Death penalty

[BES]

Many innocent people have been executed in the past and will be in the future in certain parts of the world and just one is too many but when there is absolutley no doubt like the names I've mention please explain why they should not be executed.

Why does the state kill people who kill people to demonstrate that killing is wrong?
It is not a deterrent. If it were then no murders would occur.
It's a difficult one considering the names you mention but there is always a chance that the justice system will get it wrong again.
Imo you either support the death penalty for all found guilty of murder or you do not. I can't support it.

Trev. I agree the death penalty doesn't deter murder but I don't see it as a deterrant but as a punisnment for extreme cases. How we define extreme cases is obviously up for arguement .The criminals that I've mentioned never even thought they would be caught never mind executed so it certainly was no deterrant to them.

 

[Besoeker]

The first electric chair execution indirectly involved some big names. Thomas Edision was in a bit of a war with George Westinghouse over who's type of electricity was going to be used to power the USA Edisons Dc or Westinghouse Ac and neither want to have theirs used for an execution for obvious reasons. When the politicians decided to use Ac generators to power the first electric chair Westinghouse refused to supply them so they had to get the two generators to be sent to a university in brazil on a bogus order and then back to the prision in albany in new york. When westinghouse heard about this he tried to delay the execution by paying for defence lawyers for the appeal of the first victim of the chair a wife murder callec william kemmler. He only managed to delay the execution for a few months and the execution went ahead. It took approx 15 mins to kill kemmler the first two jolts of 2500v didn't kill him so the executioner called Edwin Davis the prision electrician banged the gennys up full and gave kemmler 17000 v to finish he off. Aparently just about cooking him.

Interesting and informative post.
A few paragraph breaks would make it easier to read.

 

[Tiny Spark]

you either support the death penalty for all found guilty of murder or you do not. I can't support it.

Why does it have to be all or nothing?

The system should be more flexible than that.

Sure I would have no problem with say Ian Huntley going to the drop, But they I would consider it unnecisary for say someone who battered a burglar to death in his living room.
Perhaps thats a bad example as I would actually condone that.....
But you get the idea LOL

 

[BES]

The first electric chair execution indirectly involved some big names. Thomas Edision was in a bit of a war with George Westinghouse over who's type of electricity was going to be used to power the USA Edisons Dc or Westinghouse Ac and neither want to have theirs used for an execution for obvious reasons. When the politicians decided to use Ac generators to power the first electric chair Westinghouse refused to supply them so they had to get the two generators to be sent to a university in brazil on a bogus order and then back to the prision in albany in new york. When westinghouse heard about this he tried to delay the execution by paying for defence lawyers for the appeal of the first victim of the chair a wife murder callec william kemmler. He only managed to delay the execution for a few months and the execution went ahead. It took approx 15 mins to kill kemmler the first two jolts of 2500v didn't kill him so the executioner called Edwin Davis the prision electrician banged the gennys up full and gave kemmler 17000 v to finish he off. Aparently just about cooking him.

Interesting and informative post.
A few paragraph breaks would make it easier to read.

Bloody hell I'm an electrician not william bleeding shakespere. Your lucky you got full stops and capitals

 

[trev]

Why does it have to be all or nothing?

The system should be more flexible than that.

Sure I would have no problem with say Ian Huntley going to the drop, But they I would consider it unnecisary for say someone who battered a burglar to death in his living room.
Perhaps thats a bad example as I would actually condone that.....
But you get the idea LOL

Someone who battered a burglar to death would, or could, be equally as guilty as Huntley because the law on reasonable force would apply. Just like it has on many occassions, a recent example being the guy who battered one with a cricket bat causing brain damage. The burglar was heading away from his property when he was attacked.

 

[Guest77]

That is why the system is wrong, we should have murder 1 and murder 2 , murder 1 would be with film evidence or video evidence and absolutely no doubt, 2 for murder where forensics and witnesses are involved, 1 could be the death penalty, 2 life imprisonment, like other parts of the world where murder can be in different catagories, the States and South africa to mention 2.

 

[trev]

As a slight aside, there was something on the Jeremy Vine radio 2 prog today which mentioned public support for the death penalty had dropped below 50% for the first time since monitoring of it began

 

[Tiny Spark]

Someone who battered a burglar to death would, or could, be equally as guilty as Huntley because the law on reasonable force would apply. Just like it has on many occassions, a recent example being the guy who battered one with a cricket bat causing brain damage. The burglar was heading away from his property when he was attacked.

I never denied the guilt.
Only the reasoning behind said murder.

Huntley deliberatly went out to do the evil he did.

Burglars who get whacked round the head with a bat while breaking into a law abiding familys home deserves what he gets.
We know the risks of getting killed by our profession, So to should a burgler.

Break into my house and you best hope you get out before the dogs eat you!
Or I beat crap out of you.

Again ime very unsympathetic to these kind of individuals.

 

[Besoeker]

Bloody hell I'm an electrician not william bleeding shakespere. Your lucky you got full stops and capitals

Don't get your knickers in a twist.
It was a constructive comment.

When I get hit with a wall of text I'm not altogether likely to read it all.

