Stabbing (tv programme)

Frank the tank

The other night. Absolutely shocking cctv footage of totally innocent people being attacked and MURDERED on British streets.

Time for a return of proper deterents I reckon. :evil:

fast as fupp

such as frank?

Frank the tank

I believe corporal and capital punishment should be on the statute book. Sentences are far too short and the prisons far too soft.

I know the death penalty will never return so in that case life should be life.

schmako

Britain is a sinking ship getting more overloaded with crap everyday.

downfader

Many people are generation, after generation, being raised into this selfish ideal. It starts with the children of children or of people who simply dont care. These kids start to grow up and dont know which way to turn, or right from wrong as no one is showing them.

Theres a girl at work, 16, got herself pregnant because she wanted a flat off the council and beleived she would be able to jump the queue. The child didnt stand a chance, but thankfully a strong mothering instinct from my work mates seems to have kicked in and mother skills seem to be being taught. Some dont seem to have that option - especially if they dont work.

These kids then get to their early teens, sometimes a lot earlier, and have no family structure and discipine. I saw a woman lean out her door a few weeks back and tell her kid "why dont you F*** OFF!" and push the child out the door. I suppose children look for rules and structure and gangs then provide that. Theres a heirachy where once mum and dad told them what to do, an older lad now takes them under his wing.

I do think theres a stage when you start to grow up, around 14 years and you begin the realise that somethings are not right to do. The papers have it on their front page after all, that should be a clue.

People also fear kids. I suppose thats the way its always been...

For the over 18s that get themselves caught doing this s*** I say tough. I agree life should be life. I do now feel swayed that the death sentance could be brought back. I never used to like the idea one bit but years on you have so many criminals that are sitting on their arse. Either make them a resourse (the victorians put them on treadmills and made them grind corn, for one, perhaps as I said before they could generate electricity in such a way).

There was a brilliant horizon documentary with Micheal Portillo a couple of years back about the death sentance. He found that the hypobaric chamber would be a good option, painless and gentle you just fall asleep and die feeling happy. Sadly places like the states wont invest as they do want the criminals to fear their death.

Sorry, I've gone off on a bit of a tangent. :oops:

-liam-

Missed this but out of some kind of morbid curiosity caused by the uproar following its screening I wanted to watch it. Nothing doing on the BBC I Player. Anyone else aware of any sources ?

fast as fupp

Frank the tank wrote:

I believe corporal and capital punishment should be on the statute book. Sentences are far too short and the prisons far too soft.

I know the death penalty will never return so in that case life should be life.

death penaly doesnt work- even pierrepoint came to that conclusion

Frank the tank

fast as fupp wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

I believe corporal and capital punishment should be on the statute book. Sentences are far too short and the prisons far too soft.

I know the death penalty will never return so in that case life should be life.

death penaly doesnt work- even pierrepoint came to that conclusion

Stops re-offending for sure.

Tranced

death penaly doesnt work- even pierrepoint came to that conclusion

It works 100%.
Removes the cancer from society permanently! The way it should be.

Bottom line in any society you may have 10% that'll never do crime, 80% that may be swayed if the chance presents itself & 10% that'll do crime no matter what. Death penalty will not disuade them, but neither will wasted attempts at rehabilitation.

The object is to persuad the 80%, that it's better not committing crime.
In order to do that there are 2 scales:
0 to 100 chance of getting caught.
0 to 100 intencity of punnishment.

If law enforcement provides for a 90% chance of getting caught & the punishment is death, you probably only have 2% of the 80% that'll still take the chance.

On the other hand, if law enforcement only presents a 5% chance of catching the offender & a fine for the crime, a far greater % of the 80% will be tempted if the opportunity comes along.

In order to disuade the majority of the 80% from crime, both scales need to be as high as possible. Simple equation.

I've watched a country, over the last 15-20 years, lose almost all ability within law enforcement to capture a criminal. At the same time I have watched the political will to provide for either improved law enforcement hit rock bottom and at the same time watched punishments become a laughting stock. Prisoners are better off in jail than outside & commit crimes again on their release day just to get back into prison.

