Life means LIFE, or does it?

Discussion in 'Et Cetera, Et Cetera' started by dong20, Feb 26, 2008.

  1. dong20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    The grey country
    The second such sentence handed down in just a few days.

    Bellfield given 'whole life' sentence - Yahoo! News UK
    Whole life sentence for Suffolk killer - Yahoo! News UK

    Unrelated (perhaps), I saw a the results of a snap (popular) poll this morning where 62% in the UK said they would support the re-introduction of the death penalty.

    Do these sentences (which I support) signal a spontaneous toughening of approach by the judiciary, or are they more reflective of political and popular pressure to 'get tougher' with criminals, especially those of this type, a little of both or, mere blips?

    The problem of political interference in judicial sentencing decisions is nothing new of course. One notable and comparatively recent instance was the Shipman case a few years back, and of course there were other classics such as Hindley.

    The line marking a correct balance between rapidly increasing (and costly) prison populations, political accountability, judicial independence and a sentencing regime acceptable to society and especially the victims of crime is is a hard one to draw, perhaps an impossible one.
     
  2. Pretend_Woman

    Pretend_Woman New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2008
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    62% of people asked.

    The idea that 62% in the UK want the death penalty reintroduced is simply nonsense and a prostitute murderer will do little to effect that.

    Murder rates in Enland and Wales are still far, far lower than the world average, no matter what the tabloids may like to present.
     
  3. dong20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    The grey country
    I disagree, and...I disagree. The reason I cited it (as a throwaway if you like) was precisely because such crimes do exactly that which you say they don't - they influence popular opinion.

    When asked the question rationally, and in context, of course the answer is usually rather different. Seems rather obvious to me, although it wasn't really my point in starting the thread.

    Naturally, this largely depends on both the question being asked, and of whom.
     
  4. frizzle

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,076
    Likes Received:
    3
    Yet they've gone up 400% sine the abolition of the death penatly.

    What disturbs me about these murders, it's not the fact that people are killing each other, that's been going on since the beginning of time, BUT it's the vulgarity and extremeness of these killings. Take the Sally-Anne murder, that's just fucking sick and you wouldn't hear about stuff like that 30 or 40 years ago.
     
  5. dong20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    The grey country
    No, they really haven't but they have doubled in the last 40 years and you may not know that murder rates at the turn of the 20th century were higher than at the time the death penalty was abolished.

    On your 400% claim, a citation?

    Well, first you weren't alive 30 or 40 years ago so that rather discounts your view as other than anecdotal, and second no you likely wouldn't. That's not proof they didn't happen though is it?

    On the subject of horrific crimes and crime sprees; have you ever heard of Jack the Ripper, Dr. Crippen,* Reginald Christie, Peter Manuel, Robert Maudsley, Dennis Nillson, the Hindleys to name but a handful?

    The biggest factor in the reporting and perception of violent crime lies less in any increases in the crimes themselves than that their reporting and sensationalism.

    * Recent DNA evidence casts doubt on his guilt.
     
  6. B_ScaredLittleBoy

    B_ScaredLittleBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2007
    Messages:
    3,337
    Likes Received:
    8
    Last time I remember reading a paper it was about the sentences handed down to paedophiles and them getting off lightly. I remember one judge actually said in court that a ten year old was "dressed provocatively"...in her own house!

    I agree that life should mean life or at the very least the full 30 year term. Although I don't know whether that is becoming obsolete and full life is becoming the norm.

    The issue I think is the sentencing and punishment of paedophiles and other sexual criminals.

    "Provocative" Story: Judge Claims Paedophile Victim Dressed Provocatively (from Oxford Mail)

    About Crippen: If he was innocent why did he flee the country and wear a disguise?
     
  7. dong20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    The grey country
    I didn't say he was, merely that doubt had been cast on exactly whose remains were found. As for running, at that time, under those circumstances, guilty or not, I can understand why he might have decided that a swift exit was his best strategy.

    He had the distinction of being the first criminal (OK, alleged) caught through the use of wireless communications.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted