Death penalty for these evil prisoners

[Sameoldsameoldsame]

Manchester bombers brother who helped plan attack is in prison for life.

In 2022 along with another prisoner attacked 3 officers, getting another 3 years added to sentence.

Now just seriously stabbed 2 male prison officers and thrown hot oil on them both and another female officer. Vile, disgusting.

Why is he and similar other evil prisoners being housed in comfort in a separation centre, highly staffed with their own cooking facility?

Needs putting down. Save millions. He's no good to anyone. A rabbid dog that just attacks anyone that goes near him. How many more prison officers will he be allowed to stab or throw hot oil over.

Capital Punishment is a complex issue.

Often, after reading reports of the grotesque murders of children, I feel absolutely certain that it is the most just course of action to execute those that are guilty of these horrific and (mercifully) quite rare acts of utter evil. It sends a very clear signal that there are absolute red lines that society, as a collective, will just not tolerate.

However, I have three major concerns.

1. Potential miscarriages of justice. Although this risk has lessened significantly with the advent of DNA, forensics, widespread cctv and so on since the UK abolished capital punishment decades ago, there is still a very small risk of wrongful conviction.

2. Cost.
   It’s actually more expensive to execute than pay for life time imprisonment. The financial costs of Capital Punishment are huge. For example, in the USA, prisoners will sit on Death Row for years while their case undergoes a lengthy (and very expensive) legal appeals process.

3. State over-reach.
   For me, this is the most convincing argument against Capital Punishment. I look at the Establishment (government, the CPS, judges etc) and the idea of giving such people and institutions this level of power over its citizens chills my blood. I simply do not trust them.

So it’s a reluctant “no” from me, OP.

OP, I don’t think you have answered yet whether you accept miscarriages of justice like the Birmingham Six as valid collateral damage, to ensure that this criminal could be executed.

Certainly the appeal court judge (or one or them) said it would have been preferable for them to be executed than to have the police and forensic service questioned. Presumably you agree with that? And are you happy for that rule to be applied to your own family?

If you bring back the death penalty, if there’s a miscarriage of justice, who gets executed? Judge who sentence them? The jury who convicted them or is it all on the executioner?

Just put him in solitary confinement for life. The next best punishment to the death penalty, protects the people around him as minimal contact. Just meals every few hours through a slot and he can live the rest of his life contemplating his actions or not.

If someone like Tommy Robinson can be put in solitary for contempt of court which often doesn't even get a custodial sentence, then surely it's completely appropriate for someone involved in the murder of dozens of people including children and the attempted murder of prison officers?

💯 agree. Death penalty for these mosters along with rapists, murderers and paedophiles. Obviously you'd need irrefutable evidence as to not execute the wrongly accused.

Those points can be easily discounted.

1. As you state it's a very small risk, particularly in the type of case the OP is talking about. We're talking about a person with overwhelming evidence against them who were involved in the murder of many innocent people. Someone who still seeks out ways to kill people even in confinement.
2. It may be more expensive in America, but it doesn't have to be. There's no need to let someone live on death row for years. That's not how it used to work in Britain, executions were carried out after three Sundays had passed. People were convicted, sentenced and executed in short order. The cost of cremation of the corpse could be done cheaply enough, no more than £1000 per convict, perhaps more cheaply if multiple condemned were cremated together. The execution itself need not be expensive, just a bit of rope and a trapdoor. The executioner and their team would need paying of course but then so do normal prison guards. Executions could cost less than keeping an inmate locked up for a few months, all in.
3. The state over-reach argument doesn't hold up. It might if we lived in a free society which left people to their own devices, but we most certainly do not. The state has immense power over us and we live in a country where we have to behave in a certain way. We are so brainwashed most people don't even realise it. We pay a huge amount in taxes and the whole system is designed to benefit the super-rich, whichever party is in power. Even if you don't agree with me on this and think our country is a perfect democracy, by extension you'd also have to accept that in that case it would be perfectly acceptable for the voters to vote for a party that would enable convicts to be put to death. It's not over-reach if it's what people vote for.

I support the death penalty for murder, rape and terrorism. For this sentence the evidence should be at the point where's there's no doubt, instead of just no reasonable doubt.

There are people who have committed unspeakable crimes for whom I would feel no sorrow or regret for if they died, I'd even be pleased, and there are times when I read about a peadophile and think they ought to be shot, but I cannot and will not ever agree to the death penalty.

My heart bleeds for Tommy Robinson.

Mass unmarked graves for executed prisoners? On the grounds of saving costs?

That's not worrying in the slightest.

what is irrefutable evidence? Unless there is video of the assailant committing the offence (which clearly shows their face), there is no irrefutable evidence. Very, very few cases have that. All other evidence has the potential to be invalid!

What evidence gives no doubt? Only a video of the offence showing the perpetrators face. How many cases have that?

Well forensics and DNA evidence.

I agree with every word of this.
There is no evidence that the threat of the death penalty prevents future crime and it does not bring back those who have been murdered already. It does not remove the suffering of the relatives left behind. It does spread the suffering wider. Most people on this thread seem to be wanting to use it as revenge against murderers. I cannot get onboard with that.

@hurricanemandy Tommy Robinson broke 10 court injunctions, and so was imprisoned for contempt of court. Contempt of court is a common reason for men to be in prison. Very often domestic abusers are given court-imposed restraining orders which they break, and this is contempt of court and what sends them to prison.

