Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
I'm a strong believer. If found guilty of horrific murders, child abuse etc... Then save time & money and hang the feckers!
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 124
|
By:
`'horrific' - `grossly offensive to decency or morality', so topping ceo's of corporate companied and mp's etc gets you off?
Child Abuse - `physical, sexual or emotional mistreatment or neglect of a child or children' Surely includes swearing at a football match in front of minors. Hang em high. |
|
By:
No no no. Legalised murder. Brings society down to their level.
|
|
By:
in favour, as long as the evidence is utterly bombproof... still plenty of unsound connvictions around imo
|
|
By:
For starting pointless threads, yes. Otherwise, no.
|
|
By:
e.g. baby peter - what point is there in letting his killers live? what will be their future contribution to society? hindley & brady? get rid, if only for cathartic reasons, subject to the above qualification
|
|
By:
'believe in capital punishment'
I don't really agree with the question in the title of the thread whether we have the death penalty is not a matter of belief at all anyway, completely pointless it's not going to be re-introduced |
|
By:
It should be re-introduced.
Would save the country a fortune, taxes could be lowered & victim's family would feel justice has been done. |
|
By:
never gonna happen forget it
|
|
By:
Even in the countries with capital punishment, it is not used enough.
I miss your threads about P&L and your German wife. |
|
By:
It could happen , the trend towards eliminating it across the world could reverse ,as other historical trends have in the past.
It is inconceivable with the current political establishment in the UK , but nothing is set in stone and political structures can be swept away by events. The first major nation to abolish Capital Punishment was , surprisingly , Russia , in the mid 1800s (which is why Lenin,Stalin et al were still at large in 1917 in spite of convictions for what would have been capital offences in many contemporary societies) . God knows how many millions have been sentenced to death in that country since. |
|
By:
I believe terrorist suspects should be tortured first and then hanged. cheers.
|
|
By:
This has been debated so many times on here, it will never happen but in certain circumstances it is justified. I would vote yes myself.
|
|
By:
I believe terrorist suspects should be tortured first and then hanged. cheers.
lol just if they are suspects? don't bother with a trial then ,save even more money  |
|
By:
glimmer for Rope Man Job
|
|
By:
whilst we are signed up to the ECHR it aint happening
|
|
By:
The chit chat pitchforks and blazing torches are at the ready. If it's beyond doubt that a murderer say for example like Moat is bang to rights as he was then I don't see the point in giving him a life sentence, get rid and be done with him.
|
|
By:
timothy evans
|
|
By:
Stefan Kiszco
|
|
By:
Kizsko was 'bombproof' as a murderer in 1976:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lesley_Molseed |
|
By:
yes the poor standard of detective work (maybe corruption too in some cases) and the reluctance of the establishment to admit they got it wrong would mean probably 20+ innocent people would have been hanged if it hadn't been abolished
Barry George would be 6ft under and there are still a few very dubious cases with people still in prison ( eg Michael Stone) who would have been hanged by now |
|
By:
"Sheila Buckley, whose daughter Maxine played a major part in securing Kiszko's conviction, blasted the police for not arresting him earlier and told the Manchester Evening News that "Children are a lot safer now this monster has been put away". She also demanded Kiszko's hanging."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Also in February 1991 the four girls involved in the court trial admitted that the evidence they had given, which had led to Kiszko's arrest and conviction, was false and that they had lied for "a laugh" and because "At the time it was funny". Burke said she wished she had not said anything but refused to apologise, saying she did not think it would have gone as far as it did. Buckley said it was not Kiszko who had exposed himself to her and had not been stalking them, but that they had seen a taxi driver (not Ronald Castree) urinating behind a bush on the day of Molseed's murder. She also refused to apologise. Brown refused to make a statement. Hind was the most remorseful of the four, and said what they did was "Foolish but we were young" and had she appeared in court, she would have told the truth about Kiszko and not perjured herself, unlike her friends who committed perjury. She herself did not think Kiszko would be convicted." |
|
By:
yes in some circumstances
eg the recent manchester cop killer. 32 bullets and a hand grenade!! FFS premeditated murder if ever there was +++++++++++++++++ life for a life is the only answer in cases like this |
|
By:
Kizsko was a tragic case tommy and why I said the evidence must be bombproof, i.e. cctv or multiple eyewitness accounts... rip stefan
 |
|
By:
Indeed, Tober.
For anyone to think miscarriages of justice would not happen 'in this day and age' are severely mistaken. Would anyone of the 'pro death penalty' brigade be prepared to have say, their mother or father killed by the state on a wrongful conviction if it meant that 'the ones who really deserved it' were executed? Think on. |
|
By:
But MisterBadger, the evidence was 'bombproof' according to the evidence provided in 1976.
It was only with hindsight to be seen as one of the worst miscarriages of justice of all time. |
|
By:
Kiszko was remanded until his murder trial, which began on 7 July 1976 under Sir Hugh Park. He was defended by David Waddington QC, who later became Home Secretary. The prosecuting QC, Peter Taylor, later became Lord Chief Justice the day after Kiszko was cleared of the murder in 1992. Taylor was most noted for his reports into the Hillsborough Disaster at the Sheffield Wednesday FC football stadium at Hillsborough, Sheffield.
what more do you need to know?  |
|
By:
I couldn't agree more tommy, there needs to be material, corroborated, evidence
too many tory cvuns involved in the above case, they will always look after their own first |
|
By:
we all know about miscarriages of justice - it's a very old record.
eg guildford 4, bham 6, Carl Bridgewater - all in the 70's and 80's +++++++++++++++ with cctv / dna / video confessions in the cop shop / people admitting to murder at the trial....things have moved on. A copper can no longer beat the **** out of you for a confession then life for a life |
|
By:
With a proviso
Any copper found guilty of manipulating evidence then max life imprisonment sentence available - to stop bent coppers stitching people up (like they used to) |
|
By:
But Emden, there are and always will be provisos.
People of any given era think the latest technology provides the uncontrovertible proof. This is not so - and is always superseded at a later date. Would the death of one innocent man or woman (your father or mother, say) be worth killing everyone who falls into a specific criteria at one particular moment in time? |
|
By:
all forms of life are worthy of compassion
|
|
By:
sorry bb, can't see that - what are the redeeming qualities of those I mentioned above?
|
|
By:
waste of time
not happening in any of your lifetimes |
|
By:
TT
I like to think I am a reasonable man. I know of lots of cases of miscarriages of justice. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/may/05/gerry-conlon-miscarriage-of-justice (The 2nd paragraph I agree with) However, in exceptional circumstances - like the one I mentioned above - the death penalty should apply. |
|
By:
Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
|
|
By:
The death penalty will never be reinstated so no need for the antis to worry - the majority are always ignored in this country
|
|
By:
Emden, I see many cases on the news where the automatic, human response is 'they should hang for that' - but as I'm trying to postulate, the death penalty is never a thing which can be taken at pure face value.
Kizsco admitted to his 'crime' in 1976: "Kiszko confessed to the crime after three days of intensive questioning: he believed that by doing so he would be allowed to go home, and that the ensuing investigations would prove him innocent and his confession false." How many people on here would think if the case was being heard now that the man could be innocent? |
|
By:
The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.
|
|
By:
Kizsco admitted to his 'crime' in 1976:
you're referring to Stefan Kiszko . I'm aware of the case. The coppers stitched him up. The coppers got away with it. THe law need to be changed when coppers fabricate evidence they face the full wrath of the law - unlike now , when then they retire 'early' |