The same country is in the process of amending parlimentary law to allow offenders of crimes that carry more than 12 months jail sentence become menbers of parliment just to get votes.

Sound extreme...??? It's a CANCER!!! Creeps up under the veil of goodwill & kills! Crime & especially violent crime needs to be dealt with properly & permanently! It's not you or your future at stake.... it's the future of your children that is endangered through gently gently policy of dealing with criminals.

What is the legacy you want to leave them??? A safe society in which to live or a life behind high walls, security fences & armed security guards outside their houses.

Yep...20 years ago, the "high walls, security fences & armed security guards outside their houses" weren't even a thought in said country either!

I know.... I was a cop there.
There are now (published) 55000 murders a year & over a rape/ sexual assault estimated at every 30 seconds!
There is no turning back from that.

fast as fupp

[/quote] It works 100%.
Removes the cancer from society permanently! The way it should be.

Bottom line in any society you may have 10% that'll never do crime, 80% that may be swayed if the chance presents itself & 10% that'll do crime no matter what. Death penalty will not disuade them, but neither will wasted attempts at rehabilitation.

The object is to persuad the 80%, that it's better not committing crime.
In order to do that there are 2 scales:
0 to 100 chance of getting caught.
0 to 100 intencity of punnishment.

If law enforcement provides for a 90% chance of getting caught & the punishment is death, you probably only have 2% of the 80% that'll still take the chance.

On the other hand, if law enforcement only presents a 5% chance of catching the offender & a fine for the crime, a far greater % of the 80% will be tempted if the opportunity comes along.

In order to disuade the majority of the 80% from crime, both scales need to be as high as possible. Simple equation.

I've watched a country, over the last 15-20 years, lose almost all ability within law enforcement to capture a criminal. At the same time I have watched the political will to provide for either improved law enforcement hit rock bottom and at the same time watched punishments become a laughting stock. Prisoners are better off in jail than outside & commit crimes again on their release day just to get back into prison.

The same country is in the process of amending parlimentary law to allow offenders of crimes that carry more than 12 months jail sentence become menbers of parliment just to get votes.

Sound extreme...??? It's a CANCER!!! Creeps up under the veil of goodwill & kills! Crime & especially violent crime needs to be dealt with properly & permanently! It's not you or your future at stake.... it's the future of your children that is endangered through gently gently policy of dealing with criminals.

What is the legacy you want to leave them??? A safe society in which to live or a life behind high walls, security fences & armed security guards outside their houses.

Yep...20 years ago, the "high walls, security fences & armed security guards outside their houses" weren't even a thought in said country either!

I know.... I was a cop there.
There are now (published) 55000 murders a year & over a rape/ sexual assault estimated at every 30 seconds!
There is no turning back from that.[/quote]

good lord!

you sound like john wayne

what police force were you in- the S.S.?

spen666

Frank the tank wrote:

fast as fupp wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

I believe corporal and capital punishment should be on the statute book. Sentences are far too short and the prisons far too soft.

I know the death penalty will never return so in that case life should be life.

death penaly doesnt work- even pierrepoint came to that conclusion

Stops re-offending for sure.

and for the wrongfully convicted?.........


When you volunteer yourself to face the gallows even though you are innocent, then I might listen to you. Too many people are wrongly convicted...



Or how can you sayto someone convicted of murder that killing is wrong, so therefore we are going to KILL you... A tad contradictory is it not?

graeme_s-2

Your suggestion that 80% of the population want to commit crime, but will only refrain from doing so if they fear capture and punishment was pretty outrageous, but I think you finally lost all credibility with this little gem:

Tranced wrote:

It's not you or your future at stake.... it's the future of your children that is endangered through gently gently policy of dealing with criminals.

Frank the tank

spen666 wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

fast as fupp wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

I believe corporal and capital punishment should be on the statute book. Sentences are far too short and the prisons far too soft.

