Zico Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 32 minutes ago, royal white said: Nor does jail in many cases, but the death penalty for the most severe crimes is more cost effective. So kill the cunts This is not the case that though Life without parole is cheaper because there is no appeal, stick them in a cell and be done with it Death row means numerous appeals and reviews and more time in solitary over many years at a much greater cost, which they do to make sure to the best degree of certainty they can that it's the "right" decision you also end up with scenarios like the one in Alabama or wherever it was where they hadn't executed anyone in years and the drugs used were going to expire so they decided to kill several people in ten days to get value for money Fuck that Let them rot Quote
royal white Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 1 minute ago, Jol_BWFC said: But if you plead guilty, the evidence isn’t tested before a jury in a full trial. Presumably, only sufficient evidence is needed to satisfy the CPS that the threshold to be charged has been met. I’m sure there’s been nut jobs in the past who have said they’ve committed crimes when they haven’t. Quote
royal white Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 3 minutes ago, ZicoKelly said: This is not the case that though Life without parole is cheaper because there is no appeal, stick them in a cell and be done with it Death row means numerous appeals and reviews and more time in solitary over many years at a much greater cost, which they do to make sure to the best degree of certainty they can that it's the "right" decision you also end up with scenarios like the one in Alabama or wherever it was where they hadn't executed anyone in years and the drugs used were going to expire so they decided to kill several people in ten days to get value for money Fuck that Let them rot Hence me saying the sooner the better, no appeals, no reviews, get them in the ground within a month. Save some pennies. Quote
Zico Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 5 minutes ago, royal white said: Hence me saying the sooner the better, no appeals, no reviews, get them in the ground within a month. Save some pennies. Nah, too much margin for error Just did a search, since the 70s, 160 death row inmates in the us have been exonerated, so 3 or 4 a year that could've been killed when innocent Add to that all the innocent ones who will have been executed Unless you're happy for some collateral damage to "save money"? Quote
Jol_BWFC Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 10 minutes ago, royal white said: I’m sure there’s been nut jobs in the past who have said they’ve committed crimes when they haven’t. Didn’t Tommy Robinson admit to contempt of court, before he successfully won his appeal?* Should have just hung him. * Although he was retried and found guilty, many argued he shouldn’t have faced any further retrial. Quote
Jol_BWFC Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 (edited) 15 minutes ago, royal white said: Hence me saying the sooner the better, no appeals, no reviews, get them in the ground within a month. Save some pennies. Tommy Robinson was in prison for more than a month (for a crime he admitted) before he had his conviction overturned. He’s have been dead under your proposals, if it had been a crime with that punishment. Edited July 24, 2019 by Jol_BWFC Quote
royal white Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 3 minutes ago, ZicoKelly said: Nah, too much margin for error Just did a search, since the 70s, 160 death row inmates in the us have been exonerated, so 3 or 4 a year that could've been killed when innocent Add to that all the innocent ones who will have been executed Unless you're happy for some collateral damage to "save money"? “Proven beyond doubt” Quote
royal white Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 1 minute ago, Jol_BWFC said: Tommy Robinson was in prison for more than a month before he had his conviction overturned. “but the death penalty for the most severe crimes is more cost effective.” I wouldn’t have his crime down as severe. Quote
Jol_BWFC Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 (edited) 3 minutes ago, royal white said: “but the death penalty for the most severe crimes is more cost effective.” I wouldn’t have his crime down as severe. If you’re talking costs, aren’t you actually talking about the length of the sentence (ie cost of keeping them in prison), rather than the nature of the crime committed? There are some very lengthy sentences for fraud. Should they be punishable by death? Edited July 24, 2019 by Jol_BWFC Quote
Lt. Aldo Raine Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 (edited) 39 minutes ago, royal white said: Guy writes a letter saying he’s going to kill people, said guy jumps in his car and starts knocking people over, before getting out and stabbing people in his way. This is witnessed by many and recorded on numerous CCTV devices. thats beyond reasonable doubt. Jurors have to be certain beyond reasonable doubt to return a guilty verdict in any criminal trial. There's no legal distinction between criminal convictions. It's either guilty beyond reasonable doubt or not guilty (or possibly also not proven if you're in a Scottish court). What you're proposing would create that legal distinction. So what level of certainty would be required to convict a defendant of murder but only impose a lengthy prison sentence instead of death? And in any case, what would be more torturous, knowing that you'll spend decades/the rest of your life in prison without your freedom or being put out of your misery within a month? I know what it would be for me. Edited July 24, 2019 by Lt. Aldo Raine Quote
Zico Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, royal white said: “Proven beyond doubt” Every guilty conviction by definition is meant to be "proven beyond doubt" Miscarriages happen all the time, both ways This is one of the reasons why most places don't have it and why it's not coming back Keep dreaming though Quote
royal white Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 1 minute ago, Jol_BWFC said: If you’re talking costs, aren’t you actually talking about the length of the sentence (ie cost of keeping them in prison), rather than the nature of the crime committed? There are some very lengthy sentence for fraud. Should they be punishable by death? What don’t you understand? “but the death penalty for the most severe crimes is more cost effective.” I’ve combined the 2, murderers, child abusers, etc, the severe ones. Instead of keeping them inside for the rest of their lives, at a massive cost, be done with them. If you’ve been done for fraud then do your time and be good when released. Quote
