Hang em high!
 

Following the shocking death of PC Sharon Beshenivsky at the weekend, I learn that the former Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Lord Stevens, has called for the re-introduction of the death penalty for people who kill police officers.

A few questions occur to me:

1. Is this a credible solution to the problem?

2. If it is a credible solution, why should it be limited to people who murder Police Officers, why not widen it to cover all murders?

3. Is there any chance at all of the government listening and acting on Lord Stevens advice or is the doddering old fool just flapping his gob in the breeze?

What do you think???

Re: Hang em high!
 

yep but only where there is no doubt , i think with modern forensics for instance its pretty hard to get mistaken identity

Re: Hang em high!
 

Why just police officers?

I realise that nobody expects to be killed in the course of their work and agree that it is disgusting to kill somebody who is simply doing their job, but we should not have one law for one section of society and a different law for others.

The police have fought long and hard to overcome the assumption that they are above the law. They are just as likely to be charged with a crime as anybody else should they commit one. The law should be the same for everyone whether white, black, police or Joe public..

Re: Hang em high!
 

if everyone took an eye for an eye the whole world would be blind

Re: Hang em high!
 

Well if it is anything like the USA then it could drag on for years. Also would the European Court of Human Rights let them swing in the first place? It would be said it was against their human rights. How would the ECHR take being asked about the rights of the dead victim?

Re: Hang em high!
 

Quite right Bettie,
I'm willing to be the man behind the mask that pulls the lever, but only if all people are considered as worthy of both being the reason & the result for such punishment.
Police officers do this job because it is a job, I do what I do because it's a Job! If (although it's less likely because of my job) I was to be murdered by some uncaring swine I would expect as much retribution as would be given to a Police Officer a life is a life.
If the people that go out to rob & harm others are prepared to carry weapons that can take an innocent life no matter whether that person wears a policeman's uniform, a suit or a pair of overalls then they should have forfeited their own existence.
A sentence of life often doesn't mean a thing so lets harden ourselves to make sure the innocent have their right to life, long before any low life that would not care about bringing grief to the rest of us.
http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/12/12_1_214.gif

Re: Hang em high!
 

In order to prevent too many miscarriages of justice, although there would always be the exception to the rule

I think that the death penalty should be in place automatically for those who have commited murder before - (i.e. before the death penalty was re-introduced)

Then it should be the death penalty for all convicted of murder, subject to the following circumstances

1. The decision of the Jury must be unanimous
2. The accused must be allowed every appeal available
3. following the exhaustion of all appeals, the accused must then spend a period of 10 yrs on a new "death row" during which time hopefully, any assisting new evidence may come to light
4. Yearly during this 10 yr spell on "death row" the case must be reviewed by an High Court Judge to see if any circumstances have changed and all involved should be informed of the outcome
5 At the end of that period the execution must be carried out immediately by using lethal injection

Re: Hang em high!
 

A person is convicted of a crime when the evidence shows “beyond reasonable doubt” that the accused is guilty. For murder I would qualify that to “beyond ANY doubt”.

Much obliged to mickmc for presenting the rest of my argument.

Re: Hang em high!
 

Re: Hang em high!
 

Re: Hang em high!
 

I take all the points about being absolutely certain of a person's guilt but there has to come a time where dragging the checking and re-checking out over years becomes not justice, but torture.

I would be in favour of a unanimous verdict and swift execution. Where a verdict is less than unanimous the sentence would have to be "life" without possibility of parole. Perhaps this would also help to end the ridiculous situation where some cases of murder are punished with a mere eight years in prison and others like Ian Brady and Peter Sutcliffe are detained until they die.

As far as the Human Rights Act goes, as we learned at the last election, the government and the opposition have both considered withdrawing from the European Convention and repealing the act, so I do not see that European interference would be that much of a problem.

Re: Hang em high!
 

A Unanimous verdict says "no doubt" - a majority verdict says that somebody on that jury has a doubt

and to further qualify my argument I would propose that for those convicted of murder by a majority verdict (where someone has a doubt) - the sentence should be "Life Imprisonment" - and I do mean life - only way out is in a coffin

Whats the old sayings.... "Better that 10 guilty men go free, than 1 innocent man hanged" and "Hangings too good for em"

And if you think that making the b......d count down every day to the sure end of his life is softly softly, - think of the torment that people with a terminal llness go through knowing that someday death is coming to them - only this way the swine will know the exact date and time of his/her death

Might give him time to reflect on his actions and may just deter the next guy

Re: Hang em high!
 

Not dragging it out indefinitely, was a way of trying to reassure the waverers and those afflicted with an excess of scruples.

Re: Hang em high!
 