I know the death penalty will never return so in that case life should be life.

death penaly doesnt work- even pierrepoint came to that conclusion

Stops re-offending for sure.

and for the wrongfully convicted?.........


When you volunteer yourself to face the gallows even though you are innocent, then I might listen to you. Too many people are wrongly convicted...



Or how can you sayto someone convicted of murder that killing is wrong, so therefore we are going to KILL you... A tad contradictory is it not?

You can look on the death penalty as murder by the state. But murder victims have no choice in their fate whereas if the death penalty was on the statute book, it could be looked on as someone in effect commiting suicide as they would know if they were to be aprehended and convicted they would be put to death.

Bit of a perverse way of looking at I suppose.

One avenue we've not touched on is, the death penalty is not just about it's deterant value it's also about retribution/revenge, ugly but true.

spen666

Frank the tank wrote:

...

and for the wrongfully convicted?.........


When you volunteer yourself to face the gallows even though you are innocent, then I might listen to you. Too many people are wrongly convicted...



Or how can you sayto someone convicted of murder that killing is wrong, so therefore we are going to KILL you... A tad contradictory is it not?

You can look on the death penalty as murder by the state. But murder victims have no choice in their fate whereas if the death penalty was on the statute book, it could be looked on as someone in effect commiting suicide as they would know if they were to be aprehended and convicted they would be put to death.

Bit of a perverse way of looking at I suppose.

One avenue we've not touched on is, the death penalty is not just about it's deterant value it's also about retribution/revenge, ugly but true.[/quote]


And the wrongfully convicted and executed have what choice exactly?

Notice you avoid thisd and also avoid offering yourself as the first to be wrongfully executed

Tranced

Flamers delight....
I shared my opinion,. One which I am quite entitled to have.
You're welcome to have & to share your own.
Personal attacks are unnecessary & merely show up intolerant attitude for people with ideas differing from yours.

There is obviously no one size fits all (Noose or otherwise) solution to this question. Clearly somebody accidently killing someone in a car accident cannot be treated the same as someone who has premeditated, planned & murdered with intent!
That should not need to be spelled out.

Members of my family were attacked in their home.

I won’t describe here what was done to them for hours with boiling water, knitting needles, welding machines, kitchen knives, & various other implements of torture that came to hand.
I have immediate close friends attacked in their home, parents of a 5 month old baby, bound with barbed fencing wire & their teeth removed one by one whilst the robbers were demanding money which they did not have at home. At the same time other members of the gang were throwing the baby up & down the passage. That was just the start of a whole night of torture they had to endure.

These are the criminals to which I refer. Nobody believed this sort of thing could/ would happen 20 years ago in that city either.

I can run through more examples, but I doubt even more will change opinions that are set in stone. So be it. I’ll not knock you for having your opinion.
All I ask is the same be chance afforded to me.

And yes, people are wrongly convicted. It has happened. But where there is ANY doubt, the sentence should reflect that too. That is such a blatantly obvious point I didn’t think it even needed mentioning.…

There is an alternative… make a life sentence, a LIFE sentence. Not call it life, but it’s actually 12 years & out in 6 for good behaviour (sic). Opponents of this will ask why money that can be used for hospitals, cancer treatment, food for the poor etc. has to be used to keep these criminals in prison. That’s another whole debate.

So if the need exists go wild… flame away. But at least try & keep it subject based & not personal.

And for those that are bound to come back with the fact that I refer only to other experiences… I’ve experienced first hand too. Why should I now have to volunteer to be executed as well? I didn’t volunteer the first 3 times they tried ….


BTW... nowhere did I say "80% of the population want to commit crime", I tried to explain that there was a portion of society that MAY be tempted commit crime if the opportunity presented itseltf & that for some of those, if not most... if the chance of capture & the penalty was high enough.... would choose rather not to take the risk & thus would not commit the crime.

spen666

Tranced wrote:

.....
And yes, people are wrongly convicted. It has happened. But where there is ANY doubt, the sentence should reflect that too. That is such a blatantly obvious point I didn’t think it even needed mentioning.…

.....

