Capital punishment

[smiffy]

name='dylan']Had they not been demolished the "squalid" dwellings would have been gentrified and sold for a fortune - this is Notting Hill, after all.



D.

Well it just goes to show you , yesterdays murderous slums? tomorrows wealthy man,s haven.

Great film wonderful performances by attenborough and hurt

[Steve Crook]

name='Marky B']I was a strong advocate of the death penalty,but I have softened over the years. However,if a person has maliciously killed another,then they deserve life imprisonment:walk into jail,and come out in a wooden box.

For anyone who advocates the death penalty, ask if they can ever be 100% sure that the person did it - even if the prisoner admits it? And would they be willing to give their life (or the life of a loved one) if they got it wrong and it was later proven that the person didn't do it? At least life imprisonment gives the option of a reprieve.



Steve

[smiffy]

name='Steve Crook']For anyone who advocates the death penalty, ask if they can ever be 100% sure that the person did it - even if the prisoner admits it? And would they be willing to give their life (or the life of a loved one) if they got it wrong and it was later proven that the person didn't do it? At least life imprisonment gives the option of a reprieve.



Steve

Totally agree steve .Does the term beyond reasonable doubt apply to murder cases or is it used for all criminal cases?.

Have there been many films made with regard to miscarriages of justice?(b/w)

James hanratty springs to mind,I've never watched it (is it called let him have it) but after reading this thread I'll track it down and any others that people can suggest.

Life sentence for me every time,it gives the chance for mistakes to be rectified and also for wrongdoers to pay the price ,as long as life does mean life

[PS68060]

name='Steve Crook']

The James Hanratty case was known as the "A6 murder". There is still a some doubt about his guilt.



Steve

I thought that recent DNA tests had confirmed the verdict. I don't

know the details but I suppose whatever they tested could have been

contaminated.

[Steve Crook]

name='PS68060']I thought that recent DNA tests had confirmed the verdict. I don't

know the details but I suppose whatever they tested could have been

contaminated.

Exactly. So much of the other evidence was contaminated there has to be some doubt. And anyway, DNA doesn't prove anything. It just gives a liklihood.



When evaluating a DNA match, the following questions should be asked:



Could it be an accidental random match?



If not, could the DNA sample have been planted or contaminated?



If not, did the accused leave the DNA sample at the exact time of the crime?



If yes, does that mean that the accused is guilty of the crime?





Steve

[smiffy]

name='Steve Crook']Exactly. So much of the other evidence was contaminated there has to be some doubt. And anyway, DNA doesn't prove anything. It just gives a liklihood.



When evaluating a DNA match, the following questions should be asked:



Could it be an accidental random match?



If not, could the DNA sample have been planted or contaminated?



If not, did the accused leave the DNA sample at the exact time of the crime?



If yes, does that mean that the accused is guilty of the crime?





Steve

Steve, I hope it never happens but if I am ever in the dock I would like you to represent me,

all the best from smiffy

[Steve Crook]

name='smiffy']Steve, I hope it never happens but if I am ever in the dock I would like you to represent me,

all the best from smiffy

I'd do well as a lawyer with a name like Crook



Everyone assumes that DNA fingerprinting gives a exact, unique match - except the people that actually do it or the people that understand statistics.



Come to that, how often does fingerprint "evidence" ever get challenged?

Nobody can prove that all fingerprints are unique - unless they compare the fingerprints of everybody who has ever lived.



Steve

[Carmel]

I think that whenever anyone commits a crime they should go to prison with hard labour not the cushy prisons they have now, They seem to reward people for being bad with their gyms and pools and dvd's and tv's in their cells take all those luxuraries away and give them bare cells. There is even people that come out with degree's where they have received free education and no fees to pay back where our children are leaving university and having huge debts to pay back so were is the justice.

[Steve Crook]

name='Carmel']I think that whenever anyone commits a crime they should go to prison with hard labour not the cushy prisons they have now, They seem to reward people for being bad with their gyms and pools and dvd's and tv's in their cells take all those luxuraries away and give them bare cells. There is even people that come out with degree's where they have received free education and no fees to pay back where our children are leaving university and having huge debts to pay back so were is the justice.

Is the idea to punish or to try to reform, where reformation is possible?

Depriving someone of their liberty is quite a significant punishment in itself. It's not necessary to make them do hard labour. If a prisoner can get an education and comes out a better person isn't that better for society?



If you do impose hard labour, should that be for every crime? Even for non-payment of a parking fine?



And as for prisons being "cushy", have you ever been in one? Don't believe everything you read in the newspapers



Steve

[smiffy]

name='Carmel']I think that whenever anyone commits a crime they should go to prison with hard labour not the cushy prisons they have now, They seem to reward people for being bad with their gyms and pools and dvd's and tv's in their cells take all those luxuraries away and give them bare cells. There is even people that come out with degree's where they have received free education and no fees to pay back where our children are leaving university and having huge debts to pay back so were is the justice.

