And perhaps they'd just execute innocent people on the basis of unsafe prosecutions. (for avoidance of doubt for the terminally dim this does not include Huntley, Brady, Peter Sutcliffe et al).

You still appear to be of the opinion that the ocasional execution of an innocent party is acceptable. Why is that?

So do you agree with the death penalty for those like Huntley etc that have been proved guilty beyond any doubt ?

No, for a variety of reasons.

How many cases do you think have been proved beyond any doubt? the criteria is "beyond reasonable doubt". Which is all well and good, but not a lot of use if you've lopped someones head off on the basis of what, at the time was "reasonable" evidence.

You'll end up with a two tier sentencing system, those that are "very very 100% we hope definatly guilty" those that are "well we're pretty sure it was you, so we're going to lock you up but not kill you just in case we've got it wrong somewhere along the line" In which case the issue of should they even be locked up arises.

None of the above means that I subscribe to the mailesque rants of prisons being like 5 star hotels though. Or that I feel people should be let out for good behaviour or any of the more fanciful accusations thrown about by the lynch mob types.

Anyhow, you've got a yes/no answer from me. So once again, is the execution of an innocent party ever acceptable? in all cases? if for example it was a family member/friend that was the victim of an unsafe/incorrect conviction you'd presumably just shrug your shoulders and get on with your life?

In the case of The Guildford Bombers, Colin Stagg,and the Guy that was found guilty of murdering Jill Dando, it was either the way the police got the conviction or/and ADVANCES in crime detection that actually cast DOUBT over their convictions.....that is DOUBT.....hence their release. What if the murder was caught on cctv, would that be good enough for a capital punishment conviction? www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/arti ... t-tesco.do or witnesses actually watching the murder news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/mers ... 176471.stm www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... costume.do www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ma ... 96025.html Perhaps some of this type of murder could be avoided if you thought that by kicking someone in the head and you kill them, your life is at risk as well, but with this type of killing you've always got the...i didn't mean to do it, i was on drugs or i was drunk and didn't know what i was doing defence. Just remember, this type of murder can happen to you, your friends or your family just as they go about their daily lives, even your friends could commit this type of MURDER, but while there are people guaranteeing their care and every comfort in jail with the probability of an early release we are not safe on our streets.

In the case of The Guildford Bombers, Colin Stagg,and the Guy that was found guilty of murdering Jill Dando, it was either the way the police got the conviction or/and ADVANCES in crime detection that actually cast DOUBT over their convictions.....that is DOUBT.....hence their release. What if the murder was caught on cctv, would that be good enough for a capital punishment conviction? www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/arti ... t-tesco.do or witnesses actually watching the murder news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/mers ... 176471.stm www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... costume.do www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ma ... 96025.html Perhaps some of this type of murder could be avoided if you thought that by kicking someone in the head and you kill them, your life is at risk as well, but with this type of killing you've always got the...i didn't mean to do it, i was on drugs or i was drunk and didn't know what i was doing defence. Just remember, this type of murder can happen to you, your friends or your family just as they go about their daily lives, even your friends could commit this type of MURDER, but while there are people guaranteeing their care and every comfort in jail with the probability of an early release we are not safe on our streets.

You've still not answered my question. Why's that?

If your reffering to "You still appear to be of the opinion that the ocasional execution of an innocent party is acceptable. Why is that?"

I think my last post answers that, advances in forensic science and DNA profiling over the last few years got these people released,just as it would have stopped them being convicted in the first place had we had this technology then...do you agree? Just as nowadays it convicts you without any doubt. We are not talking convictions of the past, we are talking technologies of the 21st century.

21st century like Jill Dando's you mean?

So, yes it would be ok? Cool, just so we know.

Pretty well every advance has been seen to be infailible when it was introduced, that doesnt stop people interpreting it wrongly either thoiuigh accident or a deliberate act.

