (2007). The Letters of Sacco and Vanzetti. London: Penguin. p. l. ISBN 978-0-14-310507-7.
Jump up ^ "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou (2004) : Soundtracks". IMDb.com. Retrieved 2016-10-03.
Jump up ^ "Release "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou" by Various Artists". MusicBrainz.org. 2004-12-14. Retrieved 2016-10-03.
Jump up ^ "TwitLonger — When you talk too much for Twitter". Twitlonger.com. 2012-05-01. Retrieved 2016-10-03.
Jump up ^ Daliah Lavi – Here's To You Discogs.com
Jump up ^ Baez, Joan. "Here's to You". Joan Baez Lyrics. Retrieved 24 November 2015.
[show]
v
t
e
Sacco and Vanzetti
Films
Sacco e Vanzetti (1971)
The Diary of Sacco and Vanzetti (2004)
Sacco and Vanzetti (2006)
Other media
Boston (1928 novel)
Ballads of Sacco & Vanzetti (1947 album)
Winterset (1935 play)
"Here's to You" (1971 song)
Sacco and Vanzetti: The Anarchist Background (1996 book)
Sacco and Vanzetti Must Die! (2006 novel)
[show]
v
t
e
Joan Baez
Studio albums
Joan Baez
Joan Baez, Vol. 2
Joan Baez/5
Farewell, Angelina
Noël
Joan
Baptism: A Journey Through Our Time
Any Day Now
David's Album
I Live One Day at a Time
Carry It On
Blessed Are...
Come from the Shadows
Where Are You Now, My Son?
Gracias a la Vida: Joan Baez canta en español
Diamonds & Rust
Gulf Winds
Blowin' Away
Honest Lullaby
Recently
Speaking of Dreams
Play Me Backwards
Gone From Danger
Dark Chords on a Big Guitar
Day after Tomorrow
Whistle Down the Wind
Live albums
Joan Baez in Concert
Joan Baez in Concert, Part 2
From Every Stage
Live Europe 83
Diamonds & Rust in the Bullring
Ring Them Bells
Live at Newport
Bowery Songs
Compilations
Folksingers 'Round Harvard Square
Portrait of Joan Baez
The First 10 Years
The Joan Baez Ballad Book
Hits: Greatest and Others
The Contemporary Ballad Book
The Joan Baez Lovesong Album
Best of Joan C. Baez
The Joan Baez Country Music Album
Joan Baez: Classics
Brothers in Arms
Rare, Live & Classic
Notable songs
"Babe, I'm Gonna Leave You"
"Diamonds & Rust"
"Farewell, Angelina"
"Forever Young"
"Here's to You"
"Honest Lullaby"
"House of the Rising Sun"
"It's All Over Now, Baby Blue"
"Joe Hill"
"Lily of the West"
"Love Is Just a Four-Letter Word"
"Love Song to a Stranger"
"Mary Hamilton"
"The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down"
"Reunion Hill"
"Scarlet Tide"
"Silver Dagger"
"Speaking of Dreams"
"Sweet Sir Galahad"
"There but for Fortune"
"We Shall Overcome"
"What Have They Done to the Rain"
Related
Discography
List of Joan Baez concerts
Albert Baez (father)
Mimi Fariña (sister)
David Harris (husband)
Richard Fariña (brother-in-law)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Here%27s_to_You_(song)&oldid=832755422"
Categories:
1971 songs
1971 singles
Ennio Morricone songs
Joan Baez songs
Songs written for films
Songs written by Joan Baez
Songs in memory of deceased persons
Sacco and Vanzetti
Anarchist songs
Hidden categories:
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from October 2011
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Deutsch
Français
Italiano
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Edit links
This page was last edited on 27 March 2018, at 20:40.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

key: html

type: local

value: div

attrs: id class

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

value: a

attrs: id class lang

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

value: th

attrs: colspan class style

value: tr

value: img

attrs: alt src width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

attrs: href class

value: td

attrs: colspan style

attrs: href title

value: i

values:
/wiki/Nicola_Sacco
mw-redirect
Nicola Sacco

values:
/wiki/Bartolomeo_Vanzetti
mw-redirect
Bartolomeo Vanzetti

values:
/wiki/Deutschland_im_Herbst
mw-redirect
Deutschland im Herbst

values:
/wiki/Metal_Gear_Solid_4
mw-redirect
Metal Gear Solid 4

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (October 2011)

values:
noprint Inline-Template Template-Fact
white-space:nowrap;

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/h7ti3a

values: nowraplinks collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values:
Joan_Baez
fn
font-size:114%;margin:0 4em

values:
row
navbox-group
width:1%;background: #EEEEEE;

values:
/wiki/Farewell_Angelina
mw-redirect
Farewell Angelina

values:
/wiki/Love_Song_To_A_Stranger
mw-redirect
Love Song To A Stranger

values:
/wiki/Mary_Hamilton_(ballad)
mw-redirect
Mary Hamilton (ballad)

values: nowraplinks vcard hlist collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: Category:Songs in memory of deceased persons

values: Category:All articles with unsourced statements

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from October 2011

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Here%27s_to_You_(song)
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Here_s_to_You_song rootpage-Here_s_to_You_song skin-vector action-view


