Restoring the Death Penalty in Britain

[LittleStan]

There is no contradiction in a suitable punishment for the crime you commit.

Why is this exempt from the laws of morality?

I don't see the death penalty as murder , I see it as a punishment.


We'll never agree , i'm happy to agree to disagree.


How do you fellas opposed to the death penalty feel about the nazis executed after the Nuremberg trials?

Or more recently Saddam Hussain?

still fundamentally wrong in mine and many people’s eyes. They committed atrocities that can never be justified but I could still not find justification in killing another person.

Could you actually kill somebody?

 

[Lucky13]

Why is this exempt from the laws of morality?

I don't see the death penalty as murder , I see it as a punishment.


We'll never agree , i'm happy to agree to disagree.


How do you fellas opposed to the death penalty feel about the nazis executed after the Nuremberg trials?

Or more recently Saddam Hussain?

still fundamentally wrong in mine and many people’s eyes. They committed atrocities that can never be justified but I could still not find justification in killing another person.

Could you actually kill somebody?

Good question, if I was in a jury I know that i could give a guilty verdict which would lead to the death penalty.

Think that question is a lot harder for someone like yourself who's opposed to the death penalty , if you was on the jury and the bloke was bang to rights how would you feel ?

 

[Bluemoon115]

I think it would see a lot more guilty people walk free tbh.

You're sat on a jury. You're 99% sure the guy is guilty of an atrocious murder. However, there is 1% of doubt there. A doubt that festers, and plays on your mind.

If prison is his punishment, the doubt could be investigated, fresh evidence could be found, and he could be found innocent on appeal.

Could you find a man guilty, handing him a death sentence, with that lingering doubt still in there? What if he's posthumously found innocent? Could you live with yourself, having been the one to wrongly find him guilty?

Or would that doubt wriggle to the front of your mind. Force you, and other people on the jury to be too fearful of killing the wrong man?

 

[BingoBango]

I think it would see a lot more guilty people walk free tbh.

You're sat on a jury. You're 99% sure the guy is guilty of an atrocious murder. However, there is 1% of doubt there. A doubt that festers, and plays on your mind.

If prison is his punishment, the doubt could be investigated, fresh evidence could be found, and he could be found innocent on appeal.

Could you find a man guilty, handing him a death sentence, with that lingering doubt still in there? What if he's posthumously found innocent? Could you live with yourself, having been the one to wrongly find him guilty?

Or would that doubt wriggle to the front of your mind. Force you, and other people on the jury to be too fearful of killing the wrong man?

Agreed. There's plenty of historical evidence to show that, when execution is the potential or likely punishment, that juries refuse to convict on the most serious offence, and instead prefer a lesser charge.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I think it would see a lot more guilty people walk free tbh.

You're sat on a jury. You're 99% sure the guy is guilty of an atrocious murder. However, there is 1% of doubt there. A doubt that festers, and plays on your mind.

If prison is his punishment, the doubt could be investigated, fresh evidence could be found, and he could be found innocent on appeal.

Could you find a man guilty, handing him a death sentence, with that lingering doubt still in there? What if he's posthumously found innocent? Could you live with yourself, having been the one to wrongly find him guilty?

Or would that doubt wriggle to the front of your mind. Force you, and other people on the jury to be too fearful of killing the wrong man?

Agreed. There's plenty of historical evidence to show that, when execution is the potential or likely punishment, that juries refuse to convict on the most serious offence, and instead prefer a lesser charge.

Except possibly in Texas.

 

[Challenger1978]

I think it would see a lot more guilty people walk free tbh.

You're sat on a jury. You're 99% sure the guy is guilty of an atrocious murder. However, there is 1% of doubt there. A doubt that festers, and plays on your mind.

If prison is his punishment, the doubt could be investigated, fresh evidence could be found, and he could be found innocent on appeal.