To be convicted, a jury has to be "sure as to be certain" that accused is guilty or put another way- beyond all reasonable doubt.

Here in a 2 second internet search is a list of a few of those wrongly convicted and cleared later


Sheila Bowler
4 years
Carol Hanson
27 years
Peter Fell
17 years
Birmingham Six
16 years
M25 Three
10 years
Ryan James
3 years
Bridgewater Four
17 years
Judith Ward
18 years


Danny McNamee
11 years
Guildford Four
15 years
Patrick Nicholls
23 years
Derek Bentley
Hanged in 1953
Stefan Kiszko
16 years

Robert Haughton
6 years
Ashley King
14 years
Trevor Campbell
14 years
Kevin Callan
4 years



Derek Treadaway
9 years
Johnny Kamara
20 years
Keith Twitchell
12 years
George Long
16 years

Mary Druhan
10 years
Andrew Evans
25 years
Jonathan Jones
2 1/2 years
Andrew Smith
22 years



Gurnos Three
3-4 years
Eddie Browning
6 years
Maguire Seven
10 years
John Roberts
15 years

George Lewis
5 years
Patricia Bass
3 years
Cardiff Newsagent
Three
11 years
Mark Cleary
9 years
Iain Hay Gordon
7 years
Trevor McCalla
18 mths + remand
Roy Burnett
15 years
Timothy Evans
Hanged in 1950
Cardiff Three
4 years
John McGranaghan
10 years
Richard Karling
6 years
Alexander Hall
11 years
James Hanratty
Hanged in 1962
Colin Wallace
6 years
Wayne & Paul
Darvell
7 years
Hussein Mattan
Hanged in 1952


Terry Pinfold / Harry Mackenney
22-year wait for redemption
Christopher Hagans / John Wilson
Spent nine years in prison as a consequence of wrongdoing by police officers
Gary Mills / Tony Poole
Served 14 years before convictions overturned
Mark Dallagher
Served 7 years before charges formally dropped following re-trial
Angela Cannings
Served nearly 2 years before convictions quashed
Trevor Wickens
Incarcerated for thirteen and a half years before conviction declared unsafe
George Kelly
Hanged in 1950
Reg Dudley / Bob Maynard
Both served around twenty-five years before being released and later saw their convictions quashed
Michael McMahon / David Cooper
Both men served 10 years in prison before being released; sadly neither lived to see his name cleared.
Michael Shirley
Spent 16 years in prison for a crime the court of appeal admitted he could not have committed.
Sally Clark
Conviction quashed after 3 years in jail.
Erkin Guney
Conviction quashed after 7 years in jail.
Michael Lawson / Basil Rigby-Williams
The two men spent three years in prison after being convicted of sexual abuse - crimes it later transpired had never happened.
Hasham Shah
Spent 18 months in prison. Found guilty of committing a gay sex attack although he (a hererosexual) had been attacked at knifepoint by his supposed victim.
Robert Brown
Conviction quashed after 25 years in jail.
Frank Johnson
Conviction quashed after 26 years in jail.
Dudley Higgins
Conviction quashed on appeal.
Patrick Irvine
Conviction quashed after serving 11 years and 9 years after his release on licence.
John Brannan/Bernard Murphy
Convictions quashed after ten years.
Stephen Downing
Spent 27 years (!) in prison before his conviction was finally quashed.
Roger Beardmore
Conviction quashed three years after false rape accusations.
Donald Pendleton
Conviction quashed by the law lords after 15 years.
Alex Allan
Conviction quashed after student lawyers took up his case.
John Hemphill
Conviction quashed by the Scottish court of appeal after he had served six years.
Joseph Otoo
Aged 17 when convicted, Joseph Otoo served three years of a 7-year sentence before his conviction was quashed.
Kevin Martin, Michael Brown, Anthony Taylor
Cleared by the Court of Appeal 5 years into a ten-year sentence for armed robbery after being convicted on the basis of evidence planted by corrupt police officers.
Serena Kayretli
Cleared by the Court of Appeal after spending one and a half years in prison.
Mohammed Yusef Patel
Cleared by the Court of Appeal 13 years after serving 28 months of a 4-year sentence.
James Reith
Two years for "rape".
Michelle & Lisa Taylor
Convictions quashed following "sensationalist" reporting.
John Woodruff and William Hickson
Served two years in prison after having a gun "planted" on them by corrupt police officers.
John McLoughlin
Cleared by the Court of Appeal almost 10 years after being convicted of sex offences.
Gary Shaffi, David Noble, Craig Lane, Michael Beadle
Acquitted on appeal of the murder, nearly three years earlier, of a pensioner. Michael Beadle died while serving his life sentence.
Philip English
Philip English, whose conviction for the murder of Sergeant Bill Forth in Gateshead was later overturned by the Court of Appeal. Mr English was 100 yards away in handcuffs when a police officer was stabbed by Paul Weddle, but he was sentenced to life imprisonment under the law of 'joint enterprise'.
George McPhee

