Kyle Clifford - does it make you think the death penalty in some cases might be right?

[mids2019]

Read about Kyle Clifford's crimes and although for most of my life objected to the death penalty actually found it difficult to find reasons in this case not to have it. I really just couldn't think of justification for keeping the guy alive as there. Is no hope of redemption, reformation or education leading to a man being able to renenter scoiety. We would be in a position of keeping someone alive for pets face it the ideological reasons we don't believe it is rig h for the state to forcibly take a life.

Maybe my mind might change but reading about that blokes crimes I think sometimes you do forfeit the right to life.

I'm against the death penalty, for many reasons, but mainly because there is no room for error. One wrongful death and that's one too many.

I go back and forth in my head if there is no shadow of a doubt, would my mind change? I'm not sure, through, it's sometimes an easy way out for them.

However Axel Rudakabana made me seriously question my standpoint on it, and I don't think I'd be outraged if he was sentenced to it.

If it was my child, I would want an eye for an eye, most definitely, which again, throws my standpoint into question sometimes.

Some people have really given this subject some thought...

Why does it have to be disability benefits or not killing off prisoners? Why can't we favour both? After all, logically if you're going to put finances into the equation, why not kill all prisoners, it would save an absolute fortune. You might feel a bit uneasy about it when, say, you or yours are in the dock for any reason.

It would be horrific not to allow appeals. We know the system isn't infallible, an appeal process is essential.

I think it's bad for society to kill people. That's the bottom line. For me it's not about the possibility of redemption for the person, particularly-it's about the impact on society at large.

If maintaining standards is the criterion, why draw the line at homicide? Why not have the death penalty for every crime to maintain standards? Maybe also for things that are not crimes, e.g. people who fail to keep to legal requirements under the equality legislation, people who don't pay their taxes. Likewise, if we have to kill people who are a danger to society, how about people with infectious diseases?

Saying that anything justifies killing (other than in self defence or the defence of others) is the beginning of an extremely slippery slope.

@hattie43 Your post is what I was trying to say up thread. A lot of crims are so dysfunctional that they see prison as opting out of real life. No heating bills, no having to arrange food or go to work or have any responsibilities in life at all when we would all love that right? Losing their freedom is unlikely to bother them as they barely function in the real world and need to be told what to do and when to do it.

For these types, prison is not a deterrent, more a lifestyle choice.

I have opposed the death penalty all my life, because of the possibility of miscarriages of justice. Added to that in more recent times I believe some juries would not convict, and also the possibility of martyrdom (if not political think of the man who shot and killed a burglar in his rural house).

That does not mean that someone deserves to live.

Define "People who hurt children". Otherwise every parent who smacks their child would be on the gallows.

Emotionally, I get it, especially in particular cases that are clear cut.

Logically, there are plenty of issues with it.

1. Wrongful convictions.

1. Escalation in crime , if you’re going down anyway, might as well be for something worse or killing the victim/witnesses .

1. Time spent on death row is very lengthy (in the US the average is 19 years for example), plus the extra costs involved. It's a false economy.

1. The eye for an eye mentality and in a way societal approval of it.

1. Unlike in the countries that always had it, would a change to having a death sentence possible make jurors more hesitant to deliver a guilty verdict?

Even in those cases there may be doubt as to the person's mental capacity, and happily we have never executed people we knew to be mentally incapable of forming the intention to kill or who have killed while in the grip of delusions. Yes, they may be dangerous people, but again if you start killing off the mentally ill because they may be dangerous where do you draw the line?

Also, I can think of at least one high profile miscarriage of justice case that falls into each of these categories. I mean, it probably would increase trust in the justice system if we executed the wrongly convicted before they can start kicking up a fuss so it looks like the courts are always right but I’m not sure that’s quite the way we should be doing it.

So what happens when you've got it wrong and you've sent someone innocent into one of these places where it's virtually inevitable that they would get killed?

