Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

The Yorkshire Ripper question?

436 replies

PassingStranger · 22/10/2024 13:42

Just read that it cost the taxpayer 11 billion to keep him alive including his funeral?
Do you still feel the same way about him being hung for his murders?

is it acceptable to the taxpayer to pay that much, when there are so many other things that the money could have been spent on, or dosent the money matter?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
Vynalbob · 23/10/2024 20:15

WhatsInTheRug · 23/10/2024 19:06

Ok

And how will you staff this place? Would you also want to work in those conditions with those prisoners?

Probably a similar way to oil rigs. Also staff don't actually stay in the cells now as far as I know so I wouldn't have the same restrictions on their accommodation 👀😳.

FarmGirl78 · 23/10/2024 20:19

Waterboatlass · 23/10/2024 20:00

OI'm not sure how that's an argument for the death penalty rather than whole life tariffs?

It wouldn't cost £11mill to keep them alive?

Radiolala · 23/10/2024 20:23

PassingStranger · 22/10/2024 14:36

Did you know his name was actually Peter Coonan in the end. He changed it. No doubt to distance himself from his crimes.

Lots of prisoners do. It’s very common.

GMV42 · 23/10/2024 20:48

PassingStranger · 22/10/2024 14:16

We dont even have whole life terms for murder anymore. Its gone too far the other way and we seem to hear of murders every week now.

Where do you get your information from? Of course people serve life in prison!!

RelationshipOrNot · 23/10/2024 21:01

Cityandmakeup · 23/10/2024 20:05

Why does he deserve humane?

Everyone deserves humane. If we start chipping away at that, it doesn't lead anywhere good.

ThistleTits · 23/10/2024 21:12

GalacticTowelMaster · 22/10/2024 13:50

I heard it was eleventy billion

😂😂😂

eastegg · 23/10/2024 21:25

TarantinoIsAMisogynist · 22/10/2024 14:50

Are those countries that the UK should be aspiring to emulate?

You're surely not suggesting that the death penalty might be okay because it can be delivered cheaply with minimal admin and faff if we deny the convicted any right of appeal?

That seems to be exactly what Brefugee is suggesting. Incredible isn’t it?

VickyPollard25 · 23/10/2024 21:32

PassingStranger · 22/10/2024 13:59

yes i couldnt have given a shit if hed been hung.

I’m with you!

TarantinoIsAMisogynist · 23/10/2024 21:42

eastegg · 23/10/2024 21:25

That seems to be exactly what Brefugee is suggesting. Incredible isn’t it?

She wasn't, tbf. But it wasn't totally clear from that post.

eastegg · 23/10/2024 21:50

TarantinoIsAMisogynist · 23/10/2024 21:42

She wasn't, tbf. But it wasn't totally clear from that post.

Yes I’ve seen the further posts now, but I still think the meaning came across exactly as I, and you, took it. People against the DP pointed out the expense and she said ‘but look how it could be cheaper’.

Waterboatlass · 23/10/2024 22:03

FarmGirl78 · 23/10/2024 20:19

It wouldn't cost £11mill to keep them alive?

It isn't simply an economic question

It wouldn't or shouldn't be quick or cheap, with the more robust appeal procedures that would be needed

I think you see this point as a mic drop but it really isn't.

Miscarriages of justice aren't a fair sacrifice on balance. Seeing the appeals through is valuable not only for fairness but it helps point out important areas where the judicial system, society, medicine and forensics need to improve.

Also death sentences aren't the only solution to preventing reoffending

ChampaignSupernova · 23/10/2024 22:04

They didn't spend 11 billion to keep him alive. They spent 11 billion protecting the public and the staff who had to watch over and work with the monster and others just like him. His funeral was £3k according to newspapers. I suspect a fair amount of that was security to ensure the coffin and body and grave site were not tampered with.

No the money does not make me want to bring back hanging. I don't agree in taking a life in punishment or torturing people as punishment. I do agree with removing liberty from those who are high risk and dangerous and ensuring they never have the ability to harm another again. I do agree with them getting the right medical care and treatment to ensure they do not harm others.