text:
Origination Clause
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is part of a series on the
Constitution of the
United States of America
Preamble and Articles
of the Constitution
Preamble
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
Amendments to the Constitution
Bill of Rights
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
XI
XII
XIII
XIV
XV
XVI
XVII
XVIII
XIX
XX
XXI
XXII
XXIII
XXIV
XXV
XXVI
XXVII
Unratified Amendments
Congressional Apportionment
Titles of Nobility
Corwin
Child Labor
Equal Rights
D.C. Voting Rights
History
Drafting and ratification timeline
Convention
Signing
Federalism
Republicanism
Full text of the Constitution and Amendments
Preamble and Articles I–VII
Amendments I–X
Amendments XI–XXVII
Unratified Amendments
United States portal
U.S. Government portal
Law portal
Wikipedia book
v
t
e
The Origination Clause, sometimes called the Revenue Clause, is part of the United States Constitution. This clause says that all bills for raising revenue must start in the House of Representatives, but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as in the case of other bills.
The Origination Clause stemmed from a British parliamentary practice that all money bills must have their first reading (and any other initial readings) in the House of Commons before being sent to the House of Lords. This practice was intended to ensure that the power of the purse is possessed by the legislative body most responsive to the people, although the British practice was modified in America by allowing the Senate to amend these bills.
This clause was part of the Great Compromise between small and large states. The large states were unhappy with the lopsided power of small states in the Senate, and so the Origination Clause theoretically offsets the unrepresentative nature of the Senate, compensating the large states for allowing equal voting rights to Senators from small states.
Contents
[hide]
1 Text
2 Background leading up to adoption
3 Developments since 1789
4 See also
5 References
6 External links
Text[edit]
The Origination Clause, also known as the Revenue Clause,[1][2] reads as follows:
All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.
Background leading up to adoption[edit]
The federal Constitution was written in 1787 and adopted in 1789. Prior to 1787, several state constitutions followed British practice by providing that "money bills" must start in the more representative branch of the state legislature.[3]
Vesting the power of origination in the U.S. House of Representatives was part of the Great Compromise, in which the framers also agreed to allow equality in the Senate regardless of a state's population, while creating representation based on a State's population in the House.[4] The framers adopted the Great Compromise on July 16, 1787. At that point, the draft clause stated: "all bills for raising or appropriating money....shall originate in the [representative house], and shall not be altered or amended by the [other house]...."[5]
The Origination Clause was modified later in 1787 to reduce the House's power by allowing the Senate to amend revenue bills,[6] and by removing appropriation bills from the scope of the clause (the House and Senate have disagreed on the latter point).[1][7][8] However, a proposal was defeated that would have reduced the House's power even more by changing "bills for raising revenue" to "bills for raising money for the purpose of revenue".[5] James Madison explained:[9]
In many acts, particularly in the regulations of trade, the object would be twofold. The raising of revenue would be one of them. How could it be determined which was the primary or predominant one; or whether it was necessary that revenue shd: be the sole object, in exclusion even of other incidental effects.
Ben Franklin (left) and Elbridge Gerry urged adoption of an origination clause.[10]
John Dickinson (left) and Edmund Randolph joined Franklin and George Mason to urge reinsertion of the clause.[10]
Regarding the decision to allow Senate amendments, some of the reasoning was given by Theophilus Parsons during the convention in Massachusetts that ratified the Constitution; Parsons said that, otherwise, "representatives might tack any foreign matter to a money-bill, and compel the Senate to concur or lose the supplies."[11] Madison believed that the difference between a permissible Senate amendment and an impermissible Senate amendment would, "turn on the degree of connection between the matter & object of the bill and the alteration or amendment offered to it."[12]
During that era, the Continental Congress had a rule stating: "No new motion or proposition shall be admitted under color of amendment as a substitute for a question or proposition under debate until it is postponed or disagreed to."[3] At the Virginia convention to ratify the Constitution, delegate William Grayson was concerned that a substitute amendment could have the same effect as an origination: "the Senate could strike out every word of the bill except the word whereas, or any other introductory word, and might substitute new words of their own."[13] Grayson was not convinced by Madison's argument that "the first part of the clause is sufficiently expressed to exclude all doubts" about where the origination must occur.[14]
In its final form, the Origination Clause was a major selling point for ratification of the Constitution. James Madison, who supported the final version during and after the 1787 Convention,[10] wrote the following in Federalist 58 as the debate over ratification was raging:[13]
The house of representatives can not only refuse, but they alone can propose the supplies requisite for the support of government. They in a word hold the purse; that powerful instrument by which we behold, in the history of the British constitution, an infant and humble representation of the people, gradually enlarging the sphere of its activity and importance, and finally reducing, as far as it seems to have wished, all the overgrown prerogatives of the other branches of the government. This power over the purse, may in fact be regarded as the most compleat and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people, for obtaining a redress of every grievance, and for carrying into effect every just and salutary measure.
This clause resonated with a citizenry opposed to taxation without representation.[15]
Developments since 1789[edit]
This article is part of a series on the
United States House
of Representatives
History of the United States
House of Representatives
Members
Current members
(by seniority
by age
non-voting)
Former members
Hill committees
(DCCC
NRCC)
Congressional districts
Speaker of the United States
House of Representatives (list)
Party leaders
Democratic Caucus
Republican Conference
Politics and procedure
Committee of the Whole
Closed session (list)
Saxbe fix
Committees (list)
Procedures
Origination Clause
Quorum call
Unanimous consent
Salaries
Apportionment (Huntington–Hill method)
Redistricting
Gerrymandering
Articles of impeachment
Self-executing rule
Rules suspension
General ticket
Plural district
Places
United States Capitol
House office buildings
(Cannon
Ford
Longworth
Rayburn)
v
t
e
Many scholars have written about the Origination Clause. Among the most widely influential was Joseph Story, who wrote in 1833 that the clause refers only to bills that levy taxes:[16][17]
[The clause] has been confined to bills to levy taxes in the strict sense of the words, and has not been understood to extend to bills for other purposes, which may incidentally create revenue. No one supposes, that a bill to sell any of the public lands, or to sell public stock, is a bill to raise revenue, in the sense of the constitution. Much less would a bill be so deemed, which merely regulated the value of foreign or domestic coins, or authorized a discharge of insolvent debtors upon assignments of their estates to the United States, giving a priority of payment to the United States in cases of insolvency, although all of them might incidentally bring, revenue into the treasury.
The U.S. Supreme Court has decided several cases involving this clause, and all of those challenges to federal statutes failed.[18] For example, in the 1911 case of Flint v. Stone Tracy Company, the Court held: "The amendment was germane to the subject-matter of the bill and not beyond the power of the Senate to propose."[19] But, the plaintiffs in one lower court decision succeeded in striking down a federal statute on Origination Clause grounds.[20] The Supreme Court stated in the 1990 case of United States v. Munoz-Flores:[21]
Both parties agree that "revenue bills are those that levy taxes in the strict sense of the word, and are not bills for other purposes which may incidentally create revenue." Twin City Bank v. Nebeker, 167 U. S. 196, 202 (1897) (citing 1 J. Story, Commentaries on the Constitution § 880, pp. 610–611 (3d ed. 1858)). The Court has interpreted this general rule to mean that a statute that creates a particular governmental program and that raises revenue to support that program, as opposed to a statute that raises revenue to support Government generally, is not a "Bil[l] for raising Revenue" within the meaning of the Origination Clause.
Justice Joseph Story
What this means exactly is disputed. According to one scholar, a statute is outside the scope of the Origination Clause if it, "imposes an exaction not to raise revenue, but to enforce a statute passed under the Commerce Clause or other enumerated power."[22] However, according to another scholar, even exactions imposed only under the taxing powers of Congress are outside the scope of the Origination Clause if Congress "earmarks revenues to fund a program it creates."[23] Regarding the latter view, Justice John Paul Stevens suggested in 1990 that its tendency was to "convert the Origination Clause into a formal accounting requirement...."[21]
A bill that lowers taxes instead of raises taxes may still be a bill for raising revenue, according to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.[13] Assuming that a bill is for raising revenue, a further ambiguity in the clause involves how far the Senate’s right to amend extends.[7] According to law professor Jack Balkin, the Senate may take a House-originated revenue bill, and "substitute a different bill on a different subject."[24] On the other hand, law professor Randy Barnett says: "The Supreme Court has never approved the 'strike-and-replace' procedure...."[25]
Not only the House of Representatives, but also the Senate and the judiciary have sometimes tried to guard the role of the House with regard to origination of revenue bills. For example, as early as 1789, the Senate deemed itself helpless to pass a law levying a tax.[1] And, as mentioned, a federal court in 1915 struck down legislation contrary to the clause.[20] The U.S. Supreme Court has expressed willingness to address such issues, according to its 1990 opinion by Justice Thurgood Marshall in Munoz-Flores:
