• We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website. Read more here

The death penalty !

ramone

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
7,279
Location
If i had to agree with you we would both be wrong
OK so we all know if this was reinstated it could possibly mean someone be sentenced and killed wrongfully but in light of this woman who killed 2 young girls for little no more reason than it interfered with her social life isn't it time for the ultimate deterrent be brought back in cases like this where there is 100% evidence instead of lowlifes like this being allowed back into society to possibly do it again ?
This POS even chatted up the security guard at the hospital when her daughter was laid dead in the A & E department.

I'm not saying if there is any shadow of a doubt the person should remain in prison for their natural life but surely in certain cases like child killers, Police personnel killers and a few other then I think it should be an eye for an eye.
 

Rosencrantz

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jul 12, 2019
Messages
10,249
Location
Tiverton
I think it is natural in a case that you mention this gets brought up. However the "ultimate deterrent" has never been the ultimate deterrent as shown in the places that still have the death penalty and our own past. 100% evidence is incredibly rare and there will always be the risk of unsafe convictions. However you would hope in these cases life would mean life unless there is overwhelming evidence of the convicted not being a danger to society.

Also there is the state of our justice system as it stands. I've just finished reading The Secret Barrister and it makes for scary reading regarding both not putting away the guilty due to mistakes in police and CPS procedures and putting away the innocent with insufficient defence and cuts in legal aid depriving some people adequate representation without putting themselves in financial trouble with little money coming back if you are found not guilty. What the secret barrister calls the innocence tax.
 

ramone

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
7,279
Location
If i had to agree with you we would both be wrong
That's what I'm saying the case would have to be 100% safe with no possibility it can be anything else and again only in the most extreme cases such as this.

All these years people like Hindley , Brady , Huntley etc gaining some sort of prison fame behind bars does nothing for the parents of child killers when every so often their names get emblazoned on the front pages of the papers because they have been attacked inside when it could have been sorted long ago and at a fraction of the cost to keep these vile things alive in security.
This thing that killed her own children could possibly be out in less time than the youngest girl would be looking forward to her 21st birthday !
 

DB9

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
24,700
Location
Hampshire. Heart's in N Devon
This thing that killed her own children could possibly be out in less time than the youngest girl would be looking forward to her 21st birthday !
No, She has been given a Life sentence with a MINIMUM of 32 years, So even when 32 years are up she will not be automatically be given parole, It will probably be down to a future Home Secretary to decide if she's fit for parole but given the nastiness of this disgusting crime no politician would let or recommend her to go free
 

ramone

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
7,279
Location
If i had to agree with you we would both be wrong
I didn't honestly see the Minimum bit DB tbh I was so wound up reading the bit on the net all I saw was the headline of 32 years but stopped reading halfway through when I read the things she did like stopping for fuel and sending topless pics.

Just think if that lunatic Longford had still been alive he would be campaigning for Hindley's release til this day !
 

DB9

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
24,700
Location
Hampshire. Heart's in N Devon
I didn't honestly see the Minimum bit DB tbh I was so wound up reading the bit on the net all I saw was the headline of 32 years but stopped reading halfway through when I read the things she did like stopping for fuel and sending topless pics.

Just think if that lunatic Longford had still been alive he would be campaigning for Hindley's release til this day !
When you put up an emotive subject like the Death Penalty and use this woman's vile crimes as an example you need to read everything, Especially what jail term she was given, As for Longford, He was for some reason, Not of the side of Hindley or Brady but the actual sentence they were given and his views were in a minority as they both and deserved to die in jail and I'm glad they never saw freedom. The woman who did this crime to her children like Rose West, Peter Sutcliffe and other high profile killers will be in prison for their natural lives and die in there, No "Brave Do Gooder" or Politician will sign their freedom notes and to me them staying in jail is worse than the death sentence because you put them to death and their guilt and "Suffering" would stop, The only ones to suffer are the family of the victims who will live with this for the rest of their lives, By keeping them locked up they will have this on their conscious for the rest of their lives, You may say they have none we don't know but all i know is putting them to death would free them of any guilt. You also say their gulit has to be 100% to sentence them to death but at the time of their trials they are found guilty 100%, Not just maybe guilty. In the past the people found guilty of the Birmingham and Guilford pub bombings would be dead now but they weren't guilty, The man who was jailed for Jill Dando's murder would be dead now, He was innocent, There are numourous times misscarridges of justice have been found and taken years to prove, If those on death row who were innocent would in most cases been put to death.

Look at the US, They have the death sentence but it's not a deterrent, China kill loads by the state but still the crimes happen, Russia, Japan, S Arabia all have Capital Punishment but it doesn't deter, Which is what the death sentence is suppose to do
 

Oldsmobile-88

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
27,062
Location
In RaWZ we trust....Amen.
It’s is widely accepted that Lord Longford was a silly old tw@t who was manipulated by the cunning Bradley & lying Hindley

The big difference today with convictions for serious crimes is the use of DNA which should rule out similar miscarriages of justice that have happened in the past.
 

ramone

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
7,279
Location
If i had to agree with you we would both be wrong
It’s is widely accepted that Lord Longford was a silly old tw@t who was manipulated by the cunning Bradley & lying Hindley

The big difference today with convictions for serious crimes is the use of DNA which should rule out similar miscarriages of justice that have happened in the past.
Or like Huntley and the savage murderers of Lee Rigby.
 

IndoMike

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
34,044
Location
Touring Central Java...
I didn't honestly see the Minimum bit DB tbh I was so wound up reading the bit on the net all I saw was the headline of 32 years but stopped reading halfway through when I read the things she did like stopping for fuel and sending topless pics.

Just think if that lunatic Longford had still been alive he would be campaigning for Hindley's release til this day !
You need to read properly, as you keep telling everyone else to do.
 

IndoMike

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
34,044
Location
Touring Central Java...
Could you provide us with the scientific proof/data that the death penalty is a deterrent?
From what I have read that isn't true.
 
Top