Cleared after serving 16 years for murder



Bentley, Evans, Hanratty, Mattan & Kelly were actually executed but were not guilty of the crimes they were accused of and have been cleared in a court of law since then.

What do you say to all these people's familes- whooops mistakes happen?

Tranced

spen666,
This is clearly not about what I would say to anyone... I've stated & explained my beliefs & reasoning’s. Purely as part of a thread & as part of the conversation.
I'm not trying to or even suggesting that anyone should even consider changing their thoughts on the subject.
It appears you are clearly against. That's fine & I respect your opinion & your right to have your own opinion.
I'm not going to get into a tit for tat right or wrong argument about the merits or lack there of this penalty. I see the forum a a sharing point for various & sometimes opposing views.
I've shared mine, you've shared yours, as have a few others. Great. Sharing of differing ideas is all part of free society. It doesn't mean we all have to agree. Doesn't even mean that the majority are necessary correct. It certainly does not mean that all shared ideas/ beliefs are popular, but it’s nice to know that people are willing to tolerate if not embrace diversity.
Thanks for sharing.

spen666

Tranced wrote:

spen666,
This is clearly not about what I would say to anyone... I've stated & explained my beliefs & reasoning’s. Purely as part of a thread & as part of the conversation.
I'm not trying to or even suggesting that anyone should even consider changing their thoughts on the subject.
It appears you are clearly against. That's fine & I respect your opinion & your right to have your own opinion.
I'm not going to get into a tit for tat right or wrong argument about the merits or lack there of this penalty. I see the forum a a sharing point for various & sometimes opposing views.
I've shared mine, you've shared yours, as have a few others. Great. Sharing of differing ideas is all part of free society. It doesn't mean we all have to agree. Doesn't even mean that the majority are necessary correct. It certainly does not mean that all shared ideas/ beliefs are popular, but it’s nice to know that people are willing to tolerate if not embrace diversity.
Thanks for sharing.

So what do you say to the familes of those wrongly executed?
Whoops sorry mistakes can happen?

Tranced

Guess the same as you would say to the mother of a 6 yr old daughter, raped & mutilated by a 3 times offender released on "good behaviour" after spending only 6 yrs in prison, because the families of the previously murdered victims, could not afford legal council to assist in their petition to keep the criminal in jail. Whilst the criminal gets free legal assistance.

Oops, sorry, guess the system isn't 100% perfect.

There is no fool proof system in anything in life. We have but to decide for ourselves what is the best/ most acceptable solution that we as individuals can life with.
You & I seem to have quite some gap, between what we can each "live with" as far as beliefs go. Well on this subject anyway.
That's why we have legal systems/ processes to determine the framework within which we live. i.e. why you & I are not the sole deciders the fate of criminals. Hopefully these systems provide a happy medium.
Doesn't mean that we can't still each have our own opinion about it.

spen666

Tranced wrote:

Guess the same as you would say to the mother of a 6 yr old daughter, raped & mutilated by a 3 times offender released on "good behaviour" after spending only 6 yrs in prison, because the families of the previously murdered victims, could not afford legal council to assist in their petition to keep the criminal in jail. Whilst the criminal gets free legal assistance.

