Dhiren Barot has had his sentence cut from 40 years to 30. The court of appeal said that the longer term was for, "the terrorist who has been convicted, after trial, of a serious attempt to commit mass murder by a viable method."
The defence had argued that the plot to murder hundreds or thousands was far from completion at the time of arrest. And, it would appear, that the judges agreed.
The Lord Chief Justice also said:
A terrorist who is in the grip of idealistic extremism to the extent that, over a prolonged period, he has been plotting to commit murder of innocent citizens is likely to pose a serious risk for an indefinite period if he is not confined.Why then did he cut this man's sentence? Do we have to wait for him to actually kill thousands of innocent civilians before we can keep him locked away? With judges like this how are we to fight an effective war against Islamism?