To question my long held beliefs against capital punishment after what happened to Alesha MacPhail

[Noteventhebirdsareupyet]

Hi all,

I have recently been really shaken by the Alesha MacPhailcase and possibly because I now have a tiny daughter of my own, I am feeling really affected by what has happened.

I have always had reasonably strong views against capital punishment and have often argued that:

No one has the right to take the life of another.

When capital punishment is lawful, mistakes are made and innocent people get killed.

We are supposedly a civilised society.

Often offenders were victims first and therefore need empathy and have been failed by the system.....

However I am now shocked to find myself thinking that if a person can do the things that Aaron Campbell has done to a tiny, innocent girl and show absolutely no remorse, then perhaps instead of spending hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers money keeping him incarcerated and then putting communities at risk upon his release, maybe we as a society should say that this person is intrinsically evil and has no place among us.

I honestly never imagined myself feeling like this and maybe it is because I am now a mother that I do. Surely people like him don't deserve a second chance and should be killed before they ruin more lives.

Am I being unreasonable to feel like this? Has anyone else had a turning point like me? I feel that my family and friends would be a bit shocked to hear me say "let's kill dangerous criminals" but this incident has had a profound effect on my outlook and I feel like I can't voice my opinions out loud.

I’m entirely with Janeyre. The treatment she describes used to be the standard way prisoners were treated, they didn’t go mad

Actually they did. The great plan of model prisons in the early nineteenth century was to keep prisoners in complete isolation so that they could contemplate their sins. Caps like those from the Handmaid's Tale, even in Chapel they were in high stalls where they could only see the minister ahead of them. These fantastic new prisons all had to be changed because too many prisoners went mad through isolation, silence and lack of human contact.

It's all very well having fantasies about how you think prisons should be but prisons have to work, both for prison officers and offenders. Privileges are very important and the possible loss of TV is a big incentive to behave while facing years inside.

For crimes against children like this, I agree with the death the penalty

The definition of murder - 'In which one person kills another with the intention to cause either death or serious injury unlawfully'

From www.gov.uk - 'If a person’s found guilty of murder, a court must give them a life sentence.'

Note that neither of these statements make reference to the age of the victim. In law, it does not matter if the victim is 1 or 100, the definitions and recommendations remain the same.

The law does not judge one person's life to be more valuable than that of another. The life of Alesha MacPhail is deemed to be of equal value to that of Christopher Donnelly, a 55 year old man murdered in March 2018. His wife was given life for his murder just as Aaron Campbell was for MacPhail's murder.

In saying that the murder of a child should be punishable by death, we are saying that one life is more important than another. We are also saying Donnelly's life is of less value than MacPhail's.

I found this case incredibly upsetting, partly because I was sexually abused by a 16 year old boy when I was 7.

Still don't believe in the death penalty. I just can't support the state killing its own citizens in that way, and there's always the risk of executing an innocent person.

Youbumder yeah I'm not judging the dad for punting a bit of weed but it pisses me off when I see the parents being described as drug dealers and this isn't the first time I've seen it. The mother lives in Airdrie, the father lives in Bute. She's not involved in dealing drugs.

Ah ok twatty fair point

I’ve only ever seen people referring to the dad as a drug dealer but there have been other judgy comments though along the lines of “with a family like that she didn’t stand a chance” on here as well as elsewhere :( I don’t know why some people need to stick the boot into people who are already suffering enough :(

True klopptimist but there can be both aggravating and mitigating factors that can influence the length of the recommended tariff. Abducting and raping a small defenceless girl before murdering her is pretty high up on the aggravation scale.

Murdering police officers also attracted the DP I think after it was done away with for other crimes. I doubt that was because police officers lives were worth more but because killing someone whose job it is to uphold the law whilst they are carrying out their duties is again an aggravation

Surely with the advances in DNA testing, the chances of mistakes are slim.

Not quite as simple as that. Interesting reading -
www.theguardian.com/science/2017/oct/02/dna-in-the-dock-how-flawed-techniques-send-innocent-people-to-prison

I have to say, OP, the point where you advocated the execution of 10 year olds is the point where I really struggle to believe you when you claim to have had strong views against capital punishment in the past

This. What's your preferred method, OP? Hanging? Electric chair? Firing squad?

Wait till your own DD is 10 and see how you feel about a child her age being executed, whatever s/he had done.

I have to say, OP, the point where you advocated the execution of 10 year olds is the point where I really struggle to believe you when you claim to have had strong views against capital punishment in the past

This. What's your preferred method, OP? Hanging? Electric chair? Firing squad?

Wait till your own DD is 10 and see how you feel about a child her age being executed, whatever s/he had done.

My own DD1 is about to turn 10. She's adopted (both my DDs are) and has had violent meltdowns in which she's left DD2 or me with bruises, but therapy is making a real difference to her, which is very encouraging.

I wonder whether maybe if the boy killers of James Bulger had had the same help, their lives would have turned out completely different? We don't know, obviously, but the fact that Robert Thompson has seemingly been rehabilitated would suggest that this might well be true of him at least?

I'm NOT saying that what they did wasn't totally heinous, it was and it rightly provoked outrage. But suggesting that 10 year olds should face execution is wrong on so many levels.

I disagree, but I would like to say a big well done to you for having a proper think about it, coming to your own independent conclusion and then voicing an opinion that you know is unpopular. That takes strength and a lot of people don't do this.