A law passed in violation of the Origination Clause would thus be no more immune from judicial scrutiny because it was passed by both Houses and signed by the President than would be a law passed in violation of the First Amendment.
In 2012, the joint dissent in the U.S. Supreme Court case National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius mentioned that "the Constitution requires tax increases to originate in the House of Representatives" per the Origination Clause,[26] though that issue was not addressed by the majority opinion.[27] In 2014, Sissel v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, a challenge to the Affordable Care Act brought by the Pacific Legal Foundation based upon this clause, was rejected by a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia,[28] and that court later declined a request to put the matter before all of its judges ("en banc") over a lengthy dissent authored by Judge Brett Kavanaugh.[29]
In 2013, during the United States federal government shutdown of 2013 and the United States debt-ceiling crisis of 2013, the Republican-led House of Representatives could not agree on or pass an originating resolution to end the government crisis, as had been agreed, so the Democratic-led Senate used bill H.R. 2775 to resolve the impasse by using the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2014, an insignificant bill that originated in the House, which it amended all the tax and appropriation measures so to satisfy the formal requirements of the Originating Clause.
See also[edit]
Revenue-raising bills must have started in the House (right) and moved to the Senate (left).
Article One of the United States Constitution (where the Origination Clause is located)
Blue slip (when the House protests on Origination Clause grounds)
Taxing and Spending Clause (authorizes Congress to levy taxes)
Sixteenth Amendment (expands ability of Congress to levy taxes)
Seventeenth Amendment (provides for direct election of two Senators for each state)
Shell bill (legislative maneuver)
Substitute amendment (legislative maneuver)
References[edit]
^ Jump up to: a b c Wirls, Daniel and Wirls, Stephen. The Invention of the United States Senate, p. 188 (Taylor & Francis 2004).
Jump up ^ Gold, Martin. Senate Procedure and Practice, p. 135 (Rowman & Littlefield 2008).
^ Jump up to: a b Sargent, Noel. "Bills for Raising Revenue Under the Federal and State Constitutions", Minnesota Law Review, Vol. 4, p. 330 (1919).
Jump up ^ Jensen, Erik and Monaghan, Henry. The Taxing Power: a Reference Guide to the United States Constitution. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 170 (2005). ISBN 0-313-31229-X
^ Jump up to: a b Meigs, William. The Growth of the Constitution in the Federal Convention of 1787, pp. 110–112 (Lippincott 1900).
Jump up ^ Farrelly, Marie. "Special Assessments and the Origination Clause: A Tax on Crooks?", Fordham Law Review, Vol. 58, p. 447 (1989).
^ Jump up to: a b Saturno, James. "The Origination Clause of the U.S. Constitution: Interpretation and Enforcement", CRS Report for Congress (Mar-15-2011).
Jump up ^ Woodrow Wilson wrote that the Senate has extremely broad amendment authority with regard to appropriations bills, as distinguished from bills that levy taxes. See Wilson, Woodrow. Congressional Government: A Study in American Politics, pp. 155–156 (Transaction Publishers 2002). Likewise, according to the Library of Congress, the Constitution is the source of the origination requirement for revenue bills, whereas tradition is the source of the origination requirement for appropriation bills. See Sullivan, John. "How Our Laws Are Made", Library of Congress (accessed August 26, 2013).
Jump up ^ Naroll, Raoul. Clio and the Constitution: The Influence of the Study of History on the Federal Convention of 1787, p. 140 (UCLA 1953).
^ Jump up to: a b c Graham, John. Free, Sovereign, and Independent States: The Intended Meaning of the American Constitution, pp. 238–240 (Pelican Publishing, 2009).
Jump up ^ Luce, Robert. Legislative Problems: Development, Status, And Trend Of The Treatment And Exercise Of Lawmaking Powers, p. 417 (Houghton Mifflin 1935, reprinted by The Lawbook Exchange 2005).
Jump up ^ Watson, David. The Constitution of the United States: its history application and construction, p. 346 (Callaghan 1910).
^ Jump up to: a b c Medina, J. Michael. The Origination Clause in the American Constitution: A Comparative Survey, Tulsa Law Journal, Vol. 23, p. 165 (1987). Madison also wrote this in Federalist No. 45: "[T]he present Congress have as complete authority to REQUIRE of the States indefinite supplies of money for the common defense and general welfare, as the future Congress will have to require them of individual citizens."
Jump up ^ Horn, Stephen. Unused Power: The Work of the Senate Committee on Appropriations, p. 249 (Brookings Institution Press 1970).
Jump up ^ Vile, John. A Companion to the United States Constitution and Its Amendments, p. 35 (ABC-CLIO, 2010).
Jump up ^ Nowell, Edwin. A history of the relations between the two houses of parliament in Tasmania and South Australia: in regard to amendments to bills containing provisions relating to the public revenue or expenditure, pp. 130–131 (Tasmania 1890).
Jump up ^ Story, Joseph. Commentaries on the Constitution (1833).
Jump up ^ Krotoszynski, Ronald. "Reconsidering the Nondelegation Doctrine: Universal Service, the Power to Tax, and the Ratification Doctrine", Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 80 (2005).
Jump up ^ Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107 (1911).
^ Jump up to: a b Hubbard v. Lowe, 226 F. 135 (S.D.N.Y. 1915), appeal dismissed mem., 242 U.S. 654 (1916).
^ Jump up to: a b United States v. Munoz-Flores, 495 U.S. 385 (1990).
Jump up ^ Sandefur, Timothy. "So it's a Tax, Now What?: Some of the Problems Remaining After NFIB v. Sebelius", Texas Review of Law and Politics, Vol. 17, p. 204 (2013).
Jump up ^ Kysar, Rebecca. "The 'Shell Bill' Game: Avoidance and the Origination Clause", Washington University Law Review, Vol. 91 (2014).
Jump up ^ Balkin, Jack. "The Right Strikes Back: A New Legal Challenge for ObamaCare", The Atlantic (September 17, 2012).
Jump up ^ Barnett, Randy. "New Obamacare Challenge: The Origination Clause", The Volokh Conspiracy (September 13, 2012).
Jump up ^ Fisher, Daniel. "Obamacare Dissents Poke Holes In Roberts' Reasoning", Forbes (June 29, 2012).
Jump up ^ Eastman, John. "Hidden Gems in the Historical 2011–2012 Term, and Beyond", Charleston Law Review, Vol. 7, p. 19 (2012).
Jump up ^ Sissel v. DHS (D.C. Cir. 2014). See also Hotze v. Burwell (5th Cir. 2015).
Jump up ^ Sissel v. DHS , "On Petititon for Rehearing En Banc" (August 7, 2015).
External links[edit]
"Article 1, Section 7, Clause 1", The Founders' Constitution, University of Chicago (2000).
Zotti, Priscilla and Schmitz, Nicholas. “The Origination Clause: Meaning, Precedent, and Theory from the 12th Century to the 21st Century”, British Journal of American Legal Studies, Vol. 3 (Spring 2014).
Jensen, Erik, “The Origination Clause”, The Heritage Guide to the Constitution.
Natelson, Robert. The Founders’ Origination Clause (and Implications for the Affordable Care Act), The Independence Institute (August 3, 2014), via SSRN.
Riddick, Floyd. "Revenue", Senate Procedure, p. 1214 (1992).
Hinds, Asher. "Prerogatives of the House as to Revenue Legislation", Hinds' Precedents of the House of Representatives of the United States, p. 942 (U.S. Government Printing Office 1907).
The Original Meaning of the Origination Clause: Hearing before the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, April 29, 2014
Smyth, Daniel. The Original Public Meaning of Amendment in the Origination Clause Versus the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, British Journal of American Legal Studies, Vol. 6(2), forthcoming.
[hide]
v
t
e
United States Constitution
Text
(via Wikisource)
Preamble and Articles I–VII
Amendments 1–10
Amendments 11–27
Unsuccessful Proposed Amendments
Debates in State Conventions on the Adoption of the Constitution
Preamble
and articles
Preamble
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
Amendments
Ratified
Bill of Rights
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Others
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Pending
Congressional Apportionment
Titles of Nobility
Corwin Amendment
Child Labor
Repealed
Eighteenth Amendment
Unsuccessful
Equal Rights
District of Columbia Voting Rights
List of Amendments
Bill of Rights (Amendments 1–10)
Reconstruction Amendments (Amendments 13–15)
Amendment proposals in Congress
Convention to propose amendments
State ratifying conventions
Formation
History
Articles of Confederation
Mount Vernon Conference
Annapolis Convention
Philadelphia Convention
Virginia Plan
New Jersey Plan
Connecticut Compromise
Three-Fifths Compromise
Committee of Detail
Signing
Independence Hall
Syng inkstand
The Federalist Papers
Anti-Federalist Papers
Massachusetts Compromise
Virginia Ratifying Convention
Hillsborough Convention
Rhode Island ratification
Drafting and ratification timeline
Clauses
Appointments
Appropriations
Assistance of Counsel
Bill of credit
Case or Controversy
Citizenship
Commerce
Compact
Compulsory Process
Confrontation
Contract
Copyright and Patent
Double Jeopardy
Due Process
Equal Protection
Establishment
Exceptions
Excessive Bail
Ex post facto
Extradition
Free Exercise
Free Speech
Fugitive Slave
Full Faith and Credit
General Welfare
Guarantee
Impeachment
Import-Export
Ineligibility
Militia
Natural-born citizen
Necessary and Proper
New States
No Religious Test
Oath or Affirmation
Origination
Petition
Postal
Presentment
Privileges and Immunities
Privileges or Immunities
Recommendation
Self-Incrimination
Speech or Debate
Speedy Trial
State of the Union
Supremacy
Suspension
Take Care
Takings
Taxing and Spending
Territorial
Title of Nobility
Treaty
Trial by Jury
Vesting
Vicinage
War Powers
List of clauses
Interpretation
Concurrent powers
Congressional enforcement
Constitutional law
Criminal procedure
Criminal sentencing
Dormant Commerce Clause
Enumerated powers
Equal footing
Executive privilege
Incorporation of the Bill of Rights
Judicial review
Nondelegation doctrine
Preemption
Saxbe fix
Separation of church and state
Separation of powers
Taxation power
Unitary executive theory
Display
and legacy
National Archives
Charters of Freedom Rotunda
Independence Mall
Constitution Day
Constitution Gardens
National Constitution Center
Scene at the Signing of the Constitution (painting)
A More Perfect Union (film)
Worldwide influence
US Government Portal • Law Portal • Wikipedia book
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Origination_Clause&oldid=799407661"
Categories:
Article One of the United States Constitution
Clauses of the United States Constitution
Legislative branch of the United States government
Taxation in the United States
Origination Clause case law
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Add links
This page was last edited on 7 September 2017, at 15:05.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

