Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

CrashedOutAndBurned

Why Can't He Be Marched Away And Shot Right Now?

Recommended Posts

It's banal to simply say you're for or against the death penalty. For the most part I'm against it. People can turn their lives around even after terrible crimes and, if after a long sentence they are a different person, should get another chance.

Then there are those that are best dealt with by a bullet to the head.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-11901584

A man who murdered his girlfriend's 15-month-old son after months of filming himself abusing the little boy has been jailed for life.

There's no point keeping this sort of scum alive. He's not worth 20p of the cost of keeping him in jail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no point keeping this sort of scum alive. He's not worth 20p of the cost of keeping him in jail.

A truly sickening case. I suspect the other inmates of whichever prison he's sent to will be anxious to make his acquaintance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's banal to simply say you're for or against the death penalty. For the most part I'm against it. People can turn their lives around even after terrible crimes and, if after a long sentence they are a different person, should get another chance.

Then there are those that are best dealt with by a bullet to the head.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-11901584

There's no point keeping this sort of scum alive. He's not worth 20p of the cost of keeping him in jail.

Who knows what was done to him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who knows what was done to him?

are you just playing devils advocate?

even the abused know what is wrong.

this guy does not deserve death, he does not deserve life at her majestys hotels either. This sort of scum should be punted out to jails in brazil or thailand imo. Cheaper for us and a better understanding of punishment for them.

When they join the EU maybe we could send the tw@t to turkey, a prisoner trade would be great and I am sure that he would enjoy his time in a turkish jail. If not then I fully believe that he would at least deserve it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who knows what was done to him?

That is what I was thinking. Not that I am sticking up for the ****. However very oftne people this depraved and ******ed in the head are that way for a reason.

No simple answer when that sort of thing happens. Just a ******ed up World full of ******ed up people really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is what I was thinking. Not that I am sticking up for the ****. However very oftne people this depraved and ******ed in the head are that way for a reason.

No simple answer when that sort of thing happens. Just a ******ed up World full of ******ed up people really.

Exactly. I've never heard of a case of a person doing something unconscionably depraved without there being something really horrific going on to them, usually within the first 3 years of life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No becuase more mental torture can be inflicted if kept alive. Death is too easy.

I thought that when Fred West managed to top himself. And Harold Shipman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. I've never heard of a case of a person doing something unconscionably depraved without there being something really horrific going on to them, usually within the first 3 years of life.

so....er....all of those now coming out of the woodwork telling about being abused by priests.....we should look back 3 years into their history?

is that 3 years from now or 3 years from the offence or 3 years from coming of age or what?

D I K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's banal to simply say you're for or against the death penalty. For the most part I'm against it. People can turn their lives around even after terrible crimes and, if after a long sentence they are a different person, should get another chance.

Then there are those that are best dealt with by a bullet to the head.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-11901584

There's no point keeping this sort of scum alive. He's not worth 20p of the cost of keeping him in jail.

....don't be silly ....capital punishment was for a time when we believed in justice..... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lucky for Stefan Kisko, we didn't believe in justice in 1975 then.

16 years of torture. Poor *******. He may well ahve been better off being executed by the sounds of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lucky for Stefan Kisko, we didn't believe in justice in 1975 then.

....my friend ...that is because the foundation of your criminal law system is wrong ....there should be a 'not proven' verdict available together with 'guilty' and 'not guilty'....but then only civilised countries have such verdicts..... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....my friend ...that is because the foundation of your criminal law system is wrong ....there should be a 'not proven' verdict available together with 'guilty' and 'not guilty'....but then only civilised countries have such verdicts..... :rolleyes:

The only one I know if is Scotland - a true pinaccle of civilisation, to be sure!

I don't agrewe with this type of verdict as it serves no useful purpose. The accused doesn't get his acquital nor dos the state/victim/society in general get the satisfactory conclusion it seeks. The phrase that mud sticks is true and have a "not proven" verdict only helps more of it stick as the defendant is still under a cloud of suspicion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only one I know if is Scotland - a true pinaccle of civilisation, to be sure!

I don't agrewe with this type of verdict as it serves no useful purpose. The accused doesn't get his acquital nor dos the state/victim/society in general get the satisfactory conclusion it seeks. The phrase that mud sticks is true and have a "not proven" verdict only helps more of it stick as the defendant is still under a cloud of suspicion.

The only one I know if is Scotland - a true pinaccle of civilisation, to be sure!

...you are correct in both statements ....to be sure...... :)

I don't agrewe with this type of verdict as it serves no useful purpose. The accused doesn't get his acquital nor dos the state/victim/society in general get the satisfactory conclusion it seeks. The phrase that mud sticks is true and have a "not proven" verdict only helps more of it stick as the defendant is still under a cloud of suspicion.

