Article opens with: > The judge ultimately handed Kurtaj a sentence that his lawyers have called out of proportion with the crimes he stood accused of. The fam

Article opens with: > The judge ultimately handed Kurtaj a sentence that his lawyers have called out of proportion with the crimes he stood accused of. The family declined to be interviewed. Doesn't actually mention what the sentence was until the end of the article: > The judge gave Kurtaj an indefinite hospital order—a sentence confining him to a secure mental-health ward until doctors and U.K. officials decide he is no longer a danger to the public. He was 18 years old. [. . .] People in Kurtaj’s situation can apply for a review of their detention once a year. Otherwise, their detention is subject to government review once every three years, according to the Ministry of Justice. > Kurtaj’s lawyers and some experts on autism have said a potential lifetime of incarceration isn’t appropriate for a teenager like Kurtaj. Thing is, there's basically a zero percent likelihood that it's actually a lifetime of incarceration. I haven't seen the statistics on this, but I'd bet that the average person incarcerated under such an order is out in a couple of years, and the vast majority are out within ten. What's more, it's not a prison. > It’s up to his doctors whether Kurtaj can access the internet. He was sent to a medium-security hospital ward, where in the common areas shared with other patients, he was surrounded by tablets, phones and computers. Come on, now. That sentence is neither as harsh (in terms of conditions) nor as draconian (in terms of duration) as the article wants us to feel. In the US, he be tried as an adult and he'd have it much worse... The punishment rarely fits the crime, but I think that the system did okay with this one.