Harmless 39 year old alcoholic woman tortured and beaten to death by girls aged 13 and 14.

[kaktus]

There is no deterrent.

Of course, it's impossible to stop every potential murder as some will happen no matter the consequences (mental instability, heat of the moment, rage etc).

However, the sheer fact that the girl had the audacity to ask her caregiver "whats the punishment for murder" tells you our justice system isn't even close to getting it right in our society.

Now I bet if the punishment was for example, skinning alive, dipped in acid, boiled alive, or anything else of that severity, there wouldn't be much more than a handful of people who wouldn't know about it let alone risk committing a murder and face those consequences.

 

[ColdAsIce]

BBC article reports that one of the girls was given strong cider by her mother at the age of 11 and also strong prescription drugs that resulted in her having severe nightmares and hallucinations. Absolutely no defending them but surely this mother should be in prison?

Also something like 5 siblings all from different fathers and 3 of the daughters in prison....

Can we not sterilise this awful excuse for a mother?

 

[balky12]

Absolutely barbaric. Good they have been locked up for a minimum of 15 years but there is no rehabilitating these kind of people.

If torturing someone for 5 hours, undressing them and humiliating them over social media is their idea of passing time at 13/14 they are beyond saving.

When I was that age I was probably playing with lego or something..

 

[dirtychinchilla]

Of course, it's impossible to stop every potential murder as some will happen no matter the consequences (mental instability, heat of the moment, rage etc).

However, the sheer fact that the girl had the audacity to ask her caregiver "whats the punishment for murder" tells you our justice system isn't even close to getting it right in our society.

Now I bet if the punishment was for example, skinning alive, dipped in acid, boiled alive, or anything else of that severity, there wouldn't be much more than a handful of people who wouldn't know about it let alone risk committing a murder and face those consequences.

You're making an assumption which I don't believe is supported by any fact. Those sorts of punishments have existed and do exist. I believe it's Saudi Arabia in which you can have your hand cut off for theft...thieves still exist and inf act theft accoutns for 47% of crime in Saudi Arabia (according to Wikipedia), so I'm really not convinced that deterrents work for your committed criminal.

These girls, in this case, have done something that is so utterly illogical, I'm really not sure that it would have been possible to deter them.

 

[Trig]

There is no deterrent. If you commit a murder, you know what you're in for. I doubt knowing that you might also die really lends much to your thought process if you can get over the hurdle and think that killing someone is acceptable.

What do you want to achieve by punishing people?

Well quite a lot of minor crimes, and some more major ones these days are like a badge of honor and people are more than happy enough to commit a crime knowing that they'll get out and been seen as billy big balls once they get out.

They say the punishment should fit the crime, but, what if it didn't, what if the death penalty was still an option in this country and the punishment far outweighed the crime, would that be deterrent enough?

 

[Trig]

BBC article reports that one of the girls was given strong cider by her mother at the age of 11 and also strong prescription drugs that resulted in her having severe nightmares and hallucinations. Absolutely no defending them but surely this mother should be in prison?

Also something like 5 siblings all from different fathers and 3 of the daughters in prison....

Can we not sterilise this awful excuse for a mother?

Actually a call for sterilization isn't a bad one, make sure people that are of that sort of mental attitude cant have kids either naturally or by adoption etc..

 

[Washout]

You're making an assumption which I don't believe is supported by any fact. Those sorts of punishments have existed and do exist. I believe it's Saudi Arabia in which you can have your hand cut off for theft...thieves still exist and inf act theft accoutns for 47% of crime in Saudi Arabia (according to Wikipedia), so I'm really not convinced that deterrents work for your committed criminal.

These girls, in this case, have done something that is so utterly illogical, I'm really not sure that it would have been possible to deter them.

It's a tough one really. Are those thefts born from desperation and need rather than greed? If the latter then, knowing the punishment, you can't have too much sympathy. If the former then it's an appalling punishment for someone who actually needed help.
Not particularly sure I'd trust the Saudi justice system very much either!

 

[FoxEye]

Think we tried that once, austrailia happened

And we learned our lesson.