The main reason for me disagreeing is that I think when crimes have been committed that are so heinous that we decide that capital punishment could be worthy (IE those "special cases" that we use as examples - raping little children, murdering random innocent people and showing no remorse etc) then it is often a mental health issue. I'm not in any way excusing it, just to be clear, they should absolutely still be held responsible and given a lengthy sentence in a max security facility, but actually killing them seems too far for me just because to put it simply; who in their right mind would do these things? These people must have suffered some sort of abuse themselves, have some sort of disorder, or just for some reason that we haven't figured out yet they don't have that voice in their head that tells them that innocent people suffering is bad. Innocent people suffering should be painful to watch. To have a small child in your care and do those things to them, and then murder them, is not normal human behaviour.

Therefore I feel that these people should be tightly locked up and then assessed. We need to try and figure out why these things have happened. We have learnt so much over the years by assessing murderers, peadophiles, rapists etc and that information has been invaluable to police in helping us catch more criminals and also in preventing the crime in some cases. Killing them is pointless.

Also, killing them isn't free. People talk about costs associated with incarnation but there are also a lot of costs associated with killing people, when you look at the whole package ; complex legality, equipment, medical assessment etc. They also are usually still in prison for a very long time before their execution, which is unavoidable because of the legalities of the whole thing. Unless we're advocating execution immediately after sentencing, which I don't think anyone wants to bring in. So the money thing isn't really a good enough reason, I would say.

Would you do it yourself OP? Or would you want someone else to kill him on your behalf?

I understand the rage, it has occurred to me that it might be best to just put some people down like the rabid dogs they are, however the State should not execute it's citizens.

That is an absolute foundation of civilization in my opinion.

IAmNotAWitch

**Would you do it yourself OP?

Quite honestly in this moment, yes. If AC was in front of me and I had a shotgun, I'd do small girls everywhere a favour and get rid of him.

It's been a really interesting discussion for the most part and I really appreciate your contributions. The PP who said quoted Margaret Thatcher (sorry I can't find your post right now) made a very good point about us not being able to just go with our gut instincts and having to rise above it to maintain an orderly society.

I think I am just feeling really angry and also scared about how many dangerous criminals must be being created right now through the free availability of violent imagery/porn/abuse online. That's for a other thread though!

Thanks everyone

How would it be doing small girls a favour? He's safely locked up and no danger to them whatsoever.

through the availability of violent imagery/porn/abuse online

Er, what?

You really think porn is a major factor behind creating violent criminals? 🤔

Wouldn’t be anything to do with broken homes, violence towards them, neglect, addiction, poverty, abuse as children...?

Or just being genetically wired wrong! 🤷‍♀️

Porn may not be the only factor or even the biggest one, but it definitely will have an influence on a developing or already disturbed mind, and definitely could act as an encouraging factor/tipping point. It desensitises everything.

Someone starts off looking at pictures. Tells themselves "Nevermind it's only pictures." Eventually the thrill wears off.

They start looking at videos. Justify that it's only videos, minimise it to themselves. Eventually the thrill of the videos wears off...

For some then I do believe it leads to violent crimes without a doubt.

It should be used in extreme circumstances only, because there is simply no point in just letting them grow old and die comfortably in a cell.

Do we really expect that new evidence will come forth to exonerate people like Rose West?

No, but then the death penalty never ends up being confined to the likes of Rose West. And there are cases where plenty of people at the time of the verdicts would have said similar, but that turned out to be wrongful or at least dubious decisions. The existence of obvious, slam dunk convictions doesn't negate that.

But surely the sort of porn that is violent would only appeal to someone already affected by early abuse or someone already ‘not quite right’ neurologically?

Most ‘normal’ people would be immediately turned off, disturbed even and wouldn’t watch again.

So early experiences and genetic wiring are still the cause, not the porn?
And without porn these individuals would still have gone on to commit violent crime?

That said, I do think violent porn should not be made but that isn’t because I think it causes violent men.

There’s something deeply chilling about the state having the power to take a life.

I agree. Except in cases where armed police need to prevent greater loss of life it should not have that power. Even then it can go wrong as in the case of Jean Charles de Menezes and Harry Stanley.

We don't really know a lot yet about the impact of violent porn at an early age, do we? Given how relatively new it is.

I just couldn’t believe it and kept looking at the picture of that boy in disbelief. He looked so normal and like a boy you’d pass in the street and pay no attention to yet he committed that heinous act. I genuinely hope they throw away the key as I don’t think someone like that can be rehabilitated.

It should be used in extreme circumstances only, because there is simply no point in just letting them grow old and die comfortably in a cell. Do we really expect that new evidence will come forth to exonerate people like Rose West?

The issue is that if criminals know there is a death penalty they are more likely to kill their victims to prevent them testifying and arm themselves to kill police officers trying to arrest them may as well be killed for a sheep as for a lamb. They have nothing to lose at that point.

One innocent victim executed because of faulty DNA testing, lying witnesses, corrupt processes is just too many.
No way should we bring back the death penalty - utterly barbaric.

With respect to violent porn Most ‘normal’ people would be immediately turned off, disturbed even and wouldn’t watch again

I am amazed at how many normal people (adults and kids) have pulled out their i-phones to film for their gratification suffering people, people being assaulted in the street or maimed in traffic accidents - to watch real horror at their leisure and share with friends! Doesn't get more warped than that.
Losing track of what is 'normal' somewhere.

Even if violent porn isn’t the cause of going in to murder it still needs banning .... if it’s not doing harm then there’s still no need for it and if it is it needs shutting down

There has been research on children watching violent imagary and it can change the brain chemistry exposure to porn or games affects empathy they can't see how horrific the images are , not that im saying it is a reason for Cambells crime