Mkiv Discussion thread - Do you think life should be life and people forgiven?

[Green Peace]

Sorry I havent read alll the posts...good debate....difficult one to answer!

 

Years ago I would of said NO to the death penalty the main reason being that people were put to death and then on some occasions found to be innocent of the crimes they were said to have commited!

 

It is perfectly acceptable to put a dog down...for biting a child, its done in a humane way and yes the dog prob dosn't even know about its fate!

 

Nowadays with DNA and other forms of identification...there is a lot more certainty in most criminal prosicutions...and I am not normally the type of person to support a death penalty being re-introduced but in the most servere cases like the Soham case I think it would be justified...and I mean in a humane way (even though what he did to those children is just unforgivable.)..but terminating his life would be the best all round...and the same should go for any child killer really.

 

I think the problem here is because the sentencing for child rape is a very long time in the slammer....the perpertraitors are often inclined to kill their victims in order to escape prosicution.

 

Murder is an every day occurance in London so much so..a lot of the murders dont even make the mornings press...very often Murders get a much lighter sentance on diminished responsibility and other technicalities...sentancing in this country should be tougher (a deterant) with the most severe premeditated murders and child murderers being considered for termination of their life.

 

If someone can take someone elses life...in such a horrfic way..then as far as Im concerned they forfeit their human rights!!!!!

 

I had a mate who was murdered back in 1990 the bloke who murdered him got 7 years and served about 4 years...what kind of justice is that!!!!!

[Jake]

I had a mate who was murdered back in 1990 the bloke who murdered him got 7 years and served about 4 years...what kind of justice is that!!!!!

Of what charge was the 'murderer' of your mate convicted? It couldn't have been a charge of murder because the minimum sentence for murder is life (in this country).

[Clarkey]

I think this thread is almost a of this thread!

 

[Aerotop Dave]

Have they now switched off the part of their brain that said 'lets stick batteries up a 3yr olds backside' - sorry to be graphic but its sick....

 

I have to confess that I don't really know the full details of the case. I know they took a 3 year old from a shopping centre and then killed him beside a railway line. That's about all I know.

 

There was so much tabloid ranting at the time that I never actually got to read the full details.

[Green Peace]

Of what charge was the 'murderer' of your mate convicted? It couldn't have been a charge of murder because the minimum sentence for murder is life (in this country).

 

The Charge on his arrest was murder, it was about 92 I think, he got a lighter sentance on grounds of diminished responsibility...he basically clubbed him over the head whilst he was sleeping...but it was drug induced and then tried to dispose of his body by setting fire to it...I was a charector witness for my mate who was killed, the trial was held at the Old Bailey...

 

After I left the witness box I didn't look back or really want to know how the trial progressed but i heard the result a few weeks later...tried to erase the whole thing from my mind as you do..i was v young then...but yeah I would imagine that the charge was altered..though it was described to me just as 'a lesser sentance on grounds of diminished responsibility' so yeah i guess it was most probably changed to manslaughter...but I dont recall that word being used for some odd reason!