To be appalled by the latest execution in the US.

What difference would DNA have made to the Post Office convictions?

My understanding of the situation regarding the drugs required to administer a lethal dose isn’t that there is a shortage as such. I heard it discussed on a news report earlier and it was stated that pharmaceutical companies are unwilling to supply the drugs to be used for executions.

Germanshepherdsmum

What difference would DNA have made to the Post Office convictions?

I didn't say it would have made any difference in those particular instances- I was merely pointing out that wrongful convictions can and still do happen.

Yes the claim was that the wrongful convictions that Annie quite rightly mentioned were a long time ago. The example of the rape conviction and the post office convictions show that this happens in the modern day.

And they always will.

Germanshepherdsmum

And they always will.

Indeed, which is as convincing an argument as any not to reintroduce the death penalty.

This guy was in prison for 35 years. 2 years ago they tried to kill him with drugs but they did not work. It is totally inhuman and barbaric and makes the state as bad as the murderer.

I think so, MissInterpreted.

If life means life, and there is no chance of parole, how would those advocating it suggest that discipline be maintained in jails?

Also, whereas a desire for vengeance is a very human reaction, that is the very reason why we have the rule of law. If someone killed my loved ones I'd be happy for them to be skinned alive, but that's how vendettas start, and they are not great for stability or the rule of law.

I am against the death penalty, as it diminishes the value of life, it dehumanises those who have to carry it out, and there is always a risk of an irreversible miscarriage of justice. Further examples of where this would have occurred are the falsely convicted IRA men - the Birmingham Six, the McGuire seven and the Guildford Four. How many more do people need?

Life means life in cases where that is considered appropriate. Whole life tariffs are not handed out very often. A very long period before the convicted person can even apply for parole and release on licence may mean that convicts end up spending the rest of their life in prison as some turn out not to be suitable for parole - but if they had been given a whole life sentence it would probably have been successfully appealed at considerable expense to the taxpayer,

I can't decide where I stand regarding the death sentence. Many innocent people have been put to death ! On the other hand if execution is to happen then it should happen in the most humane way. WonderfulLife I completely disagree with your theory of parading a convicted person through the streets and being put in the stocks for a community to take out their revenge out on him/ her- prior to being executed, for goodness sake which century are you living in !? If capital punishment is to happen we should take the emphasis off ' punishment ' and focus on 'prevention' the priority is to ensure that the convicted person can never do it again, if death is the only way to ensure that then so be it - but surely someone can be put to death without having to writhe in agony ?

Siope my thoughts exactly.
Was just about to look up the statistics.

We got rid of the death sentence in Europe decades ago -it is a civilised and entirely sensible decision by every country. The only countries who still retain the death sentence are Belarus and Russia - so that should tell us a great deal.

With regard to USA - looks at their gun laws they have it so wrong in both these areas.

I absolutely understand the emotional turmoil behind some of the most heinous murders but I am content with the existing law.

Someone upthread says it’s written in the Bible “an eye for an eye”. That’s correct, but elsewhere in the Bible, is written “turn the other cheek”. Things can be plucked from the Bible to suit one’s agenda.

WonderfulLife/ Ziplok - " an eye for an eye" is in the Old Testament. Jesus said " turn the other cheek" Christians are bound by the latter, Jews by the former.

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind...

Wonderfullife your views sicken me, you are as bad in my opinion as the people you are talking about.
Parading these people in public, executing them, shocking,barbaric, and going back to the dark ages. I would hate to live in a society like this, and who would bear the brunt if this barbarity, I suspect the poor, the mentally ill, ethnic minorities ect.
I admit that at times I have thought some crimes are so horrific they should be executed,but it is wrong and it is vengeful. Also it will never be safe especially if there is corruption, and people with money who can afford a expensive legal team, while the poor cannot.
Your views are medieval and I would hate to live in a society like that.

It is literally sickening! The people of Alabama must brutalised by such a procedure going on in their name.

If they must retain the death penalty they could cause death as we do to sick animals: give a tranquiliser if necessary, then inject a lethal dose of barbiturate.

Grannynannywanny

My understanding of the situation regarding the drugs required to administer a lethal dose isn’t that there is a shortage as such. I heard it discussed on a news report earlier and it was stated that pharmaceutical companies are unwilling to supply the drugs to be used for executions.

I think that you are right. I had heard that some years ago and forgotten it.

TerriBull

maddyone

I have great sympathy for the victims. Some murders are absolutely depraved, but I still don’t agree with state sanctioned murder. The problem in Britain is that many murders are not even charged as murder but charged as manslaughter, when it is clear to everyone that the crime committed was murder, but additionally, even when the charge is murder and the perpetrator convicted of murder, the tariff is so low. Twenty years, reduced to ten served normally, is not a deterrent and is certainly not enough punishment. Taking a life purposefully should attract a much longer tariff. The twenty reduced to ten devalues the life of the victim.

Absolutely agree maddyone

Less prison time = the cheapest option.
Works for the government these days. We need to build more prisons that’s for sure. If we had robust, proper sentencing, that might work as a deterrent and criminals might think twice.

I am not really convinced by the deterrent thing, what I am convinced of is trying to keep people safe. He will do this again if free.

My mother was 100% behind the death penalty. She had no problem with innocents like Timothy Evans being executed because "He was probably involved somehow" but even she found the American system barbaric and thought that imprisoning people for decades before they were killed was tantamount to torture. Surely Alabama is one of the hot beds of Christianity in the US, yet they seem to be able to ignore the more inconvenient bits of the Bible. "Thou shalt not kill"? "Vengeance is mine said the Lord"?

nanna8

Just one person wrongly executed is enough to say the death penalty should never, ever be resorted to. There have been several of these dreadful mistakes. Enough said.

There do seem to be more miscarriages of justice now and finding someone is innocent after they have been executed is just too late.

maddyone

I have great sympathy for the victims. Some murders are absolutely depraved, but I still don’t agree with state sanctioned murder. The problem in Britain is that many murders are not even charged as murder but charged as manslaughter, when it is clear to everyone that the crime committed was murder, but additionally, even when the charge is murder and the perpetrator convicted of murder, the tariff is so low. Twenty years, reduced to ten served normally, is not a deterrent and is certainly not enough punishment. Taking a life purposefully should attract a much longer tariff. The twenty reduced to ten devalues the life of the victim.

I agree, maddyone.

A life sentence in some cases should mean life.
No tagged day release at all.

Germanshepherdsmum

What difference would DNA have made to the Post Office convictions?

None whatsoever