Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

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

510 replies

mids2019 · 07/03/2025 05:25

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.

OP posts:
SlightlyJaded · 07/03/2025 10:13

No to death penalty - no matter how tempting.

I have always thought there should more focus around tiers of imprisonment. Sort of like we have in Cat A maximum security vs open prison etc, but more fixed and more defined. Currently you could be moved between the two and the quality of life in prisons varies enormously between institutions. I mean something like:

Worst offenders (Kyle Clifford and Axel Rudakubaba for example):
Life (meaning full life term) in a universally equipped Category 1 - the toughest:

So actual fairly hard labour with a productive outcome for society.
Simple yard exercise - not football matches with other inmates
No tv/no pool tables - 3 books a week and basic art supplies (or something)
Simple cell/single bunk/sink desk/no pictures on walls/no personalisation
Bland food
Lots of lock in rather than socialising.
No ability or time to form allegiances/friendships cliques etc
And no hope of better

And then work back from that.

And yes, I know we have different cat prisons, but it's random and flexible. You should know that if you are convicted of pre-meditated murder, you aren't going to a medium prison where you can be Charlie Big Potatoes and enjoy status amongst your peers, half decent food and privileges EVER

SickInBedOnTwoChairs · 07/03/2025 10:13

Weepixie · 07/03/2025 09:20

He had planned suicide from the outset. He was never planning on going to jail so no, his brother wouldn’t be a deterrent.

Fair point well made.

He could try again.

GlomOfNit · 07/03/2025 10:14

SickInBedOnTwoChairs · 07/03/2025 07:50

I would prefer to live in a society with the death penalty.

A lot of criminals in jail see it as an upgrade to their normal lives as they don't function well in society. If they thought they could end up strapped to a board with a blue drip going in, it might make them consider their plans at a much earlier stage and this alone would make this country safer to live in.

What, like America, you mean? Where the threat of the 'blue drip' seems not to make one bit of difference to the almost weekly gun massacres and horrendous levels of violence there. It.Is.Not.A.Deterent.

selffellatingouroborosofhate · 07/03/2025 10:14
  1. This utter tool wanted to die, tried to kill himself. He wanted to escape a prison sentence. Don't let him by killing him.
  2. Miscarriages of justice happen and one of the protections against that is that we can release the wronfully-convicted. Before anyone says "but there's no chance of wrongful conviction in this case", there is in others (e.g. Letby) and we have to treat all murder cases according to the same process because that's what "due process" means.
SickInBedOnTwoChairs · 07/03/2025 10:14

GlomOfNit · 07/03/2025 10:14

What, like America, you mean? Where the threat of the 'blue drip' seems not to make one bit of difference to the almost weekly gun massacres and horrendous levels of violence there. It.Is.Not.A.Deterent.

Per capita, it is though.

ThrowawayName987 · 07/03/2025 10:15

Wildflowers99 · 07/03/2025 09:41

For me it’s not an issue of emotion, it’s an issue of money. We’re sacrificing a pleasant and healthy society and great services to pay for the needs of a small group of frankly unworthy individuals who do nothing but make our lives hell.

Take a Class A drug user. Each one costs hundreds of thousands a year - prison stints, NHS for overdoses and fights, court cases for stealing and burglary plus legal aid, benefits, ineffective therapies… the list goes on. Is this a better use of money than education, defence, environmental health?

Each prison place costs tens or hundreds of thousands a year. Over a lifetime that is a huge sum of money. Is it right that Kyle Clifford is actively blocking money that could be spent on children’s hospices or addressing our hideous social housing shortage?

I say no. The UK is not rolling in cash any more so if you want a crap society on the altar of your luxury beliefs, you only have yourself to blame when other things are underfunded.

So you're after executing people suffering with drug addiction? Or, please God, have I misunderstood you?

selffellatingouroborosofhate · 07/03/2025 10:18

ThrowawayName987 · 07/03/2025 10:15

So you're after executing people suffering with drug addiction? Or, please God, have I misunderstood you?

Wildflowers is appallingly ableist. I recognise the name from other threads. This attitude towards any other struggling person is in no way surprising.

Weepixie · 07/03/2025 10:18

There’s an excellent documentary on the BBC just now. It’s episode 2 of series 25 of Storyville and is called 26.2 Life: Inside the San Quentin Prison Marathon.

It ties in really well with this discussion.

PandoraSox · 07/03/2025 10:19

ThrowawayName987 · 07/03/2025 10:15

So you're after executing people suffering with drug addiction? Or, please God, have I misunderstood you?

I wouldn't bite, given some of the posts I have seen recently from this poster.

