EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[me123]

The legal system is beyond reasonable doubt, which is why I deliberately said no doubt what so ever. To emphasise that I intended to specify a superior near absolute level of proof of guilt, which is possible for some types of crime.

Here's the problem with that view - you could end up with two dangerous situations.

1) If the death penalty is the only option for a murder conviction, juries could be less likely to return a guilty pledge (there shouldn't be any difference legally, as the jury still need only determine guilt beyond reasonable doubt, but I suspect that many jurors could be more wary of sending a person to the gallows, particularly since it will be expedited and irreversible).

2) If the jury have to determine whether or not the death penalty is to be employed (as is the case in the US), then you've potentially created a loophole in the system. Suppose the jury find the defendant guilty, but do not opt for the death penalty in a system where the death penalty is reserved for cases where we have no doubt whatsoever about their guilt (to use your words). The defendant who is not sentenced to death could quite easily appeal their whole conviction by claiming that the jury had sufficient doubt that they were not put to death, ergo the whole conviction could be quashed. I have no idea if that would hold up in an appeals court (as you have said, there is a difference between "no doubt" and "reasonable doubt"), but I don't really want to find out.

Life without parole is a preferable option when you look at the evidence, IMO. A miscarriage of justice can be reversed (you can't give that person back the time they've lost whilst in prison, but at least they'll still have a life to live). All murderers are tried to the same standard (guilt beyond reasonable doubt resulting in a custodial sentence). It's cheaper. There's no evidence that it's any less of a deterrent. It's less controversial and more publicly acceptable, and the ethical quandary is much less. One could even argue that spending the rest of your life in prison with no possibility of release is a harsher punishment than death.

 

[3141]

In Britain the jury don't decide what the penalty should be. Their job is to decide if the accused is innocent or guilty. The judge decides the penalty. So the situation you describe in (2) above will never arise.

It is possible that individual jurors might disagree with the rest, making it impossible for a verdict to be reached, because they knew that a guilty verdict might result in a death sentence.

 

[Trog]

1) is also some what irrelevant as my whole point is that the proof be way better than beyond reasonable doubt. So that the jury can be absolutely certain of the persons guilt, not just convinced that there is no reasonable doubt.

 

[me123]

In Britain the jury don't decide what the penalty should be. Their job is to decide if the accused is innocent or guilty. The judge decides the penalty. So the situation you describe in (2) above will never arise.

That's the current situation in the UK, but it's not impossible that we adopt this system for the death penalty (which would require new legislation). Indeed, in the US, judges usually have the power to determine sentencing, and capital punishment is one of the exceptions to the rule. It's not impossible that we would adopt a similar system, and it's potentially a problem worth considering if we did.

An alternative that already exists in the UK (certainly in England and Wales) could be the recommendation for mercy - not something that is common as I understand that it is not usually explained to jurors, but a jury can recommend mercy in any trial - in the case of a capital trial, it would be a recommendation of the jurors against capital punishment for this defendant. The judge will still decide upon the sentence, and does not necessarily need to incorporate this recommendation in their sentence, but it would incorporate the jurors into the system without giving them total responsibility, and could help mitigate against jurors who would never return a guilty verdict in a capital case. The recommendation of mercy would need to be explicitly explained to the jurors in this circumstance, which doesn't happen at present.

I'd almost argue that, should we readopt the death penalty (to which I am wholly opposed), the capital portion of the trail should be judged separately, by separate judges (at least three) who weigh up the merits. But I'd prefer that we didn't go down this path.

1) is also some what irrelevant as my whole point is that the proof be way better than beyond reasonable doubt. So that the jury can be absolutely certain of the persons guilt, not just convinced that there is no reasonable doubt.

But surely it could be argued that, if you don't execute the defendant, then there's more than reasonable doubt? There's no provision for absolute certainty in law, and its inclusion creates a two-tiered justice system.