Broadmoor is not a holiday camp or an easy life and the staff working there should have all the protection they need and medication to hand to keep them safe. If it costs 11 billion to lock someone like him away that's a price I'm personally happy for the govt to pay. He has not killed or hurt (to my knowledge) anyone since being housed at Broadmoor so it's money well spent!

FarmGirl78 · 23/10/2024 22:07

Waterboatlass · 23/10/2024 22:03

It isn't simply an economic question

It wouldn't or shouldn't be quick or cheap, with the more robust appeal procedures that would be needed

I think you see this point as a mic drop but it really isn't.

Miscarriages of justice aren't a fair sacrifice on balance. Seeing the appeals through is valuable not only for fairness but it helps point out important areas where the judicial system, society, medicine and forensics need to improve.

Also death sentences aren't the only solution to preventing reoffending

Nah, didn't see it as a mic drop. It's a subject that confuses me greatly. Me and my morals have very different opinions on things and this is one of them. It's me throwing it out there.

theilltemperedqueenofspacetime · 23/10/2024 22:59

The number of people killed due to a wrong conviction is lower than the number of people subsequently murdered by released murderers. Some don't just go on to kill again, but go on to kill more than one. There's more innocent people killed as a result of NOT having the death penalty.

Does not compute. A wrong conviction means the real killer remains free to kill n more people. Total deaths = n+1

Total deaths without the death penalty = n-x, where x is the killings prevented by the period of imprisonment.

MoonWoman69 · 23/10/2024 23:03

Being imprisoned and "rehabilitated" (they can even refuse to co-operate in this!) doesn't stop offenders re-offending upon release. They learn how to get away with it the next time they're released, learning tricks and tips from other inmates! (I'm talking about minor crimes here).

It makes me laugh when people talk of the human rights of prisoners who have killed. Where were there victims human rights when they were being brutally and innocently slaughtered?!
If people want a civilised society, then these proven killers need to be dispatched. And do people seriously think these offenders sit in their cells, wringing their hands, "thinking and feeling" all remorseful for what they've done? How many times have you read that during sentencing they sat in the dock, smirking and showed no remorse at all for their crimes? Then they get into prison and brag about what they've done, to any other inmate that will listen! People clearly don't read enough books or watch documentaries on this subject. I'm glad I do!
You only have to look at the likes of Hindley (now dead obviously) and West, lauding their gruesome "status" like they were/are some sort of heroines to be worshipped! They were disgusting child killers. They weren't/aren't fit to be in a decent society. Not incarcerated for life unnecessarily and being paid for by the tax payer. With their matching duvet covers and curtains and God knows what else! A decent mattress, a sheet and blanket are enough, with access to books to fill their time. They don't deserve any luxuries.
As for Hindley, she played an absolute blinder on Lord Longford, the dim witted do gooder who championed her cause for release for years. He believed every single lie she fed him! And he admitted that he'd been duped, many years after. She knew exactly what she was doing when she lured those poor kids and took them to her evil partner in crime. And she was complicit in the majority of their torture and murders.
All you do gooders out there reckon she was the only one who was/is devious enough to lie, year upon year about their involvement in the crimes they were found guilty of and incarcerated for, to try and get released? "I didn't do it, guv'nor, it wasn't me"! Oh but of course it wasn't...
Robert Maudsley is currently in HMP Wakefield, aka Monster Mansion, in a glass cage in the basement of the prison. It takes 17 steel doors to access his cell. And that's all because he has actually stated that if released, he would kill again. He's even killed whilst he's been in prison.
What actual good is it doing keeping these vile monsters alive when they have no care for other human lives? Can anybody actually give a decent, reasoned answer to that question?
They are not fit to be part of society. And not fit to have money wasted on them, trying to "rehabilitate" them.
If there is 100% proof that those crimes were committed by that person and they have absolutely no chance of release, then yes, the death penalty should be employed. We have myriad resources now to prove that someone is guilty. I don't care what anybody says about it not being failsafe. It's proof enough in todays society, unlike the sad old days.
Society has always used punishment to discourage would-be criminals from unlawful action. Since society has the highest interest in preventing murder, it should use the strongest punishment available to deter murder and that is the death penalty.
And yes, I would be executioner and still sleep at night. Soundly.

