The British should implement the death penalty
 

I was against it, but fucking hell:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...thorities.html

Sometimes a human just goes bad, and you have to put it down like a rabid dog.

Feh. It wouldn't matter, they can't even implement the punishments they already have available for their use:

Life in prison is the best these assholes deserve.

I'll say.

From TFA:

Totally against the death penalty. Apart from having a problem with it in a moral sense; there have been far too many miscarriages of justice for me to trust the system to get it right. We've recently had several murder convictions overturned, showing a vast array of the things that can go wrong in the process.

Indeed, that's kind of the problem here, too.

Difficult to undo a death sentence though.

Just reserve it for the worst cases where there is tons of evidence, like this one.

Unfortunately, there have been several notable occasions where there was 'tons' of evidence. On one of those occasions a man spent almost his entire adult life in jail for a murder he did not commit.

Also: there have been a number of cases where compelling evidence for the defence was conveniently mislaid/witnesses ignored etc.

Sometimes these cases are politically motivated. The Birmingham Six being a classic example. Those men had a chemical on their hands which was supposedly clear and compelling evidence for their having used explosives. Turned out it was also clear and compelling evidence of their having handled a pack of playing cards. But ... it was a high profile case and politically fraught. A conviction was needed.

They were eventually cleared. But not before spending many years in prison.

There was a 'ton' of evidence convicting a babysitter of murdering her charge. She was convicted on the basis of expert medical witnesses and the compelling evidence given to the jury that the child's injuries were sustained by swinging his head against a bannister with equivalent force to him being hit by a moving car.
Turned out no such event had taken place. The child had an unknown medical condition which had caused the brain damage.

By chance, a doctor watching coverage of the case spotted in a photo of the child a slight turning in of one eye. When this was investigated (after three years of trying to get an appeal) It became apparent that the child had died of natural causes. The 'medical expert' who testified has also been implicated in several other miscarriages of justice including two mothers who were convicted of murdering their babies (it was said to be 'shaken baby syndrome') when it turned out that they had died of cot death. The 'expert' has since been struck off as a doctor.

Juries convict on the basis of the evidence theyre shown. There have also been several high profile cases whereby important evidence was simply not put forward; key individuals either not interviewed or their testimonies not included in the case; and outright tampering.

There is no such thing, in my view, of a totally safe conviction. Later appeals, or changes in forensic science and techniques can overturn an unsafe conviction at a later date; but that's cold comfort if the wrongly convicted person has already been executed.

One of the last men in Britain to be hung, was later (quite recently) cleared of murder.

If we accept that the death penalty is no more then life should mean life no time off for being good, no more parole for cases like this

I think if someone is still dangerous they should remain locked up. I can't see how someone committing a crime like this could ever be rehabilitated to the point that they were no longer a danger.

no more so than undoing a couple of murders......

also easier and cheaper to clean up after an execution and no further inquest necessary. that's not as flippant a comment as it sounds when you think about it -particularly the emotional mess.

Sure there is. Example: quality surveillance video of a thug shooting a gas station attendant during a robbery. If there is clear cut proof such as that which implicates the perpetrator(s) then how can that not lead to a safe conviction? If it is absolutely clear with no reasonable doubt that the person(s) charged are in fact guilty of an exceedingly violent or heinous crime (murder, multiple DWI's, child molestation, rape under threat of death or bodily harm, etc.), then a bullet to the head and a 2'x2' piece of stone are cheaper than a lifetime in prison, and IMO more appropriate. People who prove themselves to be destructive to those around them and deem themselves through their actions to not be capable of living in "civilized" society should be dealt with swiftly and accordingly.

Capital punishment is not a deterrent, as most murders are crimes of passion or of crazies like those guys.

People who receive the death penalty go through years of expensive appeals before the sentence is carried out. In the meantime, they do not participate in jobs that prisoners do that help offset the cost of running the prison, like working in the laundry or kitchen.

Personally, I think that if something happened to one of my loved ones I would want to see the person who did it die. I can see feeling that way. I also think that it's letting them off easy. Why should they be put out of their misery (and ours) instead of living out their lives in what would seem a miserable existence? Then, too, maybe some sort of good could be gleaned from them.

Screw it. Not our problem. Let the Brits figure out what they want to do.

Thank you Merc, I was going to say that but you beat me to it.

Oh come on, when did we ever hesitate to tell you guys in the USA how to run your country?

But remember, Gandalf is against capital punishment. Case closed.

I'm with Dana - totally against the death penalty.
If the case involved someone I loved, yes of course I would want revenge. But justice isn't about revenge.

Killing more people does not bring those dead back.
And as Shawnee said it certainly does not act as a deterrant. We used to hang children for stealing - did it stop grown men murdering? No. What helped in the end was slum clearance, universal education and welfare reform.

Obviously the above does not apply in this case.
And I am not arguing that the murdered is anything but a despicable creature who deserves death. But state sanctioned killing is the thin end of the wedge.

A fair point about the cctv...but how would that be legislated? Evidence that's clear enough for a jury to convict cannot then be graded into definate and not so definate proof. It's either enough to convict or not.


Sundae used the term state sanctioned killing. I think that is what I most abhor about the death penalty. I do not believe the state should have that kind of power. There is too much potential for it to be abused. If we'd have had the death penalty at the time, the Birmingham Six would have been hung. That would have been a political as well as a criminal execution. They were convicted unsafely because of political (and racial) concerns. That is far too much power for any state to have over its citizens.

It was never meant to be a deterrant. It is a punishment. Hence the name, Capital Punishment. I respect the right of people to disagree with it. I support it.

