This is why we should bring back the death penalty

Maybe we shouldn't lock people up either, because that just normalises people locking each other up?

Because you don't combat violence by normalising it.

The sad part of this case is the red flags were there. Yet hospital were unable to prevent his access to the baby :(

Death penalty after the fact would not have stopped him

Death penalty potentially kills innocent people and does not make the murderer reflect on their crime

Some may have been supportive but unfortunately not all, she was very much targeted by certain types of people.

Again. Because of the chance of miscarriage of justice

Multiple cases have already been mentioned here. Including a man who was hanged for the murder of his own child when he was innocent. He went to the gallows knowing that he was innocent and that the actual murderer was out there unpunished

Because killing people is barbaric. Surely you agree with that?

Rapists, murderers, paedophile should all receive the death penalty. Why keep vile scum like those alive?

I don’t know much about prisons and how they are run but I do remember reading that we don’t have a lot of prisoners with whole life sentences, Rose West is one and apparently she has changed her name, carpeted her cell and spends her days reading and watching nature documentaries. I think if true it’s pretty shocking considering her crimes that she is living with any sort of comfort.

We don’t have a lot of prisoners serving whole life sentences because, thankfully, we don’t have many of the most appalling crimes that attract them.

And I don’t know how you choose to live, but a carpeted cupboard with an uncovered toilet in the corner and a nature documentary on a tiny telly isn’t what I call comfort.

All of this.

In addition, juries are less inclined to find a defendant guilty where the outcome might be the death penalty.

not in all cases but in very many of them, a person who grows up to commit heinous crime was likely to have been neglected as a child so their parents don't give a shit and were abusive towards them, they had no blue-print of how it would be to behave as a responsible contributing citizen in society. That's the problem!

You can't have a 100% certainty in evidence because there are many cases where evidence has been manufactured by corrupt cops. CCTV evidence can be doctored. Mistakes can be made.

People have been imprisoned for a very long time for crimes they didn't commit because of corruption.

I’d be in favour of bringing the death penalty back for cases where there is zero chance that the jury might have got it wrong. No circumstantial evidence.
Lucy Letby.. No because even though I’m 99% sure she’s guilty there’s still room for doubt.
Roy Whiting.. No room for doubt so I’ve got no problem with the idea of him being given the death penalty. The same goes for the despicable scum who murdered Arthur Hughes and Star Hobson. In this case it seems black and white I wouldn’t be against the idea of death penalty.
I don’t know much about prisons and how they are run but I do remember reading that we don’t have a lot of prisoners with whole life sentences, Rose West is one and apparently she has changed her name, carpeted her cell and spends her days reading and watching nature documentaries. I think if true it’s pretty shocking considering her crimes that she is living with any sort of comfort.

Could you please provide evidence that the death penalty is a deterrent?

Would you be willing for your child to be executed for a crime he or she did not commit?

If your answer is, 'No,' then you cannot support the death penalty. All systems are fallible. There will always be mistakes. If we have the death penatly, innocent people will be executed. They will be somebody's child or loved one.

Nobody should be going to prison at all where there are doubts about their guilt.

We cannot have a system of guilty - probably guilt - definitely guilty, because it is impossible to justify punishing people in the second category with the loss of their liberty.

It also opens up a whole new front of potential suffering for victims’ families.

The system we have - guilty in the absence of reasonable doubt, guilty people sentenced accordingly and recourse to challenge judgments and sentences - is the best we have.

So what is the relevance of mentioning the source?

Except nobody is saying that, are they? No.

Regardless of the source does it make this story untrue?

No.

Basing our laws and punishments on outlier cases is bad policy.

so no to death penalty. Yes to a whole life order.

With you OP. It would help with overcrowding a save taxpayers money. Axel Rudakubana is a prime example of someone who should be snuffed out.

I would far rather be a leftie liberal and have an actual brain, than be somebody who reads the Daily Mail.

No intelligence needed. There are evil people and scumbags in this world. There always have been and there always will be. No amount of rehabilitation or lessons on how not to torture new born babies or rape and murder women will change them.

Do you think the death penalty would be a deterrent? Look at the murder rates in the states of the USA that have the death penalty v those that don’t. The murder rate in states without the death penalty is consistently lower than those with it. The murder rate in the USA is significantly higher than the uk.

The death penalty simply doesn’t act as a deterrent.

Surely there are cases where, despite a guilty verdict, there's a lot of concern raised about the safety of the conviction eg Lucy Letby? The case cited by the OP has no such doubts.

Very well said. The irony of thinking you are virtue signalling by talking about killing and/or torturing another human is lost on some