Anyway... I'm trying not to derail the EU thread onto the death penalty, but I'm failing miserably at doing so!

 

[najaB]

I'd almost argue that, should we readopt the death penalty (to which I am wholly opposed), the capital portion of the trail should be judged separately, by separate judges (at least three) who weigh up the merits. But I'd prefer that we didn't go down this path.

As I said above, to be in favour of the death penalty means accepting that some innocent people will be executed. To pretend otherwise is pure fantasy.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

'Near absolute' still leaves the possibility that innocent people will be convicted. I'm not opposed to the death penalty (I'm also not particularly enamoured with the concept) but anybody proposing its reintroduction has to accept the reality that some innocent people will be executed.

There are those who would refer to that matter as "collateral damage".

 

[muddythefish]

There are those who would refer to that matter as "collateral damage".

There are those who would refer to that matter as inhuman and uncivilised.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There are those who would refer to that matter as inhuman and uncivilised.

One mans view of civilised can vary in different parts of the world and there are those in other countries who view homosexuality as uncivilised. I would like you to expand your stated word of "inhuman" as it appears that you feel this was the case in Britain of capital punishment until the mid 1960s (when I was 20 years of age). Were my formative and university years spent in an inhuman society then?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Has anyone access to official statistics that show the annual cost of prisoner incarceration in Britain per inmate?

I did some digging around and found the costs per prisoner for 2014-15.

The document takes some work to decipher, but as far as I can make out, the average cost to keep a prisoner in prison for a year is £33 291 (Overall Resource Expenditure Cost per Prisoner).

However, that's probably not a good statistic to use when comparing with a hypothetical cost of the death penalty because the figure is depressed by large numbers of low-risk (category C) prisoners who cost less to incarcerate. The average cost to keep a category A male prisoner for a year is given as £59 470, and I think that's the most relevant comparison, because that's going to be the annual cost of incarcerating those prisoners who might, if we had the death penalty, plausibly face execution.

So with those figures, I tried to compare the possible cost of life-imprisonment vs execution.

Doing a quick calculation, if it's - say - a 30 year old and you keep them in prison for life - say 50 years - at £59470/ year that's basically £3 million in total [*].

The argument is that if a person faces the death penalty, it'll cost extra because you need additional appeals and checks that they really are guilty - to account for the finality of the death penalty. I don't know what trials actually cost, but it seems to me that if those extra costs actually came to anything like £3 million for one person, then to my mind, that would suggest a (bureaucratic?) problem with the appeals procedure. That all makes me somewhat sceptical about claims that, in a reasonable system, it would cost more to execute someone than to keep them in prison for life. (But obviously, there are many other arguments for/against the death penalty. It probably shouldn't hinge on cost alone).


[*] To be pedantic, if comparing with a cost spent today, you'd need to discount it to account for it being money spent in the future. But on the other hand, that'd probably be balanced by the tendency for incarceration costs to increase over time. So on balance, £3M is probably a fair figure to use.

 

[AlterEgo]

One mans view of civilised can vary in different parts of the world and there are those in other countries who view homosexuality as uncivilised. I would like you to expand your stated word of "inhuman" as it appears that you feel this was the case in Britain of capital punishment until the mid 1960s (when I was 20 years of age). Were my formative and university years spent in an inhuman society then?

Well yes, if that society killed people.

It was however a long time ago.

 

[najaB]

Doing a quick calculation, if it's - say - a 30 year old and you keep them in prison for life - say 50 years - at £59470/ year that's basically £3 million in total.

One factor is that you need to consider is that in all likelihood they would move down the risk categories as they age.

Plus the time between sentence and execution can be as much as a decade, so that's a half-million pounds right there.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Well yes, if that society killed people.

It was however a long time ago.

No it wasn't. Are you cruelly making me feel old and remember the the last time that England won the World Cup (Football) was in the same time period.