OonaStubbs · 23/10/2024 23:38

I do not understand why some people have so much sympathy and compassion for criminals. They should save their sympathy and compassion for the innocent victims of these criminals, particularly criminals who have been convicted and then let out of prison to convict more crimes and terrorize more law-abiders.

06230villefrancesurmer · 23/10/2024 23:50

PassingStranger · 22/10/2024 13:42

Just read that it cost the taxpayer 11 billion to keep him alive including his funeral?
Do you still feel the same way about him being hung for his murders?

is it acceptable to the taxpayer to pay that much, when there are so many other things that the money could have been spent on, or dosent the money matter?

The question is/does will give many emotional reactions .
My first response, sure kill the prick.
Second response, if it was my family/friends or children burn him
Third response state killing, I'm not good with that.
I don't believe in any god but individuals believing in God sanctions ie; death penalty those people make me nervous.
But hey I'm just a retired 'pirate' . So to speak

EgyptionJackal · 24/10/2024 00:54

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

GoldenPheasant · 24/10/2024 01:03

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

But he wouldn't qualify for the death penalty anyway.

GoldenPheasant · 24/10/2024 01:05

Sharptonguedwoman · 23/10/2024 17:54

According to They Work for You, it costs about £51 000 per bod per year. So 32 yrs £ 1, 632 000 give or take. I wonder where the Daily Fail got the data from?

The reporter's backside.

GoldenPheasant · 24/10/2024 01:09

FarmGirl78 · 23/10/2024 18:41

Not quite. The number of people killed due to a wrong conviction is lower than the number of people subsequently murdered by released murderers. Some don't just go on to kill again, but go on to kill more than one. There's more innocent people killed as a result of NOT having the death penalty. Its a very simple way of looking at it, but the numbers of families hurting and heartbroken, the level of hurt and unjustness in society is higher WITHOUT the death penalty.

I don't know what the answer is, it's a very difficult subject.

We can't know that, though. If we had the death penalty, juries would be more reluctant to convict. So the reality is that you would have some murderers who don't even go to prison, or who get shorter sentences because they've been convicted of manslaughter, and would have much more time to kill if they are that way inclined.

GoldenPheasant · 24/10/2024 01:13

Yourcatisnotsorry · 23/10/2024 20:03

I don’t object to the death penalty in such cases but cost wise with the amount of appeals etc. I suspect it wouldn’t actually be cheaper. Prisoners are treated too well though in my opinion, their food and medical care is better than children etc.

The budget for food in prisons is currently £2.70 per person per day. Most people are spending more than that on feeding their children.

GoldenPheasant · 24/10/2024 01:15

Cityandmakeup · 23/10/2024 20:05

Why does he deserve humane?

The short answer is he doesn't deserve anything, given that he's dead.

The longer answer is that we should treat all people humanely, otherwise we descend below the level of the worst criminals.

EgyptionJackal · 24/10/2024 01:18

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

GoldenPheasant · 24/10/2024 01:21

OonaStubbs · 23/10/2024 23:38

I do not understand why some people have so much sympathy and compassion for criminals. They should save their sympathy and compassion for the innocent victims of these criminals, particularly criminals who have been convicted and then let out of prison to convict more crimes and terrorize more law-abiders.

People can and do oppose the death penalty without having sympathy and compassion for criminals. It's not as if a long sentence in prison is a cushy option, indeed it's very nasty indeed by all accounts.

Most people simply don't want to live in a society where it is acceptable for the state to kill someone in cold blood, particularly bearing in mind the risk that they may be killing an innocent person. It's completely hypocritical to say "Thou shalt not kill, but it's OK if we kill you".

Swipe left for the next trending thread