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.

No. No case makes me rethink my attitude to the death penalty (which is that it is wrong)

What it does make me think is that the police and authorities let women down at enormous rates and that they need to apply the laws we already have to arrest and imprison more of these violent men. And that sentencing needs to always be at the top end of the guidelines, with extra 50% for violent crimes especially MVAWAG

And it also makes me think that the Tate brothers, and all like them, need to be banned from easily accessible platforms, and that parents, schools, the police, and wider society (eg all of us) need to address the problem of violent and misogynistic boys and men. Urgently. As a massive priority.

No.

I don't agree with the death penalty ever. I don't think it's right for the state to kill people, and there are always potential miscarriages of justice.

But also, I think the death penalty would let someone like Kyle Clifford off the hook. He wanted to die anyway. Why would we put him out of his misery? Much better to let him face up up the consequences of his crimes and let him live with those consequences for the rest of his life. Death would be the easy option for him.

My family is in the unusual position of having had the person who murdered one of our relatives executed, as the crime happened in a country with the death penalty.

I can only say that this has added to the horror of the whole thing for us. We are all very much against the concept of an eye for an eye, and asked for this not to happen but had no influence. Our relative would have been appalled. This was not how they lived their life.

We also have very little faith in the justice system and no real way of knowing for sure whether the person executed was just taking the rap for a high profile foreigner murder and an innocent person has died in the name of our relative.

No I don’t agree with the death penalty.

Hope he’s miserable for the rest of his life.

There is of course no point, but the issue with the death penalty is that there have been times when innocent men and women have seemed very guilty, but were in fact innocent and lost their lives.

The cases that really did for the death penalty here were that of Timothy Evans, hung for killing his wife Beryl and daughter Geraldine in the 1940s, he even confessed to the crime. His landlord, mild mannered clerk and retired met. police officer John Christie should have been looked at more carefully and Evans had such a low IQ his confession should have been questioned - of course Christie had killed the wife and baby alongside at least 6 more women including his own wife at his run down Notting Hill home.

Then there was Derek Bentley, who during a stand off with the police after a robbery shouted to his fellow robber "let him have it", but did he mean shoot the cop or give him the gun, either way Bentley himself killed no one, but hung none the less.

Finally Ruth Ellis, who defiantly did kill her lover, shooting him dead outside a London pub, but she was a long standing victim of an abusive relationship - however because she went to the pub with intent to kill rather than it being in the heat of the moment, she hung. Hers is a difficult case, because she did plan a murder, and did it with intent, but was her mental state sufficient mitigation to commutation to life rather than death??

I’m sure people’s views would change if it were their family who had been wiped out, or their child molested. Surely you’d want to murder them with your own bare hands, why not let the state do it?

that is why we have a criminal justice system and victims get to make an impact statement but don't get to decide the sentence. Our CJS makes too many mistakes, and doesn't apply the punishments it can in too many cases.

I want the punishments to fit the crimes, and in general I'm ok with our sentencing guidelines, but they are not applied properly.

I like the idea that prison is very basic, with a work requirement (garden, laundry etc) and privileges are earned. I also believe in rehabilitation and that up to a certain educational standard, and some apprenticeships, the prisoners should have the opportunities for education.

I do think in cases like this where there is no doubt at all that he did it, and it was premeditated, and so violent that I wouldn’t be opposed to the death penalty.

It’s so tricky in this instance - as there are no words to describe the horror of this person.
But I don’t agree with the death penalty usually and in this instance it’s almost too good for him.
given he’s paralysed from chest down - maybe a life lying there with no books, TV or any major care other than perfunctory changing turning and feeding would be a better.

Do you fancy being a warder in charge of several violent men living under this regime?

Then that should change. Just because I don't want to kill them does not mean I want them to have a "cosy" life inside.

I am against the death penalty but for the lowest of low who commit hideous murders like this prison just does not seem enough for them. This scum bag did not face the court he stayed hiding in his cell. For me this raises the question of the type of prisons we have in this country. Reading the article and this thread, I think about the prison system in El Salvador… I just don’t know what the answer is.

People like him and Axel Rudakabana are a waste of oxygen. There is no doubt they carried out their terrible crimes and they will never be fit to be in society. I support the death penalty in such cases.

That is a very good point. I hadn't realised he was now disabled.

