Turner jailed for life.

[JerseySafety]

Elliot Turner has been jailed for life for the murder of New Zealand teenager Emily Longley.Turner must serve a minimum term of 16 years. With time already served he will be out in 15 years.According to TVOne correspondent Garth Bray, (https://twitter.com/#!/GarthBray) the judge told Turner, "You can put away your thoughts of champagne Bentleys and girls and think about why you are serving a life sentence."Turner, 20, was this morning (NZ time) found guilty of strangling the 17-year-old New Zealander in a jealous rage at his parents' home in Bournemouth.His father, wealthy jeweller Leigh Turner, 54, and healthcare assistant mother Anita, 51, were also found guilty of covering up the murder.High Court Judge Linda Dobbs delivered the sentence in Winchester High Court tonight (Tuesday morning UK).She also sentenced Elliot to nine months for perverting the course of justice, to run concurrently.Emily's parents Mark and Caroline were in court today to see him sentenced and the public gallery was packed, the Daily Echo reported.
The court was earlier told that Turner had boasted to friends "I will kill her. I will go to prison and still be a millionaire when I come out" before he murdered his girlfriend.Turner, a self-styled 'gangster' met Emily on a double date in December 2010 and they quickly became a couple.However, he became increasingly suspicious Emily was having affairs during their four-month relationship and began fantasising about killing her.Prosecutor Timothy Mousley QC told the trial during summing up : "He's remorseless, he's controlling, he's possessive and he's vicious."Turner practised strangleholds on his friends so tightly they "began to panic and couldn't breathe".He even told friends he had murdered Emily with a hammer on the night before her murder.Turner's parents were released on bail for sentencing reports but Judge Dobbs warned them they could also expect jail terms.


Thank god. Another moron out of this world for 15 years at least

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10807678

[Paige.]

Elliot Turner has been jailed for life for the murder of New Zealand teenager Emily Longley.

Turner must serve a minimum term of 16 years. With time already served he will be out in 15 years.

I'm confused? He's received a life sentence but he'll be out in 15 years? What lol
I also don't understand why his parents tried to cover up the murder. Personally, I think that's sick and If I knew someone who had committed a murder I'd turn them in, them being my child or not.

[Matthew]

Elliot Turner has been jailed for life for the murder of New Zealand teenager Emily Longley.

Turner must serve a minimum term of 16 years. With time already served he will be out in 15 years.

I'm confused? He's received a life sentence but he'll be out in 15 years? What lol
I also don't understand why his parents tried to cover up the murder. Personally, I think that's sick and If I knew someone who has committed a murder I'd turn them in.

Even if it was your son? Its easy enough to say you would when its got nothing to do to you, but if it was your own son I'm sure you wouldn't just go and turn them in without a single thought against it...

[Paige.]

Even if it was your son? Its easy enough to say you would when its got nothing to do to you, but if it was your own son I'm sure you wouldn't just go and turn them in without a single thought against it...

I don't know what it's like to have a child or be in this situation but from where I stand now I can safely say I'd be ashamed and would disown that child as in this case he took the life of that girl simply because he was on a jealous rage because he thought she was cheating on him.

[Neversoft]

I'm confused? He's received a life sentence but he'll be out in 15 years? What lol

Despite its name, a life sentence isn't always for life. Typically it lasts between fifteen and thirty-five years (depending on the judge), hence people are sometimes given multiple life sentences. For a single murder, they won't send you to prison for what is actually life.

[Paige.]

Despite its name, a life sentence isn't always for life. Typically it lasts between fifteen and thirty-five years (depending on the judge), hence people are sometimes given multiple life sentences. For a single murder, they won't send you to prison for what is actually life.

Ohhhh I see. Thank you :)

[GommeInc]

Life doesn't mean your whole life in prison, it only means a proportion of your life - 15 years could of been spent having a family, raising a family, progressing through a good career and so on. It's part of your life taken away that you will not get back.

The man (if you can call him that) is clearly messed up. To be so possessive and sickbas to practice strangling your girlfriend on your friends is incredibly messed up. It makes you wonder if she was ever a girlfriend, or just something to have sex with. No man can be a boyfriend if they do not consider the thoughts and feelings of their girlfriend, and it seems like in those 4 months (which is hilariously short for him to be so possessive) they didn't really click on a personal level :/

[-:Undertaker:-]

Life doesn't mean your whole life in prison, it only means a proportion of your life - 15 years could of been spent having a family, raising a family, progressing through a good career and so on. It's part of your life taken away that you will not get back.

Evil people care not for these things, life ought to mean life.

I myself think he ought to be hanged.

[dbgtz]

Evil people care not for these things, life ought to mean life.

I myself think he ought to be hanged.

Just because someone is evil in your eyes does not mean they're evil in another. Just because you think he doesn't care doesn't mean he won't at one point and ultimately regret his actions. The death penalty is not suitable and can actually be seen as an easy way out.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Just because someone is evil in your eyes does not mean they're evil in another.

I am afraid that it is the main view of our society and code of morality (on which some form of coherent legal system must be based upon) that those who purposely seek to take away life in such a manner are genuinely evil. I argue for a justice system based on due punishment, not what third rate sociology teachers preach in classrooms about society at large or parents being the blame for evil and nasty people committing evil and nasty acts.

I call those who purposely take life from others by force evil, and I make no apologies for it.