So this time, exiles will not be allowed access to cricket bats or rugby balls.

 

[D.P.]

It's so easy in this country to take a life and then get away with a silly sentence behind the bars. More burden on the tax payer and the society itself. Hang these heartless murderers.

Do you have any idea how expensive the death penalty is? Paying millions more to sentence someone to death is not smart economics, even ignoring any sense of morality.

 

[Pawnless Endgame]

15 years.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35989955

Should be a whole life tariff, regardless of their age.

15 before parole did surprise me actually. That was at least what I was hoping for, but I agree with you that they should have been issued a whole life tariff like what a US court would have done.

Both girls were blank-faced as they were told they would serve a minimum of 15 years, although once they had been led away and the door shut behind them, one of them let out a despairing wail.

Crying? Well, sucks to be you. You commit the crime, you do the time m'dear.

So probably 15 years, or out in 3 because everyone forgot about it, it's against their human rights or they're now remorseful.

Sadly, this will probably happen.

 

[Tefal]

Do you have any idea how expensive the death penalty is?

do you?


it varies wildly by country.


i assume you meant to say "do you have any idea how expensive the death penalty is in America?"

 

[Orionaut]

I believe it's Saudi Arabia in which you can have your hand cut off for theft...thieves still exist and inf act theft accoutns for 47% of crime in Saudi Arabia (according to Wikipedia), so I'm really not convinced that deterrents work for your committed criminal.

The question isn't so much about the fact that theft still occurs in Saudi, it is about how many thefts occur.

Saudi has a wide range of offences for which one can be executed, and many more where one might be mutilated.

They also show little hesitation in imposing these sentences (Unlike, say, the USA where Capital sentences are routinely handed down but are only very rarely imposed)

However, despite this, only a couple of hundred executions take place each year (I do not know how many mutilations)

This might suggest a very low underlying crime rate compared with the west.

This might also suggest that the deterrence factor is actually very powerful indeed.

As I said before, Deterrence only works for those who can be deterred. So it is a very difficult figure to quantify.

There will always be a hard core of people who will not be deterred at any price. But their swift and public execution might well effectively deter many other people who might otherwise be tempted to offend if the consequences were likely to be rather less serious.

 

[Angilion]

Well quite a lot of minor crimes, and some more major ones these days are like a badge of honor and people are more than happy enough to commit a crime knowing that they'll get out and been seen as billy big balls once they get out.

They say the punishment should fit the crime, but, what if it didn't, what if the death penalty was still an option in this country and the punishment far outweighed the crime, would that be deterrent enough?

It wasn't in the past, so why would it be in the present?

You could go with the tyrannical authoritarian police state approach, which does reduce crime significantly. I think the benefit isn't worth the cost, but some people might differ.

Before the recent mass migration changed things, many of the countries with the lowest crime rates and lowest recidivism rates had the "softest" criminal justice systems. That approach seems to work if you have a relatively civilised population. Harder to do than a tyranny, but a much nicer place to be if you can make it work.

 

[Tefal]

Only purpose the death sentence serves is to prevent reoffending.

True life in prision achives that aim wothout the dangers of killing the wrong person so for me it makes more sense.

 

[Vern1961]

Anecdotally, I did read in one of the memoirs written by a former British hangman (Syd Dernley, I think) that the atmosphere in the prison on an execution morning did change substantially. Here was a building filled with noisy, boisterous villains, the dregs of society, but when those trapdoors crashed down the building was silent. It sent a message straight back to the criminal society. Of course in the 1950's (still slightly before my time) life and culture was radically different from our current society. The memoirs also point out that very few of those hanged were cold blooded, calculating criminals. Most were actually as a result of a domestic dispute which got out of hand or a lover's tiff, than anything more sinister.

But while I support the death penalty for the most heinous crimes proven beyond absolute doubt, it's not coming back - even if the next GE produced a far right government. And it would not have applied as noted to anyone under 18. Hence the controversy in the Craig/Bentley case, where 17 yo Craig fired the weapon but it was 18yo Bentley who swung for joint enterprise. However that does not mean as a society we should not be taking a long look at where the lawlessness is coming from and what can be done on all three counts - prevention, deterrent and containment/punishment of the felon. At the least, the minimum tariff for a life sentence needs to be beefed up, with a possible move towards the US system where a specific period is given, usually in excess of 25 years for first degree murder.

