What you're effectively doing here is introducing a further test (i.e. validity of the jury's decision) after the jury has done what it was put in place to do, which is determine (either unanimously or as a majority) whether guilty or not beyond reasonable doubt. Someone else on this thread mentioned the idea of having one trial for the crime then another session or panel to determine whether or not the death penalty should apply, and while I'm loathe to keep adding layers to any area of the law, such an approach might at least resolve some of the issue you've raised. Theoretically, if the evidence in such cases is strong and compelling enough to mean a guilty verdict is reached, it's highly unlikely the jury would be quite as split as you suggest anyway, even given the potential for hand-wringing. :tongue: I'd like to see a proper referendum run in this country asking whether or not the death penalty should come back, for certain crimes of course, however I shall not hold my breath, as our glorious leaders are unlikely to want to do this, given they know what the result is highly likely to be.
Might not deter people but at least the evil *******s won't be around anymore. Plus giving someone evil a lethal injection to get shut of them would be much cheaper than giving them a prison cell for life and around the clock care/protection.
In the case of executing criminals I don't see any comparison between somebody being executed for murder when a sentence is passed by a judge and when the convicted person has been given a fair trial and found guilty by a jury of 12 to the barbaric extrajudicial executions we see carried out by ISIS, etc. We wouldn't be stoning people to death, beheading them, crucifying them, throwing them from the roofs of buildings, burying them alive, burning or boiling them alive or skinning them alive for crimes such as being gay, allowing your wife to drive a car, apostasy, being a Christian or another religion (including a different strand of the same religion, being an aid worker or a journalist, etc. The two cannot be compared.
OK I get your point - don't agree with it but you've been selective in answering my point. Not all those sentenced to death are guilty - how would you feel if the courts found you guilty of a crime you did not commit and you were about to be executed? Not exactly a nice prospect is it?
I don't know how many times I have to say this but... THE DEATH PENALTY IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN LIFE IMPRISONMENT
What is the difference between the barbaric methods used by ISIS and the barbaric method that was used in this country and the barbaric methods used in the USA.
Think they were already dead before he attacked them, mind you I wouldn't be surprised if he was eventually investigated for it! This little **** they ought to bring back hard labour
He won't be "looked after" in prison. I think "taken care of" is a more appropriate phrase. He'll not be smiling in a few weeks, believe me!
Explain that to me then. Bit of rope from a Chandlers £5-£10 as opposed to 40 years of board, food, drink, healthcare, gym, TV, 24-hour protection.
Look up extrajudicial and then if you can stomach it look at the pictures (I would advise against the videos) and decide how you would prefer to be treated. Oh and bear in mind the crimes they're being executed for. I'm not aware that the USA have started executing people for being gay or any other crime I listed in my post
It's estimated to cost 40k pa to keep a single prisoner. Times 60 let's say for a whole life tariff so c2.5m. Pales into insignificance with the actual cost of an execution (based on USAs estimates). And let's not forget that they are incarcerated on death row for a decade or so, so there are imprisonment costs there anyway.
Excuse the source - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jun/20/california-death-penalty-execution-costs
I had a feeling the Guardian was going to be quoted and while I'm not professing to be an expert I read a report that quoted a figure of £4 billion in total in California since 1978. PS. You're excused just don't do it again.
The figures probably are over stated but it's certainly not the cheap option compared to life in jail. Even stripping the estimate back severely leaves figures that swamp the UK estimate of 40k pa.