Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Lets have a heated debate. Death Sentence: Yes or No

Do you support the death sentence?

  • Yes - Death penalty is right

    Votes: 32 34.4%
  • No - Never

    Votes: 55 59.1%
  • Where's that fence

    Votes: 6 6.5%

  • Total voters
    93


Man of Harveys

Well-known member
Jul 9, 2003
18,804
Brighton, UK
BensGrandad said:
I knew police officers who were involved in the case and they all agreed that the reason that the courts found their convictions unsafe, note they were never found to be not guilty, was due to the evidence given by the then Chief Constable of Surrey Sir David McNee, later to be Chief of the Met whose evidence was not reliable but all other police officers connected with gave good evidence. These particualar officers told me directly after the case that they would 'get away with it' on appeal after they had heard McNees evidence.

The police have consistently said that they were not looking for anybody else after the retrial. They were convinced and still are that they got the right people but our justice system let them off.
So the police saw them plant the bombs? Interesting.
 




Uncle Buck

Ghost Writer
Jul 7, 2003
28,071
I am against the death penalty.

In this case catching Sadam alive in a way was the worst thing possible. It meant those in power had to do something with him. If they hang him he could become a martyr (althought those that swung at Nuremberg did not, as people thought they might). If they lock him up for the rest of his days, he becomes a focus for those that share him views, as happened with Hess.
 


Shegull

New member
Jul 7, 2003
1,645
On a Bed of Roses
BensGrandad said:
I knew police officers who were involved in the case and they all agreed that the reason that the courts found their convictions unsafe, note they were never found to be not guilty, was due to the evidence given by the then Chief Constable of Surrey Sir David McNee, later to be Chief of the Met whose evidence was not reliable but all other police officers connected with gave good evidence. These particualar officers told me directly after the case that they would 'get away with it' on appeal after they had heard McNees evidence.

The police have consistently said that they were not looking for anybody else after the retrial. They were convinced and still are that they got the right people but our justice system let them off.


Are you an ex policeman?

You are talking about an era when anybody with an irish accent was guilty until proven innocent.
 


BensGrandad

New member
Jul 13, 2003
72,015
Haywards Heath
No I am not an ex policeman. In 1968 I hada pub in Kings Cross in London that was frequented by many Irish and I had nothing against any of them.

One day an Irish lady dropped a glass and broke it and I gave her a dustpan and brush to sweep it up and a youth demo leader who was with her Tariq Ali told me should wouldnt pick it up because she was royalty. When I asked who she was, he said Bernadette Devlin whereupon I walked around the bar grabbed him behind the neck and rubbed his face in the glass and said that if she didnt sweep it up he would. A couple of weeks later the special branch asked to set up listening posts in our kitchen to listen inwhen they held their meeting but there was nothing of interest. It wasnt what the old bill had thought.
 


Buzzer

Languidly Clinical
Oct 1, 2006
26,121
Well done Ben's Grandad.

Tariq Ali is the worst kind of political opportunist and the prototype for George Galloway.

He's what Orwell would have described as 'the type of socialist who will do anything for the working classes except become one'.

He's a :censored: of the biggest order and a moral vacuum.
 






surrey jim

Not in Surrey
Aug 2, 2005
18,159
Bevendean
No:

On the one hand if someone is actually guilty, death is an easy way out, i think they should be in the traditional cells (no sky tv rubbish or playstations) they took someones human rights away they shouldnt have any themselves

also if the person is found innocent at a later date the compensation awarded would be massive
 






BensGrandad said:
I knew police officers who were involved in the case and they all agreed that the reason that the courts found their convictions unsafe, note they were never found to be not guilty, was due to the evidence given by the then Chief Constable of Surrey Sir David McNee, later to be Chief of the Met whose evidence was not reliable but all other police officers connected with gave good evidence. These particualar officers told me directly after the case that they would 'get away with it' on appeal after they had heard McNees evidence.

The police have consistently said that they were not looking for anybody else after the retrial. They were convinced and still are that they got the right people but our justice system let them off.

The police thought they would get away with it. No f***ing shit Sherlock.
The police were not looking for any one else. Surprise, f***ing ,surprise.
 


Hungry Joe

SINNEN
Oct 22, 2004
7,636
Heading for shore
I've lifted this from a post by captain riot on another forum debating the issue but it sums things up nicely for me;

Five reasons why men should not hang

1. The death penalty has no deterrent effect (the main aim of a civilised criminal justice system?).

2. Capital punishment offers no opportunity for rehabilitation (the secondary aim of a civilised criminal justice system?).

3. Execution is final and irreversible (think miscarriages of justice).

4. It's inhumane.

5. The death penalty is administered unfairly. In the capital punishment states of the US, where a black murderer killing a white victim is seven times more likely to be sentenced to death than a white murderer killing a black victim, capital punishment is the ultimate form of racial discrimination.
 


desprateseagull

New member
Jul 20, 2003
10,171
brighton, actually
even with the DP, USA (for example) has very high crime rate, so hardly a deterent?

Though people clearly intent on murder (ie, no reasonable doubt) should fry, and save the taxpayer having to keep them housed and fed. it may even bring some closure to their victim's families..

my only concern is that wrong person may be convicted of a crime, so when they're dead, they're dead- no appeal!
 




Shegull

New member
Jul 7, 2003
1,645
On a Bed of Roses
BensGrandad said:
No I am not an ex policeman. In 1968 I hada pub in Kings Cross in London that was frequented by many Irish and I had nothing against any of them.

One day an Irish lady dropped a glass and broke it and I gave her a dustpan and brush to sweep it up and a youth demo leader who was with her Tariq Ali told me should wouldnt pick it up because she was royalty. When I asked who she was, he said Bernadette Devlin whereupon I walked around the bar grabbed him behind the neck and rubbed his face in the glass and said that if she didnt sweep it up he would. A couple of weeks later the special branch asked to set up listening posts in our kitchen to listen inwhen they held their meeting but there was nothing of interest. It wasnt what the old bill had thought.



So if the police didn't hear what they wanted to hear how come you know for a fact that the Guildford Four were guilty without a shadow of a doubt.

Have to say that have never heard of people in pubs being made pick up their own broken glasses. Usually some lounge boy or barman would do that. And as for Bernadette Devlin being called royalty - well I have heard of her being called many things but royalty was never never ever one of them. To her that would have been the greatest insult.
 


Gully

Monkey in a seagull suit.
Apr 24, 2004
16,812
Way out west
I agree wholeheartedly with the post by Hungry Joe, the death penalty is just wrong, no credence should be given to any country or state that still practices it.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here