I'm afraid that I would prefer unanimous and swift. It would cost millions to keep these people on death row for years with appeals and re-appeals. You only have to look at the American system to see that it is a very expensive way of doing things. In the meantime, who would be paying for these scrotes to be fed, watered and legally represented through all of their appeals.....we would.:rolleyes:

Re: Hang em high!
 

Dont you mean the PC brigade?

Re: Hang em high!
 

Lettie

so you'd do it right away

would you say that if the people listed below were your loved ones or friends

these are just a few innocent men hanged

nothings perfect but a waiting time is a must - and I think in our times of ever improving forensic investigations - I doubt that many mistakes would be made, but it would be a tragedy if sufficient time was not given for new evidence to emerge



James Hanratty

Derek Bentley

http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,38...103690,00.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlConte...25/nhan25.html

Re: Hang em high!
 

I cant believe some of these comments!!!
I cant believe that any sane person would 'even up' a crime with death - its barbaric and insane - we're SUPPOSED to be a civilised society!
I propose that life inprisonment should be life - no death penalty - as surely life inprisonment is much more punishment than being executed?!

Re: Hang em high!
 

ime pretty sure the parents of a baby that was raped before it was killed will disagree with you on that one m8

Re: Hang em high!
 

[quote=mickmc]Lettie

so you'd do it right away

would you say that if the people listed below were your loved ones or friends


I believe that I posted that if it was unanimous then yes I would prefer that it was swift.... that does not mean immediate.
We would all love to believe that our friends and loved ones are innocent, that they could never do any wrong. It is the my child, my mum, my dad, my wife etc would never do that attitude, when we all know what people are capable of. Bear in mind that Peter Sutcliffe, Ian Brady, Myra Hindley were somebody's children/loved ones, but they were still guilty.

Re: Hang em high!
 

i doubt they would disagree, 'chav'; if you were the parent - wouldnt you rather have the culprit suffer for the rest of his life in prison than giving him/her the easy way out?

Re: Hang em high!
 

That's the problem though isn't it? Prison can hardly be seen as suffering these days. Prisoners are allowed to study, watch tv, exercise, have 3 square meals a day and a place to sleep. There are millions of innocent people in this world who cannot claim to have those luxuries.

Re: Hang em high!
 

well in light of that comment, lettie; i propose that these 'lifers' are sent to maximum security hospitals for the mentally ill - as i know for a fact that these places are hardly welcoming.
and you MUST be wrong in the head to kill another person!!

Re: Hang em high!
 

Shakermaker, mate. You are young and presumably not so stupid or so proud to admit that, like many of us here, you still have much to learn about the world and the people who live in it.

Before you become too fixed in your views on this issue, why not take the time to review the transcripts of the trails of Brady and Hindley and Peter Sutcliffe, perhaps even Rosemary and Fred West too. And then when you have done that, put your hand on your heart and tell us that you still believe it is wrong to impose the ultimate sanction on murderers.

Re: Hang em high!
 

I am sick of hearing criminals talked about as if they were the victims......and victims treated as though they were the criminal. The criminal suspends his own human rights by indulging in criminal activity. Prison would be a deterrent if it was not such a cushy life. Personally I would transport the criminals to some uninhabited island and leave them with enough food for a week...if they could build their own shelter and survive.....then good on 'em.....if they couldn't it would be natural justice done without anyone having to soil their hands to do the deed. Prisons do not remove liberty anymore....prisoners can read, study.....do a degree.....I can't do that and I am supposed to be free...they get three meals a day....their welfare is looked after. Some pensioners would like to be treated in this manner.

Re: Hang em high!
 

Look i know i dont have the life experience to deem what is the 'right thing to do' in circumstances such as the ones you have hilighted, but that does not mean i cannot have a valid opinion on this issue.
I have read the details of individual cases before; and I still hold the opinion that The Death Penalty is wrong.
I do think that prisons are more like holiday camps nowadays and are more like a child being sent to the 'naughty chair' for doing something wrong...which is disgraceful.
I believe society has become way too soft on criminals nowadays but the death penalty is too far in my opinion.
You cant give a wrongly convicted murderer a pardon can you?......the justice system is too prone to human error.

Re: Hang em high!
 

We have come a long way in the field of Forensic Science - currently DNA is being used to bring very old crimes to a close.....so I think human error is far less likely. I would, however always be a bit afraid of corrupt officials.

Re: Hang em high!
 

[quote=Margaret Pilkington].....so I think human error is far less likely.[quote]

less likely? so error would obviously still happen! if forensic science could get everything 100% right then i might take a different view on this issue - but that isnt going to happen any time soon is it.

Re: Hang em high!
 