attrs: id class style

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

values: Greater coat of arms of the United States.svg

values: Preamble to the United States Constitution

value: li

value: ul

values: Article One of the United States Constitution

values: Article Two of the United States Constitution

values: Article Three of the United States Constitution

values: Article Four of the United States Constitution

values: Article Five of the United States Constitution

values: Article Six of the United States Constitution

values: Article Seven of the United States Constitution

values: List of amendments to the United States Constitution

values: First Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Second Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Third Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Twentieth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Twenty-first Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Twenty-second Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Twenty-third Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Twenty-fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Twenty-sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: Twenty-seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution

values: District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment

values: History of the United States Constitution

values: Timeline of drafting and ratification of the United States Constitution

values: Constitutional Convention (United States)

values: Signing of the United States Constitution

values: s:Constitution of the United States of America

values: s:Additional amendments to the United States Constitution

values: s:Portal:Unsuccessful attempts to amend the United States Constitution

attrs: alt src width height class srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values: padding:0.3em 0.4em 0.3em;font-weight:bold;border-top:1px #aaa solid; border-bottom:1px #aaa solid;

values: Template talk:US Constitution article series

values:
/wiki/First_reading
mw-redirect
First reading

values: Edit section: Background leading up to adoption

values: John Dickinson (Pennsylvania and Delaware)

values: Category:United States House of Representatives

values: Great Seal of the United States House of Representatives

values: Current members of the United States House of Representatives

values: Seniority in the United States House of Representatives

values: List of the oldest living members of the United States House of Representatives

values: Non-voting members of the United States House of Representatives

values: List of former members of the United States House of Representatives

values: Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee

values: National Republican Congressional Committee

values: List of United States congressional districts

values: Speaker of the United States House of Representatives

values: List of Speakers of the United States House of Representatives

values: Party leaders of the United States House of Representatives

values: Democratic Caucus of the United States House of Representatives

values: Republican Conference of the United States House of Representatives

values: Committee of the Whole (United States House of Representatives)

values: Closed session of the United States Congress

values: Closed sessions of the United States House of Representatives

values: List of United States House of Representatives committees

values: Procedures of the United States House of Representatives

values: Salaries of members of the United States Congress

values: United States congressional apportionment

values: Suspension of the rules in the United States Congress

values: Template:United States House of Representatives

values: Template talk:United States House of Representatives

values: float:right;clear:right;width:22.0em;margin:0 0 1.0em 1.0em;background:#f9f9f9;border:1px solid #aaa;padding:0.2em;border-spacing:0.4em 0;text-align:center;line-height:1.4em;font-size:88%;width:18em;

values:
/wiki/United_States_Supreme_Court
mw-redirect
United States Supreme Court

values:
/wiki/Flint_v._Stone_Tracy_Company
mw-redirect
Flint v. Stone Tracy Company

values: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

values:
/wiki/Affordable_Care_Act
mw-redirect
Affordable Care Act

values: United States federal government shutdown of 2013

values: United States debt-ceiling crisis of 2013

values:
nofollow
external text
https://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo50833

values: s:Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution

values: List of proposed amendments to the United States Constitution

values: Convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution

values: Ratification of the United States Constitution by Rhode Island

values:
/wiki/Guarantee_Clause
mw-redirect
Guarantee Clause

values: Oath of office of the President of the United States

values: List of clauses of the United States Constitution

values: United States constitutional criminal procedure

values: United States constitutional sentencing law

values: Separation of church and state in the United States

values: Separation of powers under the United States Constitution

values: Scene at the Signing of the Constitution of the United States

values: United States Constitution and worldwide influence

values: nowraplinks collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: Category:Article One of the United States Constitution

values: Category:Clauses of the United States Constitution

values: Category:Legislative branch of the United States government

values:
catlinks mw-normal-catlinks
catlinks mw-normal-catlinks
interface

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Origination_Clause
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values:
uls-settings-trigger
Language settings
0
button
true

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Origination_Clause rootpage-Origination_Clause vector-nav-directionality skin-vector action-view


