[Archived] Hang Em High

[Flopsy]

Because it was felt it should be by the moderating team.

Now back to hanging people (or not)

[ABBEY]

id hang the scum off panaroma

[thenodrog]

can someone inform me why the panarama thread has been closed

Dunno waggy but from the last few posts of that thread it would appear that any criticism of Jack Straw is banned on ICBINF.

[Flopsy]

From the Posting guidelines:

21. Final Word

The administrators" or moderators" decision is final. On occassions moderators will make decisions that they feel are for the overall good of the site.

22. Complaints

If you disagree with any decision taken by the moderators, you should contact us via email to [email protected] Any public disagreement will not be tolerated.

[thenodrog]

waggy ..... George Orwell's famous1984 and equally so Animal Farm and William Gouldings Lord of the Flies offers interesting opinion.

[Cheshireblue]

Prepared to take the risk yourself are you Chesh?

Imagine yourself standing on the trap door completely innocent of the crime you have been convicted of. It has happened to several people in the past. It could be you.

Absolutely happy to run the risk Al, because it could not be me.

Let's be clear, if you are sat at home drinking your horlicks watching the Vicar of Dibley, you are NEVER going to be wrongly convicted of killing a goth in a park. The only "wrongful convictions" are based around unsound forensics and circumstances whereby the "wrong" member of a gang of 4 assailants is convicted of killing their victim when it was in fact another of the scrotes in question that delivered the fatal blow. Innocent, well mannered, well behaved people who mind their own business NEVER get arrested by the police an charged with serious offences.

I strongly believe, as the son of a policeman, that there are no innocent men in jail. Whether they were guilty of the crime they were convicted of is very occasionally questionable, but to a man, the people in prison deserve to be there.

As an aside, did anyone see the MEN yesterday? The lawyer that stabbed his wife 16 times in a frenzied knife attack is out on license after having served 2 years.

[Eddie]

Nah I'm sure that we could think of something eddie .

Hey but thats an idea if we were forced to drop out of the eu. We could become the worlds execution centre. We could charge all those countries with daft moral codes a fortune to sent all their miscreants here for 'permanant correction'. Temporary institutions could be privately owned and licensed. Now there's an opportunity for a profitable business that I bet nobody else has thought of. Would tie in extremely well with an existing pet food manufacturing business...... eh Mark?

Pretty sure Hitler tried something a bit similar.

As for the average person not being at risk of being wrongly convicted, of course you're right, but you never know what might happen to you. It isn't that infrequent.

[American Rover12]

Godwin's Law.

[PAFELL]

Absolutely happy to run the risk Al, because it could not be me.

Let's be clear, if you are sat at home drinking your horlicks watching the Vicar of Dibley, you are NEVER going to be wrongly convicted of killing a goth in a park. The only "wrongful convictions" are based around unsound forensics and circumstances whereby the "wrong" member of a gang of 4 assailants is convicted of killing their victim when it was in fact another of the scrotes in question that delivered the fatal blow. Innocent, well mannered, well behaved people who mind their own business NEVER get arrested by the police an charged with serious offences.

I strongly believe, as the son of a policeman, that there are no innocent men in jail. Whether they were guilty of the crime they were convicted of is very occasionally questionable, but to a man, the people in prison deserve to be there.

As an aside, did anyone see the MEN yesterday? The lawyer that stabbed his wife 16 times in a frenzied knife attack is out on license after having served 2 years.

You would be surprised how EASY it is to be convicted for a crime for which you are innocent. About 3 years ago I worked for the citizens advice bureau in London, who have a project that helps resettle ' genuine victims' of the legal system ' miscarriages of justice. I was shocked to read how some were convicted. There have been many cases of mothers who's babies died of cot death, who were charged with murder on the say so of one doctor - not all these cases ever reach the media - yet it was later proved beyond doubt that the baby had a serious illness - and the mother was innocent. Those in favour of hanging would of hanged that mother.

To the police there are no innocent people - look how the police have treated law abiding football supporters today as well as in the past - we are all potential football hooligans in their eyes.