Brefugee · 07/03/2025 10:24

Cynic17 · 07/03/2025 09:26

And this is why we must never, ever let families/survivors have any input into punishment. It needs to be legal, fair, consistent and devoid of all emotion. That's why we have a proper criminal justice system.

But we do need to address who we let out and when. We see it all the time in, say, MVAWAG: as soon as they're out (of prison, of police custody, whatever) they often kill/offend again.

We need to make better use of the powers we already have

TerrysCIockworkOrange · 07/03/2025 10:26

No, there is no place for the death penalty in modern society. Happily, he is a young man with a whole lifetime of suffering the consequences of his actions ahead of him, not least the physical difficulties he has given himself as a result of his cowardice. I truly hope he lives for a very long time in absolute misery.

I do agree with PPs that prison life needs to have a greater focus on work, self sufficiency and earned rewards rather than working out, watching Tv and doing god knows what else. It is meant to be punishment as well as rehabilitation

SickInBedOnTwoChairs · 07/03/2025 10:29

I'm struggling to understand what level of fury he felt that he was prepared to torture rape and then kill three people and then shoot himself just because he'd been...... dumped?

There's a level of entitlement and then there's this guy that would rather do all this and then die than have a beautiful girl as an ex. It makes no sense.

If he had zero chance of ever getting another girlfriend, then I can see he might get major league miff but he's not offensively ugly so why is the part missing that just shrugs and goes about his life and goes back to online dating or something?

How can someone have this level of white hot revenge drive and been under the radar thus far and why do both he and his brother see murder as an acceptable answer for anything? It's baffling?

MorrisZapp · 07/03/2025 10:31

scatterolight · 07/03/2025 10:04

  1. Prison is not "miserable".
  1. Killers do not "suffer" with the knowledge of what they have done. Narcissism, low IQ or other pathologies mean they do not function like normal introspective people - if they did they would not have murdered in the first place.
  1. Life is sacred. A murder, particularly brutal murders and those of children, requires society to recognise the gravity of this crime. It is sickening that Axel Shithead gets to spend the rest of his life playing Xbox while 3 little girls lie dead in the ground. That is not justice. That is trivialising their lives and the manner of their deaths. It is incredibly disturbing to really contemplate this. Visualise what he did and then consider that TODAY he is experiencing the same punishment as someone who committed insurance fraud, or posted something dodgy on social media. Mooching around his prison wing. Having lunch. Popping to the library. Reading a magazine. It is mind bending in its injustice.
  1. We have technology these days where we can be 100% sure that certain people committed a crime. Where there is no risk to the innocent the death penalty should be in play. Certainly Axel and Clifford can be safely executed.

Prison is utterly, utterly miserable. The food is barely edible, the conditions crowded and volatile, the boredom mind numbing. If it was just a 'mooch about' then we'd all be kicking in windows to get a free holiday. It's the loss of liberty that is the punishment, not the conditions but the conditions are ghastly too.

AgnesX · 07/03/2025 10:37

Doesn't really work in the US does it. Why do you think it'd be of any use here.

All that'll happen is that people with good lawyers will get off and the poor will be penalised yet again.

Jade520 · 07/03/2025 10:42

I like the idea of death row for the really bad people and money saved spent on the good people. Of course it's really not that simple, even just stripping it back to finances, a death sentence is not the cheap option people think it is:

'This analysis of the dollar costs of capital punishment and life imprisonment uses data from a variety of States an studies and concludes that the death penalty is not an economical alternative to life imprisonment.'

https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/capital-punishment-or-life-imprisonment-some-cost-considerations

RingoJuice · 07/03/2025 10:45

GlomOfNit · 07/03/2025 10:14

What, like America, you mean? Where the threat of the 'blue drip' seems not to make one bit of difference to the almost weekly gun massacres and horrendous levels of violence there. It.Is.Not.A.Deterent.

It’s not a deterrent. The type of people who murder are not the type to think things through.

We should still put them to death, no decent person’s time or money should be used to keep these cretins around.

RingoJuice · 07/03/2025 10:48

Jade520 · 07/03/2025 10:42

I like the idea of death row for the really bad people and money saved spent on the good people. Of course it's really not that simple, even just stripping it back to finances, a death sentence is not the cheap option people think it is:

'This analysis of the dollar costs of capital punishment and life imprisonment uses data from a variety of States an studies and concludes that the death penalty is not an economical alternative to life imprisonment.'

https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/capital-punishment-or-life-imprisonment-some-cost-considerations

Edited

It’s because they have endless appeals and are on death row for decades. It’s very inefficient.

RingoJuice · 07/03/2025 10:51

SickInBedOnTwoChairs · 07/03/2025 10:29

I'm struggling to understand what level of fury he felt that he was prepared to torture rape and then kill three people and then shoot himself just because he'd been...... dumped?