I agree with it but only if they are 100% sure that they are guilty. As Willow said earlier there is always that nagging doubt of miscarriage of justice.

Re: Hang em high!
 

Although I voted a definite 'No' to the death penalty, your opinions are always taken on board and give pause for thought. If somebody had hurt one of my children, I have no doubt that I would take the earliest opportunity to ring them around the neck, draw out their innards and roast them with stuffing for dinner HOWEVER .. there is a little of the knitters at the side of the guillotine during the revolution in France coming through here, enjoyment of the execution of another human being, so who is being honest ?
Theory was, that by keeping murderers in jail, phychologists could do their studies and assess exactly what makes the human brain commit such terrible atrocities.. I would like to believe this.
Getting back to the original thread re: the policewoman, yes, I believe that they are the priority in the punishment of murder 'cause this is the force we have elected to protect us all and if abusers of law shoot the uniform, then where do we go from here ?

Re: Hang em high!
 

so you're all swinging over my way huh

nothings perfect (forensics etc) but give it a while you never know - 10 yrs should give everybody enough time - if the evidence is there we should have it by then plus the actual science will have improved in those 10 yrs

and who are we to improve on the 'almighty' - even he admitted "an eye for an eye"

don't want to be cruel to no-one - if the criminal (aka scum) admits his crime and wants to accept his punishment immediately, then go ahead - do it right away

otherwise give him 10 yrs to think about it

and the expense - well -- i've no doubt some of my hard earned cash went into things like the chanel tunnel or the dome and I ain't used them either

as for watching tv or studying for a degree - whats the point when you'll never get the chance to use the degree - and TV - just think - you'll never see the end of the DFS sale................

Re: Hang em high!
 

[quote=shakermaker][quote=Margaret Pilkington].....so I think human error is far less likely.I think that with the advances in Forensic Science it will be possible to state 100% that a criminal did the crime - what worries me is that maybe.....just maybe if you got a rogue police official then evidence could be corrupted, mislaid, tampered with etc....need I go on?

Prison is definitely no longer a deterrent. Life sentences are rarely that.
The murdered person's family are the only ones who truly serve a life sentence.

Re: Hang em high!
 

At some piont if it was brought back exceptions would creep in and ultimately weaken it. Besides does anyone here believe the present judges would swing somebody? Hell they cant even get linear sentancing on crimes as it is. At what court would neck stretching be handed down from? How long would they have before they were dropped? This issue could pause as many questions as it poses so I will abstain on this vote. There are arguments for and against but I would need to see the white paper proposal on it before deciding. Yes there is the Yorkshire Ripper Rose and Fred West Ian Huntley Ian Bradey etc But what about the Guilford 4 and others who would have hanged yet were innocent. Science will never be 100% so unless the act was caught on camera with full face body and the act on there as well how are you 100% sure?

Re: Hang em high!
 

If my memory serves me correctly, were the Guildford Four not convicted on contaminated evidence? And it IS a long time since those convictions. Todays methods and DNA evidence would be more reliable.

Re: Hang em high!
 

What about Peter Fell http://www.innocent.org.uk/cases/peterfell/index.html he would have probably hung, his only crime was being mentally ill at the time.

Re: Hang em high!
 

I've made my opinion on the death penalty in other similar threads, I'm against it.

Most murders are committed by someone the victim knows. It wasn't a deterent when we previosly had the death penalty, and it still wouldn't be for crimes of passion.

I look at the United States, were they have both the death sentence in many states, and also armed police, and I prefer the society we have here.

Even with the advances in DNA there will always be some doubt as to the guilt of a person when it's left to twelve people to decide.

An interesting survey was released by Amnesty today. An amazing 26% of people believe that a woman who dresses provocatively or flirts, is in some way responsible if she is raped. These are the same people, 'twelve good men and true', as well as women, who are the ultimate judges of a persons guilt or innocence. I find that frightening.

Re: Hang em high!
 

I agree that there should be no difference in punishment for the life of a police officer & that of the man in the street.

I also agree that where there is D.N.A proof & a jury convicts someone then the death sentence should be brought in. But what about cases where there is very little or no forensic evidence & a person is convicted by a jury? Not too sure about that one as jury members are only human & do make mistakes, thats when miscarriages of justice happen.

As has already been said on here judges are too soft with their punishments now, which one of them would have the bottle to hand out the death penalty.

There have been many cases where psychiatrists have been fooled into thinking criminals are safe to be let out of prison only for them to kill again. Sick or evil people are often very clever but life should mean life NOT 15/20 years

Re: Hang em high!
 