I support capital punishment also. It should not become the burden of the taxpayers to support scum for years, knowing they will never be a productive citizen again. They will wind up dead ultimately...so why prolong it?
If you are not prepared to have your life taken, don't take a life. There are thousands of sicko losers sitting on their asses this morning while I prepare myself to go to work to provide them with food, clothing, shelter, medical treatment, and janitorial service. There are lots of law abiding citizens that can't afford that. That's where I prefer to put my money. Fuck 'em. They had a choice just like we do.

Cost is, again, not a viable argument. I believe it costs more ultimately to actually get to the sentence in a death penalty case than it costs to house someone for the rest of their life. See previous post.

Some US states have suspended the death penalty to save money during the economic crisis.

Oh Sundae, I'm pretty sure you meant murdereR
:p

Depending upon how you look at it yes, but it does make more room for all those drug offenders :eyebrow:

That is only because of the length of the appeal they get on death row. Someone sitting on Death Row for 20 years is just stupid. A life sentance surely would be more costly if they didn't get to sit on DR for years on end.

Argh! So shoot me!

"Burn the witch!"

A death sentence does not negate due process of law.

No doubt. But it doesn't take 15 - 20 years to ensure that.

I think the reasoning is that if you're planning to kill someone, rather than a slap for a traffic violation, they want to be really really sure. ;)

And, they're not always really really sure.

Why? They are able to convict people to life in prison in less than a week.

So we Brits are no longer welcome on the Cellar? Is it now officially an American board? No discussion of topics affecting other countries? Shame you almighty alrighty alllwhitey allamericans couldn't apply this "not our problem" rule to a few more countries with "problems" eh? :p

Yeah, I was watching a show recently about people convicted, life sentences, spent many many years in prison...only to be proven undeniably innocent later. They spoke with a woman who was SURE SURE SURE that she had picked the right guy, to find out later it wasn't. The mind can play funny tricks in that arena. Luckily, he wasn't dead. Also, he forgave her.

No, no, no. Silly person.

Just that I did not think we should meddle in your affairs and tell you how you should or should not do things.:p

I went to see The Exonerated.

Yeah, okay, I only went to see it because Steve Pemberton was in it (and got Catherine Tate as well!) but I moved me profoundly. And confirmed my belief that an eye for an eye leaves everyone blind. (Mahatma Ghandi and all that)

Monster, I don't think that comment was meant the way you took it, but don't you know there are no nationalities on the internet? We're all one glorious whole.

shame on you SG -you not see the :p?

:lol:

Not my business either -I don't live there anymore. I live in the US. US laws affect me. Of course I'm not allowed to affect them, but hey....... ;)

Yeah, I just wanted to get the Red Dwarf joke in one more time :)

PS - don't kill anyone, m'kay?

no killing? aaaaw, moooommmmm.....

I can so hear your crew saying that...

I have nothing against the death penalty if the convict pleads guilty.

Court-assisted suicide?

Or coerced confessions.

We had a case a couple of years ago with a guy who confessed to a murder he'd been implicated in. Turned out he was mentally ill. He later retracted his confession and eventually was cleared on appeal.

Yes but maybe he actually did do it, but because he's mentally ill he has a different perception of events...or maybe someone just told him to recant under the grounds of mental illness...or...or...or...

Anyway, I don't think you need capital punishment, and nor do we.

So there!

No he was cleared of the crime. There was other evidence which should have been brought up at the trial but wasn't. It was just too damn convenient to convict the guy who'd confessed.

Well, I was just playing devils advocate. ;)

No, really? you? :P

I wasn't aware of doing it that often, although I do like to try and consider things from different perspectives.

I used to really like discussion papers when I was at uni for this reason.

Ali: The Devil's Advocate It's an American movie

http://unrealitymag.com/wp-content/u...2/18453740.jpg

Hey...I don't look anything like big Al.

Yeah, but the witness picked you out of the line up.

What do you want for your last meal?

cocopops

Cocopuffs./:eng trans:/

Actually I think they are more like a chocolate version of our "Corn Pops"

I'm going to try to find the time to do a stat thingie on death-worthy crimes committed per capita during the era of the guillotine, stoning, gallows, and the firing sqad as opposed to times w/out capitol punishment. You think there will be a noticeable difference?

The people who got cleared after years on DR were mainly those whose trial was pre DNA days. Now we have the ability for the prosecution to present this as evidence in the trial from jump st. The days of what the jury believes, IMO are waning. Technology has no emotion.
To get completely real... a juror would be less credible for a verdict decision than scientific fact/data any day.
I think most folks who are convicted and sentenced to the DP these days, have a minute chance of clearance...regardless of how many years. If the evidence is there, surely they'd use it. Yep. technology is fairly well making it 'cut and dried'. Methinks.:eyebrow:

You know.... COCO-PUFFS. With the brown stork looking bird with the round glasses. I must be the only old geezer on this board.......:cool:

What are you Koo-koo?

You mean these?

http://www.selectcouponprogram.com/g.../cocopuffs.jpg

I was thinkin of those other things with the Vampire dude ....

http://that70skid.files.wordpress.co...nt-chocula.jpg

My bad - I stand corrected.

Forensics can be manipulated, faked, or just dumb-ass screwed up, just like any other form of evidence.

I've been in philosophy seminars where captial punishment was the topic, stats like what you want are often discussed, but it is virtually impossible to get a conclusive finding because you need two societies where all conditions are the same except for captial punishment. Capital punishment and high crime rates are correlated because capital punishment is brought in in reaction to high crime rates.

Cocoa Puffs used to be hollow. Now they're just chocolate cheetos.

Yep, different cereal. I hope the warden knows the difference!