text:
Life imprisonment in England and Wales
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Criminal procedure
Criminal trials and convictions
Rights of the accused
Fair trial
Speedy trial
Jury trial
Counsel
Presumption of innocence
Exclusionary rule1
Self-incrimination
Double jeopardy2
Verdict
Conviction
Acquittal
Not proven3
Directed verdict
Sentencing
Mandatory
Suspended
Custodial
Discharge
Guidelines
Totality5, 6
Dangerous offender4, 5
Capital punishment
Execution warrant
Cruel and unusual punishment
Imprisonment
Life imprisonment
Indefinite imprisonment
Post-sentencing
Parole
Probation
Tariff 6
Life licence6
Miscarriage of justice
Exoneration
Pardon
Sex offender registration
Sexually violent predator legislation1
Related areas of law
Criminal defenses
Criminal law
Evidence
Civil procedure
Portals
Law
Criminal justice
1 US courts
2 Not in English/Welsh courts
3 Scottish courts
4 English/Welsh courts
5 Canadian courts
6 UK courts
v
t
e
In England and Wales, life imprisonment is a sentence which lasts until the death of the prisoner, although in most cases the prisoner will be eligible for parole (officially termed "early release") after a fixed period set by the judge. This period is known as the "minimum term" (previously known as the "tariff"). In some exceptionally grave cases, however, a judge may order that a life sentence should mean life by making a "whole life order."
Murder has carried a mandatory life sentence in England and Wales since capital punishment was suspended in 1965.[1] There is currently no "first degree" or "second degree" murder definition. However, there were two degrees of murder between 1957 and 1965, one carrying the death penalty and one life imprisonment, and there have recently been plans to introduce such a definition.[2]
Life imprisonment is only applicable to defendants aged 21 or over. Those aged between 18 and 20 are sentenced to custody for life. Those aged under 18 are sentenced to detention during Her Majesty's pleasure for murder, or detention for life for other crimes where life imprisonment is the sentence for adults. However people under 21 may not be sentenced to a whole life order, and so must become eligible for parole.
In addition to the sentences mentioned above, until 2012 there were two other kinds of life sentence, imprisonment for public protection (for those over 18) and detention for public protection (for those under 18). These were for defendants whose crimes were not serious enough to merit a normal life sentence, but who were considered a danger to the public and so should not be released until the Parole Board had decided that they no longer represented a risk. These sentences were abolished by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, although a number of prisoners remain imprisoned under the former legislation.
Contents
[hide]
1 History
2 The Criminal Justice Act 2003
3 Paroles
4 Minimum term
5 Starting points for murder
6 Whole life order
6.1 European Court of Human Rights challenges against whole life orders
7 References
8 External links
History[edit]
Main article: Capital punishment in the United Kingdom
When Parliament was considering abolition of the death penalty, there were many MPs who were against the reform, and the deal offered was that former capital offences would always inevitably merit a mandatory life sentence. Accordingly, life imprisonment replaced the death penalty as punishment for murderers, firstly for those whose sentences were commuted and later for those whose crimes were not "aggravated" within the meaning of the Homicide Act 1957. To begin with, it was fairly common for those sentenced to life to be released in around ten to fifteen years.[3] As time passed, it came to be thought that longer sentences should be imposed, especially in cases such as the Moors Murders, the Yorkshire Ripper and Dennis Nilsen. The Home Secretary (and now the Minister for Justice) was empowered to make Whole Life Orders to ensure that particularly dangerous or heinous criminals were never released. Currently, mandatory lifers serve an average of 14 years and for other lifers the average has been in decline and now stands at nine years.[3]
The Criminal Justice Act 2003[edit]
Main article: Criminal Justice Act 2003 § Life sentences for murder
Formerly, the Home Secretary reserved the right to set the "tariff" or minimum length of term for prisoners sentenced to life imprisonment. However, in November 2000 politicians were stripped of this power in relation to defendants aged under 18, following an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights by the murderers of James Bulger.[4]
In November 2002 a similar decision in relation to adult offenders followed a successful challenge by convicted double murderer Anthony Anderson. Anderson had been sentenced to life imprisonment in 1988 with a recommended minimum term of 15 years, but the Home Secretary later informed him that he would have to serve at least 20 years. The House of Lords ruled that this was incompatible with his human rights.[5][6]
This judgment was upheld by the European Court of Human Rights. Since then, judges have set minimum terms and only the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom can make any amendments to the sentence. Though politicians can no longer decide when or if a life sentence prisoner can be considered for parole, the Attorney General still has the power to petition the Court of Appeal in a bid to increase any prison terms which are seen as unduly lenient.[citation needed]
The Criminal Justice Act 2003 sets out guidelines for how long murderers should spend in prison before being considered for parole. Judges are not obliged to follow the guidelines, but must give reasons in court if they depart from them - whether recommending a lesser or higher minimum term than in accordance with the guidelines.[7]
The guidelines recommended that multiple murderers (who murder two or more people) whose crimes involved sexual abuse, pre-planning, abduction or terrorism should never be released from prison. Such a sentence is known as a "whole life order". The murder of a single child following abduction, sexual or sadistic conduct also qualifies, as does the murder of a police or prison officer during the course of their duty (since 2015) and murder committed to advance a political, religious or ideological cause - along with any murder which was committed by someone who had previously been convicted of murder. Other multiple murders (two or more) should carry a recommended minimum of 30 years as a starting point sentence prior to consideration of additional aggravating factors and of any mitigating factors. A 30-year minimum should also apply to the worst single murders, including those with sexual or racial motives and the use of a firearm - until 2015, the murder of a police officer in the course of duty also came within this category. Most other murders should be subject to a 15-year minimum as a starting point. Inevitably, there have been numerous departures from these guidelines since they were first put into practice. For example, the judge who sentenced American fugitive David Bieber for the murder of a police officer said that he should never be released from prison,[8] whereas statutory guidelines recommended a 30-year minimum for this type of murder - this was a decade before the act was amended to include the murder of a police officer in the course of duty as one of the offenders whose life sentences should mean life.
On 23 July 2008, Bieber won a High Court appeal against the whole life tariff recommended by the trial judge, and was instead issued with a minimum term of 37 years, effectively meaning that he would not be released until at least 2041, by which time he would be 75 years old if still alive. In the case of Mark Goldstraw, who killed four people in an arson attack on a house in Staffordshire in 2006, the trial judge set a recommended minimum of 35 years; this crime met the guidelines for a whole life term as it involved planning and resulted in the death of more than one person.
Angus Sinclair, who had been imprisoned since 1982 for child abuse, was jailed for a minimum of 37 years in 2015. This means he will almost certainly die in prison as he was 69 by the time of his conviction for murdering two teenage girls in 1977. Many other life prisoners have received minimum terms which, due to their great length or the fact that the killer was middle aged or elderly when convicted, make it almost certain that they will never be released.
Paroles[edit]
A prisoner who has served their minimum term becomes eligible for parole. If the Parole Board agrees to release a prisoner who was sentenced to life, he or she is released on a life licence meaning that he or she will remain on parole for the remainder of their natural life. Prisoners who break the conditions of their release, or who are found to be a danger to the public, can be immediately returned to prison for an indefinite period under the terms of this licence.
In England and Wales, the average life sentence prisoner serves around 15 years before being paroled, although those convicted of exceptionally grave crimes remain behind bars for considerably longer; Ian Huntley was given a minimum term of 40 years. Some receive whole life sentences which make it almost certain that they will die in prison; they can only be considered for release on appeal to the High Court, or in exceptional circumstances such as great age or ill health.
By 2015, there were at least 60 prisoners[citation needed] in England and Wales serving such sentences, issued by either the High Court or the Home Office. These include "Yorkshire Ripper" Peter Sutcliffe. A number of other prisoners have died in prison when serving such sentences including Moors Murderers (Ian Brady and Myra Hindley) and serial killer GP Harold Shipman who committed suicide four years into his sentence.
For England and Wales, the law regarding release on licence of prisoners is laid out in chapter 2 of the Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 (see in particular sections 28–30). This Act was amended and updated by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 chapters 6 and 7.[citation needed]
For Scotland, the law is set out in the Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Act 1993, as amended in relation to life prisoners by the Convention Rights (Compliance) (Scotland) Act 2001, which incorporated changes to ensure that the procedure is compliant with the European Convention on Human Rights. The Scottish legal system does not allow a whole life sentence to be issued, but retains other forms of indefinite imprisonment, such as an Order for Lifelong Restriction.
Minimum term[edit]
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Under the criminal law of England and Wales, a minimum term (formerly "tariff") is the minimum period that a person serving an indefinite sentence must serve before that person becomes eligible for parole. The sentencing judge bears responsibility for setting the minimum term.
The purpose of this mechanism has been described as follows:
The tariff is the minimum period a life sentence prisoner must serve to meet the requirements of retribution and deterrence before being considered for release. After this minimum period has been served release will only take place where the prisoner is judged no longer a risk of harm to the public.
—  Hilary Benn, House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 8 July 2002.
The factors involved in the determination of a tariff were contested in the 1993 case of Robert Thompson and Jon Venables, two 11-year-old boys who were convicted of the murder of two-year-old James Bulger. Although the trial judge initially recommended that the pair would have to serve at least eight years in custody, the High Court later set a minimum term of 10 years. However, in July 1994 the Home Secretary Michael Howard set a tariff of 15 years, based in part on the public outcry over the murders. The ruling also came shortly after The Sun newspaper petitioned the Home Secretary with the signatures of more than 20,000 readers for the two killers to receive stiffer sentences.
Another petition for "life to mean life" (even though the whole life tariff was not an option in the case offenders who committed their crimes before the age of 21) for the two killers attracted almost 280,000 signatures. It also came at a time when the popularity of the Conservative government was at a low ebb - particularly on Merseyside, where the crime occurred. Some commentators also argued that The Sun newspaper also saw the petition as an attempt to boost its sales on Merseyside, which had plummeted five years earlier due its controversial reporting of the Hillsborough disaster, in which 96 Liverpool F.C. supporters were killed at an FA Cup semi-final. In June 1997, the House of Lords ruled that Howard had acted unlawfully when setting the 15-year minimum terms. This ruling also signalled the end of the Home Secretary's powers to set minimum terms for offenders who committed their crimes before the age of 18.[citation needed]
