Why can’t we just hang scum like this?

There should be a referendum on bringing back the death penalty just like there was for Brexit. I am fairly certain that "yes" would win.

@KTheGrey

"Nah mate don’t put words in my mouth. I didn’t say I supported the death penalty. I said that AR looks like a clearly guilty case to me - ie plainly unambiguously guilty does exist."

Someone can have unambiguously committed a crime, but not be considered fully responsible for their actions. Not commenting specifically on AR, just pointing out that these things can be complicated.

I don't share your confidence on that. Evidence can often be interpreted in multiple ways, it's not always clear cut.

He won't have an easy time in prison.

Human rights need to apply to everyone or they're worthless.

Nah mate don’t put words in my mouth. I didn’t say I supported the death penalty. I said that AR looks like a clearly guilty case to me - ie plainly unambiguously guilty does exist.

The last two hangings in England that I am aware of were Derek Bentley and Ruth Ellis, and neither would get a ‘fully’ guilty verdict now, iyswim.

Somebody told me that he thinks all prison and punishment is revenge, but for myself I genuinely think the issue is how people are to be protected from dangerous criminals. I don’t approve of state murder, but equally I don’t think AR is ever going to be safe to release, and atm he is also a risk to prison officers. We currently seem to have an emergent law-of-the-jungle situation among prisoners, given the recent killings of two sex offenders in prison. I do not have an answer; too complicated for me.

Why not? We used to but we have decided it is not acceptable to do this. Killing someone tended to be used as an example of what would happen to you if you broke the law. We don't act in that way now - not because it is ineffective but because it is unjust. And that's better.
Besides, there is an argument that removing freedom for life is a better punishment than death.

There are laws against this to protect the innocent and for many, there is no right to take a life irrespective of the crime. Some people think that a death sentence is actually an easy option compared to years of unrelenting fear living in a prison among people who know what you did.

regardless of any of these things, if someone hurt my babies in the way this animal did, I would want to kill them with my bare hands, so I do also really reason with your sentiment.

Many legal professionals could only stand doing one capital trial

The stress was to much

Marshall Hall the defence barrister was the exception to the rule but he managed to save most of his clients

There will never be support for the restoration of the death penalty in the House of Commons, it is an academic question nowadays.

He won’t be under threat in one of the UK’s dedicated sex offender prisons

did you know that there are many seperate prisons for just sex offenders? No prisons exclusively for any other crime

i don’t know any prison staff who would continue to work in a prison that had the DP. I certainly wouldn’t be part of it. Prison service is already short staffed and has no money for a DP…they are costly

Virtually impossible? So not completely impossible then.

I don’t agree with the death penalty. But I also won’t shed a tear if he gets dealt with in prison.

But with the technology, DNA etc that we have today it would be virtually impossible to wrongly hang someone.

Sure, it may be. But how do you define "pretty clear" in other cases?

A conviction of murder is a conviction of murder, regardless of clarity, and would, in your world, carry the death penalty. Will we only convict of murder in cases like Rudukubanas? Will all the other less-clear-but-still-probable murderers now walk free because we can't convict them where it means the death penalty? Or do we take the risk of sentencing innocent people to death?

Nor does it apply to this case.

Not sure that would apply to A Rudukubana. Seems pretty clear he did it.

Because we are getting rid of jury trials and it’ll be the Wild West run by judges with the world’s most bizarre ideas about justice soon enough.

Because we’re a civilised country.

Because even state sanctioned murder is wrong, regardless of the crime.

Because it clearly does not deter crime.

This thread started as a duscussion on this case yes. But the scope has widened to debating the death penalty in general which is why I brought up the confession angle because I so often see people suggesting that if someone has confessed they must be guilty. And it's an interesting rabbit hole to go down, about how false confessions are more common than one might think.

Hopefully.

But this thread is about this specific case. And the certainty of his guilt.

We don’t need to muddy the waters by discussing other cases with less bullet proof evidence.

You seem very angry about being told this.

The Guildford 4 and the Birmingham 6 all confessed. Mind you, those confessions were obtained through the use of were obtained through coercion, police brutality, threats, and torture.

But yeah, they confessed so should have been executed.

He’ll also likely be getting the shit kicked out of him, sexually assaulted and slashed every other day, living in fear of the next attack.

I'm not arguing he isn't guilty, I don't know why you seem to think I am? I was speaking GENERALLY about confessions and how they cannot be used as a basis for guilt. There needs to be other evidence which, in this case, there is.