Active discussions

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

Talk
News
Original poster

Akmal shaikh

187 replies

thehappyprince · 28/12/2009 19:30

Just think it's desperately sad he is going to be executed within hours for a crime committed apparently due to psychotic beliefs from bipolar disorder. Wish there was some way for him to get clemency.

OP posts:
Bessie123 · 30/12/2009 11:27

Atlantis - I suppose the moral justification for shooting a suicide bomber about to blow up would be that it is the only way of preventing the murder of a number of innocent people (and he was about to die by his choosing anyway). I don't think anyone has agreed with you that a suicide bomber not en route to the bombing should be killed.

And I have tried to hold back from getting into this argument but
'The more people we execute who do something very wrong the more lives we save down the line'.

Surely you can see that is a completely rubbish argument? Perhaps you should consider that the more people we rehabilitate the more lives we save down the line or from the other side, the more people with mental health issues who get help the more lives we save down the line

atlantis · 30/12/2009 11:49

" I too had similar anger to do with a different issue and found that channeling it into helping/speaking to charities that help people (in your case) with drug addictions and issues was quite beneficial. I don't know if it's something you've thought about. I bet they would bite their arm off to have someone as eloquent and passionate as you helping them."

Thank you Foxinsocks, I have loose ties with drug link and help as best I can from a distance- apparently I get 'too' involved up close ( I shall say no more ).

atlantis · 30/12/2009 11:54

Festive;

"but the assumption that you or people like you have the right to condemn others to die. "

That's what jury's are for and it's people 'like' me who sit on jury's.

"Executing dealers?? I really hope to god a child of yours isn't found one day with a few too many grammes of skunk or whatever on him."

There's a difference between dealers and users I don't think the adverage user would be caught with £250.000 worth of drugs on them, users are quite smart people where the law is concerned they tend to stay just under the threshold of the law i'm sure they could manage if a new law was brought in.

"People who run chains of pubs perhaps- they 'deal' in alcohol which is just as destructive of lives overall as drugs."

Alcohol is not illegal, in fact the government likes to support alcohol consumption because they can tax it, so no fear of that then.

atlantis · 30/12/2009 11:58

Bessie,

"Perhaps you should consider that the more people we rehabilitate the more lives we save down the line or from the other side"

society has tried rehabilitation, it doesn't work for most, are you saying we should give murderers and paedophiles a get out of jail free card or just drug mules?

" the more people with mental health issues who get help the more lives we save down the line"

I'm not and have not debated that issue, this country does not do enough for people with MHI, I am an will debate the fact that this man was mentally ill, there was no past history to prove that and that's why people believe he was using the mental health issue as a stay of execution.

Bessie123 · 30/12/2009 12:04

Atlantis - just because there was no previous diagnosis of a mental illness does not mean that he was not mentally ill. And do you not think that if there is a suggestion of a mental illness there is a duty to investigate before executing the man for a crime he may have committed while he was not fully aware of his actions or their implications?

VirginPeachyMotherOfSpod · 30/12/2009 12:12

We'vetried the death penalty as well though Atlantis, and that didn't stop crime either.

Fortunately peoplelike me also sit on juries, people who beleive in strict sentencing but not capital punishment. Of course that is why we have juries, so strng opinions can be balanced.

calamari · 30/12/2009 12:16

I think the chinese went for the facts that they had, and given the fact that he's spend quite a few months in Chinese jail and they still didn't appear to have any proof of mental illness, they assumed there is none. Let's not forget, slapping a "mentally ill" label on someone has gotten many violent murderers and rapists out so that they could reoffend in the most brutal manner.

VirginPeachyMotherOfSpod · 30/12/2009 12:18

Amnesty seem to believe they didn't take all the facts into account though.

atlantis · 30/12/2009 13:03

"We've tried the death penalty as well though Atlantis, and that didn't stop crime either."

No but there was certainly less of it back in the day.

"Amnesty seem to believe they didn't take all the facts into account though."

Amnesty for obvious reasons do not like China because of their human rights record so forgive me if I take anything they say in this case with a pinch of salt, they are not exactly impartial.

Bessie123 · 30/12/2009 13:12

Atlantis - what do you mean, there was certainly less crime?

  1. I don't believe that
  2. I don't think you can know that
  3. 'Crime' was in any event categorised differently because laws were different. For example, there was probably much more 'crime' in the sense that committing 'homosexual acts' was a criminal offence.

But we are getting off the point.

Morloth · 30/12/2009 13:18

I actually don't think this has much to do with this man and this crime TBH.

I think China just checked exactly what the UK was up for, and I think they found out.

None of this stuff matters, China is not going to change it laws to suit the West, they are a major world power and there is nothing a little country like the UK can do about it.