Could you find a man guilty, handing him a death sentence, with that lingering doubt still in there? What if he's posthumously found innocent? Could you live with yourself, having been the one to wrongly find him guilty?

Or would that doubt wriggle to the front of your mind. Force you, and other people on the jury to be too fearful of killing the wrong man?

Judges pass sentences a jury only determines if someone is guilty or not guilty.

 

[BingoBango]

I think it would see a lot more guilty people walk free tbh.

You're sat on a jury. You're 99% sure the guy is guilty of an atrocious murder. However, there is 1% of doubt there. A doubt that festers, and plays on your mind.

If prison is his punishment, the doubt could be investigated, fresh evidence could be found, and he could be found innocent on appeal.

Could you find a man guilty, handing him a death sentence, with that lingering doubt still in there? What if he's posthumously found innocent? Could you live with yourself, having been the one to wrongly find him guilty?

Or would that doubt wriggle to the front of your mind. Force you, and other people on the jury to be too fearful of killing the wrong man?

Agreed. There's plenty of historical evidence to show that, when execution is the potential or likely punishment, that juries refuse to convict on the most serious offence, and instead prefer a lesser charge.

Except possibly in Texas.

Indeed! I should have said 'historical evidence relating to UK courts'.

:-)

 

[Bluemoon115]

I think it would see a lot more guilty people walk free tbh.

You're sat on a jury. You're 99% sure the guy is guilty of an atrocious murder. However, there is 1% of doubt there. A doubt that festers, and plays on your mind.

If prison is his punishment, the doubt could be investigated, fresh evidence could be found, and he could be found innocent on appeal.

Could you find a man guilty, handing him a death sentence, with that lingering doubt still in there? What if he's posthumously found innocent? Could you live with yourself, having been the one to wrongly find him guilty?

Or would that doubt wriggle to the front of your mind. Force you, and other people on the jury to be too fearful of killing the wrong man?

Judges pass sentences a jury only determines if someone is guilty or not guilty.

I know that. But you're still going to know what the sentence is going to be. You know what's awaiting the accused once you pass the guilty/not guilty recommendation.

 

[Lucky13]

I think it would see a lot more guilty people walk free tbh.

You're sat on a jury. You're 99% sure the guy is guilty of an atrocious murder. However, there is 1% of doubt there. A doubt that festers, and plays on your mind.

If prison is his punishment, the doubt could be investigated, fresh evidence could be found, and he could be found innocent on appeal.

Could you find a man guilty, handing him a death sentence, with that lingering doubt still in there? What if he's posthumously found innocent? Could you live with yourself, having been the one to wrongly find him guilty?

Or would that doubt wriggle to the front of your mind. Force you, and other people on the jury to be too fearful of killing the wrong man?

I think it would make the police and the cps work harder and and as a consequence of that the defendants solicitors also work harder.

What if the defendant admits guilt?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I think it would see a lot more guilty people walk free tbh.

You're sat on a jury. You're 99% sure the guy is guilty of an atrocious murder. However, there is 1% of doubt there. A doubt that festers, and plays on your mind.

If prison is his punishment, the doubt could be investigated, fresh evidence could be found, and he could be found innocent on appeal.

Could you find a man guilty, handing him a death sentence, with that lingering doubt still in there? What if he's posthumously found innocent? Could you live with yourself, having been the one to wrongly find him guilty?

Or would that doubt wriggle to the front of your mind. Force you, and other people on the jury to be too fearful of killing the wrong man?

Judges pass sentences a jury only determines if someone is guilty or not guilty.

I think he is well aware of that.

I believe he is saying that certain people on a jury's sense of reasonable doubt would shift if they knew that a conviction would result in an execution.

It is not inconceivable that there may be some form of civil disobedience from some jurors who would refuse to convict in a under trial under any circumstances. Given the unfettered powers of jurors to make unjustified decisions in a trial this could prove to be a problem that the pro-capital punishment lobby need to consider more carefully than they previously have.