In November 2002, following a European Court of Human Rights ruling that the Home Secretary could no longer set minimum terms for life sentence prisoners, the High Court stripped the Home Secretary of his powers to set minimum terms completely. Earlier that year, following a legal challenge by another convicted murderer, Dennis Stafford, the Home Secretary had also been stripped of his powers to overrule the Parole Board's recommendations that a life sentence prisoner should be granted parole.[citation needed]
Another notable prisoner whose minimum sentence was increased was Myra Hindley, jailed for life in 1966 for her role in the Moors Murders; she was convicted of murdering two children and being an accessory in the murder of a third. Her partner Ian Brady was convicted of all three murders. Their trial judge later recommended to the appropriate authorities that he felt it was unlikely that Brady could ever be rehabilitated and safe to be considered for release, but felt that the same was not true of Hindley once she was removed from Brady's influence, recommending that she should be considered for parole after a period of around 25 years. This ruling was endorsed by at least one Home Secretary and High Court judge, but after the pair confessed to two more murders in 1986, Hindley's minimum term was increased to 30 years and then replaced by a whole life tariff in 1990, although she was not informed of the decision until 1994 - following a High Court ruling that the Home Secretary was obliged to inform all life sentence prisoners when or if they could be considered for parole. This was despite reports by Parole Board and prison officials which stated that Hindley posed little or no risk to society, and should be considered for parole or at least for a transfer to an open prison as a possible prelude to parole in the near future. A number of high-profile supporters, including Lord Longford and David Astor, backed Hindley's campaign for parole, and claimed that a succession of Home Secretaries were keeping her in prison in attempt to win votes for their respective governments, as well as shying away from an inevitable tabloid media backlash that would accompany lost votes for any government whose Home Secretary failed to block Hindley's release from prison. Some sources also claimed that Hindley was being kept in prison for her own safety more than to protect to the public from any risk she might pose, as she had received numerous deaths threats from relatives of the Moors Murders victims and from members of the public pledging to kill her if she was ever set free. Hindley lodged three appeals against her whole life tariff, but all three appeals were unsuccessful and she remained in prison until her death in November 2002, just over a week before the Home Secretary was stripped of his powers to set minimum terms for life sentence prisoners. Daily Mirror columnist Carole Malone was not a supporter of Hindley's campaign for parole, but was critical of Michael Howard's motives for reaffirming Hindley's whole life tariff in February 1997 - three months before an inevitable general election defeat - and claimed that the Home Secretary was seizing the opportunity to win votes by keeping Myra Hindley in prison. Immediately after Hindley's death, Malone commented that it had been inevitable that Hindley would die in prison, as successive Home Secretaries were too fearful about the survival of their government to consider Hindley's release.
In the days between Hindley's death and the ruling being delivered, the Home Secretary issued 50-year minimum terms on four convicted child killers who had been convicted of high-profile murders between 1995 and 2001. Various legal and media sources, whether opposing or supporting the 50-year tariffs, were keen to argue that the 50-year minimum terms were politically motivated, as the crimes were high profile and still relatively fresh in public memory, and that the Home Secretary had also seized the opportunity to set these hefty tariffs as he knew that he was on the verge of being stripped of these powers. The government was also under public scrutiny due to the start of a firefighter's strike which began after the government failed to settle pay and working conditions with the national firefighter's union.
With the death of Myra Hindley, the Home Secretary had lost perhaps the most high-profile prisoner in the prison system, whose minimum term had been increased by a succession of Home Secretaries, leaving him with limited time to select new high-profile prisoners to impose heavy sentences on. Some of these factors were used as grounds to appeal in June 2010 when one of the killers, Roy Whiting, successfully appealed to have his sentence reduced in the High Court.
A similar system operates in Scotland, whereby the trial judge fixes a "punishment part" to "satisfy the requirements of retribution and deterrence". The prisoner cannot be considered for parole until this punishment part is served.
For example, for a murder, someone may be given a life sentence with a minimum term of 15 years. This means they cannot be released on parole until the minimum term is served. Some prisoners serve considerably longer than the minimum term recommended by the trial judge - even if it was later reaffirmed or reduced by a Home Secretary or by the High Court. A notable example is Harry Roberts, jailed for life in 1966 for his role in the murder of three policemen in London. His trial judge recommended that he serve at least 30 years before being considered for parole, but he was not granted parole until 2014, by which time he had served 48 years in prison.
Starting points for murder[edit]
The terms below are only guidelines for adults, and starting points vary in different legal cases. Starting points may either be increased or decreased depending on aggravating and/or mitigating factors respectively. The guidelines are in Schedule 21 of the Act.
However, the law still states that life sentence prisoners (and prisoners issued with fixed-term prison sentences) who have been convicted of crimes committed before the Criminal Justice Act 2003 came into force (18 December 2003) are sentenced according to guidelines which existed when the crime was committed.
Type of murder
Starting point
Multiple murder where each murder involved premeditation, abduction or sexual or sadistic conduct.
Murder of a child involving abduction or sexual or sadistic conduct.
Any assassination committed to further a religious, political, racial or ideological cause.
Murder by a person previously convicted of murder.
Murder of a police or prison officer in the execution of their duty (from 13 April 2015).[9][10]
Whole-life order (if aged over 21).
Murder involving a firearm or explosive.
Murder done for personal gain.
Murder to obstruct the course of justice.
Murder involving sexual or sadistic conduct.
Multiple murder.
Racially, sexually, or religiously aggravated murder.
Murder committed by a person aged under 21 if it would otherwise deserve a whole life order.
(In Griffiths and others v R (2012)[11] the Court of Appeal said that this list is not exhaustive.)
30 years.
Murder involving a knife (from 2 March 2010). 25 years.
Murder committed by a person under 18 (10-17). 12 years. In some cases a convicted person has been sentenced to 10 years and in some serious cases up to 15 years.
Other cases of murder. 15 years.
Whole-life orders cannot be given to offenders under the age of 21.[12][13]
Whole life order [edit]
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Further information: List of prisoners with whole-life orders
The whole life order (formerly a whole life tariff) is a court order whereby a prisoner who is being sentenced to life imprisonment is ordered to serve that sentence without possibility of parole. This order may be made in cases of aggravated murders committed by anyone who was aged 21 or above at the time of the crime. The purpose of a whole life order is for a prisoner to be kept in prison until he or she dies with absolutely no chance of eventual release, although in exceptional circumstances a prisoner can still be released by the Home Secretary on compassionate grounds such as great age or ill health; which has also seen several life sentence prisoners being granted early release a considerable length of time before the date when they could first apply for parole.
A whole life tariff can also be quashed on appeal by the Court of Appeal; a number of prisoners have had their sentences reduced by this method. From 1983, the Home Secretary had the right to decide how long a life sentence prisoner should serve before being considered for parole, and the trial judge was not obliged to recommend when or if an offender should be considered for parole. In some cases, the trial judge had recommended that a life sentence prisoner should at some point be considered for parole, only for the Home Secretary to later impose a whole life tariff; this happened in a number of cases involving prisoners who had been sentenced to life imprisonment before or after 1983.
The question of whether a Home Secretary should have the power to impose whole life tariffs was a controversial one, since a decision to impose such a sanction (or not) could carry political consequences for the Home Secretary and, by extension, the government he served – as well as a backlash by the national media. Perhaps the most notable example is Myra Hindley, jailed for life in 1966 for her role in the Moors Murders. Her trial judge recommended that she should serve a minimum of 25 years before being considered for parole, However, this was later increased to 30 years and in 1990 to "whole life" by David Waddington.
The introduction of the government's tariff-setting procedures in 1983 also came shortly after a number of other high-profile murderers convicted. 1983 was also the year in which Dennis Nilsen was jailed for life for murdering 11 young men whose dismembered bodies were found at the two flats he had rented in North London. Two years earlier, "Yorkshire Ripper" Peter Sutcliffe had been found guilty of murdering 13 women and attacking seven others in a six-year spree.
In 1976, "Black Panther" Donald Neilson had been convicted on four charges of murder at the end of a highly publicised trial. All of these murderers were also subjected to a whole life tariff by subsequent Home Secretaries; Neilson remained in prison until his death in 2011, while Nilsen and Sutcliffe both remain imprisoned more than 30 years into their sentences, despite recommendations from their trial judges that they should be considered for parole after 25 and 30 years respectively.
In November 2002, a successful legal challenge by convicted double murderer Anthony Anderson saw the Home Secretary stripped of the final say on how long a life sentence prisoner must serve before parole can be considered, including the right to decide that certain prisoners should never be released. This ruling had been anticipated for several months, and was delivered just days after the death of Myra Hindley, who had been widely expected to gain immediate parole in the event of the Home Secretary being stripped of these sentencing powers.
A year later, the Criminal Justice Act 2003 was passed, which required that the trial judge recommended the minimum number of years to be served (or order that life should mean life) in the case of anyone being sentenced to life imprisonment.[14] As had been the case when the Home Secretary could decide on the minimum length of a life sentence, prisoners were entitled to have their tariff reviewed by the High Court. These prisoners can also appeal to the European Court of Human Rights if their appeals to the High Court are unsuccessful.[15]
In June 1997, the High Court had already stripped the Home Secretary of their powers to decide on minimum terms for life sentence prisoners who were convicted before the age of 18, following a legal challenge by solicitors acting for Robert Thompson and Jon Venables. The pair had been found guilty of murdering Merseyside toddler James Bulger in 1993, when they were 11 years old. The trial judge's initial recommendation was that they should not be considered for parole for at least eight years. The Lord Chief Justice later ruled that the pair should serve a minimum sentence of 10 years, but following a petition by The Sun newspaper, Home Secretary Michael Howard had ruled during 1994 that the pair should not be released until they had spent at least 15 years in custody.
Opponents on this ruling had argued that this decision had been politically motivated; the murder of James Bulger had been a highly publicised case, the change in the sentence had been announced at a time when the Conservative government was trailing the Labour opposition in the opinion polls (which might have seen a "vote puller", in a similar vein to the constant changes to Myra Hindley's sentence), and was perhaps seen as an attempt by The Sun newspaper to regain lost sales on Merseyside, where its circulation had slumped dramatically since its controversial reporting of the Hillsborough disaster (which had claimed the lives of 96 Liverpool fans) five years earlier.