 

[trev]

So if they're both as guilty then in your world they must be equally deserving of the death penalty

 

[Tiny Spark]

So if they're both as guilty then in your world they must be equally deserving of the death penalty

No, Not at all.

One is premeditated and deliberate evil, The other is a choice that was forced upon the individual by circumstance.

2 very very different murders.

That is why you have Murder and you have manslaughter.

All be it ime not sure they are used in the correct context any more :s

 

[trev]

What rubbish!
Suppose I were to hit you with a cricket bat because you had been on my property but at the time you were walking away from it. I knock you unconcious but I continue to rain blows down on you despite you 1) being no threat to me or mine 2) being unable to defend yourself.
How can I not be guilty of murder (def, The unlawful killing of a reasonable creature in being with malice aforethought) and so deserving to hanged?

 

[trev]

Now suppose there are 2 people walking away from my house, you are carrying something which looks like something which has gone missing from my house. I therefore choose you to batter to death with my cricket bat.
Oops, it was the other bloke who was the burglar.
How am I not guilty of murder and deserving of the death penalty?
Completely unprovoked I've attacked you, an innocent passer by. I've knocked you out with the first blow but I've continued until your head is mush and you're dead

 

[RogertheBodger]

Why does the state kill people who kill people to demonstrate that killing is wrong?
It is not a deterrent. If it were then no murders would occur.
It's a difficult one considering the names you mention but there is always a chance that the justice system will get it wrong again.
Imo you either support the death penalty for all found guilty of murder or you do not. I can't support it.

This is a very absolutist statement. How can you be sure? Murders will always occur with or without deterrence, I've had a look at some studies by various criminologist groups, Think tanks, Judicial reports etc. concluding that deterrence does not work. Without exception they are full of disclaimers such as ‘might be’, ‘we think’, ‘points to’, ‘the evidence suggests’ and so on and so on.

There are also reports that say deterrence does work, including one I read that says that for every executed inmate, 7 murders are prevented by deterrence, I take all these reports with a pinch of salt, we all know that reports can say whatever the vested interests who compile them want them to say.

They simply don't know if it works are not, but common sense tells me that if an action has been deterred, it never happened, and how can you prove something didn't happen, How can you count all the murders that didn’t happen and include them in a report?

You worry that innocent lives could be lost through wrongful executions, and so we should, but if the deterrence value of the death penalty could prevent hundreds of murders over, say, a 5 year period, how many miscarriages are likely to occur? taking into account up to date forensic technology, a few, if any.

 

[trev]

but if the deterrence value of the death penalty could prevent hundreds of murders over, say, a 5 year period, how many miscarriages are likely to occur? taking into account up to date forensic technology, a few, if any.

Sorry to keep mentioning him but he's the most recent miscarriage of justice I can think of.
What do you think Barry George's response to that claim be?

 

[Tiny Spark]

What rubbish!
Suppose I were to hit you with a cricket bat because you had been on my property but at the time you were walking away from it. I knock you unconcious but I continue to rain blows down on you despite you 1) being no threat to me or mine 2) being unable to defend yourself.
How can I not be guilty of murder (def, The unlawful killing of a reasonable creature in being with malice aforethought) and so deserving to hanged?

Again thats a difference, I was refering to some crackhead in my living room at 2am.

You have just proved my point that there are different murders based upon different circumstances.

 

[trev]

Again thats a difference, I was refering to some crackhead in my living room at 2am.

You have just proved my point that there are different murders based upon different circumstances.

You're moving the goalposts mate. You mentioned burglars so I asked you to put yourself in the position of being one for a moment and gave you a scenario (there's another one too) which you've chosen to ignore.
How can beating you to a bloody pulp when you are no threat to me be any different from Hawley Harvey Crippen for example?

 

[rapparee]

That is why the system is wrong, we should have murder 1 and murder 2 , murder 1 would be with film evidence or video evidence and absolutely no doubt, 2 for murder where forensics and witnesses are involved, 1 could be the death penalty, 2 life imprisonment, like other parts of the world where murder can be in different catagories, the States and South africa to mention 2.

What you are actually doing here is introducing a hierarchy of victims. Why should one victim be worth the death penalty and the other a a life sentence. The Garda (police in republic of ireland) lobbied for a similar approach, and to make the punishnent for the murder of a guard more severe than a civillian. Public opinion soon had this idea shelved.

(N.B. i realise this is another irish example but i feel this is a relevant to the thread)

 

[RogertheBodger]

Sorry to keep mentioning him but he's the most recent miscarriage of justice I can think of.
What do you think Barry George's response to that claim be?

What do you think the response of the hundreds of potential murder victims would be?

 

[Tiny Spark]

I did not move the goal posts, The scenario you gave was thus:

What rubbish!
Suppose I were to hit you with a cricket bat because you had been on my property but at the time you were walking away from it. I knock you unconcious but I continue to

That sounds more like tresspass to me.

Now if you had said you had just chased me out of your house with a cricket bat at 2am in your underpants then I would of treated it as a burglary.
In which case I would not blame you for smashing me around the head with a bat.

Would you deserve to be hanged? No I dont think so as I would of brought it on myself by scaring the hell out of you and your family when I broke into your house at 2am with a knife in my hand.