In exceptional cases a judge may impose a "whole life order", meaning that the offender is never considered for parole, although they may still be released on compassionate grounds at the discretion of the home secretary.
Imprisonment for public protection was abolished by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, although some prisoners remain incarcerated under the former legislation.
Accordingly, life imprisonment replaced capital 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.
[5] 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.
[6] In November 2002, a similar decision in relation to adult offenders followed a successful challenge by convicted double murderer Anthony Anderson.
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.
Many life prisoners have received minimum terms which, due to their length or the fact that the killer was middle aged or elderly when convicted, make it highly likely that they will never be released.
(i)inflict grievous bodily harm on a person, or (ii)do unlawful damage to a building or anything in it; A prisoner who has served their minimum term becomes eligible for parole.
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.
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.
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.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.
The ruling also came shortly after The Sun newspaper petitioned the home secretary with the signatures of thousands of readers for the two killers to receive stiffer sentences.
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.
Lord Longford and David Astor, two high-profile supporters of Hindley, backed her campaign for parole, and claimed that a succession of home secretaries were keeping her in prison in an 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.
[citation needed] A similar system operates in Scotland, whereby the trial judge fixes a "punishment part" to "satisfy the requirements of retribution and deterrence".
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.
Supporters of her campaign for parole, most notably Lord Longford and David Astor, argued that she was being kept in prison by successive home secretaries afraid of going against public opinion.
Also in 1983, 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.
This ruling had been anticipated for several months, and was delivered just days after the death of Hindley, who had been widely expected to gain immediate parole in the event of the home secretary being stripped of these sentencing powers.
[24] In June 1997, the High Court had already stripped the home secretary of the power 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.
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.
Her campaign for parole was supported by 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.
She 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 was ever released from prison.
A number have 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.
Only the home secretary can grant a release to a prisoner sentenced to a whole life order, on compassionate grounds including great age or ill health.
[27][28] 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 orders within 25 years of the prisoner being sentenced, and that any impossibility of parole would violate their Article 3 rights.
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.
But in actual practice there is no recognition of this fact in any policy statement by the Secretary for Justice and no real means of knowing what it is they must do to win release even after decades in custody".