Only the Home Secretary can grant a release to a prisoner sentenced to a whole life tariff or whole life order, on compassionate grounds including great age or ill health. Only four prisoners known or believed to have been issued with a whole life tariff have so far been released from their sentences. Three of them were IRA members who were freed under the Good Friday Agreement in 1999, having spent more than 20 years in prison for terrorist offences including murder. The other was gang member Reggie Kray, who was freed from his life sentence in August 2000 after serving 32 years (two years after the expiry of his original 30-year minimum term) due to terminal cancer; although the Home Office never confirmed he had been issued with a whole life tariff, his lengthy imprisonment and the fact that he was not paroled when his tariff expired (despite being well into his sixties) helped fuel media speculation that he was among the prisoners who had been issued with a whole life tariff. He died a few weeks after being freed.
Many prisoners have also received minimum sentences which are likely to last for most if not all of their remaining lives, such as child killers Roy Whiting and Ian Huntley, who were both convicted of child murder and received 40-year minimum terms which mean that they cannot apply for parole until they are at least 82 and 68 respectively. Whiting's trial judge had originally recommended that life should mean life and just before the High Court stripped politicians of their sentencing powers in November 2002, Home Secretary David Blunkett set Whiting's minimum term at 50 years, which was effectively a whole life tariff as it meant that he could only apply for parole if he lived to be at least 92. This decision was later appealed before the High Court, and the tariff was reduced to a 40-year minimum term. Huntley murdered two 10-year-old girls in August 2002, but by the time he was convicted 16 months later, the Home Secretary had been stripped of powers to set minimum terms for life sentence prisoners, and that decision was instead left to the High Court.
Perhaps the most notable prisoner to have been issued with a whole life tariff is Myra Hindley, who was jailed for life in 1966 for her part in the Moors Murders with Ian Brady; she was convicted of two murders and being an accessory in a third murder which Ian Brady was convicted of. Her original 25-year minimum term was later increased to 30 years in 1985 by Home Secretary Leon Brittan, before his successor David Waddington ruled in 1990 that life should mean life for Hindley. His successors Michael Howard, Jack Straw and David Blunkett agreed with this ruling over the next 11 years.
Between 1997 and 2000, Hindley made three appeals against the ruling that life should mean life in her case, but each was unsuccessful. She remained in prison until her death in November 2002, 36 years after she was jailed. Her campaign for parole was supported by the likes of Lord Longford and David Astor, who claimed that she was a reformed character who had merely acted as Brady's accomplice under duress, and had completely changed once removed from his influence. However, opinion polls showed that the majority of the British public was opposed to Hindley being paroled, and the tabloid media largely opposed her release as well. Hindley received numerous death threats from members of the public – including the relatives of some of the Moors Murders victims – who vowed to kill her if she were ever released from prison. Widespread public and media doubt as to whether Hindley's remorse was genuine was further fueled by the fact that Hindley did not confess to two more murders until 1986, and further strengthened the belief of those who opposed her attempts to win parole that the reported turnaround in her life while in prison was nothing more than a ploy to boost her chances of parole.
Ian Brady was also told by a succession of Home Secretaries that his life sentence should mean life, but unlike Hindley he never attempted to gain parole, and insisted he never wanted to be released from custody. In 1999, he even made an unsuccessful legal challenge to be allowed to starve himself to death. He died in May 2017 after more than 50 years in prison, and was Britain's longest-serving prisoner.
Since 2003, the law has provided that whole life orders cannot be issued to anyone who was under the age of 21 at the time of their crime, although there had never been a previous case of a whole life tariff being imposed or recommended to someone who committed their crime before the age of 21.[16]
Around 100 prisoners are believed to have been issued with whole life tariffs since the mechanism was first introduced in 1983, although some of them were convicted of their crimes before that date and some of the prisoners known to have been issued with the whole life tariff have since died in prison or had their sentences reduced on appeal.[citation needed]
A number of prisoners who are unlikely to ever be released or have received very long sentences have declared their wish to die;[citation needed] for example, Ian Brady. At least two such inmates have committed suicide in prison, Harold Shipman and Daniel Gonzalez and there have been attempted suicides by such prisoners, including Ian Huntley. A number have since died in prison as a result of ill health, including Brady's accomplice Myra Hindley and the "Black Panther" serial murderer and armed robber Donald Neilson.
Whole life sentences have also been criticised in some quarters for giving offenders no incentive to behave well and co-operate with prison staff, or make any serious attempt at rehabilitation. This was highlighted by the case of Robert Mawdsley, jailed for life for a single murder in 1975, who went on to kill three inmates several years into his sentence. In 2016, a second convicted murderer, Victor Castigador, admitted to murdering another prisoner. At least two other such prisoners have seriously wounded other inmates in prison. Shortly after being jailed for life in 2005, spree killer Mark Hobson poured a bucket of boiling water over Ian Huntley and left him scarred for life. In 2012, convicted murderer Gary Vinter admitted slashing Roy Whiting with a sharpened toilet brush handle. Four years later, Vinter admitted the attempted murder of another inmate who was left with a traumatic brain injury and blinded in one eye. Vinter's lawyer claimed after the second attack that the absence of any likelihood of eventual release from prison had left him with no incentive to co-operate with the prison regime.[citation needed]
European Court of Human Rights challenges against whole life orders[edit]
Three convicted murderers, Jeremy Bamber, Peter Moore and Douglas Vinter, all murderers who had been sentenced to whole life orders, applied to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, for the court to declare that it is a contravention of the European Convention on Human Rights for someone to be sentenced to lifelong imprisonment. When the initial ruling was delivered in January 2012, the court ruled that because the whole-life orders were imposed by a judge only after consideration of the facts of each case, and because the life prisoners could apply to the Home Secretary for compassionate release, their whole life orders did not breach their human rights.[17][18]
A later appeal by the same men led to a ruling in July 2013 that there must be a prospect of review of whole-life tariffs within 25 years of the prisoner being sentenced, and that any impossibility of parole would violate their Article 3 rights.[19] By this stage there were at least 49 prisoners serving such sentences in England and Wales.[20]
In February 2014, five judges at the Court of Appeal (ECHR) found the Strasbourg court was incorrect in concluding English and Welsh law never allowed whole life orders to be reduced because the Secretary of State could reduce such orders in "exceptional circumstances", and that all "whole life" prisoners would be entitled to a review of their sentence within 25 years of being sentenced. Lord Thomas, current Lord Chief Justice said whole life orders were compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in the most appalling cases of murder. Thomas said further, "Judges should therefore continue as they have done to impose whole-life orders in those rare and exceptional cases. ... In our judgment the law of England and Wales therefore does provide to an offender 'hope' or the 'possibility' of release in exceptional circumstances which render the just punishment originally imposed no longer justifiable."[21]
In February 2015, the ECHR upheld the lawfulness of whole life orders, on the ground that they can be reviewed in exceptional circumstances, following a fresh challenge by murderer Arthur Hutchinson, who had been sentenced to life imprisonment for a triple murder in Sheffield more than 30 years earlier. Another legal challenge to the court by Hutchinson was rejected in January 2017. A fresh challenge by another "whole life" prisoner – Jamie Reynolds, who murdered a teenage girl in Shropshire in 2013 – is now reportedly pending with the ECHR. By this stage, there were believed to be more than 70 prisoners in England and Wales serving whole life sentences.[22]
References[edit]
Jump up ^ "Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965 (c.71)". opsi.gov.uk. Retrieved 14 August 2010.
Jump up ^ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6433195.stm
^ Jump up to: a b Rohrer, Finlo (2006-06-16). "The history of life". BBC News. Retrieved 2010-05-07.
Jump up ^ HM Courts Service: Review of Minimum Terms set for Young Offenders detained at her Majesty's Pleasure (Statement from the Lord Chief Justice about the 2000 changes) Archived 2 January 2010 at the Wayback Machine., hmcourts-service.gov.uk; accessed 21 November 2017.
Jump up ^ "Lords defy Blunkett on life sentences". BBC News. 25 November 2002. Retrieved 24 August 2007.
Jump up ^ "Judgments - Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) Ex Parte Anderson (Fc) (Appellant)". House of Lords of the British Parliament. 25 November 2002. Retrieved 24 August 2007.
Jump up ^ Schedule 21 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, legislation.gov.uk; accessed 21 November 2017.
Jump up ^ "Killer's appeal delayed for 'rights' ruling". Yorkshire Post. Retrieved 21 November 2017.
Jump up ^ "Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015, section 27".
Jump up ^ "The Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 (Commencement No. 1, Saving and Transitional Provisions) Order 2015".
Jump up ^ [2012] EWCA Crim 2822
Jump up ^ Crown Prosecution Service - Retrieved March 21, 2013
Jump up ^ Section 269(2) and (4) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003
Jump up ^ Section 269
Jump up ^ Section 276 and Schedule 22
Jump up ^ Criminal Justice Act 2003, section 269(4) at legislation.gov.uk; accessed 21 November 2017.
Jump up ^ "European Court of Human Rights: CASES OF VINTER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM". Hudoc.echr.coe.int. Retrieved 10 December 2012.
Jump up ^ "Murderers lose appeal against whole life tariffs". BBC. 17 January 2012. Retrieved 10 December 2012.
Jump up ^ "Killers' life terms 'breach their human rights'". BBC. 9 July 2013. Retrieved 9 July 2013.
Jump up ^ "Killers' life terms 'breach their human rights'". bbc.co.uk. 9 July 2013.
Jump up ^ "Court of Appeal upholds principle of whole-life prison terms". bbc.co.uk. 18 February 2014.
Jump up ^ "British courts can impose whole-life prison sentences", bbc.co.uk; retrieved 3 February 2015.
External links[edit]
Schedule 21 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, from legislation.gov.uk
Life Sentenced Prisoners in United Kingdom from Ministry of Justice
Information from Liberty website regarding United Kingdom
[hide]
v
t
e
Life imprisonment in Europe
Sovereign states
Albania
Andorra
Armenia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Belarus
Belgium
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bulgaria
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Georgia
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Kazakhstan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macedonia
Malta
Moldova
Monaco
Montenegro
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
San Marino
Serbia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
Ukraine
United Kingdom
England
Wales
States with limited
recognition
Abkhazia
Artsakh
Northern Cyprus
South Ossetia
Transnistria
Dependencies and
other entities
Åland
Faroe Islands
Gibraltar
Guernsey
Isle of Man
Jersey
Svalbard
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Life_imprisonment_in_England_and_Wales&oldid=838233217"
Categories:
Imprisonment and detention
Life imprisonment by country
English criminal law
English legal terminology
Sentencing (law)
Hidden categories:
Webarchive template wayback links
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from November 2017
Articles with unsourced statements from July 2017
Articles needing additional references from November 2017
All articles needing additional references
Articles with unsourced statements from December 2010
Use dmy dates from December 2010
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Français
Edit links
This page was last edited on 25 April 2018, at 19:02.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

