there are lies and lies Ms purves !

if one lies about who ate all the chocolate cake, then that is no big deal

but if, as in this case, the lie causes a close relative to go
through the pain of bereavement, unnecessarily, then that is
a terrible crime -the mental anguish being as bad as pain

qua, bath, uk

I'd agree with the points in the article. But what is interesting is that the two of them carried out the fraud and so both are to be held accountable for the behaviour of the other. But why has Mrs Canoe got a longer sentence than Mr Canoe? Could it be because of the lies told and she is the mum?

Anthony, Cardiff, UK

Leaving the lying to one side, six years seems a reasonable sentence for this calculated, premeditated fraud. Stonehouse got seven years for essentially the same thing, although he was let out quite early because he had several heart attacks.
And they'll only do 3 years in any case.

Ben, Karlovy Vary,

There are people in prison doing less time for kicking someone to death.

David Thijm, Storubridge, UK

When someone's found guilty of a crime the judge looks at all the circumstances of the case, those that make the crime more serious, such as this, (aggrevating factors) and those that go some way to excusing the crime (mitigating factors). Sadly it would take more than 300 characters to debate this.

Chris Jackson, London,

agree except the fact they shouldnt even go to jail. They are not a danger to othere. They should pay all money back with interest, pay for police time and a hefty fine. make them clean the streets for 2 yrs every weekend and their humiation is complete. prison costs taxpayers 55,000 per year

Heeners, bath,

I do agree with you, Libby, that judges shouldn't act as emotionally driven disgusted onlookers. When moral umpiring creeps into jurisprudence, we start acting like a medieval theocracy, then we are in trouble.

Dilip Dhokia, Bradford, UK

Regarding the sons...What yardstick was used to measure any upset caused to the sons? For a father to do this, surely he felt no love was being lost. And,children tend to reflect the parents. And as for the amount swindled in relation to the sentence of six and a half years, totaly disproportionate.

jack london, london, england

Good for Mr Justice Wilkie. Suffering caused to others should always be taken into account when sentencing.

Lin, London, UK

Libby, you are spot on..There is always a difference between a good lie and a bad lie. Telling a lie, or perhaps concealing a truth which doesn't ill or harm a person is a better choice. At times as prudent and sensible parents, we aught to put off or fake an issue which prevents wrecking a family

sandy, New Delhi, India

Totally agree. It's between them and their sons. Nothing to do with the State.

Amy Allen, London,

I think the Judge was correct the time in Jail should reflect the totallity of the crime and should therefore be taken into consideration when the sentence is formulated by the Judge.
I mean they wont even serve the total anyway. I would have presented a bill for the rescue services time as well.

KeithW, Wirral, UK

'If the Darwin sons want to bring a civil claim of some sort of emotional abuse (and I doubt that they would)'

Possibly because there hasn't been a precedent to give them belief that any claim is justified.

Surely this ruling sets that precedent?

Graeme Morrison, London,

Glad to see this being mentioned in the press. The judge's silly comments should help their appeal. I was taken aback by their sentence. Think of the sums involved. Blame each for half the amount. I'm quite sure I've read reports in the past year where 'carers' of vulnerable pensioners had sentences

Harold William Heslop, Crook, Co. Durham

of less than eighteen months (or community service)for stealing £120000.
Dare I mention Northern Rock directors who would have been jailed in America?

Harold William Heslop, Crook, Co. Durham

Well said - justice is supposed to be blind.

I look forward to a denunciation of the tendentious and distorting "victim impact" statements.

monty, bristol,

The sons, adult as they are, were deliberately tortured.

Human Rights legislation has something to say on that.

Like any woman abandoned for another, after years of lying, these men must feel totally betrayed. They had the right, as sons. That right was totally betrayed.
Darwins deserve jail.

Charlote Peters Rock, Knutsford, England

....and in so doing his honour has provided classic grounds for an appeal of the severity of the sentence which, in view of the fact that the Dawsons funds are now frozen, will be paid fro out of legal aid.

derek robinson, york, uk

You are totally wrong Libby. There is nothing unusual in a judge taking into account the harm done by criminals to innocent parties when determining their sentences. Also the judge is totally correct in looking at what is revealed about the Darwins in their conduct to their sons.

Patrick Hadley, Lichfield,

I think that what the judge might have really meant by giving such a high sentence and explaining that it was influenced mainly by the suffering of the sons, was the light in which this particular suffering placed the accused parents. They witnessed their sons' pain and fueled it by further lies.

Amanda, Lodz, Poland

Attagirl, Libby. for what it's worth, I am 100% with you. I read with incredulity the newpaper reports of what the judge is supposed to have said.

Amin Aswet, Gibraltar,