Oops, sorry, guess the system isn't 100% perfect....

Take this approach and you'd better report to prison immediately in case you might commit a crime. We'd have to all be locked up


Remember in this country it is a presumption of innocence.


I am prepared to take the risk of someone re offending?

Are you prepared to risk your life or your family's life being wrongly ended by the state killing you or them>

Incidentally how is it wrong to kill, so the state will kill you? A tad contradictory is it not

Tranced

Are you prepared to risk your life or your family's life being wrongly ended by the state killing you or them>

There again, I feel, irrelevant to the bigger picture. Same as "am I prepared to risk my or my families life to a too lenient penal system". It becomes a tit for tat arguement with win or lose purpose. I'm not trying to convince you or anyone to change your idea. Just shared mine for sharing sake.

Nor do I actually have any choice in the matter after all, so it's all just my humble take on it.

[/quote]Incidentally how is it wrong to kill, so the state will kill you? A tad contradictory is it not

Only if you live in a country like this where it is frowned upon. In some countries it's perfectly acceptable and the norm. (Don't bother going down the route of critisizing other countries and their "eye for an eye" beliefs etc..)

By the same "contradictory" arguement, so a kidnapper/ abductor that deprives their victim of their freedom, should not be sent to prison & be deprived of their freedom????

No sir, it's only a "contradictory" issue at all because that's the current state of the law as a result of current morals/ norms etc. 100 years ago things were very different. 100 years from now, things may again be very different.

If we can use jail as a punnishment/ means to remove criminals from society because current values/ etc say that's OK, it does not mean that the "current values/ etc" are right. It just what we have.

Just like many say today that death penalty is wrong & barbaric, so we say that electro shock therapy is wrong & barbaric and in years to come they may say imprisoning criminals was inhumane. They may just as easity decide because of the absolute inability to control crime worldwide that there is actually only one solution.

It's all speculation within another realm.

spen666

Tranced wrote:

[.....
Nor do I actually have any choice in the matter after all, so it's all just my humble take on it.
....

You are so very wrong with this opinion.

You do have choice in this matter, whether via the ballet box and or by expressing your views, you help to shapwe the agenda in this country.

Taking such a view as that expressed is how countries/ councils or other bodies end up being controlled by a few extremists.

Your views re capital punishment may be abhorrent to me, but don't think your views don't matter

Tranced

Your views re capital punishment may be abhorrent to me, but don't think your views don't matter

I appreciate this sentiment & I agree with you, that I have have the vote to make use of & in all honesty I can say that I do my share and cast a vote whenever the opportunity arrises. I do not feel justified in having a winge about something if I didn't at very least bother to have my say when the chance was presented.

The only niggle is in that no politicaly party in the "western world" that I am aware of (I may be wrong) has on it's agenda, the reintroduction of the DP. Even in USA where it is still carried out, the parties do not use it as a fighting point. It's kind of a unwriten agreement.

Now, were there a refferendum on the matter, well... it'll never happen. So it remains just my opinion & in reality, my single vote can make a difference, but probably not in this issue.

I will as a result do what ever I can to continue being a law abiding citizen & raising my family to respect the law & above all, have respect for themselves & others. To do unto others as they would have done unto themselves & hopefully they'll never be in a position to be a victim on either side of this arguement.

I have enjoyed this thread today. Probably haven't done quite as much work as I had intended, but leaving now for matters pleasent & family orientated.
I bid all the viewers & spen666 as happy & safe evening.

Frank the tank

I believe Capital punishment should be an option. Each case has to be taken on it's merits.

The cctv footage I saw which initiated this thread, there was no doubt what-so-ever who the guilty parties were and as such they should face the ultimate penalty. In a totally unprovoked attack two people were stabbed one of them fatally.

