This is why we should bring back the death penalty

When we had the death penalty in this country, most killers sentenced to death were in fact reprieved and their sentence commuted to life imprisonment.
The system only wanted to hang “the worst” cases and recognised, even then, that most people (especially people who had killed once only) were capable of reform and redemption. This last idea hasn’t changed.

Not really true, though, is it, when you look at cases like Derek Bentley, Timothy Evans, and Ruth Ellis.

Sorry, but you are wrong on every level.

First off, the DP actually costs more to the taxpayer than keeping them incarcerated, again they exhaust their appeals.

Secondly, countless studies have proven the DP does not act as any form of deterrent. Taking the States as a classic example; States that have the DP implemented have no less crime stats than States without - in fact they're higher.

Thirdly, implementing capital punishment in the UK will never happen, as the UK is still signed up to the ECHR and the European Convention. And in any event, putting the DP out to referendum should never happen either, simply because a proportion of UK society lack capacity to see the bigger picture surrounding the task of putting an offender to death, in practise.

Because believe it or not, our focus should be on the offender and his or her rehabilitation in order to reduce recidivism. Simply because that's where society benefits most.

Victims do not run the judicial system, nor should they ever, as they are not best placed to do so.

An example being, a mother loses her child to murder and wants the offender hung, drawn and quartered (a justifiable emotion), but another mother loses her child to murder yet is a spiritual person who believes in forgiveness and wants the offender to walk free (again, a justifiable emotion).

The law gets applied to all of us, and victims do not get to determine punishment, albeit impact statements are given some weight.

In law there is no such thing.

You were advocating that all criminals be killed as the best way to stop recidivism. If that isn't what you meant to say, you need to learn to express yourself better.

Oona is a troll. Do not feed her.

That really made me laugh…..OONA is clueless

hire new staff indeed! How will they have experience of prisoners let alone prisoners facing a DP?

When we had the death penalty in this country, most killers sentenced to death were in fact reprieved and their sentence commuted to life imprisonment.

The system only wanted to hang “the worst” cases and recognised, even then, that most people (especially people who had killed once only) were capable of reform and redemption. This last idea hasn’t changed.

The average time spent in prison before parole for someone who was reprieved was about 10 years.

When the death penalty was abolished, the trial judge would set recommendations as to how long a life sentenced person should serve before parole was considered, but the decision rested with the Home Secretary.

In the case of the Moors Murderers the trial judge said Brady should never get out and that Hindley should serve 25 years before parole.

Nowadays the minimum period to be served before parole can be considered is set by the trial judge, and in the worst cases life really does mean life.

The minimum periods are often a lot longer now than they were when we had the death penalty.

The relevance of all this to the death penalty debate is that support for the death penalty is actually lower in countries and states where “life without parole” is an option in the worst cases as the public can be sure that the worst killers will never get out.

I am not advocating the death sentence for shoplifting!

I was around then and no, that wasn't the expectation, because it was made perfectly clear that life prisoners would be able to apply for parole. There was a recognition that even killers can be rehabilitated - indeed, that one-off killers were more likely to be rehabilitated than most - and/or that there may be extenuating circumstances.

What are you going to do when new staff don't come forward, or find that they too don't have the stomach for killing a load of potentially innocent people in cold blood?

Why do you keep repeating the same knee-jerk inflammatory statements without addressing the very valid points which have been put to you throughout this thread?

Do you seriously want to be at risk of being summarily put to death just because someone has erroneously accused you of shoplifting a can of beans? Because that is what you are advocating for.

WLOs came in in 2003, Home Secretaries had the power from 1983 but in practice always did because the decision to release sat with them alone. How could that have been the expectation of the public when that wasn’t the law? You’re probably correct that some people thought that, just like some people now don’t understand how the law operates. But I’m not sure where that takes the debate.

Hahah, why??

That would be 39% of MNers who voted, not all the MNers that there are.

If 39% of Mumsnetters want to bring it back, the percentage of the general population would be much, much higher.

Whole Life orders were introduced in 1983. Not after abolition, that's true, but then I didn't say they were - I said it was probably the expectation of the public that people who would previously have been executed would now be jailed for life-meaning-life.

double posted due to rubbish signal!

I wonder what you think exponentially means.

61% of people who voted on the thread think bringing back the death penalty is unreasonable.

Whole life sentences were introduced in 2003, not after abolition. The system after abolition was that people went to prison and at a certain point the Home Secretary would say ‘oh you’re safe to be released now’. Very limited probation supervision, no tagging. The time served in prison on life sentences has doubled in the last 15 years.

Nobody wants to work in prisons….read the thread! We are short staffed beyond belief

so where are you hiring from??

Anyone old enough to remember 1964 is old enough to remember when we still
had it, including my parents who are in their early 70s.

The reason it was got rid of wasn’t because it was felt that it was inhumane or
that murderers didn’t deserve it, it was purely because there had been a number of
miscarriages of justice in the 50s and 60s where innocent people had been hanged.

It’s like abortion- it wasn’t permitted in 1967 because everyone believed that a woman had a right to choose- it was to stop desperate women killing themselves through backstreet abortions.

Hire new staff?

so so many prisoners have ADHD/autism/hidden disability/anxiety /mental health issues

the sons of mumsnetters maybe?

we still going down that route OONA??

The ‘law-abiding public’ might not want the death penalty. Just a few of you

waste of resources for a referendum which if it was successful would see majority of prison staff refuse to be involved. What you gonna do then OONA?