You mentioned being at home drinking your horlicks watching vicarof dibley you wouldn't get convicted of killing two goths in a park. You may be surprised to know that that is NOT an alibi - especially if you were on your own at home - how do you prove that was what you were doing at the time a crime was committed???????? Your word against, say (for example) somebody giving a description of the criminal - which looks like you. Your at home alibi would not stand up in court.

I have often heard people say that there are no innocent people in prison. I asked those same people a simple question, "Is our legal system 100% perfect?" most would say no. So what about 99% perfect and I get the same answer. But if it was 99% perfect imagine 50.000 people in prison it would mean 1% of that 50.000 people were innocent - that is 500 people!!!!!

It is a frightening thought.

The truth is there are many people in prison for crimes they did not do. All people lie, including police. often people will do all sorts of things to get to the top of their profession even if it cost somebody else. People will stand in court and lie through their teeth. It happens it is part of life.

As this is a football website - look at football and what footballers do just to get a free kick or a penalty - they cheat, they dive, feign injury all for a game, to win an advantage.

As to those who killed those in the park they deserve to be given the toughest punishment that this country can legally give them. If that is life imprisonment - so be it. I would also bring charges against the parents in this case as they obviously do not see like the rest of us the seriousness of the crimes their children did. It also beggers belief what upbringing they gave to their children in the first place - that 'possible' influenced them to do what they did. Yet parents never get charged for being bad parents, like these certainly were.

[roversmum]

Interesting thought provoking post, Pafell.

One of my granddaughters was born with an undiagnosed heart condition and we were later told by the consultant that he suspected quite a few cot deaths were due to that particular condition as had the baby died there would have been no indication of the cause.

[Claytons Left Boot]

You mentioned being at home drinking your horlicks watching vicarof dibley you wouldn't get convicted of killing two goths in a park. You may be surprised to know that that is NOT an alibi - especially if you were on your own at home - how do you prove that was what you were doing at the time a crime was committed???????? Your word against, say (for example) somebody giving a description of the criminal - which looks like you. Your at home alibi would not stand up in court.

Just read Chesh's second paragraph again. As he says, it's NEVER going to happen.

[Al]

Just read Chesh's second paragraph again. As he says, it's NEVER going to happen.

Can happen, has happened. Innocent men have been hanged in the past.

[Eddie]

I strongly believe, as the son of a policeman, that there are no innocent men in jail. Whether they were guilty of the crime they were convicted of is very occasionally questionable, but to a man, the people in prison deserve to be there.

I can tell you the story of someone I know who most certainly does not deserve to be in jail. He is currently serving time in a New York prison for statutory rape. He was 19, the girl was 17, which although made her over the basic age of consent, the law in the state he was in meant that as she was under 18 and the age gap was greater than two years, it was still illegal. They had been going out for a while, they were "in love" and she had no problem with it, but her parents reported him to the police (after they had been going out for a year I might add). Despite her objection it was brought to trial and he was convicted and is now in prison. He will be on the sexual offenders list when he is released.

Now he isn't innocent, but he certainly isn't deserving of his punishment; especially when you consider that he is in prison with real rapists, so it isn't as if he ended up in some minimum security open prison or anything like that.

You can make your sweeping statements and say that everyone is prison is guilty or deserves it or that mistakes are never made, but that is simply wrong. I wouldn't like to spend a day in prison for a crime I didn't commit, but at least I (through my family, friends and lawyers) could attempt to prove my innocence and have me released. Once you have the death penalty that time is limited and if even one mistake is made there is blood on the hands of the state. There would be blood on the hands of the judge. Blood on the hands of the jury. Are they then taken to trial? What is the proper recourse for a state sanctioned murder?

[thenodrog]

They had been going out for a while, they were "in love" and she had no problem with it, but her parents reported him to the police

Had a tattoo did he?

btw I guess the issue is eddie that whether the law was right or wrong he did knowingly break it and he most probably did know the penalties for such. No one can defend the indefensible I'm afraid.

[PAFELL]

Interesting thought provoking post, Pafell.

One of my granddaughters was born with an undiagnosed heart condition and we were later told by the consultant that he suspected quite a few cot deaths were due to that particular condition as had the baby died there would have been no indication of the cause.