Hehas a string of convictions for things like fraud and drug offences, and when you have been to prison once, you are more likely to be sent to prison again, because you are a repeat offender.

Robinson is in solitary for his own protection, because he wouldn't go into a vulnerable prisoners unit because he doesn't want to associate with sex offenders. Apparently.

The problem is everyone always thinks there's "no doubt" . . . until there is. Which may be after the wrongly convicted person is dead.

"No doubt" is built in to the justice system as it already stands. When someone is found guilty of an offence, it's because a jury has carefully considered all the available evidence and decided they're guilty "beyond reasonable doubt".

So when someone says they support the death penalty but only in cases of definite guilt where there's "no doubt", by that rationale we should feel comfortable about putting to death every murderer, rapist etc. that has ever been found guilty under our justice system.

And yet despite the widespread "beyond reasonable doubt" caveat, those jurisdictions that do have the death penalty invariably make mistakes from time to time and execute innocent people.

Some people just can't seem to get their head around the fact that there can always be things we don't know, new information that comes to light at a later date. Tolerable when you're deciding whether to believe in God or which party to vote for in an election. Not so good when deciding whether somebody lives or dies.

Just a reminder that in the nascent age of AI, there's no longer even any such thing as "irrefutable" video evidence.

The world's most powerful country is currently run by someone who happily and unashamedly produced faked footage of their opponent as part of their election campaign. And people still believe in irrefutable video evidence? Jesus.

I don't support the death penalty in any circumstances for a variety of reasons.

Having worked within the system I think I have a good overview.

But for this kind of offender I'd happily adopt the 'supermax' prison regime seen in other countries.

Bang up 23 hrs per day, one hour a day out for a shower and exercise in a pen outside.

No visits other than legal. No phone calls other than legal. No visits from Religious figures.

No TV or books or other media.

I don’t feel like there is an easy sort of answer. In reality there are a fair number of people who don’t feel like they have to live within societies norms so they steal, rape, murder, commit violence. Then if imprisoned abuse the staff.

It is unfair on the staff, that said we shouldn’t be going back to the the “screws nick” of the 70s where beatings were routine and carried out with impunity.

Personally I don’t think I’d hand out the death penalty as punishment but if you can not live within a prison without committing violence upon staff then I’d think that euthanasia is a possible solution. I suspect lots people would disagree but I’d look on it as akin to putting down a dangerous animal it’s unpleasant and sad and possibly had circumstances been different they’d not if found themselves in this place. You can’t expect people to go to work and be stabbed/ assaulted though.

It must have a really negative impact on the rest of the prison too. How’s anyone going to be rehabilitated in that environment?

I understand, but I can’t agree with torture either. A complete lack of any social interaction and stimulation from books etc, would eventually drive a person insane. Your proposed model would dramatically infringe basic human rights. The US doesn’t care about such matters, but I hope the UK will always respect human rights.

There isnt going to be a return of the death penalty so the debate is essentially pointless. However for people like this it’s clear there should be a much tougher regime in prison, essentially locked up, no free association and no privileges tv, jobs etc. There is absolutely no point trying to rehabilitate him.

To me the death penalty just seems like an easy way out for these monsters. Just let them rot in solitary confinement for the rest of their natural lives.

The death penalty comes at too high of a cost for us as a society. It damages our collective soul.

prisoners like this need to be held under high security conditions. I definitely support treating prisoners well if they behave and are on a path to release someday. We want to reduce recidivism. People treated with respect and given responsibility are much more likely to succeed upon release.

Someone who is never going to reintegrate into society and represents an ongoing threat to other prisoners and staff does not deserve any degree of freedom, even within prison.

There comes a point where for the safety of all involved, 'human rights' need to take less priority.

The person discussed here is a radicalised fundamentalist Muslim who feels and believes that his Religious beliefs justify his murder and serious assault on people he feels are against his beliefs.

He would likely use any visits by family, Religious figures or access to media to further justify his beliefs and behaviour which has been repeatedly demonstrated to put people that don't share his belief system at risk of serious harm

He's a fucking terrorist at the end of the day. That's who he is and it's what he believes and even when given opportunities to e.g cook in prison, he's used it to harm people.

He's fucked himself repeatedly in terms of opportunities in prison and taken those opportunities to harm people.

I'm sure he will suffer mentally in a more reduced regime but I couldn't care less to be honest. And really question the bleeding hearts and why they give more of a shit about his mental health than the staff that he's already harmed and would continue to risk to do so with a more permissive regime.

I'll always support the staff.

Countries that have introduced the death penalty for rape have found something very interesting. The rate of murder goes up. Want to know why? Because if you are getting the death penalty for rape then you may as well also murder the person - nobody to testify against you. Want to reconsider that idea?

And could you provide the defintion of "no doubt" - because there's been a hell of a lot of people convicted of crimes they didn't commit when everyone had "no doubt" they were guilty. There is no convenient line between "no doubt" and "beyond reasonable doubt". If you want a comparable case, try the Birmingham Six. Six terrorists jailed for life - 21 people killed and 182 injured. Sentenced to life. Nobody (well actually, most people) doubted their guilt. Similar screams of bring back hanging, or the death penalty. Lucky for them, they only served 16 years in prison before being vindicated. Mind you, to be fair, the police that fitted them up were also sure they were guilty. And the police are so much more trustworthy today. They'd never do something like that. Would they?