Justice?

Or bad journalism? She hasn't just been sent down for life for a second time, as the title suggests, she had her conviction overturned on appeal, but was found guilty at her retrial

On reading that title I thought, 'she's not a cat', but then

Mr Justice King, sitting at Liverpool Crown Court, recommended that Rachel Tunstill, 26, should serve a minimum 17 years before being considered for parole

She's 26. She could easily be out in time to live another life. Or serve another 'life' sentence

Maybe she is a cat?