It would shock you to know how many babies have died with this - and the mother charged with murder. The mother suffers the loss of the baby - her freedom - receives jail, anxiety and unable to grieve properly for her loss. Even when they are able to prove they were innocent - society still says 'no smoke without fire etc'

[Cheshireblue]

I can tell you the story of someone I know who most certainly does not deserve to be in jail. He is currently serving time in a New York prison for statutory rape. He was 19, the girl was 17, which although made her over the basic age of consent, the law in the state he was in meant that as she was under 18 and the age gap was greater than two years, it was still illegal. They had been going out for a while, they were "in love" and she had no problem with it, but her parents reported him to the police (after they had been going out for a year I might add). Despite her objection it was brought to trial and he was convicted and is now in prison. He will be on the sexual offenders list when he is released.

Now he isn't innocent, but he certainly isn't deserving of his punishment; especially when you consider that he is in prison with real rapists, so it isn't as if he ended up in some minimum security open prison or anything like that.

You can make your sweeping statements and say that everyone is prison is guilty or deserves it or that mistakes are never made, but that is simply wrong. I wouldn't like to spend a day in prison for a crime I didn't commit, but at least I (through my family, friends and lawyers) could attempt to prove my innocence and have me released. Once you have the death penalty that time is limited and if even one mistake is made there is blood on the hands of the state. There would be blood on the hands of the judge. Blood on the hands of the jury. Are they then taken to trial? What is the proper recourse for a state sanctioned murder?

What a load of old nonsense Eddie. Typical, but nonsense none the less. How can somebody that has committed statutory rape, been convicted by the court system, who openly admits to his actions, and who by your own admission is not innocent, not deserve to be in prison? You may argue that the law is wrong, but he has been rightfully convicted in accordance with those laws. What a ridiculous example to give. You could very easily argue that he was a sexual predator who had been grooming her since she was 16, and that is exactly what the law was passed to prevent. “They were in love” came the cry. Like any 16 year old knows the meaning of that expression.

Additionally, murder is defined as the unlawful slaying of a human being within the Queens peace. If a killing is sanctioned by the state and carried out in accordance with the laws of the land, then by definition it is not unlawful. It cannot therefore be murder so your emotive drivel is, on any analysis, wrong.

I have no doubt that if put to a referendum, the people of this country would vote in favour of the restoration of the death penalty. All laws are passed by the legislature, who are voted for by the people. There is no blood on anyone’s hands (more emotive nonsense - have you thought of being a speech writer for an American senator?) other than those that elected the legislature. Given that they would be the people of the country, then the people would have taken the decision to run the risk of a wrongful hanging. I firmly believe that risk would be run by an over whelming majority of the people in this country. And don't tell me that more than half of the people didn't vote for the government because I can use the same argument to not pay my tax bill.

CLB - The day anyone gives a description of an attacker as being "Just over 6 feet tall, about 16 stone, slightly thinning (!?) hair, wearing a Barbour and walking two Labradors" I'll go into the nearest police station and confess.

As for the cot death point made earlier, that comes down to dodgy forensics, and I can see a case for excluding the death sentence when a conviction is based upon science alone. Science changes, just look at the disaster that was Sally Clark and her case.

Pafell - Just how many of your clients had no criminal record before their "wrongful" convictions, or weren't in some way or another already known to the police? The answer will be zero, or as close to zero as makes no difference. The police do not, despite what sensationalist journalists would have you believe to the contrary, randomly single out people that they have never dealt with before and convict them of crimes they have not actually committed.

I’m not saying hang the lot of them, but it is clear to me that certain crimes are so abhorrent to society that those that perpetrate them ought to be put to death. If that makes me uncivilised or some kind of old dinosaur, so be it, but there are millions like me.

[Al]

I don't think James Hanratty would have agreed with you views Chesh.

[adopted scouser]

I don't think James Hanratty would have agreed with you views Chesh.

Eh ? They matched the DNA of the dead rapist - don't we all agree that DNA is the be all and end all these days ?