values: padding:0.3em 0.4em 0.3em;font-weight:bold;font-weight:normal; padding:0 0 0.6em;

values:
/wiki/Directed_verdict
mw-redirect
Directed verdict

values:
/wiki/Sex_offender_registration
mw-redirect
Sex offender registration

values:
/wiki/Courts_of_the_United_States
mw-redirect
Courts of the United States

values:
/wiki/Courts_of_Canada
mw-redirect
Courts of Canada

values: padding:0.3em 0.4em 0.3em;font-weight:bold;padding:0.4em;border-top:1px #aaa solid;font-weight:normal;font-size:smaller; font-size:100%;border-bottom:1px solid #aaa;

values: Template talk:Criminal procedure (trial)

values: float:right;clear:right;width:22.0em;margin:0 0 1.0em 1.0em;background:#f9f9f9;border:1px solid #aaa;padding:0.2em;border-spacing:0.4em 0;text-align:center;line-height:1.4em;font-size:88%

values: Capital punishment in the United Kingdom

values:
/wiki/Death_penalty
mw-redirect
Death penalty

values:
/wiki/Aggravation_(legal_concept)
mw-redirect
Aggravation (legal concept)

values:
/wiki/Moors_Murders
mw-redirect
Moors Murders

values:
/wiki/Yorkshire_Ripper
mw-redirect
Yorkshire Ripper

values:
/wiki/Whole_life_tariff
mw-redirect
Whole life tariff

values: Edit section: The Criminal Justice Act 2003

values: Judicial functions of the House of Lords

values:
/wiki/Court_of_Appeal
mw-redirect
Court of Appeal

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (November 2017)

values:
noprint Inline-Template Template-Fact
white-space:nowrap;

values:
/wiki/Ian_Huntley
mw-redirect
Ian Huntley

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (July 2017)

values: Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 (page does not exist)

values: Help:Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup/1

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content ambox-Refimprove

values:
/wiki/Dennis_Stafford
mw-redirect
Dennis Stafford

values:
/wiki/Myra_Hindley
mw-redirect
Myra Hindley

values:
/wiki/Lord_Longford
mw-redirect
Lord Longford

values: Edit section: Starting points for murder

values: List of prisoners with whole-life orders

values:
/wiki/David_Waddington
mw-redirect
David Waddington

values:
/wiki/Reggie_Kray
mw-redirect
Reggie Kray

values: 3 people are not yet a 'high proportion' (December 2010)

values:
/wiki/Robert_Mawdsley
mw-redirect
Robert Mawdsley

values: Edit section: European Court of Human Rights challenges against whole life orders

values:
/wiki/Douglas_Vinter
mw-redirect
Douglas Vinter

values:
/wiki/Secretary_of_State
mw-redirect
Secretary of State

values:
/wiki/Lord_Chief_Justice
mw-redirect
Lord Chief Justice

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16591164

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23230419

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26236225

values:
nofollow
external text
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31110814

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values:
nofollow
http://www.justice.gov.uk/
external text

values: Life imprisonment in Andorra (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Armenia (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Life_imprisonment_in_Austria
mw-redirect
Life imprisonment in Austria

values: Life imprisonment in Azerbaijan (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Belarus (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Bosnia and Herzegovina (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Bulgaria (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Cyprus (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in the Czech Republic (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Estonia (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Georgia (country) (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Life_imprisonment_in_Hungary
mw-redirect
Life imprisonment in Hungary

values: Life imprisonment in the Republic of Ireland

values: Life imprisonment in Kazakhstan (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Latvia (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Liechtenstein (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Lithuania (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Luxembourg (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in the Republic of Macedonia (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Malta (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Moldova (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Monaco (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Montenegro (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Portugal (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Romania (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in San Marino (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Life_imprisonment_in_Serbia
mw-redirect
Life imprisonment in Serbia

values: Life imprisonment in Slovenia (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Ukraine (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Abkhazia (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in the Republic of Artsakh (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Northern Cyprus (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in South Ossetia (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Transnistria (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Åland (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in the Faroe Islands (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Gibraltar (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Guernsey (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in the Isle of Man (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Jersey (page does not exist)

values: Life imprisonment in Svalbard (page does not exist)

values: nowraplinks collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: Category:Webarchive template wayback links

values: Category:All articles with unsourced statements

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from November 2017

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from July 2017

values: Category:Articles needing additional references from November 2017

values: Category:All articles needing additional references

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from December 2010

values: Category:Use dmy dates from December 2010

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values: Condamnés connus et récents à la perpétuité réelle anglaise – French

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Life_imprisonment_in_England_and_Wales rootpage-Life_imprisonment_in_England_and_Wales skin-vector action-view