The Death Penalty

[Butts]

I think it unlikely that the Death Penalty will ever be reintroduced.

It's true that up until the eighties the public were probably in favour although would any of them actually have had the courage to "pull the lever" ?

Strikes me it is a generational thing and as the people who lived through it's existence have died off so has the demand for it.

When I was younger I was an advocate but shifted my position as I matured.

 

[nw1]

The death penalty makes economic sense, what is the point of keeping someone alive in a prison for decades if they are never to be released?
It can cost the tax payer anything up to £90,000 per year to keep someone in prison.
Would anyone shed any tears for a dead paedophile, rapist, child killer?

We have to execute people because they're costing the taxpayer money being kept in prison? That's a very weak argument. Sounds like another, more extreme, version of the argument that some people make (and which I detest) that smokers should be left to die because they brought cancer on themselves and are draining NHS resources.

All sorts of outrageous things involving killing large sections of the population might make economic sense, doesn't mean we should do them. We could probably solve the world overpopulation crisis by euthanasing everyone over a certain age (wasn't 'Logan's Run' about that?), doesn't mean we should even contemplate anything so monstrous.

 

[Busaholic]

Do they go around asking them, calling up justice ministers every year to check if that’s the reason? I wouldn’t believe a single word Amnesty said about anything.

Fine, I'll know not to attempt not to engage in any logical (or other) discourse with you in future.

 

[AlterEgo]

Fine, I'll know not to attempt not to engage in any logical (or other) discourse with you in future.

“Amnesty says…” isn’t discourse.

 

[Busaholic]

“Amnesty says…” isn’t discourse

''Deterrence is probably the most commonly expressed rationale for the death penalty'' is the statement that appears at the top of the first page if you google 'value deterrent of death penalty' as I just did. This appears before any specific threads are referenced. QED.

 

[AlterEgo]

''Deterrence is probably the most commonly expressed rationale for the death penalty'' is the statement that appears at the top of the first page if you google 'value deterrent of death penalty' as I just did. This appears before any specific threads are referenced. QED.

Yes, that’s a quote from a website set up by a pressure group against the death penalty in the USA, so I’m not sure why you give it such weight, being the top result of a specific Google search. This isn’t how you argue a point, is it? “Well Google says!” Else why come to a discussion forum if we can all Google the answer and just look at the top result?

I don’t think “it deters crime” is actually at the forefront of most pro-capital punishment lawmakers given that everyone knows it doesn’t really deter the most serious crimes, but merely exists to atone for them. Mostly, the concern is for natural justice, and for religious reasons, I’d wager.

“Becuase that’s what murderers deserve” is the most commonly expressed rationale and the hardest to rebut. “It’s a deterrent” is the easiest to rebut and almost never comes up in any discussion I’ve had with pro-death penalty people before.

 

[edwin_m]

I think it unlikely that the Death Penalty will ever be reintroduced.

It's true that up until the eighties the public were probably in favour although would any of them actually have had the courage to "pull the lever" ?

Strikes me it is a generational thing and as the people who lived through it's existence have died off so has the demand for it.

When I was younger I was an advocate but shifted my position as I matured.

I think also mass casualties in WW2 were very much in living memory until fairly recently, whereas now anyone old enough to remember that will be 80+. Those casualties hadn't done anything wrong and just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Combined with "we've always done it that way", that probably led to more acceptance of execution despite the fact that it happened to innocent people from time to time. Life is considered to be much more precious these days, as also seen in attitudes to workplace safety for example.

 

[alex397]

Looking at the list of other countries which have the death penalty should surely ring alarm bells about reintroducing it.

 

[najaB]

The death penalty makes economic sense, what is the point of keeping someone alive in a prison for decades if they are never to be released?

Hmm. Experience in California says otherwise:

The additional cost of confining an inmate to death row, as compared to the maximum security prisons where those sentenced to life without possibility of parole ordinarily serve their sentences, is $90,000 per year per inmate.

Not to mention the fact that there is inequity in the imposition of the death penalty:

A study found that those defendants whose representation was the least expensive, and thus who received the least amount of attorney and expert time, had an increased probability of receiving a death sentence. Defendants with less than $320,000 in terms of representation costs (the bottom 1/3 of federal capital trials) had a 44% chance of receiving a death sentence at trial. On the other hand, those defendants whose representation costs were higher than $320,000 (the remaining 2/3 of federal capital trials) had only a 19% chance of being sentenced to death. Thus, the study concluded that defendants with low representation costs were more than twice as likely to receive a death sentence.

Source: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NEL...86&fileDownloadName=h041211ab501_pescetta.pdf

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Just a few interesting cases in the UK over the years.

Think of Timothy Evans (Rillington Place) and a lesser known one - Edith Jesse Thompson (Ilford 1922)

Both very well covered over the years in learned books.

 

[DerekC]

I don't agree that is the logical upshot of what I said, which is merely that releasing an innocent man is not a reversal of his sentence or in any way a correction of the injustice meted against him.

