death penalty

[Robert]

Louisa do their just desserts include cyanide-laced apple pie?

[caz]

I seriously doubt that bringing back the death penalty could work in the UK today without changing the current jury system.

As a juror you are free to say guilty or not guilty without having to explain your reasoning. Of course, you are instructed to convict if the evidence puts guilt beyond reasonable doubt, but nobody can touch you for it if you claim to be personally unconvinced by that evidence in any way.

These days I suspect there would be too many potential jurors who would simply not convict anyone if the sentence was likely to be death. They wouldn't necessarily say so beforehand, and murderers could get off as a result.

Love,

Caz
X

[Abby Normal]

I admit its a tough one and I am torn, but forced to decide-
I am for the death penalty if the person is convicted of first degree murder in a court system such as the USA has.

philosophically- because I believe some people don't deserve to live or forfit there right to live by their actions.

practically- because I don't believe that society should pay to keep them in jail for their lives, too many get out and kill again, and justice for the victims families.

[caz]

The problem with allowing for even the tiniest percentage of wrongful executions is that people rarely consider it could ever happen to their own flesh and blood. If one's own child was on death row for a crime they didn't commit, I suspect they would be the first to demand abolition.

Mothers-in-law might be a different matter of course.

Love,

Caz
X

[Hannibal Hayes]

I'm all for it in the most obvious cases & we can all think of one recently. No point in paying for 60 odd years to keep scum like that alive in good conditions.

On another note its a pointless debate as the EU will not allow it. Poland had it up until 1990 but were told they will never join the EU until they get rid of it. They soon got rid of it to join.

Game over people.

[GUT]

G'day Caz

The problem with allowing for even the tiniest percentage of wrongful executions is that people rarely consider it could ever happen to their own flesh and blood. If one's own child was on death row for a crime they didn't commit, I suspect they would be the first to demand abolition.

Couldn't have sad it better.

Mothers-in-law might be a different matter of course.

Didn't think I could agree with with anything more than I do with the first paragraph, then read this one.

[pinkmoon]

I think talking about the possibility of killing mother in laws could open the flood gates here.

[Chris]

These days I suspect there would be too many potential jurors who would simply not convict anyone if the sentence was likely to be death. They wouldn't necessarily say so beforehand, and murderers could get off as a result.

Yes - I think it's well documented that this was a problem even in the 1950s. How much more so now?

[GUT]

G'day Pinkmoon

I think talking about the possibility of killing mother in laws could open the flood gates here.

So... are we going to drown mother-n laws... in the flood after the gates open.

[Robert]

I wouldn't think that many would be executed - judges these days are reluctant to even impose whole life sentences. But it would surely be possible for a juror to be excused from a court case if he/she objected to capital punishment. In fact, they would have a duty to mention it anyway, if it's an issue that might affect their objectivity.

[GUT]

G'day Robert

But if they don't disclose it, how will anyone ever know?

Surely you don't think that everyone who goes to Court, in whatever capacity, tells the truth?

[Robert]

Hi GUT

Well, I know jurors are supposed to say if they know the judge/barristers/defendant/witnesses. I don't know whether they're obliged to reveal if they have any other factors which might influence them, such as strong feelings for or against gays/heterosexuals/blacks/whites/men/women etc. I would have thought that if they do have such feelings, they should reveal them, but you'll never get a perfect system, and jurors can be biased. Better than having a judge act as jury, though.

[Abby Normal]

if a potential juror does not believe in the death penalty in a capital murder case they can be ruled out by the prosecutor during the juror screening process. usually a juror will admit they are against it.

[Abby Normal]

I admit its a tough one and I am torn, but forced to decide-
I am for the death penalty if the person is convicted of first degree murder in a court system such as the USA has.

philosophically- because I believe some people don't deserve to live or forfit there right to live by their actions.

practically- because I don't believe that society should pay to keep them in jail for their lives, too many get out and kill again, and justice for the victims families.

I would also add that I think that the all of the convicted first degree murderers wealth should automatically go to the victims immediate family without having to go through a civil trial.

[GUT]

G'day Abby

I would also add that I think that the all of the convicted first degree murderers wealth should automatically go to the victims immediate family without having to go through a civil trial.

Why only 1st degree, and what about the family etc of the murderer, aren't you punishing them for what their family member, husband/father etc did. After all they probably helped amass the wealth.

Maybe better to let the judge at the criminal tral make a compensation order.