I know what you mean Carmel,but again I have to agree with Steve Crook.

If we want to live in a reasonable society then we have to treat people in a reasonable way.

Unfortunately education has become very expensive ,but we don't stop sending our kids to university because we hope that it will lead to a more satisfying life for them,not only financially,but in the quality of life they lead.Hopefully they get not only an academic qualification,but an education in life,and see things they might not see in their usual environment.



By the same token somebody spending time in prison and gaining a qualification,is enriching their lives in a way they might not have been able to in their usual environment.By doing this they are less likely to re-offend , and not only that they can become a different type of role model for young people who are going down the same path that led them to prison.They already have a qualification that a social worker can't learn from a book, they learned it at the school of hard knocks.



Don't get me wrong I am not a bleeding heart liberal,and in some cases I used to think an eye for an eye was a just punishment,but justice must prevail and because there are miscarriages of justice we must act with reason.



My own opinion is that if more prisoners came out with qualifications,society would benefit,why not make some form of education compulsory,it would have a positive knock on effect.

Prisoners are there at the expense of the tax payer,and I am sure that some prisoners have never paid a penny in income tax,give them the tools to earn an honest living,and they will lighten the burden for those of us who do contribute to society financially and morally.



Anyway I must go now before I fall off me soap box



Best wishes to all, SMIFFY

[Santonix]

Whilst remaining neutral on the subject of capital punishment, I put the following facts to you. It would appear that there were less than a handful of capital sentences which were carried out where a mistake was made. As technology has developed one of those, that of James Hanratty has now been removed from that list. I know that that is a handful to many and should not have happened. However it is a fact there are hundreds of instances where released muderers have murdered again. Think of those poor families who have had there lives wrecked for ever by a known offender who having gone through rehabilitation and having convinced a parole board that they can be released have been let out to do it again. We know that we cannot rely on life sentences to mean life, (mainly because of cost) except for a few.

As violent crime continues to rise and as the deterents become weaker and weaker, somebody has to say enough is enough and realise we are losing ground, the system is just not working as we would like it to. Our first priority has to be the protection of our law abiding citizens.

[Carmel]

Im not saying dont let them improve their lives by getting an education what im saying is when they go to prison get a degree and then leave prison to get a qualified job make them like our children pay something back like our children have to dont just let them get a free degree and walk away with no debts like our children that have never committed a crime. Where is the justice that we work hard all our lives and pay our children through university then some criminal goes to prison and gets a free degree with no worries about paying back huge debts.

[Steve Crook]

name='Carmel']Im not saying dont let them improve their lives by getting an education what im saying is when they go to prison get a degree and then leave prison to get a qualified job make them like our children pay something back like our children have to dont just let them get a free degree and walk away with no debts like our children that have never committed a crime. Where is the justice that we work hard all our lives and pay our children through university then some criminal goes to prison and gets a free degree with no worries about paying back huge debts.

How do you know that is how it currently works?



Steve

[Carmel]

I know people in my town that have done it thats how

[Steve Crook]

name='Carmel']I know people in my town that have done it thats how

And you readily believe convicted criminals? :



Steve

[Carmel]

[mark-b]

give them bare cells, chain them to the wall 24/7, no tv/radio/gyms or education no nothing, bring back floggings, scumbags wear prison as trophy, but a public flogging = pain and humiliation, they wont wear that as a trophy, as for re-offending when released, brand them on their foreheads with the letter of the crime the commit, scumbag gets released for say rape, stick a great big "R" on his head and a lone female on a train/bus etc will know to be wary and extra carefull, with severe punisments in place how many will still want to "risk the crime and end up doing the time", far too many do-gooders looking out for the criminal to make sure they are OK, yet the victims are left to get on and deal with it, stop being soft and treat them hard, so hard and painfull the punishment will put them off from committing in the first place.





Mark

[Carmel]

Mark-b i agree with everything you said, to many do gooder's who probebly never had a crime commited against them, wait until they do and see how quick they will be to forgive

[smiffy]

re:my last post,any workable suggestions anybody ?

[mark-b]

Hi Smiffy,

very well written post, and respect to you for you for what you did achieve.



No-one but no-one will change my mind on how scumbags should be treated, from very personnel experiance, My disabled Grandad ( D-Day and Arnhem veteran) was mugged, he died shortly after from his illness, they could not decide if it was brought on quicker due to him being mugged, and my Mother has been attacked as well in the past, so as far as I am concerned they must be punished so severly they will not want seconds, in fact second serious offence then string em up, best detterent for putting off others in the first place.





Cheers

Mark