Had Micheal Ryan (Hungerford) not had the decency to "top himself" the tax payer would have had to pay the cost of a needless trial and then for his upkeep for the rest of his natural.

RockyHopperShow

Spen, I normally agree with you but here:-

"Incidentally how is it wrong to kill, so the state will kill you? A tad contradictory is it not"

...I don't. Let's phrase that slightly differently. How about "You have unlawfully killed an innocent person, now we are going to lawfully kill a guilty one"?

Your examples of innocent victims of the DP are flawed too. Someone was always going to hang for the murder of PC Miles. It should have been Christopher Craig but he was too young so it fell to Derek Bentley to take the punishment (wrongly, I agree). There was no issue with the evidence (other than what Bentley shouted to Craig) as both were caught at the scene of the crime. PC Miles was dead and somebody had to pay, pure and simple. They were different times, and the Government were worried about escalating violence in the post-war period. An example was to be made.
James Hanratty, on the other hand, was found (using modern DNA evidence) to be very much guilty of the A6 murders.

spen666

RockyHopperShow wrote:

Spen, I normally agree with you but here:-

"Incidentally how is it wrong to kill, so the state will kill you? A tad contradictory is it not"

...I don't. Let's phrase that slightly differently. How about "You have unlawfully killed an innocent person, now we are going to lawfully kill a guilty one"?

Youreally have not thoughtr about this have you? Who decideds that one killing is lawful and one is not? Yes that's right- one of the killers ie the state.

Its a bit like me assaulting you and saying its lawful but when you assault me back, my claiming your assault is unlawful. That is nonsense and it is the same in your example- one of the killers condeming killing by others but justifying it by itself

Lets start again ignoring the self serving use of words lawful and unlawful.

"Incidentally how is it wrong to kill, so the state will kill you? A tad contradictory is it not"

If killing is so wrong, then it is wrong. not it is wrong except when we do it

Your examples of innocent victims of the DP are flawed too. Someone was always going to hang for the murder of PC Miles. It should have been Christopher Craig but he was too young so it fell to Derek Bentley to take the punishment (wrongly, I agree). There was no issue with the evidence (other than what Bentley shouted to Craig) as both were caught at the scene of the crime. PC Miles was dead and somebody had to pay, pure and simple. They were different times, and the Government were worried about escalating violence in the post-war period. An example was to be made.

Erm you tell that to Bentley's family. The fact is a man was hung for a crime he did not commit. The example is not flawed. It is a matter of record
1. Bentley was hung

2. Bentley has subsequently been cleared by the Court of Appeal of the offence for which he was hung



Therefore the example is not flawed at all. It is exactly what I said it was- an example of someone being hung for a crime they did not commit

Making an example of the wrong person doesn't make it any less of a killing of a person who was did not commit the crime he was hung for

James Hanratty, on the other hand, was found (using modern DNA evidence) to be very much guilty of the A6 murders.

Re Hanratty- the case is not as clear as you make out. I don'twantto divert this thread off from the subject, but the DNA evidence is very much disputed and I think this is a case that will continue to "run".

spen666

Frank the tank wrote:

I believe Capital punishment should be an option. Each case has to be taken on it's merits.

The cctv footage I saw which initiated this thread, there was no doubt what-so-ever who the guilty parties were and as such they should face the ultimate penalty. In a totally unprovoked attack two people were stabbed one of them fatally.

Had Micheal Ryan (Hungerford) not had the decency to "top himself" the tax payer would have had to pay the cost of a needless trial and then for his upkeep for the rest of his natural.

So Frank, what about all those wrongly convicted people that you would be executing?

Whooops sorry mistakes happen?


What about the contradiction in the position of the state saying killing is so wrong we are going tokill you?



What about the fact that Juries in many cases won't convict of murder if they know it may lead to the accused being given the death penalty? Thus murderers get away or get convicted of non capital crimes?

Frank the tank

There will always be mis-carriages of justice. It would be truley terrible for anyone to be executed wrongly. I think there would be less crime if corpral and capital punishment were at the judges disposal, therefore less chance of a wrongful conviction.