[Claytons Left Boot]

CLB - The day anyone gives a description of an attacker as being "Just over 6 feet tall, about 16 stone, slightly thinning (!?) hair, wearing a Barbour and walking two Labradors" I'll go into the nearest police station and confess.

Just about to reply to Al's post in a similar vein but you have saved me the trouble.

[broadsword]

Eh ? They matched the DNA of the dead rapist - don't we all agree that DNA is the be all and end all these days ?

No, as someone has said, it's not infallible, and is open to misuse.

[Al]

Eh ? They matched the DNA of the dead rapist - don't we all agree that DNA is the be all and end all these days ?

I didn't know that so I'll hold my hand up on that one however I have just discovered that over 150 prisoners have been released from death row after being proven innocent. Many of them had been there for over 10 years. In the UK they would have been executed after a couple of months. That is totally unacceptable.

[Cheshireblue]

I didn't know that so I'll hold my hand up on that one however I have just discovered that over 150 prisoners have been released from death row after being proven innocent. Many of them had been there for over 10 years. In the UK they would have been executed after a couple of months. That is totally unacceptable.

That really all rather depends on how many previous convictions they had etc. It might in fact have been entirely acceptable. Let's say one of them was a serial criminal who engaged in violent attacks and had a list of previous as long as your arm. He is then convicted of a series of 10 robberies, one of which resulted in the death of the victim. The murder conviction (which carried the death penalty) was quoshed but the other 10 robbery convictions remain valid. Personally, if that person had been "wrongly" hung, I wouldn't be losing too much sleep over it. That is the reality of the kind of people that you find on death row. They are not chartered accountants wrongly convicted of drive by shooting a drug dealer in Compton.

We also don't know how many of them were convicted on Forensic evidence that was subsequently found to be "unsound". As I mentioned earlier, that is an area where more caution is needed.

Take the birmingham 6. They carried out one of the worst IRA attrocities in Birmingham killing 20-odd people in an utterly cowardly attack. They were subsequently cleared. I suppose Al, you would consider them innocent. At the time you needed 16 positive finger print matches to have the evidence admissable. The police had only 15 so that could evidence could not be used against them. There is no question that these were the guys that carried out the attack, so again, if they had been strung up, I'd still be sleeping like a baby at night.

[BuckyRover]

Im just glad in this great country of ours that the re-introduction of the death penalty will never happen.

That makes me sleep soundly at night

[Al]

That really all rather depends on how many previous convictions they had etc. It might in fact have been entirely acceptable. Let's say one of them was a serial criminal who engaged in violent attacks and had a list of previous as long as your arm. He is then convicted of a series of 10 robberies, one of which resulted in the death of the victim. The murder conviction (which carried the death penalty) was quoshed but the other 10 robbery convictions remain valid. Personally, if that person had been "wrongly" hung, I wouldn't be losing too much sleep over it. That is the reality of the kind of people that you find on death row. They are not chartered accountants wrongly convicted of drive by shooting a drug dealer in Compton.

We also don't know how many of them were convicted on Forensic evidence that was subsequently found to be "unsound". As I mentioned earlier, that is an area where more caution is needed.

Take the birmingham 6. They carried out one of the worst IRA attrocities in Birmingham killing 20-odd people in an utterly cowardly attack. They were subsequently cleared. I suppose Al, you would consider them innocent. At the time you needed 16 positive finger print matches to have the evidence admissable. The police had only 15 so that could evidence could not be used against them. There is no question that these were the guys that carried out the attack, so again, if they had been strung up, I'd still be sleeping like a baby at night.

Chesh, you are quoting isolated incidents whereas I am citing over 150 innnocent people and your generalisation about people on death row is completely unfounded, although you state it as a fact.

Incidentally I do not accept your reasoning on the 10 robberies scenario. Firstly that is not a real situation but a figment of your imagination, secondly there is no death penalty for robbery and thirdly I am talking of people released. Your robber would still have had to serve a sentence for his lesser crimes.

These people would have been wrongly killed. That is unacceptable to me.

[Cheshireblue]

But you have simply quoted a number with no detail as to how they were convicted in the first place let alone why those convictions were later quoshed. I'm not even sure which country you are talking about their being released in!