There's a level of entitlement and then there's this guy that would rather do all this and then die than have a beautiful girl as an ex. It makes no sense.

If he had zero chance of ever getting another girlfriend, then I can see he might get major league miff but he's not offensively ugly so why is the part missing that just shrugs and goes about his life and goes back to online dating or something?

How can someone have this level of white hot revenge drive and been under the radar thus far and why do both he and his brother see murder as an acceptable answer for anything? It's baffling?

Nothing has been published about the family which is really quite strange, usually the Daily Mail would be on it like stink on shit

JingsMahBucket · 07/03/2025 10:52

Wildflowers99 · 07/03/2025 09:28

Yes. I feel like our luxury beliefs are becoming the destroyer of the country.

Wow. Nice way to open the door to fascism.

SickInBedOnTwoChairs · 07/03/2025 10:57

RingoJuice · 07/03/2025 10:51

Nothing has been published about the family which is really quite strange, usually the Daily Mail would be on it like stink on shit

Yes, it's weird. It's like they were raised in a cult or something.

I wonder what the parents of this murdering pair are like?

selffellatingouroborosofhate · 07/03/2025 10:59

scatterolight · 07/03/2025 10:04

  1. Prison is not "miserable".
  1. Killers do not "suffer" with the knowledge of what they have done. Narcissism, low IQ or other pathologies mean they do not function like normal introspective people - if they did they would not have murdered in the first place.
  1. Life is sacred. A murder, particularly brutal murders and those of children, requires society to recognise the gravity of this crime. It is sickening that Axel Shithead gets to spend the rest of his life playing Xbox while 3 little girls lie dead in the ground. That is not justice. That is trivialising their lives and the manner of their deaths. It is incredibly disturbing to really contemplate this. Visualise what he did and then consider that TODAY he is experiencing the same punishment as someone who committed insurance fraud, or posted something dodgy on social media. Mooching around his prison wing. Having lunch. Popping to the library. Reading a magazine. It is mind bending in its injustice.
  1. We have technology these days where we can be 100% sure that certain people committed a crime. Where there is no risk to the innocent the death penalty should be in play. Certainly Axel and Clifford can be safely executed.

We have technology these days where we can be 100% sure that certain people committed a crime. Where there is no risk to the innocent the death penalty should be in play. Certainly Axel and Clifford can be safely executed.

This nonsense again.

  1. That technology can fail if evidence is planted or mistakes happen in labs. However, jurors are not competent to assess the risk of that happening and have to take the evidence at face value.
  2. Juries are instructed to acquit unless they are "sure" that the defendant is guilty. Therefore all convictions are presumed to be safe and the defendant has to apply to appeal.
  3. Therefore an undiscovered lab error or planted evidence can convict someone and it won't be appealed unless lab error or corruption is suspected.
  4. We can't divide guilty verdicts into "we can be 100% sure" and "we can't be 100% sure" because the jury should have acquitted the "we can't be 100% sure" defendants to begin with.
  5. Therefore we cannot declare some cases to merit the death penalty because we are somehow "more sure" of those verdicts.
AnAlpacaForChristmasPleaseSanta · 07/03/2025 11:07

@SlightlyJaded I didn't want to quote your entire post as it's quite long, but I agree with everything you said.

@SickInBedOnTwoChairs Obviously we can only guess at what went on in his depraved head but from what I gather his parenting (or lack of) and a certain Andrew Tate had a bit to do with it.

selffellatingouroborosofhate · 07/03/2025 12:39

SickInBedOnTwoChairs · 07/03/2025 10:29

I'm struggling to understand what level of fury he felt that he was prepared to torture rape and then kill three people and then shoot himself just because he'd been...... dumped?

There's a level of entitlement and then there's this guy that would rather do all this and then die than have a beautiful girl as an ex. It makes no sense.

If he had zero chance of ever getting another girlfriend, then I can see he might get major league miff but he's not offensively ugly so why is the part missing that just shrugs and goes about his life and goes back to online dating or something?

How can someone have this level of white hot revenge drive and been under the radar thus far and why do both he and his brother see murder as an acceptable answer for anything? It's baffling?

It's the exact same reasoning that underpins all the men who treat their wives like fuckable housekeepers and whose wives get told LTB on the Relationships board, namely that women aren't people with autonomy and their own dignity and rights, but are subordinate support appliances ("bangmaid" for short, a maid that he gets to shag) who exist to service men and that men are entitled to have such a female support appliance.

This reasoning underpins a whole range of behaviours, from DV, rape, and murder to almost invisible things like women getting out of men's way when walling towards each other and women washing male colleagues' cups at work because the men silently leave the dirty cups next to the sink and the women silently do the dishes because we've been conditioned to tidy up after men.

