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.

@ufucoffee

No but I do wish that prisons were less comfortable places than they currently are.

Have you ever been in a closed prison? If you know anything at all about the subject, you would know that they aren't at all comfortable. How comfortable would you feel if you had to share a small cell with a couple of thugs and an open toilet, being locked up in there frequently for most of the day? And if you were kept awake all night by the noise of people shouting out to each other, singing, moaning etc?

@Chloemol

I believe if you are hailed for 10 years you do 10 years. I believe you should all be treated the same in jail, so no open prisons, a cell no tv, possibly a radio, books etc but also you work during the day doing something productive, but not for money, but to recompense for what you have done

Prison is tough, but you have committed a crime against someone and all crimes affect those who it’s don’t to on some way. By making things tough hopefully people won’t want to do the crime because of the punishment

But think about what it would be like guarding prisons when the prisoners have absolutely no incentive to behave and far too much time to build up resentment for what they are going through and plot their revenge.

Wasn’t Amanda Knox found guilty partly through so called DNA evidence along with a very strange story the prosecution put forward for the murder of Meredith Kercher

That was not so long ago (2009)

And numerous people have admitted to crimes that did not commit some have had no connection at all

No Pritti, I would not.

@UserOfManyNames

And in the case of Thompson and Venables, the vast majority of abused children (I think that was overplayed as well) don’t go on to commit crimes like that, especially at that age. Ever read A Child Called It? Obviously it is a step too far to euthanise children but they both should have been in a secure facility for life without ever being released. That they could ever have a normal life after the horrific and savage acts they committed on James Bulger is even worse than that.

The argument that two abused children who killed can't have any sort of leeway because other abused children don't ill simply isn't sustainable. No two children have the same characters or go through the same abuse and you simply can't compare them. It's like saying that because one person survived, say, a car crash without ongoing trauma then no one else in the same crash is allowed to be traumatised.

No. I don't believe in taking life even that of monsters. And there are cases of innocent people being killed under CP.

I'm sure I'd probably change my mind if someone harmed my partner or child mind.

• There's no evidence it's a deterrent
• It costs a fortune - the legal fees on death row are extraordinary, far more than prison
• It is unfairly applied - you are far more likely to be executed in the US if you are poor and non-white
• There would be miscarriages of justice, eg Guildford 4 etc
• It has no place in a civilised society - if murder is wrong then state sanctioned murdered cannot be right

No.

It's not a good deterrent anyway.

But it is also the case that there will be errors. Maybe not often. But there would always be someone mistakenly convicted, at some point.

I don't think that's justifiable in our society.

There may be places where in some cases, where there are no prisons, where it's not possible to lock someone up long term, that it may be justifiable to protect the community. But we are way past that.

@BigYellowHat

You are missing my point.

No child should have such a bad home life that inflicting harm on another improves it.

There is nothing we can do to bring back Arthur, or James Bulger but there are things that could and should be done to children living lives of misery.

Sure Start centres were a great idea but have all closed. We don't know the consequences of those closures.

I personally just wish that life would mean life and that we kept people in prison but we just don't have the room.....

I also think if you are a repeat offender you should spend a larger amount of time in prison. (Katie Price)

I'm sure I'd probably change my mind if someone harmed my partner or child mind

I suspect that, in that situation, I'd want the person responsible torn limb from limb. But, fairly obviously, I recognise that in a civilised country you cannot build a justice system based on people's primitive revenge responses.

A while back, a child was murdered and the perpetrator was given a life sentence. The tabloids - The Sun, particularly - went into their usual ‘string ‘em up’ frenzy, and said that anyone who disagreed should ask the family of the victim what they thought. The family, they said, would want to see the murderer hang, and their views should be taken into account.

Then the family released a statement that, in accordance with their religious views, they would strive to forgive the murderer and would pray for his eventual redemption.

There was a short, perplexed silence from the Sun. Then they started to peddle the editorial line that the family was addled by grief, didn’t know what they were saying and nobody should pay any attention to them.

Just the sort of trash I'd expect The Sun to peddle. Liverpool has the right attitude to that rag.

@Stomacharmeleon

I personally just wish that life would mean life and that we kept people in prison but we just don't have the room.....

I also think if you are a repeat offender you should spend a larger amount of time in prison. (Katie Price)

The trouble with life being life, is that it gives the offender nothing left to lose and nothing to work towards, which makes them very dangerous and difficult to manage within the prison system. The hope of parole is a useful means of control.

No but I think tougher sentences. Maybe a way to make the prisoners contribute to society more like working in secure factories with only prisoners and high security. If they refused they don't get to have TV and other privileges just food and life's basics. I think incase like those who took Arthur's life should have a long prison sentence with no chance to get out after a certain amount of extended time like decades they may have a a chance if they have worked and proven themselves to be changed and are no danger to society but it must be a very hard test to past that takes years and years to prove. They don't get to have a new identity and live off the tax payers out of prisons. They can change their name themselves but they have to live with the consequences of their past.

I'd worry about miscarriage of justice. Even with DNA innocent people have been jailed.
HOWEVER the murder / torture of a child should IMMEDIATELY be life in prison, and I mean life not 20+yrs and def no ahnce of parole.

5128gap- what about those on a ‘whole life’ tariff?

They still manage to control those, and they can never be released. They can take away visits and other privileges and put them in segregated cells as punishment

@BluebelllsRosesDaffodills

5128gap- what about those on a ‘whole life’ tariff?

They still manage to control those, and they can never be released. They can take away visits and other privileges and put them in segregated cells as punishment

There are very few of these, and I believe even they are entitled to a review of their sentence after 25 years. So while unlikely, it isn't definite they will never be released.

I am sure there are only between 30-40 full life tariff lifers in prison at the moment.
I do think tougher sentences and longer and I mean much longer periods would be better as a deterrent (some sentences are laughable)
I disagree they are any different to manage. Start with a basic bed and bog and you earn your privileges- you can lose them as easily as earn them.
But we do need better prisons and an overhaul of the system. We need to make it harder.

So the likes of Levi Bellfield could in theory be released? What a joke. Evil bastards like him should never see daylight again, let alone have the chance to be out of prison. No doubt some do gooders somewhere will think he could be rehabilitated but I think most people know what he is.

Who would be comfortable being an executioner.....

Exactly @PinkSparklyPussyCat and look at what happened with Colin pitchfork.

I did see an interview with Dominic rabb then and he said the rules were changing with parole and rather than an automatic right that prisoners have (and the state has to make a case for why they would be a risk) it will be the other way round.

I'd forgotten him @Stomacharmeleon. There will always be people who cannot be rehabilitated and unfortunately there will always be people who think we should try to rehabilitate them. The likes of Pitchfork and Bellfield should just be left to rot.

No. It is never right to take another person's life, even if they are a proven murderer.

Furthermore, I read a book about Ruth Ellis, the last woman to be hanged in England. Her executioner, Albert Pierrepont was quoted later as saying he believed the death was not a deterrent to murder.