But it puts a limit on the injustice - whereas the death penalty is irreversible and the consequences go on and on in terms of the impact on those around the victim of the injustice

You will always have miscarriages of justice in any judicial system. I would consider it unjust that a police officer who raped, murdered, and burned a complete stranger gets to live until he's probably 80 years old, in confinement or not. He should already be dead. I think most people in Western democracies live in such a state of safety and relative comfort that the idea of the state wrongly executing someone once every few years is a total abhorrence. In fact, so unspeakable and unconscionable it is, we reach the point we are happy for people like Wayne Couzens to have three meals a day and complete a university degree. I'll repeat - he should be dead.

In your opinion, which it's obvious is not open to any counter-argument. Fortunately these days a minority of people in the UK have views as extreme as yours.

 

[GB]

Hmm. Experience in California says otherwise:

Not to mention the fact that there is inequity in the imposition of the death penalty:

Source: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NEL...86&fileDownloadName=h041211ab501_pescetta.pdf

Clearly the death penalty will never come back over here but if it did why would you assume it would follow USA practice instead of creating our own?

Who is to decide it is unequivocal though? Some would say the evidence against some who were later found innocent was unequivocal at the time.

There is also the issue of martyrdom if terrorists were given the death penalty.

Is there any doubt in the killers of Lee Rigby, Manchester arena bombing, Westminster attack, Borough Market attack, MP attacks etc? What about Thomas Hamilton, Derrick Bird, Michael Ryan or Jake Davison. While they all died during said attacks, had they survived I think they would be unequivocal. What if Anders Behring committed his act over here, there is no doubt what he did.

Martyrdom only applies to some and frankly I couldn't care less about it, we should concentrate on what's right for us.

 

[najaB]

Clearly the death penalty will never come back over here but if it did why would you assume it would follow USA practice instead of creating our own?

We aren't China. The desired higher standard of evidence, trial, appeal, appeal to the high court, etc. will make death penalty cases more expensive.

 

[GB]

I didn't say we were China, but there must be something inbetween what China does and the somewhat lengthy death row of the USA.

 

[edwin_m]

Is there any doubt in the killers of Lee Rigby, Manchester arena bombing, Westminster attack, Borough Market attack, MP attacks etc? What about Thomas Hamilton, Derrick Bird, Michael Ryan or Jake Davison. While they all died during said attacks, had they survived I think they would be unequivocal. What if Anders Behring committed his act over here, there is no doubt what he did.

Martyrdom only applies to some and frankly I couldn't care less about it, we should concentrate on what's right for us.

I suggest those people were willing to die in the attempt and would therefore not have been deterred by the prospect of execution.

 

[Busaholic]

I suggest those people were willing to die in the attempt and would therefore not have been deterred by the prospect of execution.

It was a crime to commit suicide before the Suicide Act 1961 (goodness, didn't the sixties produce a lot of good, well thought-out legislation, the absolute opposite of today) but very few of the bodies were dragged through the courts to be sentenced. Sentencing suicide bombers who have achieved their dastardly aims to death in their enforced absence seems like an equally fatuous exercise though, in the fashionable hackneyed phrase du jour, I guess it signals virtue.

 

[muz379]

A lot of people that argue about it being a justice driven initiative cite examples of infamous murderers and the argument that they should be dead . And in many cases I would not be fussed about that , but equally you can cite cases of innocent people killed or that would be killed in the name of this justice .

Granted being incarcerated for a long time for a crime you did not commit would be terrible , but its about acting proportionately , clearly its totally unreasonable for the state to not have some system of incarceration for people that commit serious offences , and in criminal justice there are a variety of purposes behind incarceration . But even taking the most utilitarian one of public protection its unreasonable for the state to not have that power . But to have the power to end someones life even on the chance of them later being revealed as innocent is in my view not proportionate and not a system that I would support .

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Looking at the list of other countries which have the death penalty should surely ring alarm bells about reintroducing it.

Ah, the fallacy of, "I disagree with this country on X, therefore they are automatically wrong on Y as well" rears its unfortunate head again

 

[Busaholic]

Ah, the fallacy of, "I disagree with this country on X, therefore they are automatically wrong on Y as well" rears its unfortunate head again

Would you say that of North Korea?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Would you say that of North Korea?

North Korea has an utterly dreadful Government with what must surely be one of the worst human rights records in the World and I have no intention of defending it in any way. But at the same time it is still a logical fallacy to assume that 'this awful Government happens to do Y (as well as the other awful things they do)' automatically means that Y is wrong.

Let's argue the death penalty based on the merits or otherwise of the death penalty, not on the basis of some childish game of 'this country that I don't like does it therefore we mustn't do it'.

 

[edwin_m]

Flip it over. How many countries that we regard as sharing our values have the death penalty?