Just because you think he doesn't care doesn't mean he won't at one point and ultimately regret his actions.

Too late, even if he genuinely did then the life has been taken - something that cannot be replaced. And besides, just because somebody accepts they've made a 'mistake' doesn't mean the due punishment ought to be annulled. The secondary purpose of punishment is, after all, to act as a deterrence.


The death penalty is not suitable and can actually be seen as an easy way out.

This is utter nonsense, apart from not stating why it is not suitable you simply say it is 'not suitable' as a way of knocking it down without any substance to that statement. On the second part, death is the ultimate punishment you will find, especially amongst criminals hence why they use it on one another for serious acts of revenge or betrayal. I therefore fail to see why you would be opposed to a justice system (note the word justice) using the ultimate and civilised punishment on those who have committed acts which justify such a fate and who committed the act in the full knowledge that they may meet this fate at the hands of a jury if they carried out their evil thoughts.

Do you take/have taken sociology may I ask? if so, you might as well come out and blame everybody on this forum right now for the ills of society which have 'driven' this man to commit unspeakable acts of evil.. as 'enlightened' students of that subject like to trot out.

[Chippiewill]

Evil people care not for these things, life ought to mean life.

I myself think he ought to be hanged.
You're asking for retribution, not justice.

[dbgtz]

I am afraid that it is the main view of our society and code of morality (on which some form of coherent legal system must be based upon) that those who purposely seek to take away life in such a manner are genuinely evil. I argue for a justice system based on due punishment, not what third rate sociology teachers preach in classrooms about society at large or parents being the blame for evil and nasty people committing evil and nasty acts.

I call those who purposely take life from others by force evil, and I make no apologies for it.


I accept that, I was just stating a fact.




Too late, even if he genuinely did then the life has been taken - something that cannot be replaced. And besides, just because somebody accepts they've made a 'mistake' doesn't mean the due punishment ought to be annulled. The secondary purpose of punishment is, after all, to act as a deterrence.



It's not really a "secondary purpose". As far as I'm aware, different sentences have different purposes.



This is utter nonsense, apart from not stating why it is not suitable you simply say it is 'not suitable' as a way of knocking it down without any substance to that statement. On the second part, death is the ultimate punishment you will find, especially amongst criminals hence why they use it on one another for serious acts of revenge or betrayal. I therefore fail to see why you would be opposed to a justice system (note the word justice) using the ultimate and civilised punishment on those who have committed acts which justify such a fate and who committed the act in the full knowledge that they may meet this fate at the hands of a jury if they carried out their evil thoughts.

Do you take/have taken sociology may I ask? if so, you might as well come out and blame everybody on this forum right now for the ills of society which have 'driven' this man to commit unspeakable acts of evil.. as 'enlightened' students of that subject like to trot out.

Well it's not suitable because it can be seen that killing someone because they went against law can be hypocritical as essentially you're killing them for not accepting your views, which he may have done to that person.

On the point on death being the ultimate punishment, well it's not really. It happens to everyone at one point therefore is everyone being punished? And even if it can be seen as punishment, surely having essentially wait for around 15 years (or however long it is), come out with little chance of getting a job which means you'll be living on the streets most likely, living off the bare minimum and then perhaps catch a disease and die. Surely that sounds much worse?

Finally I have not taken sociology and I don't see how this is relevant. I do not mention anything about how society made the man do what he did therefore why would I suddenly blame everyone.

[-:Undertaker:-]

You're asking for retribution, not justice.

No, I think you will find that justice is the notion of a punishment which punishes (ie something bad occurs) in order to carry out the act of justice on the offender. Now, as I said earlier - the notion of death is the most severe punishment you can use on somebody;- it is why criminals use it on one another and why we correctly wish death upon those who commit the most evil of crimes.

Criminals themselves understand this, hence why they use torture and murder to teach a lesson/hand out justice to their enemies. I think though that the point should also be made that as we are not criminals, the state shouldn't use torture or barbaric methods of death - a civilised death penalty of hanging is suitable.


It's not really a "secondary purpose". As far as I'm aware, different sentences have different purposes.

I'm referring to the secondary purpose of the death penalty itself, to deter.


Well it's not suitable because it can be seen that killing someone because they went against law can be hypocritical as essentially you're killing them for not accepting your views, which he may have done to that person.

No, I am no anarchist. I accept that the state should be present to do the essential duties of protecting the nation itself along with protecting the liberty and lives of subjects and citizens against other subjects or citizens. For this system to work, there needs to be a method of punishment - and of course, being logical we would say that some crimes deserve a spell in prison, others more harsh measures.


On the point on death being the ultimate punishment, well it's not really. It happens to everyone at one point therefore is everyone being punished?

I do not speak of natural death, the point in the death penalty is that is brings forward death - the punishment is that you lose your life just as you took the life of another.


And even if it can be seen as punishment, surely having essentially wait for around 15 years (or however long it is), come out with little chance of getting a job which means you'll be living on the streets most likely, living off the bare minimum and then perhaps catch a disease and die. Surely that sounds much worse?

If you really believe that 'life' in prison in this country is a punishment then I don't know what else to say. What I would say to you however is that rather than us viewing prison as it is from our cushy carefree lives, view prison from the position of a hardened criminal for example - do you really think a criminal who is either a) pure evil or b) has been involved in a hard life of crime for many years - do you think these people will see prison as a punishment?