This Bryan Kohberger case, shows death penalty is flawed?

tenofspades · 1 May 2025 at 12:53

I don't know if anyone has followed this Bryan Kohberger case.

There were student murders in Idaho. And the suspect is this guy.

Everything looks a red flag, but there's no smoking gun. You could say 95% chance he did it, but there's that 5% doubt. There is no 100% bang to rights proof. For example, could there have been someone else on the scene? No way of 100% knowing.

IvanDobskey · 1 May 2025 at 13:01

Whilst I do think the death penalty should be there for particularly evil crimes, it should never be actioned without 100% proof of guilt. Overwhelming circumstantial evidence isn't enough for me.

Just let them rot in jail in this case.

Zefan · 1 May 2025 at 13:04

Yes the death penalty has inherent problems, as does any form of justice for that matter. Of course it is more final but I do find it interesting that people put it on such a high pedestal vs other sentences, it's not like you can truly undo the taking of someone's freedom unjustly for any period of time.

Chuk_Chuk · 1 May 2025 at 14:31

I’m assuming it was a pretty heinous murder for this person to be considered for the death penalty.

Also what’s the summary of the evidence? What makes you say there is a 5% chance he didn’t do it.

dirtychinchilla · 1 May 2025 at 14:45

This is how GD used to be. I don't believe that the death penalty is acceptable in any case. The government should not be allowed to murder its citizens, amongst many other reasonable arguments.

Zefan · 1 May 2025 at 15:02

dirtychinchilla said:
This is how GD used to be. I don't believe that the death penalty is acceptable in any case. The government should not be allowed to murder its citizens, amongst many other reasonable arguments.

Can you explain why this is worse than being able to take their freedom by locking them up for life? What's the material difference? I'm not saying I don't believe there is one, but I find the exercise of explaining it very interesting.

dirtychinchilla · 1 May 2025 at 15:08

Zefan said:
Can you explain why this is worse than being able to take their freedom by locking them up for life? What's the material difference? I'm not saying I don't believe there is one, but I find the exercise of explaining it very interesting.

Chance of rehabilitation, living with what they've done, opportunity to understand it and them, and the fact that death is too easy, if you want to punish someone (I don't necessarily believe that they need punishing).

Dis86 · 1 May 2025 at 15:40

Zefan said:
Can you explain why this is worse than being able to take their freedom by locking them up for life? What's the material difference? I'm not saying I don't believe there is one, but I find the exercise of explaining it very interesting.

At least with locking them up, if new evidence to potentially exonerate them comes to light it can be acted upon.

potatolord · 1 May 2025 at 15:40

We need the death penalty for a lot more offences. Off (with!) the top of my head I can think of
Complaining about the death penalty
Obeying the 20mph limit in wales
Standing in front of me at the "whoops!" section in asda

ZXSpectrum · 1 May 2025 at 15:45

you forgot "People who say innit"... Innit... oh bugger... :cry:

uber soldat · 1 May 2025 at 15:56

Hang 'em high.

Chuk_Chuk · 1 May 2025 at 16:11

dirtychinchilla said:
Chance of rehabilitation

I see your point but i will retort that there are people that cannot be rehabilitated because they don’t want to change.

dirtychinchilla said:
living with what they've done,

Only relevant if the person in question feels remorse.

dirtychinchilla said:
and the fact that death is too easy, if you want to punish someone

Unless you plan on torturing them keeping them in jail is a lot easier for them than death.

Quartz · 1 May 2025 at 16:25

tenofspades said:
I don't know if anyone has followed this Bryan Kohberger case.

Nope, but I'm firmly against the death penalty for multiple reasons.

First, there's always the possibility the accused is innocent. Fit-ups happen and it's impossible to apologise to someone who's dead. Check out the Law's Strangest Cases for an interesting example in Scotland where the accused was fitted up by the victim - she committed suicide while accusing him.

Second, imprisonment allows the convicted to repent and reform.

Third, it makes police officers safer. If someone knows they're going to die then why not take as many people as possible with them? But if they know they're going to live if they surrender then they're more likely to surrender.

And let's be clear, at this stage, Bryan Kohberger is simply the accused. He has yet to be convicted so is due the presumption of his innocence.

StriderX · 1 May 2025 at 16:33

Well their government is currently in the process of trying to justify the deportation of an innocent man by lying that he's a gang member, so how anyone can trust the death penalty in such circumstances must surely just like murdering people.

bainbridge · 2 May 2025 at 06:12

Imprisonment is quite a recent punishment.

In the past people were only held in a jail while waiting to appear in court.

Then after the hearing whatever the deemed punishment was meted out; Fines, flogging, the stocks or death etc.

With near-instant access to CCTV and other evidence nowadays, a short spell on remand then being hauled before the court for instant justice is the way forward IMO.

StriderX · 2 May 2025 at 07:32

bainbridge said:
Imprisonment is quite a recent punishment.

In the past people were only held in a jail while waiting to appear in court.

Then after the hearing whatever the deemed punishment was meted out; Fines, flogging, the stocks or death etc.

With near-instant access to CCTV and other evidence nowadays, a short spell on remand then being hauled before the court for instant justice is the way forward IMO.

That implies CCTV is infallible, it clearly is not and is only going to get less trustworthy not more so. The only 'proof' there can ever be is a series of corroborations which isn't impossible to engineer so a death penalty isn't reasonable.

dirtychinchilla · 2 May 2025 at 07:41

Chuk_Chuk said:
Unless you plan on torturing them keeping them in jail is a lot easier for them than death.

The only thing difficult about death is knowing that it's coming.

bainbridge · 2 May 2025 at 08:00

StriderX said:
That implies CCTV is infallible, it clearly is not and is only going to get less trustworthy not more so. The only 'proof' there can ever be is a series of corroborations which isn't impossible to engineer so a death penalty isn't reasonable.

This is the reason why many people have been on death row for decades. A seed of doubt sown by the defence and the whole thing is strung out.

I say use the evidence that we have at the time, with whatever the best trusted methods of confirming valid evidence are, and get on with it.

dirtychinchilla · 2 May 2025 at 08:36

bainbridge said:
This is the reason why many people have been on death row for decades. A seed of doubt sown by the defence and the whole thing is strung out.

I say use the evidence that we have at the time, with whatever the best trusted methods of confirming valid evidence are, and get on with it.

The flip side, which has been very often the case in the US, is that the prosecution sows a seed of doubt based on fabricated evidence and an innocent is killed as a consequence.

ttaskmaster · 2 May 2025 at 08:38

The death penalty and other pretty harsh punishments were never effective deterrents before, as evidenced by how often people were executed throughout history, so why would it be of any use today?