Would you want capital punishment back?

[Mynameisnew]

There are people who do such vile things in this country and are jailed for a decade or two. Perhaps released for good behaviour a bit earlier.

Afaik CP was stopped amongst other reasons because there were a number of errors made and innocent people being convicted.

But these days with DNA proof or cases where it is on cctv /phone messages or has been admitted (thinking of Emma Tustin)

Would it not make a good deterrent? Even if one person is saved from being murdered...

I appreciate that in the USA people still commit murder, but they also have guns there which means a higher incidence of spur of the moment violence.

But a sustained campaign of abuse - would such an abuser as Tustin have been put off if CP was an option, even if very rarely used?

It's easy for me to say that I would be deterred, but I'm not a psychopathic and sadistic person so the issue is, it's hard to say if people like that would be put off such a crime. Perhaps it doesn't even enter their heads that it's wrong.

Members of the EU are not allowed to use the death penalty. Policy position here:

www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/world/20190212STO25910/death-penalty-in-europe-and-the-rest-of-the-world-key-facts

Leaving the EU makes restarting the death penalty potentially possible in legal terms. Several polling analysts showed a link in voter preferences between the two issues.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36803544

There has been a fair bit of coverage on Priti Patel’s stance on the death penalty. However you interpret it it is hard to see her as an opponent.

Whether or not you liked being in the EU it did give certain protections to individuals which you may or may not agree with. I was always grateful that it gave us some protection over the possibility of the death penalty returning at the whim of a particular government.

Thank goodness we have a justice system that has nothing to do with 'revenge'' or retaliation.

[quote MynameisWa]@Saskatcha are you taking the piss? The UK abolished the death penalty long before other European countries did.

What on earth makes you think that the EU has been keeping the UK in check on capital punishment?

I mean we’re not even remotely close to reintroducing it.[/quote]
Not true - the UK did not formally abolish the death penalty until 1998. The last execution was much earlier than that, but the death penalty was still on the statute books formally speaking. Most European countries formally abolished considerably earlier.

@Saskatcha

Definitely not. It’s one of the things that really worried me about the Uk leaving the EU that it could potentially be brought back. I recently watched ‘The Penalty’ on Netflix. Really harrowing.

The UK abolished the death penalty in 1965. Well before we even joined the Common Market (which later evolved into the EU). It thankfully looks likely to stay that way.

It isn't an issue which is related to Brexshit.

Thank goodness we have a justice system that has nothing to do with 'revenge'' or retaliation.

Yes it does, it's just covered up with legal jargon. Punishment/incarceration is revenge - what else could you call it?

I’m not. Below from the Council of Europe which adopted protocol number 13 of the convention into European Law -

In 1989, abolition of the death penalty was made a condition of accession for all new member states. Since then, all countries are committed to introducing an immediate moratorium on executions and ratifying Protocol No. 6 when joining the organisation. A number of mechanisms have been set up to monitor the respect of those commitments while assisting governments with their implementation.

In 2002, an important step was taken by the Council to ban the death penalty in all circumstances with the adoption of Protocol No. 13 to the European Convention on Human Rights, which requires the complete abolition of capital punishment - even for acts committed in time of war.
As a result, there has not been a single execution in any of the member states of the Council of Europe for 10 years

Topseyt you are right but you are also wrong - the death penalty did not get taken off the statute books in Northern Ireland until 1998.

Punishment/incarceration is revenge - what else could you call it?

It's a penalty for an offence, and these penalties are laid out in law.

Yes it does, it's just covered up with legal jargon. Punishment/incarceration is revenge - what else could you call it?

And what do you suggest as an alternative?

@Fidgetty

Thank goodness we have a justice system that has nothing to do with 'revenge'' or retaliation.

Yes it does, it's just covered up with legal jargon. Punishment/incarceration is revenge - what else could you call it?

Justice.

Yes and justice is legal jargon for giving people what they deserve by assigning a suitable punishment for crimes committed. It's revenge in all but name.

The truth is people can say no way or morally it’s wrong but when it happens to one or theirs, feeling change.

Take Arthur’s grandad’s change of opinion on it as an example.

Our justice system needs to be impartial, unemotional and ensure a punishment that brings some sense of closure. That's why juries are selected randomly and not from the families of victims.

Justice systems cannot be a personalised, vindictive or retaliatory - that would just lead to a free for all where vigilantes and lynchings were possible!

Never x

@Fidgetty

My penfriend has been on Death Row in Nevada for 34 years. He has had medical treatment withheld, delayed and botched. He now has a limp and several of his teeth have fallen out. Is that really what you’d want to happen to prisoners? (I have a horrible feeling you’ll say yes).

What is your "pen friend" convicted of? If it's death row it's safe to assume he did something heinous to another person? In which case he deserves everything he gets IMO.

We’ve been writing to each other for 30 years. No need for speech marks - he’s actually my penfriend.