 

[Amp34]

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state

Interesting statistics on murder rates in US states. It appear to show no real correlation between the death penalty and murder rates. Even those states that have rescinded the death penalty in recent years haven't seen a corresponding jump in crime rate.

However:

For 2013, the average Murder Rate of Death Penalty states was 4.4, while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 3.4

For 2012, the average Murder Rate of Death Penalty States was 4.7, while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 3.7

For 2011, the average Murder Rate of Death Penalty States was 4.7, while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 3.1

For 2010, the average Murder Rate of Death Penalty States was 4.6, while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 2.9

For 2009, the average Murder Rate of Death Penalty States was 4.9, while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 2.8

For 2008, the average Murder Rate of Death Penalty States was 5.2, while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 3.3

So on average the murder rate is lower in states with no death penalty. At first glance that would imply the idea execution is a deterrent probably has no scientific basis.

That said, as above, the majority of murders are impulsive, and wouldn't be deterred, and there may be a correlation between states with more crime believing they need the death penalty.

 

[Vern1961]

I guess in this case the debate also extends as to how young people of school age come to the situation of being lawless in their early teens. Discipline (or lack of) in the home and at school, no respect developed for the society they exist in.

As with capital punishment, corporal punishment isn't coming back either. Nevertheless as someone who went to school in the mid 60's to mid 70's it was very sobering to be in the vicinity of the headmaster's office on a Monday morning and hear the "whack" from behind the door, not to mention the look on the faces of those waiting to go in... One school I attended in the North East was a hardcore Catholic school (St John's in Felling if anyone here might have heard of it). The educational equivalent of the gulag where each teacher had their own strap and punishment was meted out mercilessly and summarily in front of the whole class. No wonder I became an agnostic as soon as I left home!

I was a goody two shoes and managed to dodge anything like that, so the deterrent worked. In addition I loved and respected my parents and would have felt thoroughly ashamed if I had let them down.

 

[FoxEye]

So on average the murder rate is lower in states with no death penalty.

Which doesn't prove anything, unfortunately.

The only data that would possibly prove anything would be if a state adopted/outlawed the death penalty, and the change in behaviour in that state (if any).

 

[Amp34]

Which doesn't prove anything, unfortunately.

The only data that would possibly prove anything would be if a state adopted/outlawed the death penalty, and the change in behaviour in that state (if any).

That was kinda the point of the rest of the paragraph.

As for your second point there are four states that rescinded the death penalty in the last few years. All show* either a decline in murder rate or no change. That could back up the assertion that the death penalty is not a deterrent (in fact at first glance it would appear, with both bits of data, that it is an encouragement to murder). Obviously that would need a lot more analysis than we could do to actually provide actual real evidence however, especially considering murder rates throughout the US have declined over that period as well.

*Two states do jump up the year after, but subsequent years are at or lower than death penalty years.

 

[The Running Man]

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state

Interesting statistics on murder rates in US states. It appear to show no real correlation between the death penalty and murder rates. Even those states that have rescinded the death penalty in recent years haven't seen a corresponding jump in crime rate.

However:



So on average the murder rate is lower in states with no death penalty. At first glance that would imply the idea execution is a deterrent probably has no scientific basis.

That said, as above, the majority of murders are impulsive, and wouldn't be deterred, and there may be a correlation between states with more crime believing they need the death penalty.

How many of those receiving the death penalty reoffended vs those who did not receive the death penalty?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...far-higher-know-admits-parole-board-boss.html

"More killers and rapists are committing another serious crime after they are let out of jail than official figures suggest, the head of the Parole Board has said.
Sir David Latham said he was concerned government statistics underplay the extent of reoffending by life sentence prisoners who are released from prison.
Prison rules allow murderers, paedophiles and other serious offenders given life sentences to be released once they have served the minimum term set by the court."

It's alright though innit, could have arrested the wrong person etc. Let's do some good!