The judge would have to make the decision on whether a convicted criminal was to face the ultimate penalty.

The problem in society at the moment too many totally innocent people are being murdered by others who know they'll be out of prison sooner rather than later even if captured and convicted.

Also it's also emotive when someone kicks/stabs someone to death and they get charged with manslaughter and walk away with a 2-3 year sentence, leaving the family of the victim feeling what??????

heftyrider

I don't really know where I stand on this issue.

1. I don't agree with organised execution, however if it was someone close to me that had been the victim I'd want revenge.

2. the process in USA doesn't seem to be a detterent, seems to just cause more misery for everyone involved

3. Our system needs to be tougher, many criminals not receiveing punishments that actually punish them or deter from future, i have friends in police that see the same offenders almost daily and can't do anything. Prison does not reabilitate, possibly does exactly the opposite and costs a fortune for the state.

I've seen similar incidents (no where near as serious as discribed in OP) where little boys have attacked people for no reason, the worry is if I intervene I leave myself open as these little S**ts will more than happily complain to police about a black eye - this is then a problem as a largish man with small 16 year olds pointing finger and unlike them I have things to lose (job etc). These little assholes know that nothing can really be done to them by the law, they also know if anyone reacts and gives them a kicking they'll get the innocent person arrested.

spen666

Frank the tank wrote:

There will always be mis-carriages of justice. It would be truley terrible for anyone to be executed wrongly. I think there would be less crime if corpral and capital punishment were at the judges disposal, therefore less chance of a wrongful conviction.

Why people don't commit murder thinking they wont get much of a sentence, they commit it thinking they wont get caught.


There is a huge distinction between the two. It might be different for lesser offences where you know if caught pinching sweets off pick n mix you wont get much of a punishment.

However, who is going to want to spend a minimum of 15 years of their life in prision for murder thinking it is only a short sentence?

The judge would have to make the decision on whether a convicted criminal was to face the ultimate penalty.

as in the famous example of the Guildford 4 when the Judge told them if still had the death penalty he would have passed it, but some 16 or so years later they were acqquitted.

Great safety net that was eh?

Great safety net to young Mr Bentley or others




You seem to want to move away from the presumption of benefit of doubt being given to individual against the state. This paves the way for more state control either in marxist type way or in dictatorship type way.

Cherish your freedoms, don't throw them away

The problem in society at the moment too many totally innocent people are being murdered by others who know they'll be out of prison sooner rather than later even if captured and convicted.

so the solution to the failure of the state to impose sentences that are sufficiently ( in your view) lengthy is to make the individual pay with his life. Seems like a rewarding of state inefficiency by punishing the individual


By all means impose sufficiently long sentences-, but that is no argument for the death penalty

Also it's also emotive when someone kicks/stabs someone to death and they get charged with manslaughter and walk away with a 2-3 year sentence, leaving the family of the victim feeling what??????

Now you hit on a very interesting issue. it is the JURY who return the verdict after a trial. They decide the defendant is guilty of manslaughter not murder- they are 12 members of the public who have heard the facts, not the lawyers or judges etc
It is very rare the CPS wont run a murder trial and run only on manslaughter.


To drag this slightly off topic. Remember Tony Martin who shot the burlar dead and was jailed. A wrong use of the law?
It was a jury of members of the public who convicted him of murder. It was the Court of Appeal who reduced the offence to manslaughter. The public trying the case thought, contrary to the tabloid press that it was murder

spen666

heftyrider wrote:

I ... Prison does not reabilitate, .....

Should prison

a) rehabilitate

b) simply keep offenders off the streets for a while


or c) both?



In order to have chance to rehabilitate, the argument is they authorities need sufficient time to work with offenders. Thus short sentences are pointless


I'm not sure that such a simplistic view is appropriate. A counter to it could be that after your sentence there is a compulsory "probation" period when offender must work with authorities or face being convicted of a new offence of failing to comply and facing a further prison term with "probation" period after it