 

[Bevan Price]

I don't agree that is the logical upshot of what I said, which is merely that releasing an innocent man is not a reversal of his sentence or in any way a correction of the injustice meted against him.

You will always have miscarriages of justice in any judicial system. I would consider it unjust that a police officer who raped, murdered, and burned a complete stranger gets to live until he's probably 80 years old, in confinement or not. He should already be dead. I think most people in Western democracies live in such a state of safety and relative comfort that the idea of the state wrongly executing someone once every few years is a total abhorrence. In fact, so unspeakable and unconscionable it is, we reach the point we are happy for people like Wayne Couzens to have three meals a day and complete a university degree. I'll repeat - he should be dead.

So do you also think that Timothy Evans should have been hanged ?

Timothy Evans - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

or the "Guildford Four" ?

Guildford Four: how the innocent were framed and the truth buried – The Justice Gap

www.thejusticegap.com

or the "Birmingham Six"

Birmingham Six - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

All convicted due to police incompetence or malpractice.

 

[AlterEgo]

So do you also think that Timothy Evans should have been hanged ?

Timothy Evans - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

or the "Guildford Four" ?

Guildford Four: how the innocent were framed and the truth buried – The Justice Gap

www.thejusticegap.com

or the "Birmingham Six"

Birmingham Six - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

All convicted due to police incompetence or malpractice.

Well no, clearly any sentence a court passes is an injustice if the accused is innocent. That’s not an argument against particular forms of punishment though, and I completely accept that you could cite a dozen miscarriages of justice in the 20th century alone.

We do live in a country of 66 million people though, and there is no happy medium between avoiding giving the correct, just punishment and avoiding all “incorrect verdicts”.

 

[Busaholic]

Well no, clearly any sentence a court passes is an injustice if the accused is innocent. That’s not an argument against particular forms of punishment though, and I completel y accept that you could cite a dozen miscarriages of justice in the 20th century alone.

We do live in a country of 66 million people though, and there is no happy medium between avoiding giving the correct, just punishment and avoiding all “incorrect verdicts”.

You say the death sentence is the 'correct' and 'just' punishment for a person convicted of murder. Are there any occasions when you think it might be incorrect or unjust at the time of sentencing?

 

[Trackman]

I suggest those people were willing to die in the attempt and would therefore not have been deterred by the prospect of execution.

In the past at capital murder trials the accused have tried to plead guilty, normally over-ruled by the judge then the 'normal' defence of insanity put in place. Once found guilty they wouldn't be bothered with an extra four weeks to live by an appeal and dismiss it. It's reported a quite a few of the condemned would rather face execution rather spend 20 years in gaol or whatever.

So do you also think that Timothy Evans should have been hanged ?

For what Evans was convicted of (murder of his daughter) Christie never confessed., but to all the other murders.
There was some head-scratching at the time and they even tried to delay Christie's execution.
Yes, Christie was evil; maybe that's why he didn't confess.

 

[najaB]

That’s not an argument against particular forms of punishment though, and I completely accept that you could cite a dozen miscarriages of justice in the 20th century alone.

That's the problem. The state can at least attempt to provide restitution to someone if it is found out that they were imprisoned unjustly. The person who has been executed...

 

[arbeia]

Increase the penalties for Murder to full term of life, then give them, at any time in their sentence, the right to terminate their own life. Their choice.

 

[najaB]

Increase the penalties for Murder to full term of life, then give them, at any time in their sentence, the right to terminate their own life. Their choice.

Well, suicide is no longer illegal so it wouldn't be a matter of giving them the right as much as the means and opportunity.

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

Is it possible out of interest here, to have a Poll page set up to ask if people are in favour of bringing back Hanging here in the UK and perhaps also Judicial Corporal Punishment like they still have in Singapore, ordered by the courts for adult male offenders, that was being discussed in the pub the other night.

 

[Typhoon]

...
or the "Birmingham Six"

Birmingham Six - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

All convicted due to police incompetence or malpractice.

It was this event that did it for me. After that I would actively act against the restoration of the death penalty. I can still remember coming home that night and the traffic pouring out of the city, I used to catch a bus outside of the Tavern in the Town. Such was the feeling at the time. they would have hanged, no doubt. (Probably one reason why restoring the death penalty was an issue at the polls in the '70s). But thanks to the likes of Chris Mullin (whose role in the eventual overturning of the conviction cannot be underestimated, and endured a good deal of opprobrium for doing so), justice was done*.

Increase the penalties for Murder to full term of life, then give them, at any time in their sentence, the right to terminate their own life. Their choice.

My gut feeling is 'no'! It would be fine if you assume that those only those guilty of the crime took their own lives but an innocent person, particularly a sole innocent person, could be 'persuaded' to do so if you make life difficult enough for them - and I bet life can be made very difficult. Once they have committed suicide 'they must have been guilty, they killed themselves.' Case closed.

* - if anyone doubts that ITV has got worse in the last half century - no 'World in Action'.