I watched and as Ghost said, the guy who killed twe people when he was 13 seems to be a decent guy and have been harshly dealt with but then they didnt mention exactly how he killed these people and maybe he is a schizo, maybe just a good actor, who knows. Also, remember how we all feel when we hear about James Bulgers killers being released and helped to get back in the community. As that crime so very different? I am not sure there can be hard and fast rules that cover everything and the death penalty is obviously not a working deterrent. It was very good TV but an extremely hard issue to handle correctly as proved by our UK sysytem which certainly gets it wrong too often.
justice is a double edged sword. You have to have hard fast rules, which apply in 100% of occasions. Then you need judges wise enough with the correct tools to be ale to set aside on an individual basis. Alas both seem all to often not to exist.
We do seem very keen on this death penalty debate. We've had it a few times now. Not sure how many new things we are likely to add.
I watched it and was amazed how long they are on death row, for some it was for years. Also some of them had tv's, game consoles etc. I wonder how much the tax payer pays for these to be kept in such comfortable surroundings for years on end when if they have been sentenced to death it should be done immediately. Some might think that's harsh, but when they have planned to kill somebody or some people did they have a chance to have a say in the matter....no their life was taken from them immediately.
I was merely quoting someone who was an eminent member of the legal profession. If someone stops to think then I believe the prospect of a death sentence probably does serve as a deterent. The problem is that few people seem to stop and think.
He thinks Pakistan's problems are best left to the Pakistanis and UAV strikes in the border regions of Pakistan are causing more problems than they solve. Remind me what your specialist knowledge is :wink:.
Here we go again on a favourite topic. Ill get my popcorn and settle down to just watch this time!! Ps where shall I store my tax disc? Pps why is Ducati red obviously the fastest??
one of my oldest friends has his younger brother inside on year 10 of a 12 stretch for murder...his 5 year old daughter was raped by paedophile who was subsequently acquitted on a technicality.. said brother and two friends located him and literally beat him to death with their bare hands. as part of his rehabilitation he sits in on weekly therapy sessions with paedophile inmates in an attempt to retrain him..my mate told me that all they do is brag about their exploits to try and antagonise him into reacting...when you hear stuff like that then it does make me wonder about the death penalty..that, or use them as organ donors... incidentally, all three received the same 12yr sentence, although from what i gather, it was my mates brother who was responsible for continuing the attack until the rapist was dead. i dont know all of the details as it is something that he doesnt like to discuss for obvious reasons. however, i did find the programme quite thought provoking....i did have some sympathies for the lad who was imprisoned at the age of 15 for double homicide although i would never condone his actions..at that age, he was just a punk kid and the murders were not premeditated..perhaps at his age, and if he showed genuine remorse there may be an argument for removing from death row..as an adult however then i think that may be harder decision to make.
The only sentence available for murder is life imprisonment, which must presumably have been the sentence in the case you mention. Perhaps you mean that he could be considered for parole after a minimum of 12 years. If that is the position, he may or may not be let out on parole after 12 years or more. If he gets parole, he will be supervised by Probation Officers and be liable to recall to prison if he commits any further offence in the rest of his natural life. Perhaps you are referring to "joint enterprise". If two or more people set out together knowingly to commit premeditated criminal acts, and murder is committed in the course of their joint enterprise, they are ALL guilty. The prosecution does not have to prove which one of them struck the fatal blow. If that was not so, criminals could blame one another and if it could not be proved beyond reasonable doubt that any one of them had done it, they might all be acquitted. That unjust outcome is avoided by the joint enterprise principle.
I wonder what you mean by "a technicality"? If the prosecution does not prove to a jury beyond reasonable doubt that a defendant is guilty of the charges, he is acquitted; that is what the rule of law means. Perhaps you mean something else by "technicality", but I can't think what. From what you say, it seems the person you mention thinks he knows better than the courts and can take the power of life and death into his own hands. If that is so, he might imagine he is justified in beating me to death, or you, and we can all sleep the more safely in our beds so long as he is detained.
hi pete, yes youre probably correct in what you say. ive never pressed him on the subject so i assume they were given life sentences with a 12 year parole. im not really sure...as i said, they were sentenced 10 years ago and it isnt a subject that crops up too often. his mum died last year and i know my mates brother wasnt allowed to attend the funeral, and i dont know all of the details of the case other than they deliberately set out to attack the rapist..
I watched these on catch up last night, very interesting insite into death row. It was quite emotional but at the same time those men deserve the death penalty for their crime. I felt a bit sorry for the lad who had been inside since the age of 15, how much of a threat would he be to society now? Would have liked to have seen a couple more programmes as for once something decent to view on tv
it will never be a clearcut decision when confronted by the limitations of humanity. There is no clearcut case. For the psychopatic, there is only the drive to make sure they will not inflict more damage then they did before we found out they were psychopatic. And we must decide whether we do this by killing them ( as we do mad dogs) or putting them away in a hole somewhere. The same goes for the professionally criminal. All the rest lies in the twighlight zone of talent ( or the lack thereof), upbringing and circumstance. that and the fact that, technically, killing someone is so easy. One bad barbrawl, one wrong hit on the head, one push is all it takes to become a murderer. Most in jail are dumb, sometimes bordering on the retarted, and have backgrounds that makes it almost impossible not to land in jail for doing something utterly stupid. For many, it is petty crime, for some it is murder. i guess it's seeing that for some the cards have really been stacked against them from birth that makes it emotional to see them there. On the other hand, it s the confrontation that we're all capable of murder. And that it does not take much to loose the thin layer of civilisation and to decend into barbary. It puzzles me that with over centuries of experience with justice and punishement we, as a society, have not been able to combine and the wish of society to 'get even' with deterence to go at it again. I'm sure that building in a system whereby there is leniance at the beginning but ever growing severity when repeated crimes can combine both. all that has to be done is having an automated increase in senctence by 30, 40, 50,.... % with every crime committed that many serial criminals would have to start changing their risk assesments.. for youth... be leaniant, give them the possibility to get through some difficult years. But do cumulate sentences that they have on their books waiting for them when they reach maturity. So that when they reach adulthood, crossing the line will cost them very very dearly. as a society, we re entitled to this severity as the perpetrators have made the case for us themselves. as to peado's, if they're considered sick, they should be treated that way. I'm sure no one asks to be one. no one asks to get arroused by a child. but to protect society, we should do what needs to be done. and that can go many ways.. as to the deathpenalty, well, having executed an innocent must be the hardest blow justice can deal, but also suffer... as it hits the very essence of the word. and as a deterrent , it suffizes to look at the USA to see that it does not work. Poverty and the lack of prospect makes for dispair and dispair brings out the worst in man. and the worst in man will get him to do anything imaginable.. hence the unnamable cruelty we can witness every day over... justice is an abstract and very personal notion. Giving it in the hands of humans to apply it is a full guarantee to be utterly dissapointed with the outcome..