...that is true but the 'not proven' verdict is a logical consequence while 'not guilty' maybe an open lie which cannot be proven as guilty...... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who knows what was done to him?

perhaps you haven't heard the details of this case?

Anyway it doesn't matter what was done to him there is no way anything takes away from what he did. I am quite annoyed to pay his room and board for 20 years only to see him walk free when he is not much older than i am now.

1 vote for hanging over here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lucky for Stefan Kisko, we didn't believe in justice in 1975 then.

Wow, that's a moving story. Very sad.

I do believe capital punishment has a place though, but only for proven serial killers. A miscarriage of justice is possible, but far less likely for people with multiple convictions of murder. For these people, incarceration is waste of their time and our money. Put them out of their misery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, that's a moving story. Very sad.

I do believe capital punishment has a place though, but only for proven serial killers. A miscarriage of justice is possible, but far less likely for people with multiple convictions of murder. For these people, incarceration is waste of their time and our money. Put them out of their misery.

Mainly a reflection on the moral vacuum apparent in the Police Force, Evident then, alive and kickin today.

I would side towards capital punishment but my complete lack of faith in the British Police has changed that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who knows what was done to him?

Good point - and if we execute him now then there is no chance of him repeating the cycle into another generation!

Excellent idea.

Who knows - if such an execution were conducted and publicly known then ... wow ... who knows .... it might....

just might,...

Maybe,.....

Give the next person to think of such a crime a second thought....

Just sayin....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Capital punishment is about revenge, not justice. Don't stoop to their level. On the other hand there's the entirely reasonable argument that we don't want these guys wandering around, and we shouldn't have to pay a penny to keep them alive either. I'd go for dumping them on some godforsaken little island and forgetting about them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...you are correct in both statements ....to be sure...... :)

...that is true but the 'not proven' verdict is a logical consequence while 'not guilty' maybe an open lie which cannot be proven as guilty...... :rolleyes:

What you call it doesn't matter too much. By the phrase "not proven" though, I thought you meant that we should have a third or middle veridct like the Scots do(not actually sure whether they still do or not, actually) which I do not agree with. You can't have a judicial system which says "well, we think you did it but can't prove you did so we'll just cast a permanent cloud over you".

The reason for this, I think (and I stand to be corrected on this), was that it allowed proceedings to be reinstated at a later date if different evidence came to light whereas if you were cleared then they could not be. This would make no difference today as murder charges can be reinstated if evidence comes to light later as the law was changed in this respect several years back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting, according to Wikipedia there is no technical legal difference between the two verdicts and that "not proven" wasn't an additional verdict to "not guilty" but that the former actually pre-dats the latter!

"Not proven is a verdict available to a court in Scotland.

Under Scots law, a criminal trial may end in one of three verdicts: one of conviction ("proven") and two of acquittal ("not proven" and "not guilty"). Historically, the two verdicts available to Scots juries were that the case had been "proven" or "not proven". However in a dramatic case in 1728 the jury asserted "its ancient right" to bring in a "not guilty" verdict even when the facts of the case were proven (see jury nullification). As the "not guilty" verdict gained wide acceptance amongst Scots juries, Scots began to use "not guilty" in cases where the jury felt the "not proven" verdict did not adequately express the innocence of the defendant. Shrewd defence then further encouraged this interpretation in order to persuade juries unwilling to bring in a "not guilty" verdict that the "not proven" could be brought in as a lesser or "third verdict".

The result is the modern perception that the "not proven" verdict is an acquittal used when the judge or jury does not have enough evidence to convict but is not sufficiently convinced of the defendant's innocence to bring in a "not guilty" verdict. Essentially, the judge or jury is unconvinced that the suspect is innocent, but has insufficient evidence to the contrary. Technically (though not in the perception of the public), there is no difference between "not proven" and "not guilty" and both are equivalent to the "Not Guilty" verdict of English Law and of other jurisdictions. In popular parlance, this verdict is sometimes jokingly referred to as "not guilty and don't do it again".[1]"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Capital punishment is about revenge, not justice. Don't stoop to their level. On the other hand there's the entirely reasonable argument that we don't want these guys wandering around, and we shouldn't have to pay a penny to keep them alive either. I'd go for dumping them on some godforsaken little island and forgetting about them.

Well I've thought and talked about this issue for years and still haven't come to a completely satisfactory solution that covers all the permutations.

In reference to homicide in general rather than this appalling case in particular, it is certainly true is that knowing more about the details of a case usually leads to a less 'black & white' view on the crime, the criminal and punishment.

I do think however that in cases proven beyond any doubt the convict should be able to opt for death. There may also be a case for compulsory capital punishment if murder is committed in a public place witnessed by at least 2 disinterested witnesses unconnected to the murderer or each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.