Bearing in mind his brother is also inside for murder I do find myself wondering what sort of background they both have to commit such heinous crimes.

What he did was truly sickening and I hope he suffers for it.

Not in his case, no. I don’t think it was his plan to live past that day, but he has, paralysed from the chest down & that gives me a small sense of justice. He’s going to live a long time with what he did, immobile, which I wouldn’t normally wish on anyone but for him I only wish he’d lost the use of his arms too. He’ll he vulnerable like his innocent victims were & I really hope he suffers inside, I hope he’s frightened every day. His ex partner endured over 3 hours of absolute terror before he shot her, she must have been desperately frightened knowing that her sister would walk into his trap & he’d already killed her mum. it would be too easy to hang him, when really at this time what does he have to live for? Why reward him & put him out of his misery?

I'm sure my views would change in those circumstances. However, I don't believe that society's rules should be dictated by my primitive revenge motivations.

The simple fact is that if we say "Thou shalt not kill| and then kill in cold blood, we are dragging ourselves down to a level beneath that of the killers.

i do think there is a separate conversation to be had about our prisons, the state of them, the staffing of them etc etc
And for sure they cost a lot.

But also: why are we imprisoning people for non-violent crimes? Why aren't we making more use of tags and the probation services?

i guess it is down to cost, but a proper budget would be able to pony up some cash for that.

We also need to be putting people in prison who own, spread and make images of child sex abuse. That isn't non-violent, and i get that prisons "are full" but there must be better punishments, better applied.

Exactly the death penalty will be giving him what he wanted.

Now he’s paralysed and a prisoner for life in his own body, permanently worried another inmate might get him and powerless to do anything about it. He’ll spend the rest of his miserable life feeling the terror he inflicted on those beautiful women in those hours. I can’t think of a more fitting punishment personally, death would be too easy.

Maybe we should just let the victims family decide .

This. I thought at the time Wayne Couzens should have been thrown into a dark hole for a cell, no one talks to him just chucks some basic food at him so he stays alive, but otherwise left to rot away with nothing except his guilt to eat at him for the rest of his miserable life.

This is pretty much where I sit. The idea of the death penalty doesn't sit easily with me at all, but then I am left wondering what the purpose of prison is. If it is for rehabilitation to ensure people do not re-offend then figures on re-offending suggest it is failing miserably. And what about people, like you said, who are deemed as too much of a risk to society to ever be rehabilitated?

The answer probably ultimately lies in creating a more equal society, where people receive a quality education that not only provides them with real choices as adults, but also makes it harder for them to be radicalised online. An education that encourages critical thought and engagement rather than feeling like a drive towards exams that are made to feel like a barrier to a better life if you cannot meet the arbitrary requirements. More effort put into mental health in a proactive rather than a reactive approach too.

But yes, I do feel that perhaps as someone suggested above an option of voluntary euthanasia or a true life sentence, in certain very extreme cases, would perhaps be something that provides a response that remains somewhat liberal.

Because it’s never right to murder, even if it’s legalised.

Look at the USA, the death penal­ty is far more expen­sive than a sys­tem uti­lising life-with­out-parole sen­tences as an alter­na­tive pun­ish­ment.

The murder rates in US states with the death penalty is much higher than in those without, so it’s the opposite of a deterrent.

Yes he's an obvious candidate and when you think he's so young we'll be spending millions over his lifetime to keep him incarcerated.
FWIW I don't think serial killers can be rehabilitated.

Is this what happens? Or is he King of the prison, with a gang, taking drugs brought in by drone, having sex? We don’t know.

i also find it interesting that people think it would be illiberal to put someone to death humanely but not illiberal to want them to have a torturous existence for 60 years. I don’t think this is logical

Look at the USA, the death penal­ty is far more expen­sive than a sys­tem uti­lising life-with­out-parole sen­tences as an alter­na­tive pun­ish­ment.

but in places like Singapore or other countries with the death penalty it is cheaper because they don't get an appeal and they don't get decades on death row. Just because we always look to the States, it doesn't mean that we have to adopt their system.

Does that feel better to those who waver on the death penalty because of cost? take cost out of it?

Absolutely not. The death penalty is barbaric. No civilised nation has it.

No one has a right to kill. For any reason. That’s the basic standard.

Let them spend the rest of their miserable lives waking up to four walls.