In the case of Carol, Louise, and Hannah's murderer (I will not name him, #sayhername instead), he turned those beliefs up to 11 and took them to the conclusion that Louise and her female relatives must be punished with death and, in Louise's case, rape, for denying him what he perceives as his right. I suspect that his motive for denying rape is that in his mind, he's entitled to put his dick in what he perceives to be "his woman" and therefore in his mind, he's done nothing wrong. Remember that a key "teaching" of Andrew Tate is that women don't have rights over our own bodies and hence rape cannot exist because women don't have a right to not consent.

Clearly, he knows that other people don't think like that about women, because he faked niceness when Carol answered the door to him.

That he is a coward who fears other men is clear, through the care he took to ensure that John Hunt would not be at home and his suicide attempt to avoid the natural consequences of being incarcerated alongside other men, some of whom will take a dim view of killing women.

How can someone have this level of white hot revenge drive and been under the radar thus far

Louise may have been the first woman to ever tell him "it's over".

SickInBedOnTwoChairs · 07/03/2025 12:46

selffellatingouroborosofhate · 07/03/2025 12:39

It's the exact same reasoning that underpins all the men who treat their wives like fuckable housekeepers and whose wives get told LTB on the Relationships board, namely that women aren't people with autonomy and their own dignity and rights, but are subordinate support appliances ("bangmaid" for short, a maid that he gets to shag) who exist to service men and that men are entitled to have such a female support appliance.

This reasoning underpins a whole range of behaviours, from DV, rape, and murder to almost invisible things like women getting out of men's way when walling towards each other and women washing male colleagues' cups at work because the men silently leave the dirty cups next to the sink and the women silently do the dishes because we've been conditioned to tidy up after men.

In the case of Carol, Louise, and Hannah's murderer (I will not name him, #sayhername instead), he turned those beliefs up to 11 and took them to the conclusion that Louise and her female relatives must be punished with death and, in Louise's case, rape, for denying him what he perceives as his right. I suspect that his motive for denying rape is that in his mind, he's entitled to put his dick in what he perceives to be "his woman" and therefore in his mind, he's done nothing wrong. Remember that a key "teaching" of Andrew Tate is that women don't have rights over our own bodies and hence rape cannot exist because women don't have a right to not consent.

Clearly, he knows that other people don't think like that about women, because he faked niceness when Carol answered the door to him.

That he is a coward who fears other men is clear, through the care he took to ensure that John Hunt would not be at home and his suicide attempt to avoid the natural consequences of being incarcerated alongside other men, some of whom will take a dim view of killing women.

How can someone have this level of white hot revenge drive and been under the radar thus far

Louise may have been the first woman to ever tell him "it's over".

Agree 100%.

I've been on the receiving end of some of this sort of thing. I left after being choked to the point of blacking out because I knew the next time I infringed his rules, he would keep squeezing. He went from just verbal abuse to nearly killing me though so I thought I had a say. Clearly not.

I'm beginning to think there should be entire continents where just women live in peace.

I hope he gets dealt with in prison and they target the parts of his body that still have functioning nerves.

scatterolight · 07/03/2025 12:52

selffellatingouroborosofhate · 07/03/2025 10:59

We have technology these days where we can be 100% sure that certain people committed a crime. Where there is no risk to the innocent the death penalty should be in play. Certainly Axel and Clifford can be safely executed.

This nonsense again.

  1. That technology can fail if evidence is planted or mistakes happen in labs. However, jurors are not competent to assess the risk of that happening and have to take the evidence at face value.
  2. Juries are instructed to acquit unless they are "sure" that the defendant is guilty. Therefore all convictions are presumed to be safe and the defendant has to apply to appeal.
  3. Therefore an undiscovered lab error or planted evidence can convict someone and it won't be appealed unless lab error or corruption is suspected.
  4. We can't divide guilty verdicts into "we can be 100% sure" and "we can't be 100% sure" because the jury should have acquitted the "we can't be 100% sure" defendants to begin with.
  5. Therefore we cannot declare some cases to merit the death penalty because we are somehow "more sure" of those verdicts.

Are you disputing that Clifford or Axel are guilty? Is there any doubt in your mind that they may not have been the perprators in these crimes?

When I said technology I did not mean DNA. We have cctv, Ring doorbells, phone use and triangulation, Internet search histories. We have eyewitnesses who immediately give statements on camera about what they saw. All of this means that in our era there are crimes where we can say with 100% certainty who the perprator is. And in THOSE cases we should enact the death penalty.

Imo a society without the death penalty for a crime like Southport is a sick one that has lost its way.