Views on capital punishment - Page 2

Tealeaf · 30-07-2010, 17:38

There is another problem with the death penalty which has so far been missed and that is the Jury system. Just to take a sample of people from this forum - about two thirds of the contributors on here are level headed and sensible. One third, however are comprised of liberal do-gooders, crackpot conspiracy theorists, animal lovers and every other type of nutter you care to name.

Now, take this forum as a fair reflection of society; jury selection is based on the same. What would happen, say, if you were to get some child murderer or Islamic terror bomber up at Preston Crown Court, all evidence presented - including DNA - with the obvious verdict being guilty? The sentence is death by stringing up.

You can be dam sure that 8 or so of the jury will go for 'guilty', in the knowledge that the guilty party will hang. You can also be dam sure that 3 or 4 will go for 'not guilty' - not because they doubt his guilt - but because they believe the death penalty is somehow wrong. Result? Retrial. Retrial result? Retrial..and so on.

The only solution is to bring back hanging, trial by judges only.

kikine · 30-07-2010, 18:04

My vote is no! Life should mean life but our justice system is too flawed, even with DNA.
If only one person is wrongly executed then it can never be. People in America on death row are executed when politicians need votes. The last one that I know of was David Lee Palmer who spent 32 years on death row 15.6.2010. The next one is Troy Davis whose conviction is quesitonable by far. Death as we all know is irrevesible and sorry is not enough. Bread and water, shackled and chained by all means but death, Never.

Tealeaf · 30-07-2010, 18:17

..see what I mean about the bleeding-heart liberals.

cashman · 30-07-2010, 18:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

..see what I mean about the bleeding-heart liberals.

Yep spot on T.

kikine · 30-07-2010, 18:29

Ha Ha.... been called many things but never liberal am quite flattered. What if they are NOT GUILTY and your son, daughter, mother, father, are up on charges of murder? what about the woman jailed wrongly for killing her babies (can't just remember her name but since died) was exonerrated on wrong scientific evidence and released along with others.She would have been hanged years ago with an audience booing and jeering. What would we say Sorry..... we got the wrong person?

cashman · 30-07-2010, 18:38

that was before the advances wi D.N.A. which in many instances, is not even needed, wi those who are caught Bang to Rights, before that advance i would have voted No, but with millions-1 odds, its as good as ya can get.

Tealeaf · 30-07-2010, 18:46

I am sick and tired of reading of so-called innocent parties who have been hung after a guilty verdict. The cause celebre of the lot was Hanratty...numerous books were written about him, documentaries made and the law was changed to abolish hanging. Then guess what happened? DNA came along, his body was exumed and lo and behold! Guilty as charged.

There may well have been the occaisional innocent party referred to the gallows but one thing is for sure that while capital punishment existed in this country the murder and manslaughter rate was substancially less than what we have now, by a significant factor. Not only that - since it's replacement by penal servitude -the number of innocent people killed by prior murderers released after finishing sentance is now well into the hundreds. So get real and do the numbers - if you want to save innocent people, hang the guilty.

kikine · 30-07-2010, 19:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

I am sick and tired of reading of so-called innocent parties who have been hung after a guilty verdict. The cause celebre of the lot was Hanratty...numerous books were written about him, documentaries made and the law was changed to abolish hanging. Then guess what happened? DNA came along, his body was exumed and lo and behold! Guilty as charged.

There may well have been the occaisional innocent party referred to the gallows but one thing is for sure that while capital punishment existed in this country the murder and manslaughter rate was substancially less than what we have now, by a significant factor. Not only that - since it's replacement by penal servitude -the number of innocent people killed by prior murderers released after finishing sentance is now well into the hundreds. So get real and do the numbers - if you want to save innocent people, hang the guilty.

That 'occasional innocent party' was indeed an innocent party! I rest my case!

If you believe that DNA is proof of guilt, dream on they said that about fingerprints. DNA will only be good until the next scientific developement, even the man who discovered it said it could only be 1% of a conviction.

DaveinGermany · 30-07-2010, 20:50

It is still on the Military books for acts of desertion, while in an operational environment or under orders to deploy on ops, although it is never likely to be used in these "modern enlightened times" as shown by the handling of Joseph Glenton august 2009.

Mancie · 31-07-2010, 00:02

There's been many a time when I've read reports on some murders that I would have gladly carried out the death penalty in person!..but if the death penalty is a deterrent then I don't think it works, if it is a punishment then maybe, but personally speaking if I committed murder I would rather be topped than spend life in prison.
The not so recent use of DNA evidence is not always a factor... DNA profiling was around when Barry George was convicted of killing Jill Dando without any DNA or any other real evidence, and the bloke was not guilty... miscarriages of justice will still happen.. and to my mind anyone receiving the death penalty for something they have not done is as dreadful as the original crime.

ossygaz123 · 31-07-2010, 01:14

Sorry about any confusion with the poll. Were I put more evidence needed it is meant in a way that the police would have to have clear and obvious evidence that a person had commuted the crime....it's good to hear your views and opinions on the matter

Eric · 31-07-2010, 01:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Probably the killer posing for CCTV cameras while pulling the trigger cashy

DNA didn't do it in the trial of O. J. Simpson .... and the video evidence didn't do it in the Rodney King case. Which leads one to think that if you are rich and famous enough, or a member of the LAPD, you can get away with just about anything. So, those who do go to the chair or whatever will be those who are without money or influence.

I've already expressed my views on this subject in other threads, so, I'll just vote.

Eric · 31-07-2010, 01:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

..see what I mean about the bleeding-heart liberals.

If bleeding heart liberals, an empty generalization if ever I heard one, are those who believe that innocent people should not suffer life imprisonment or the death penalty, count me in. David Milgaard spent 23 years in Kingston Pen for a murder he didn't commit ... Guy Paul Morin, 8 years for the rape and murder of a six-year-old girl, a crime he didn't commit .... one can go on. And have any of the hang 'em high crew thought about the other consequences of convicting the wrong person: for starters, while they are cheering the death of the one convicted, the real killer is still on the loose, ready to kill again.

Eric · 31-07-2010, 01:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mancie

There's been many a time when I've read reports on some murders that I would have gladly carried out the death penalty in person!..but if the death penalty is a deterrent then I don't think it works, if it is a punishment then maybe, but personally speaking if I committed murder I would rather be topped than spend life in prison.
The not so recent use of DNA evidence is not always a factor... DNA profiling was around when Barry George was convicted of killing Jill Dando without any DNA or any other real evidence, and the bloke was not guilty... miscarriages of justice will still happen.. and to my mind anyone receiving the death penalty for something they have not done is as dreadful as the original crime.

Tend to agree ... esp. on the deterrent bit. If the death penalty were a deterrent, then shouldn't the murder rate in the US be real low, instead of through the roof

When the leading cause of death among young black males in the US is homicide, then some serious questions need to be addressed. And those questions have nothing to do with the death penalty. Maybe we should be asking why the guys who fill the jails, in all western countries, and the electric chairs in the US all seem to be mostly poor?

Mancie · 31-07-2010, 03:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveinGermany

It is still on the Military books for acts of desertion, while in an operational environment or under orders to deploy on ops, although it is never likely to be used in these "modern enlightened times" as shown by the handling of Joseph Glenton august 2009.

And in "these modern times" the only soldiers to be shot dead is for cowardice. in the first war. no one has ever got the death penalty for killing children in Vietnam.. the only one to get the death penalty in Iraq was Saddam.. no DNA involved and not needed....if or when a nation or government take the step to introduce the death penalty .. they exclude themselves from the modern world.