So looking at it another way, the evidence that got The Guildford Bombers, Colin Stagg, Barry George (thats the Guy that was found guilty of murdering Jill Dando) off could also be wrong.You know as well as i do these lawyers today can get, even a murderer(reduced to manslaughter) off due to technicalities.

Anyway so your happy that child murderers even when proven without doubt DESERVE the right to live(as in huntleys case and many more), just in case we are proven wrong in the future. OK thats your view, i have mine.

I was going to leave you with a thought (scenario) but it sent chills down my spine even to suggest it, althought you might guess what it was.

Yes it could be, but that brings me back to the earlier point about its lot easier to "fix the mistake" if you've just banged someone up for a few years, its somewhat more difficult if you've hung/shot/poisoned them. Its not ideal, I never claimed it was, but I'd rather not execute people wrongly. My earlier comments on a two tier system answer the second paragraph. You can't have a differing penalty depending on how sure you are you're right. Therefore IMO you can't have a death penalty.

Why cant you have a differing system based on the level of accuracy/type of the proof? DNA evidence for example that is 100% or thereabout accurate or un-arguable video evidence? Cases bases 100% on witness statements where witnesses have been known to be wrong would then be a 2nd tier that comes with life imprisonment instead?

I think a bigger issue than the death penalty in this country in the length of sentences given for every crime. There was the case recently of the hacker who wanted to face trial in the uk cos he would get 10 years but in america he would have got 100 years.

Can i reverse your answer then and ask if you would be so anti capital punishment if god forbid any family member of yours was murdered or had their life ruined by some phaedo scum.

Because you're either gulity or not, there shouldnt be degrees of guilty.

Tend to agree with the 2nd paragraph, I've no problem atall with life meaning whole life, or more stringent sentances etc etc. I just fail to see how execution can ever be justified, especially if, as in some cases it has, and will be applied incorrectly.

America is interesting, they do "life" sentances properly over there, its more than possilble to get put away for hundreds of years, I've no issue with that atall. Also, despite having the death penalty in a fair percentage of the states they still have a much higher (approx 4x) murder rate per capita

You can answer the question first.

To reference America again though they do have differing degrees or murder, i dont see why we couldnt and i dont see what they cant come with differing penalties, one of which is death. The risk is about incorrect application as you say.

See my arguement for the death penalty isnt based around it been a deterent, its based on the fact that it saves tax payers money keeping people in prison and its also a little bit ofjustice for the family of the person offended against.

They have different degrees which relate, in part, to premeditaion and such like, not different degrees of guilt or proof.

I'ts generally been shown that the whole life (good term huh

) costs of imprisonment vs capital punishment show a very signifigant saving to the life in prison sentances (again taking the US as a base model).

Taking the US as a base model again

Since the death penalty was reinstated in the U.S. in 1976, 1,020 men and women have been executed, with more than one-third--362--put to death in Texas.

Although more than 100 people have been released from Death Row in the U.S. during that time, no government authority has concluded that an innocent person was executed.

Also, despite having the death penalty in a fair percentage of the states they still have a much higher (approx 4x) murder rate per capita

and 0% re-offenders

So it's not a deterrent then?

It's just revenge

Is that a bad thing? (to play devlis advocate)

I'd be interested to see the costings that you talk about? Im not sure how spending 10 years on death row and then been killed could be more expensive than 40 years in prison with a better standard of living than 30-40% of law abiding people on the outside?

100 years for been a hacker seems a bit harsh! What did he hack..people to death?

CIA confidential information or something like that i think. Classed as terrorism too i believe.

Surprised Microsoft didnt offer him a 6 figure salary then.

Surely with the employment legislation been put in place rapidly to support home working more there may soon be the drive to promote prison-working?



Surprised no prisoners have tried taking legal action for not been allowed to work.

Wouldnt be surprised if that happened and i wouldnt be surprised if they won the right either!

See the other thread about human rights of prisoners.