If you think prisons are like boarding schools, you really ought to try life as a maximum security prisoner for a few weeks. I remember some years ago when the husband of a friend went to prison for a driving offence. He was bang to rights and they weren't disputing the sentence, but he found the whole experience a living hell. He was in a cell with a couple of others and an open toilet, and it was near-impossible to sleep because of the noise of other prisoners shouting all night. Most of his things were stolen or destroyed, and there was a constantly threatening atmosphere, particularly as he wouldn't get involved in smuggling drugs. He couldn't get out to activities or to watch TV most of the time, because there weren't enough warder staff to supervise. The food was revolting and other prisoners spat in it or worse. Whenever they went to shower they had to watch their backs, and younger, weaker and prettier prisoners were judged fair game by the others. If your boarding school was like that, I'm very sorry for you.

Money is the last thing that should come into this, otherwise the principle will be used to euthanise other people deemed too expensive to be kept alive. Would you like to face an early death penalty just because, say, you've got serious multiple sclerosis or something similar?

There have been executions of people without capacity. An example is the case of Derek Bentley who was described in a report which tested his mental capacity as "borderline feeble-minded" with an IQ of 77. He was executed and eventually exonerated posthumously.

Just one wrongful conviction is one too many. If you think it never happens nowadays, Andrew Malkinson and a number of sub-postmasters could tell you different.

I mentioned in a previous post that I worked in a prison (not as a prison officer but front line, so to speak. Daily contact with the cons).

It is shit. You’re in there with however many other guys, some of them are dirty, some smell terrible, are unpredictable, some are violent, most are noisy and there are plenty of bullies who’ll take every item someone owns and test drugs on them.

That’s in general - your everyday criminals who are in for serious traffic offences, domestic assaults, common assaults, weapon carrying, attempted murder etc.

It’s noisy as fuck, and the nature of the prison is large and the doors being banged or kicked echos constantly. The shouting is constant.

Food isn’t great - cereal for breakfast then cooked lunches and dinners but all pretty bland looking (I never tried it of course!).

Rec time will get cancelled due to staff shortages, a fight in the yard (so everyone gets pulled in and locked up) and the weekends are the worst because the staff levels drop. They’re locked up from about 4pm on a Saturday and allowed out at 8am on the Sunday. If you’re prescribed medication like mirtazapine (usually given at night due to sedative effect), they need to take it at 3.30pm, so are falling asleep into their dinner.

However, I think the issue that people have with the very serious offenders (sex offenders, child abusers, murderers) is that they get full protection from the noise, the torment from other cons. They generally rub along fine together in a much more peaceful, predictable environment. Their exercise time is more protected because the entire prison locks down to allow them to come out. Same with visits.

A big kicker though, is that their food is made in the kitchen by other prisoners. It was very frequently pissed on (particularly soup), ejaculated on or spat on. Fuck that for a laugh.

@AuntAgathaGregson tbf it is an issue of money, but not in the way PP thinks.

Using her Class A drug users examples, there are an incredible amount of people /young people from the middle and upper class that use Class A drugs. One difference is they don't tend to end up in prison. One other massive difference is the reasons WHY they end up being drug users , which also contributes to the risk of offending/reoffending (like undiagnosed/misdiagnosed mental or physical health disorders , trafficking, grooming,trauma,abuse etc.).

Better access to doctors,education, facilities,resources etc can make the difference between the coke taking MR. surgeon/lawyer/banker/trust fund baby(isn't he such a laugh) and just coke head Jimmy down the block .

What if you or someone you love was that innocent person facing the prospect of the hangman? Would you be this philosophical about collateral damage in those circumstances?

Bentley provides one of a number of good arguments against the death penalty: he is a prime example of someone who probably shouldn't have been convicted of murder, let alone hanged for it.

People who are incapable of forming intent are either acquitted or convicted of manslaughter, and historically even when we last had the death sentence it did not apply to manslaughter. Therefore people who claim that a person who has been seen to kill, or who has admitted it, must be 100% guilty of murder are mistaken.

Why should they get the choice that the rest of society doesn't?
I'm anti death penalty, one of the reasons is how hard the likes of Hindley try to get their freedom, shows being incarcerated isn't the picnic that the papers make it out to be.

I have enough faith in the British justice system that this would be stunningly unlikely.

As did Annie Maguire and Guissepe Conlon...

In the year of 22/23 17 convictions were overturned.

And they're only the successful ones.