With respect, what he was convicted of is none of your business (nor mine) and as you know nothing about his case, your opinion about what he does and doesn’t deserve is irrelevant.

If it was that safe to assume then he wouldn't have the right to appeal for 34 years

Why are we spending money on the likes of Brady and hiNdly

We aren't spending a penny on Brady and Hindley, @Imdreamingofapeacefulxmas.

@OneTC

If it was that safe to assume then he wouldn't have the right to appeal for 34 years

As I said, it’s irrelevant what you think about my own friend’s case.

I mentioned him because someone proposed that certain prisoners should have medical treatment withheld as well as loss of liberty and I wanted to inform them that it was already being done in a so-called developed nation.

@SliceOfCakeCupOfTea

AFAIK child abusers/murders are treated terribly in prisons as a huge proportion of prisoners have kids/nieces/nephews/kid siblings etc. And rightly so.

No, not rightly so. The punishment should be prison and nothing more. The notion that we should give thugs carte blanche licence to attack anyone they fancy is almost as bad as condoning capital punishment.

@Hertsgirl10

The truth is people can say no way or morally it’s wrong but when it happens to one or theirs, feeling change.

Take Arthur’s grandad’s change of opinion on it as an example.

Yes, but criminal cases are brought on behalf of the crown, not the victim's family.

Otherwise, what if you had a victim no one cared about? Eg someone with no relatives or friends. Should their murderer be punished less?

I'm sure if anything awful happened to one of my loved ones, I'd want terrible things to happen to the perpetrator, but justice is supposed to be impartial.

Absolutely not. I wouldn't want to pay my taxes to a state that murdered people.

Unconscious biases always come into play and we would 100% end up with a system where rich people who could afford the best legal representation would get let off for crimes that people without good representation would be left to die for. It would amplify the inequalities that already exist in our system. I have no doubt that uneducated people, black people and poor people would, by a country mile, be the people who were executed the most.

It has not been proven to be a deterrent at all. Most people either commit crimes on the spur of the moment, don't believe they're doing anything wrong or don't believe they'll get caught. From the body cam footage I don't believe ET believes she did anything wrong. I think she'll go to her grave believing that Arthur was at fault and she was disciplining him.

Lengthy appeals and plea bargains make it an expensive and inefficient system.

Possibly of error is also a worry.

And just in my opinion encouraging people to relish in violent means of retribution and revenge does not create a healthy society.

@fournonblondes

I would bring it back for cases where there is not doubt. Terrorists for example and serial killers.

But when people are wrongly convicted, at the time the judge will think there is no doubt. They don't sentence someone to life imprisonment because they're fairly sure they're guilty or just to be in the safe side.

AFAIK child abusers/murders are treated terribly in prisons as a huge proportion of prisoners have kids/nieces/nephews/kid siblings etc. And rightly so

Absolutely appalling that we would even think to condone or praise the behaviour of drug dealers, terrorists or murderers who think they should suddenly become 'law enforcers' inside prison. These are the same thugs that attack our police officers and prison officers and who'd shed no tears for attacking you or your family members.
To elevate them to 'defenders of justice' in an insult to us all. They were imprisoned for being ruthless murderers and drug gang enforcers - that is what they are. Don't think for a minute they give a shit about the 'Arthur's' of this world - they don't. They don't even care about their own kids or they wouldn't be in prison! They are just sickos showing off their strength behind bars.
They would have sold 'Arthur' drugs as a teenager and not give it a second thought, they would have shot 'Arthur' if he got in the way - have we forgotten about Rhys Jones? They'd have blown up concert halls full of 'Arthurs' if hit suited their purpose.

It really is unbelievable to me how many 'mums' on here think any of these evil thugs can be seen to 'do good' by 'revenge' beatings and stabbings in prison.

These thugs make it even harder on underpaid prison officers to keep order. Don't forget theses officers put their lives on the line every day to ensure the court sentences are served as they should be and to stop the 'vigilant' thugs adding on a bit of blood sport for fun.

The ones some Mumsnet posters are encouraging to 'give them a going over' are likely to be the same ones that will burglarise your house, mug your granny, stab your child or make your neighbourhood hell to live in.

"From the body cam footage I don't believe ET believes she did anything wrong. I think she'll go to her grave believing that Arthur was at fault and she was disciplining him."

I can believe this. I know a psychopathic child abuser and he believes he was acting in love (yes, police already involved)

I despair at the fact that some people are just psychopaths. Afaik it is a mixture of genes and upbringing - what can be done to protect others from these people?

From what I've read, you can be genetically predisposed to be a psychopath but if your upbringing is good, you don't become one. No idea what her background was like, but being egged on by Hughes could well have flipped a switch.

I have long felt that proper parenting classes should be compulsory for all expectant parents, but that's a whole other discussion really.

Vigilante