I only think you should hang them if they are caught with a smoking gun in their hand so to speak, And as for the police I don't put them on any pedestal,they might have been upright figures of the comunity back in the good old days, Now it's just for the money and the power.what makes them any better than i.e a social work or a nurse, hang bent coppers twice. hanging will also stop repeat offenders.

Re: Hang em high!
 

Don't wait to see a smoking gun. If they are carrying a weapon it is because there is an intent and a willingness to kill. Take them before they do kill.

I like the idea of segregating the hardened dangerous criminals on an island to fend for themselves. The public would be happier with criminal justice if it did not cost so much to incarcerate. Why cannot the criminals be made to work for their upkeep?

Re: Hang em high!
 

Further to this debate i dont think the death penalty is the real issue more to do with that the current Law doesnt seem to be enough deterent to criminals & criminal acts & that the law has its inconsistances with regard to reasonable punishment for these crimes..... hence the lets hang em attitude being displayed, well that wouldn't solve the inconsistances within the law system but agravate matters worse by seeking avengance & making someone pay with result of death to possibles of innocent people paying the price for the real culprit. Even in the days of corporal punishment the inconsistancy in law meant a loss of an innocent person fitted for the crimes commited & no turning back for that innocent person whom ultamately cannot get his life back at all despite being cleared of that accusation.

The real issue is justice & altho i do feel the current prison system clearly doesn't work in majority of cases & certainly not actively rehabilitating effectively so that they dont commit again, unfortunately the majority do go onto re affending & doing bigger crimes to make it more the worth while, recent case of a woman being killed on a canal path by a guy whom only just got out of prison within days on early licence, which raised the issue of rehabilitation & means of assessing these criminals. There needs to be an active re-assessment of the current system in place with regard to punishment & habilitation that is justice but also ensuring the message of deterent & something done about it. Todays world is so much more violent & seemingly socially acceptable of it which is so wrong!

Re: Hang em high!
 

Part of the legal systems problems is "do gooders" who dispite their failures still cling to their beliefs like barnicles on a rock.

Re: Hang em high!
 

Why should we make them work to pay in kind for the legal expense and to get their food and water hells teeth we have to do that why cant they

Killing some one in my opinion is MURDER, years ago it was a death penalty for any one who commited cold blooded murder, now I believe the justis in this country is pathetic. Why bring back the death penalty just for police officers they choose to do this job, just like a lot of us choose to do the job that we do best. Inocent people from all walks of life get shot and killed doing there job, teachers, service station attendants, post office workers, the public walking down the street even young children ect.
I respect the job they do and I would not choose to do it, but I believe that every persons life is precious and that the law should take stronger steps to deter muderers with a lot stiffer penaltys and that it should be the same for every victim.

Re: Hang em high!
 

Do we really want a country were life is cheaper than in South America? Somehow I dont think so but if the law did its job we would not be in this mess. If it was a guy up for shooting a police officer is hanged and in the next town a murderer gets life then we have a rule for one and a rule for another. There is no gaurentee of an even playing field so what next.

Re: Hang em high!
 

This is an emotive and complicated issue. I respect of using juries I’m not sure “Twelve Good Men” may be an ideal that past into our history many moons ago, I feel that a panel of Judges might be more appropriate for the passing of the death sentence and I feel that a period of abstention would be appropriate for cases where a sentence may be unsafe for whatever reason, however, where a conviction is secured beyond all reasonable doubt I have little objection to the sentence being conducted under medical conditions and an lethal injection being administered. Mistakes may be made if jurors remain private members of the public are where the media are allowed to run riot as they have in the past. I am all for the freedom of the press but where the life of an individual is being considered it should be done in the privacy and security of a court of law and not on the pages of the press. Public opinion will always be divided on this issue and it will remain the same when the public debate the innocents or guilt of a murderer, so the less the public have to do with due process the less likely it is that professional jurors will react emotively to public opinion rather than the public good.

Re: Hang em high!
 

well put Doug I agree whole heartedly with that.

Re: Hang em high!
 

Apart from muderers who else would suffer this fate? Would a terrorist if found to be a british national be hung drawn and quarted for high treason? And no I aint being sarcastic.

Re: Hang em high!
 

It now appears that one of the three men the police are hunting over the murder of the PC is from Burnley.

Re: Hang em high!
 

Yes and the police think they might be in London somewere. That will be like finding a needle in a haystack. Wonder if they are questioning the Burnley mans family as well>

Re: Hang em high!
 

but is death a suitable punishment for someone willing to die for their cause.For terrorists i would let them live with the shame of failure and inflict as much physical and mental torture on them as possible until they either died of old age or took their own life .Sorry if that comes across as a bit too liberal :)

Re: Hang em high!
 

There's nothing more precious than life, So imho if you take a life you should be prepared to lose your own....Hang em high