This is why we should bring back the death penalty

I would venture to suggest @LBFseBrom that if you need a newspaper article, regardless from which paper, to be 'incited' to feel 'outrage' over this, rather than it occurring naturally in you, then that's sad.

Confidently asserts the poster who clearly didn’t understand what suppression of evidence was upthread and was also batting that away as a potential problem.

It’s evident from this thread that there is a lot of support for the death penalty among people who don’t understand the problems with it and aren’t about to.

There is no nice neat dividing line between ‘definitely did it’ and other crimes. It’s an absolute non-starter so the posters on here salivating over courtrooms doubling up as firing ranges should just admit they’re happy to accept miscarriages of justice and barbarism to sate their bloodlust.

Some of the people advocating for the death penalty on this thread would be prime candidates themselves. Because they actually have murderous tendencies themselves, but they hide those behind supposed desire for justice

You don’t believe in justice, you have a desire to kill people, but you suppress the desire to kill the innocent, you live it out by claiming that it’s good to kill the guilty.

“Take them out the back and shoot them between the eyes”? “Hang them after the guilty verdict,”.

That’s a desire to kill and nothing else. So let’s not pretend you’re righteous citizens, you’re murderers in the making.

There’s a difference between believing the death penalty would be a just punishment but being open to discussion on the why’s and wherefore’s, and being totally closed to any discussion and name calling anyone who doesn’t share your desire to kill people.

Who decides what’s civilised or not? You? Me? Why is taking revenge or exacting retribution against creatures like this so ‘uncivilised’? Personally, I believe the minute you start killing kids you lose all right to live in a ‘civilised’ society. Do you really believe, that a person with his mentality, gives a single fuck about a civilised society? Do you honestly believe that simply putting him a cell, where he will have access to food, clean water, a dry clean bed is actual punishment for what he did? That’s not a punishment to him, it’s simply protecting us from him doing it again. There is no punishment.

Of course it would. People on juries aren't likely all to espouse the same views as this poster.

What are you not getting? Cases like the Southport killer or Lee rugby or this case with the baby etc where there was no doubt who killed them. There is no miscarriage of justice to be considered so how could the wrong person be executed?

Either way this type of historical injustice is not relevant to the types of cases I am talking about where the death penalty should be applied.

So what about the proven miscarriages of justice.

Surely every conviction is beyond reasonable doubt?

So you believe that there have been no miscarriages of justice. That no innocent people have faced the death penalty.

An immediate death sentence with no chance of appeal is not justice, it's vigilantism and barbaric.

Exactly. No need for death row when there is no doubt they are innocent. Money saved too I don’t see why so many people are against thisz

You indeed were suggesting it was untrue. Simply because it was in the DM. At least own it.

The issue there wasn't the science. It was that the science was suppressed and not given to the defence, or shown in court. DNA did catch the real killer years later but there was enough evidence to find him not guilty in the 70s

Specifically, he could not produce sperm and sperm was found at the murder scene.

Other things that went against him was children making up evidence, and people who could place him away from the murder scene at the time were not called in evidence.

Yes they did indeed suggest that. It is very shallow, ignorant and narrow-minded to suggest that just because it's in the DM, that it's not reliable.

Oddly enough forensics and DNA testing have moved on from the 1970s.

That is a ridiculous example.

Do you think juries will find people guilty if this is the process? Immediate death in front of them. No chance of appeals and the horrific sight of someone dying? The conviction rate would plummet

@RemusLupinsBiggestGroupie What are you saying the name can't be cross-referenced in google and with court reports?

So EVERYthing the DM says is wrong? You sound like a political purist who would argue you shouldn't trust 2+2=4 if it was reported in the DM.

The DM cannot legally defame and write stories with names. I would have thought that was common sense. But no. Some people who hate the DM don't possess critical thinking.

In the Lesley Molseed case the police suppressed evidence that would have shown Stefan Kiszko was innocent.

Would that case have been a no doubt one?

I agree with you Op. There are plenty of vile criminals who we KNOW have committed the crimes. Why are we keeping people like the Moors murderers and the West's alive? We are all paying taxes to keep people alive who don't deserve to be here, and who can never be released. It would rid the planet of scum and make more room in the jails for lesser criminals.

Suppression of evidence isn't a thing here in the UK anyway. You could argue about cases collapsing due to disclosure issues.
Hundreds of cases dropped over evidence disclosure failings - BBC News

This is irrelevant to cut and dry cases though, and these are the types of cases where the death penalty should apply.

We know without a doubt Axel stabbed multiple girls. He should be dead. It's that simple.

Ok. Are you volunteering for the job? Or are you thinking someone else will do the dirty work for you?

How sure would you need to be before returning a guilty verdict? Would beyond reasonable doubt be enough if you knew the person in front of you would die as a result? Bearing in mind the defendant will have a team of people who's actual job is to put doubt in your mind...

The fact is, where the death penalty is a likely sentence, juries are much less likely to return a guilty verdict, so the reality is more people get no punishment at all.

@PassingStranger You seem to have a very warped idea of the sort of society we live in, with 'shitty horrible people' constantly going around shagging, getting pregnant, taking drugs and stealing. I'm glad I don't live where you live! I'm also glad I don't live in a society that shames women for getting pregnant, insists they get married and stay married, chops people's hands off for stealing and has the death penalty.

*edited to include the name of the person I was addressing.

Life imprisonment. It’s not retribution-we don’t do that in a civilized society.

Another one who doesn't realise that even when the death penalty exists there are processes to appeal the sentence.

Even when we had the death penalty there was a period where you could appeal the sentence.
Any progress with finding figures that prove it's a deterrent?

Don’t they?

I could’ve sworn we have plenty where I work…do you know different then??