Capital punishment

When did I complain? I quoted figures of how much it cost as someone suggested a trail for a execution costs more than keeping a prisoner in for life.
Doubt you would be saying this if someone close to you had been the victim. The other poor person can never get his life back why should a murderer ever be released.

 

I agree I doubt I would be saying it, but that's neither here nor there. My hypothetical reaction to it happening to me is entirely different to what society should do. If someone has been rehabilitated what is there to be gained from keeping them in prison for the rest of their life?

 

That's the rub though MR. I genuinely don't believe the authorities have full competence to say without doubt that someone is rehabilitated and won't re offend. Wasn't the terrorist who attacked someone on London Bridge a couple of years back out on some sort of parole? There's plenty of examples of it. Now I'm not saying it should never happen but it should be an exceptionally high bar. There's also the option that people who are thought to have rehabilitated could h ave better conditions within the system.
I'm no more than a layman on this but i have absolutely no confidence in the infallibility of psychologists.

 

How many prisoners are ever rehabilitated from going to jail? Not many you would argue that'd why prisons are rammed re offending rates are sky high. So I'm doubtful a bloke who puts a axe into another man's skull (in the link) can ever be rehabilitated. And how can we be sure? By releasing these people we put the public in danger.

 

The British - and American - prison systems are based around punishment. Some of those on the continent are based around rehabilitation and have significantly lower reoffending rates. In England/Wales, 75% of prisoners reoffend within 9 years and 46% within 1 year (https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES/K002023/1). Compare that with Norway - with 20% reoffending within 5 years.

But it costs (short term) more money to rehabilitate prisoners than to punish them, so we punish them and pay more later.

As for murderers, they are assessed before a parole decision and only considered if they aren't a danger to other people. Remember there is a lot of difference between a murderer who lashed out at someone - and could feel genuine remorse for the rest of their days - and a serial killer.

 

Q. The Death Penalty is in operation.

You are totally opposed to it - You are called for jury service - can't get out of it - defendant charged with murder - from the evidence you believe him to be guilty. You know that if the 9/10 members of the jury find likewise the defendant will hang.

What do you say to the jury 'manager' when you're asked if you find the defendant guilty?

 

Not guilty.

 

Think I'd do likewise.

Not sure on this but in some US States aren't juries who find a defendant guilty of murder then asked to say yes or no to the question 'should the defendant die ????'

Complex issue!

 

Guilty. Not my job to decide the punishment, as much as I'm against it.

 

I replied to your other post which you chose to ignore but then jump on this anyway. You say the u.k justice system is based on punishment well letting someone out who after 17 years who put a axe in someone's skull isn't punishment in my book. There are other murder cases I can think of 2 very violent ones where the people committed them in there 20s and will be due to be released in their 50s that in my book is wrong a murderer should be serving at least the rest of his days in jail minimum. And lashing out at someone might be a punch on a night on which has ended a blokes life tragically not murdering someone with a weapon.

 

In the eyes of the law, murder is murder. We don't have first degree, second degree, etc. If someone took a weapon to another person and killed them - and there might be complex reasons for that behaviour including childhood abuse, substance abuse, etc that is exactly the same as someone who means to punch someone and they hit their head on the floor in the eyes of the law.

Maybe we should. Maybe we should give automatic full life sentences, but then you have some teenager with a rough upbringing who stabs someone in a fight getting the same sentence as Fred West or Peter Sutcliffe. Are they exactly the same though?

 

If someone punched someone and they hit their head and died from it, it isn't murder it is manslaughter. Murder is premeditated and you have to prove that beyond reasonable doubt.

 

That's true. However, there are other illustrative cases that are at the other end of the scale to Bundy and Shipman. For example, a spouse who has been systematically physically or mentally abused for many years who kills the abusive partner.

 

And that's where diminished responsibility would kick in. I agree its not as black and white as some on here seem to think.

 

If someone punches someone and they die its manslaughter it was just a reply to your "just lashed out"
No someone who just murderers 1 person isn't the same as Sutcliffe but I don't think a murderer should be released again. No just for punishment but for other members of public safety. You have your opinion I have mine.

 

(2)The court must have regard to the following purposes of sentencing—

(a)the punishment of offenders,

(b)the reduction of crime (including its reduction by deterrence),

(c)the reform and rehabilitation of offenders,

(d)the protection of the public, and

(e)the making of reparation by offenders to persons affected by their offences.

Section 57(2) Sentencing Act 2020

 

Guilty, despite my belief the death penalty is wrong can't let people go free for murder

 

I'll put forward the case of Sammy "Sammytown" McBride - the lead sing of the East Bay hardcore/proto grunge band "Fang" - their song "The Money will roll right in" was covered by Butthole Surfers, Mudhoney and famously Nirvana at Reading 92.



He had a drug problem and other issues and while high strangled his girlfriend suspecting she was working for a rival dealer. Dixie Lee Carney was 24 at the time and Sammytown went on the run for 6 months. He was later caught, tried and sentenced to 11 years for voluntary manslaughter.

In prison, he got clean. He worked with a charity where serial killers narrated books for blind kids!! - including Ed Kemper (who has recorded 5000+ hours!)

He was released in 95 after serving 6 years in prison. Since then, he reformed the band, opened a tattoo parlour and a house for addicts to get clean.

Now, you might say that he should have served longer - I'd probably agree with you. But once clean he wasn't going to do it again - and his time outside has helped far more people than he would have done rotting in a cell.

This is an interesting interview about his time in prison.

https://www.ozy.com/c-notes/sam-mcbride-punk-rock-crime-punishment/31673/

 

Is lee rigby case,Huntley,Shipman,Allott,Bendall,Moors murderers to name a few 100% black and white or not?

 

More or less but that doesn't alter the moral argument against capital punishment nor does it change the multitude of unsafe convictions that have been revealed over the years.
Maybe if you're as keen as all that on capital and corporal punishment you should embrace the faith of Rigby's murderer then you could justify cutting the hands off thieves, stoning adulterous women etc. That's where an eye for an eye tends to lead.