Something much bigger going on I think.

thedogsgottago · 30/12/2009 13:44

Sorry if someone has already posted this link:

www.reprieve.org.uk/akmalshaikh

But if you read the testomonies of people who had contact with him in Poland before he left for China then it is clear that the Chinese authorites shoud have allowed a medical assessment to be made.
I do not understand some peoples seemingly absolute refusal to believe he could have been suffering from MH illness.

atlantis · 30/12/2009 14:05

"1) I don't believe that"

hmm, you don't believe there was less crime in and before the 50's than there is now? Are we living on the same planet I wonder?

"2) I don't think you can know that"

It's called statistics, do you really need me to google it for you?

"3) 'Crime' was in any event categorised differently because laws were different. For example, there was probably much more 'crime' in the sense that committing 'homosexual acts' was a criminal offence."

I don't think homosexuals paraded their acts in the streets back then, but hey I guess I could be wrong they could have though, gee there's a law against this let's go have sex outside a police station for the hell of it?

atlantis · 30/12/2009 14:09

Morloth,

" I actually don't think this has much to do with this man and this crime TBH.

I think China just checked exactly what the UK was up for, and I think they found out.

None of this stuff matters, China is not going to change it laws to suit the West, they are a major world power and there is nothing a little country like the UK can do about it.

Something much bigger going on I think."

Couldn't agree more. Britain slates China over the global warming ( actually cooling but never mind) fiasco (because China are the big bad wolf) and blames it all on them and China decides to show it's contempt for this useless government by ignoring them and flipping them the bird. The Britain slates China for the execution and China sends out a very grim warning for Britain to shut up or put up. Quite frankly what is Brown going to do? Crawl back under his little rock again probably.

Bessie123 · 30/12/2009 14:17

  1. You obviously haven't given this much thought. I do not believe there was less crime before the 1950s than there is now.

  2. yes, please do google statistics, if you think it will support your argument

  3. men didn't need to be having sex outside a police station to be breaking the law, why don't you go and google the old legislation if you are so keen on search engines? It was only one example of laws people were breaking in any case, there are many more.

Ivykaty44 · 30/12/2009 15:41

There was more crime when uk had the death penitly - per population head, which id the crunch point as now the population is around 60 million mark.

There is more crime in Texas than other states in the US and Texas excecutes more prisoners than any other state.

If the death penalty worked you would see less crime in texas than any other state in the US and uk would be more crime by 34%

atlantis · 30/12/2009 16:26

Bessie

In 2008 the total number of 10-19 year olds violently killed was 72 are you telling me that more than 72 were killed in say 1951? 1952? because I would like to see your evidence of this.

Bessie123 · 30/12/2009 17:00

I thought you were googling the evidence?

Ivykaty44 · 30/12/2009 17:05

But you can not do statistics like that

You need to take the population in UK today

60 million and 72 murdered 10-19 year olds

Then take the population of the uk in 1951 which was 43 million then work out the percentage that would have been murdered to relate to the same % today.

VirginPeachyMotherOfSpod · 30/12/2009 17:09

There is evidence out there You'd need to compare with American stats though erally, otherwise all you'd get is a stat saying criome rose after the ending of the death penalty- what you need to know is whether crime would have still risen at that rate if there had been a DP, so you'd need a simialar-ish culture that maintains the DP.

We also know of plenty of cases where innocent people are convicted which IMO if they have been killed is as bad as a murder,more so perhaps. And DNA is not reliable enough to act as a guarantee as so many stories emerge about bad practice with storage etc.

Ultiamtely, I will never be happy with capital punishment: I believe it is inhumane and simply wrong to use. It creates victims and solves nothing that lifelong sentencing would not, whilst being irreversible in a way lifelong sentencing is not.

VirginPeachyMotherOfSpod · 30/12/2009 17:09

And yes Amnesty are biased: for IMO good humanitarian reasons.

Ivykaty44 · 30/12/2009 17:12

Interesting that there was more murder in 1900 than in 1970....

atlantis · 30/12/2009 17:15

"Then take the population of the uk in 1951 which was 43 million then work out the percentage that would have been murdered to relate to the same % today."

Ok maths girl I can't even get my head around that connundrum, any takers ?

atlantis · 30/12/2009 17:18

" You'd need to compare with American stats though erally"

I don't think you can compare the uk with america for many different reasons, socially and culturally we are still breeds apart and lets not forget america has always had the gun laws and they are allowed to defend their property so shooting burglars especially in southern states is practically a hobby.

VirginPeachyMotherOfSpod · 30/12/2009 17:26

You may well be right on America, which is why I qualified further on by mentioning similar culture; but the stats without that would genuinely be useless, all they would tell you is that crime rose- there would be no reallink able to be madewith ending of DP, it could as much be any other societalreason (and lets face it, there were many in that era). A rise oculd equally be due to changes in drinking and working cultures (more leisure time, or rises in female drinking in pubs)..... you could make a case for a lot of things using those stats tbh.