Should they have been, or be released. Murderers

Not in a million yrs in my personal opinion regardless of parole hearing.
Watched the programme on Paul Dyson this morning, a proper maniac with previous who went on to kill his Partner. Wouldn't state where body was dumped. (Conveniently forgot, given her horrific injuries. Given 16 yrs without parole). Released after 17yrs in 2022.

Then saw this while researching him.
https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/new...ulls-notorious-killers-could-released-8674218

 

Anyone refusing to disclose the location of a body should remain in prison for me as they've not that they are in any way rehabilitated.

 

Bloody hell. That's just one city.

 

What if they didn't do it?

 

The body was eventually found via forensic science 6 months or so later. He. as said, forgot once he took police to look for it. But police never thought he wanted to disclose it as he said it was an accident. But the horrific injuries proved otherwise once the body was found. Only then did he plead guilty to murder. Having admitted to killing her by accident.
The tv interviews at the time gave him away.

And as for the others they should never be paroled either for me. Although a couple already have been. And a few have Parole hearings pending. Their crimes are appalling beyond any reasonable doubt.

 

Anyone found guilty of murder should end there days inside as a minimum sentence. Unfortunately we're soft in this country.

 

In my view if it's 100% proven, or a person has owned up to taking a life or any mass murders then it's an instant death penalty
Life inprisonment should mean life as well.
We're too soft.
Id even add these sentances.
If anyone is caught with a gun without valud reason or license its a 10 year sentance. Obviously a list of valid individuals such as security forces, game keepers etc.
If caught with a knife without reason it's an instant 5 year sentance. I kbow there will be grey areas but there are no reasons for carrying a weapon.
Maybe bring back national service as we seem to be reducing armed forces numbers. If you don't do your service then you'll not be entitled to benefits such as nhs job seekers. But you get the jist.
I know its a discussion for another day. But we are soft in this country.

 

I get your point but I'd hate to come out of Wilko having bought some new cooking knives and get banged up for five years.

 

I watched a program the other week about the Wath Murderer Arkwright.
If ever a prisoner deserved execution its him.
No doubt about his guilt and his crimes were truly horrendous.
Why waste money and manpower on someone so evil.

 

How do you decide if something is 100% proven?

 

The Shane Dobson article amongst the link is barmy beyond belief. Our law system is fekked and needs revisions imo. To think a few of those are walking the streets as we speak is an affront to society.

 

As always crops up in these threads, the Birmingham 6 and Guildford 4 were found guilty after trial and the judge wanted to sentence them to death. All 10 were later found not guilty at appeal.

It cannot ever be 100% proven that someone is guilty. If that is the requirement, expect juries to find a lot more accused not guilty at trial. Even those that are guilty.

 

Remember it well mate. Driving around the wath/mexborough area at the time. Especially the allotment area. Police all over the place. And that Joke of a solicitor that came on TV to defend him and say. " The killer is still at large" wtf.

 

Christ, what a motley crew. Scum of the earth the lot of them. A bullet each would be best course of action.

 

Imho it can
With DNA evidence. Cctv. And advances in science. lots are beyond reasonable doubt. The incidents you refer to were long ago and agree, lots of fit ups. There would hopefully not be guilty verdicts in such cases based on such flimsy evidence today.

lot of juries btw can be Directed by the Judge to return a not guilty verdict.

I too agree with you, re the death sentence as has been used on innocent folk. but as I've said b4. My conscience is challenged on many occasions.

But we still have cover ups. The guy recently released on rape conviction proves that. Even though evidence of his innocence was found many years ago. But found later after his conviction 5 yrs or so. But nowadays the prosecution must give the defence any of their findings that may help a defendant.

These people in these cases. Can i ask you a simple question. And bear in mind there is no evidence to prove otherwise. Of their innocence. And they wont get the death penalty. Would you allow em back on the streets. As part of a parole board. (I couldn't imagine myself taking that risk. Regardless of reports) Given what they have been found guilty of.

 

This is when my conscience is seriously tested mate. Imagine if it was one of your own that was a victim of a brutal murder.

 

I don't think you can have levels of guilt you are either one or the other. Personally I can think of nothing worse than been locked up for the rest of my natural life, death would be preferable to me I would think and clearly was to the scum Shipman and West. Also if you have one person who suffers the death penalty and later is proven innocent that is one person too many for me personally.

 

Food for thought
To 2021 in the previous Decade. 129 of those released went on to kill again.

 

I don't think anyone really disagrees with your last point.
It is difficult
I put myself in a position of what would I want if one of mine was murdered in a barbaric fashion an made to suffer.
Then on the opposite side of the coin thinking one of mine was innocent but sentenced to death.
The latter tends to win over.

Tis why I dont criticise either point of view and just take in their thoughts. It's a very emotional subject.

 

Dna, cctv. But unless you actually see someone physically do the crime then you can never prove 100% on the same hand there's thousands walking around who should be serving long jail due to lack of evidence