I am in awe of the courage that it must have taken for Jack Merritt’s father to write his tribute to his brave, intelligent, beautiful son (Jack would be livid his death has been used to further an agenda of hate, 3 December). I agree with every word and suspect that the same themes could be applied to Saskia.

We must all do everything we can to stop our country adopting a penal system more akin to that in many American states. Instead of an approach towards offenders that is hateful, vengeful and vicious, realistic resources should be used to create one that is focused on rehabilitation.

Loss of freedom should be the punishment. Thereafter, resources should be found to offer education, drug rehabilitation and modern facilities so that the vast majority of offenders can lead useful and productive lives when released rather than return, even more bitter, angry and desperate, to a life of crime and revenge. Life sentences should be restricted to the relatively small number of dangerous murderers and terrorists who reject rehabilitation.

If the deaths of Jack and Saskia are not to be in vain, we must adopt a more modern and positive approach to offending.

Alistair Wood

Oswestry, Shropshire

• Jack Merritt and Saskia Jones were killed doing their best to make the world a better place for all of us. Given their commitment and dedication to rehabilitation, they could have no better memorial than a continuation and strengthening of their work, backed up by a dedicated and sustained programme of innovative action research in prisons and probation areas, to establish the most effective ways of helping people reduce their reoffending. This would stand in sharp contrast to the simplistic solutions being hurriedly put forward for political gain.

With political will, prison/parole security can be improved and probation expenditures restored to previous levels, but the key task is to engage people in activities that sharpen their moral sensibilities; promote and support their self-determined efforts to desist from crime; and equip them with tools to reimagine themselves as pro-social individuals pursuing the goal of citizenship. Some of these programmes already exist and could be improved, but there is an imperative for new ones to be created, especially in the area of political or religious ideology. Staff too should be selected and trained.

Rehabilitative work is difficult, fraught with uncertainty and certainly not risk-free. Those who work in it deserve access to the products of research conducted on a scale and with an urgency hitherto unprecedented in UK criminal justice systems. A standalone research and innovation agency working across prisons and a newly renationalised probation service will require strong, creative direction, a substantial budget, and the best research brains it can buy to do the job. And let the project be named for Jack and Saskia.

Philip Priestley Wells, Somerset

Prof Maurice Vanstone Swansea University

• Whenever you speak to a former prisoner whose life has been turned around, they will tell you that education and enlightened teachers have been the major contributory factors. You are never told that an ever more punitive regime has been of any help. It is dispiriting that the government reaction to the murder of two brilliant young people at a forward-thinking conference has been to look to attach the blame or to call for tougher and more destructive sentencing. Never a mention is made of the work that Jack Merritt and Saskia Jones were involved with.

John Weightman MBE

Former vice president, National Council of Independent Monitoring Boards

• So Boris Johnson wants longer sentences – nothing new there then. He does, however, miss the real point: no matter how long the sentence, most prisoners are released at some stage. Serving a longer sentence does not guarantee that the prisoner is any safer upon release.

This is much more about good rehabilitation opportunities in prison and staff with the right professional and personal skill set to undertake effective risk assessments. The IPP sentence in itself wasn’t such a bad idea. Having an option of a risk assessment before the release of prisoners deemed as posing a risk of harm to the public was sound.

The real problem arose when cutbacks to prison programmes and an overzealous use of the sentence by the courts caused a national shortage of opportunities for prisoners to prove they had reduced their risk. The real injustice of an IPP is about prisoners denied the opportunity to demonstrate their “safety”. Putting more resources and proper training into rehabilitative services in prisons and in the community, rather than spending more money detaining prisoners longer with them unchanged upon release might be the best election ploy.

Mike Nash

Emeritus professor of criminology, Institute of Criminal Justice Studies, University of Portsmouth

• Dave Merritt’s comments on the tragedy of his beautiful son’s death and the travesty of those politicians who have sought so cynically to benefit from it must produce a positive reaction in this most dishonest and dishonourable of election campaigns.

Johnson’s lowest common denominator “throw away the key” bluster, and failure as usual to answer the questions posed on Andrew Marr, made a mockery of the BBC’s decision to give him that slot without the agreement to the Andrew Neil interview he fears so much. It also represented an extraordinarily inappropriate response to the tragic deaths of Jack and Saskia. These two are worth so much more than the power-hungry, selfish individuals who use them so very cruelly.

Charlie Duncan

Oxford

• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com

• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters

• Do you have a photo you’d like to share with Guardian readers? Click here to upload it and we’ll publish the best submissions in the letters spread of our print edition