Ot - Death Penalty

[Romanis]

Dunno what's the fuss about us not objecting to the extradition of the 2 terrorists to the USA which could entail a death sentence.
I support the measure but am confused by the Home Secretary's actions or words.

If they are not UK citizens (their passports being revoked), then what's the fuss? It's no longer a matter for the UK.

If they are ( then why declare them forfeit of citizenship when revoking?)

Anyway they should face justice in a country capable of making the best possible case, in this instance the USA. And face the highest penalty for a series of heinous crimes.
But alas even that may take time. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is not even close to a trial let alone execution after 15 or so years in Guantanamo.

Besides this, perhaps this is the best time for discussion and possibly legislation on reintroducing the death penalty in the UK.
With brexit, surely we're no longer bound by EU law relating to death sentences.

Therefore this issue should also be put to the people after we leave. While it'll never be put to a vote of Corbyn comes to power. There may be other Labour leaders after him who might entertain the idea.

I believe it should be re-introduced in Law but left entirely to the prosecution whether to prefer it and then for a jury to decide whether to impose it.

Given the brutality and heinousness of some crimes, the option of this penalty should be made available in the pursuit of justice and punishment.
It should not be mandatory though but left to prosecutorial discretion and decision by a jury hearing the case.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Maybe VAR should be used to assist when considering the death penalty as well as other penalties. Although the South American judges would still get it wrong.

[Manofpride]

Now this is a discussion I can't put an agree or disagree to comment on. I cringe at the thought of what we have spent to keep the likes of Peter Sutcliffe and Ian Huntley alive. The deaths of all those women and and the two children and they get to live. Is it right to have spent all those millions to keep these deranged murderers alive or would it have been better to spend 50p on a bullet.

I would have said 50p on a bullet every time but there has been so many innocent victims that have been put to the sword that it makes it an almost impossible decision to make. But what does worry me is, we don't even have a proper deterrent to save guard us from these untouchables!

[MadAmster]

Derek Bentley. Mahmood Hussein Mattan. Timothy Evans. George Kelly.

All executed for murder in the 50s. Later proven innocent. Ask their descendents and possibly the descendents of those they didn't kill whether Capital Punishment should be brought back.

In the USA, since 1973, 151 people have been released from death rows throughout the country due to evidence of their wrongful convictions. In 2003 alone, 10 wrongfully convicted defendants were released from death row. Many more, already executed received pardons.

How many more are in prison or on death row for crimes they didn't commit?

One wrongful execution is, IMO, two too many.

It is for that reason that I am against it.

In cases where there is irrefutable video evidence of the crime, I might be for it but in these days where video can so easily be photoshopped I am no longer as clear cut on that as I once was........

[Manofpride]

Derek Bentley. Mahmood Hussein Mattan. Timothy Evans. George Kelly.

All executed for murder in the 50s. Later proven innocent. Ask their descendents and possibly the descendents of those they didn't kill whether Capital Punishment should be brought back.

In the USA, since 1973, 151 people have been released from death rows throughout the country due to evidence of their wrongful convictions. In 2003 alone, 10 wrongfully convicted defendants were released from death row. Many more, already executed received pardons.

How many more are in prison or on death row for crimes they didn't commit?

One wrongful execution is, IMO, two too many.

It is for that reason that I am against it.

In cases where there is irrefutable video evidence of the crime, I might be for it but in these days where video can so easily be photoshopped I am no longer as clear cut on that as I once was........

So are you saying you are for or against it?

[ramAnag]

Hard isn’t it? There are times when for those who spread terror by bombing concert halls, Christmas markets and shopping malls etc I feel like I’d willingly do the job myself, but it’s a fine line between doing that as a ‘terrorist’ and having the might of an Air Force to do much the same thing for you.
Similarly for the serial killers, child killers and rapists you can’t help thinking...why bother keeping them alive...but then MA has a point about wrongful execution.
Surprised you wouldn’t just hand it over to a referendum, MoP...sure the great British public would be happy to weigh it all up and come to a considered and balanced conclusion...as always.

[Salopian0]

Interestingly enough the family of one of those executed by this group of terrorists has said they do not wish the death penalty as this would make them martyrs.
As for MAs well put arguments as he says were in the 50s and before DNA evidence which at the moment is regarded irrefutable it seems.
With our judicial system m any crimes you would deem murder are downgraded to manslaughter for legal reasons so this may effect capital punishment requirements. Maybe one of our older generation could enlighten me as to what crimes were punishable by death back in the day

[Geoff Parkstone]

Going out at night with a blackened face or impersonating a Chelsea Pensioner to name but two. Consorting with gypsies for more than a month... the list is long. Over 200 capital crimes listed in the "Bloody Code" in the 19th century.

[Manofpride]

Surprised you wouldn’t just hand it over to a referendum, MoP...sure the great British public would be happy to weigh it all up and come to a considered and balanced conclusion...as always.

RA, I think it will be along time before the people of Britain will feel confident enough to want to vote again without a new system being put in place.

Can you really see the public in Britain wanting to vote knowing that the outcome will only be challenged by the losing party.

When the British people went out to vote and be heard they got the outcome they wanted, but we all know what followed that don't we.

The remainers have a lot to answer for, the good thing that will come out of this though is when we leave the EU we can go back to being patriotic and being called Great Britain again and once again being proud of that Lovely flag!

[ramAnag]

RA, I think it will be along time before the people of Britain will feel confident enough to want to vote again without a new system being put in place.

Can you really see the public in Britain wanting to vote knowing that the outcome will only be challenged by the losing party.

When the British people went out to vote and be heard they got the outcome they wanted, but we all know what followed that don't we.

The remainers have a lot to answer for, the good thing that will come out of this though is when we leave the EU we can go back to being patriotic and being called Great Britain again and once again being proud of that Lovely flag!

Ha, ha. But seriously, three points.
1. You surely have to recognise that for any referendum to have credibility the result has to represent a genuine majority of the electorate. Without that it has no claim to be a democratic result. With it there is no basis to any ‘challenge’.
2. Are all the people who make up the electorate capable of dealing with the complex issues that you have identified in relation to the death penalty let alone the financial complexities of Brexit?
3. Constitutionally we live in a Parliamentary Democracy...so why pass the most complex and controversial decisions back to the people who have already voted for their representatives?

As regards the death penalty, although I can imagine a scenario where action on the subject might become part of a Party manifesto, it is, imo, too complex and emotional a subject to be decided via a referendum.