royal white Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said: Jurors have to be certain beyond reasonable doubt to return a guilty verdict in any criminal trial. There's no legal distinction between criminal convictions. It's either guilty beyond reasonable doubt or not guilty (or possibly also not proven if you're in a Scottish court). What you're proposing would create that legal distinction. So what level of certainty would be required to convict a defendant of murder but only impose a lengthy prison sentence instead of death? And in any case, what would be more torturous, knowing that you'll spend decades/the rest of your life in prison without your freedom or being put out of your misery within a month? I know what it would be for me. That would involve people who are on a lot more money than me but I’ve already mentioned a few examples in the thread. Edited July 24, 2019 by royal white Quote
royal white Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 6 minutes ago, ZicoKelly said: Every guilty conviction by definition is meant to be "proven beyond doubt" Miscarriages happen all the time, both ways This is one of the reasons why most places don't have it and why it's not coming back Keep dreaming though I’m pretty sure the majority of comments on here are in hindsight Quote
Zico Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 5 minutes ago, royal white said: I’m pretty sure the majority of comments on here are in hindsight And? Quote
Jol_BWFC Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, royal white said: What don’t you understand? “but the death penalty for the most severe crimes is more cost effective.” I’ve combined the 2, murderers, child abusers, etc, the severe ones. Instead of keeping them inside for the rest of their lives, at a massive cost, be done with them. If you’ve been done for fraud then do your time and be good when released. So people convicted of certain serious crimes should do their time then be good, but people convicted of other serious crimes should be killed without the chance to be rehabilitated? Child abuse - is a dad beating his son with a slipper on numerous occasions over 2 or 3 years worthy of the death penalty? Or only if it’s sexual abuse? If you struggle to sleep in the heat, can I suggest you watch “When they see us” on Netflix. It’s a true story. Quote
royal white Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 2 minutes ago, ZicoKelly said: Should of “Just stuck them in a cell and be done with it” Quote
royal white Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 3 minutes ago, Jol_BWFC said: So people convicted of certain serious crimes should do their time then be good, but people convicted of other serious crimes should be killed without the chance to be rehabilitated? Child abuse - is a dad beating his son with a slipper on numerous occasions over 2 or 3 years worthy of the death penalty? Or only if it’s sexual abuse? If you struggle to sleep in the heat, can I suggest you watch “When they see us” on Netflix. It’s a true story. Sleep? Im grafting, surely you don’t think I would use my own time to talk to you fruit cakes 😂😂 Quote
Zico Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 15 minutes ago, royal white said: Should of “Just stuck them in a cell and be done with it” Only if they are proven with some doubt Quote
Jol_BWFC Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 9 minutes ago, royal white said: Sleep? Im grafting, surely you don’t think I would use my own time to talk to you fruit cakes 😂😂 Odd definition of grafting. One advantage of your approach - get rid of some of these rogue army soldiers. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/first-uk-soldier-ever-convicted-14386798.amp https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/03/14/bloody-sunday-one-soldier-charged-murder-attempted-murder/amp/ https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/04/15/former-soldier-charged-murder-teenage-boy-shot-dead-northern/amp/ Shame about this guy, who you would have had killed, despite his murder conviction being overturned. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/15/alexander-blackman-royal-marine-a-judges-quash-murder-conviction Quote
royal white Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 19 minutes ago, Jol_BWFC said: Odd definition of grafting. One advantage of your approach - get rid of some of these rogue army soldiers. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/first-uk-soldier-ever-convicted-14386798.amp https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/03/14/bloody-sunday-one-soldier-charged-murder-attempted-murder/amp/ https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/04/15/former-soldier-charged-murder-teenage-boy-shot-dead-northern/amp/ Shame about this guy, who you would have had killed, despite his murder conviction being overturned. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/15/alexander-blackman-royal-marine-a-judges-quash-murder-conviction Some haven’t been tried yet so how do you get “proven beyond doubt” from that? You didn’t think that through did you. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11740048/British-soldier-jailed-for-nine-years-for-raping-six-year-old-girl.html get this cunt in the ground Quote
Zico Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 5 minutes ago, royal white said: Some haven’t been tried yet so how do you get “proven beyond doubt” from that? You didn’t think that through did you. So if proven beyond doubt, kill them? What happens if there is doubt? Quote
royal white Posted July 24, 2019 Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, ZicoKelly said: So if proven beyond doubt, kill them? What happens if there is doubt? See above regarding some of my recommendations. What about you? beyond doubt, life? if there is doubt? What then? Quote
Zico Posted July 25, 2019 Posted July 25, 2019 11 minutes ago, royal white said: See above regarding some of my recommendations. What about you? beyond doubt, life? if there is doubt? What then? If there's any doubt, not guilty, that's the whole point of a trial, you're not meant to find someone guilty if there is doubt Unfortunately some people have ace lawyers who are able to cast doubt, eg OJ Simpson and Robert Durst, or pay people off before it gets that far, eg Michael Jackson Unfortunately some don't and are sent down when they didn't do it Which is why it's best not to kill anyone who is "proven beyond doubt" because that's technically anyone found guilty, which doesn't necessarily mean they are guilty Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.