Britain have had some wonderful methods of punishment if you want to hark back to historical times that even affected royalty, let alone the lesser mortals, such the novel method of execution of King Edward II, the lose/lose scenario that determined the innocence or guilt of supposed witches, the burning at the stake, the three method of being hung, drawn and quartered, etc.

Civilisation did not commence in Britain in the mid 1960s.

 

[LateThanNever]

Civilisation did not commence in Britain in the mid 1960s.

No, it's an ongoing effort, and as you show, progress is distinctly difficult.

 

[miami]

The lower pound also means our exports are cheaper and many exporters welcome the fall in value.

IF the economy crashes after Brexit I for one will examine exactly what has happened and why. Who knows where the EU will be by then?

However as we import more than we export the fall in the pound immediately cost us £200m more a week. Overnight.

In the meantime you and your right wing Tory chums are running public services into the ground, starving them of funds, all to keep the rich getting richer.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

People suddenly find the cost of holidaying abroad more expensive, yet still persist in being swayed to take holidays in certain exotic locations where the chance of terrorism is only too real.

 

[AlterEgo]

No it wasn't. Are you cruelly making me feel old and remember the the last time that England won the World Cup (Football) was in the same time period.

Britain have had some wonderful methods of punishment if you want to hark back to historical times that even affected royalty, let alone the lesser mortals, such the novel method of execution of King Edward II, the lose/lose scenario that determined the innocence or guilt of supposed witches, the burning at the stake, the three method of being hung, drawn and quartered, etc.

Civilisation did not commence in Britain in the mid 1960s.

That's all very well, but in my book society shouldn't coldly kill people no matter what they've done, and I view the abolition of the death penalty as progress.

 

[Trog]

Britain have had some wonderful methods of punishment if you want to hark back to historical times that even affected royalty, let alone the lesser mortals, such the novel method of execution of King Edward II.......

I thought the cause of death of Richard the Second was unknown, the red hot poker story just being one of several methods suggested at the time and since. But with no real evidence to back up any of them.

 

[HH]

I thought the cause of death of Richard the Second was unknown, the red hot poker story just being one of several methods suggested at the time and since. But with no real evidence to back up any of them.

Yeah, but. Even if it's not true it ought to be. 'Nuff said.

 

[HH]

Were my formative and university years spent in an inhuman society then?

Yes, Paul; and it shows.

Would you not agree that hanging was too good for the leadership of RMT?

 

[najaB]

People suddenly find the cost of holidaying abroad more expensive, yet still persist in being swayed to take holidays in certain exotic locations where the chance of terrorism is only too real.

The thing about terrorism is that, by definition, you don't know where they'll strike next.

If people stop going places because they're scared then the terrorists have won.

 

[miami]

People suddenly find the cost of holidaying abroad more expensive, yet still persist in being swayed to take holidays in certain exotic locations where the chance of terrorism is only too real.

What on earth are you on about? People don't holiday in "terrorist" hotspots. The chance of terrorism anywhere is so close to zero it is ignorable. Even amongst those dying abroad it's an insignificant cause compared with car accidents, or just plain old age. You're far more likely to be traditionally murdered abroad than killed in a terrorist outrage. But by all means keep peddling what the express tells you.

 

[furnessvale]

However as we import more than we export the fall in the pound immediately cost us £200m more a week. Overnight.

In the meantime you and your right wing Tory chums are running public services into the ground, starving them of funds, all to keep the rich getting richer.

Given that Corbyn believes in Brexit (although he tries his best to hide that fact), I could well be a closet left winger!

 

[backontrack]

Britain have had some wonderful methods of punishment if you want to hark back to historical times that even affected royalty, let alone the lesser mortals, such the novel method of execution of King Edward II, the lose/lose scenario that determined the innocence or guilt of supposed witches, the burning at the stake, the three method of being hung, drawn and quartered, etc.

Wasn't that a murder?

 

[miami]

Given that Corbyn believes in Brexit (although he tries his best to hide that fact), I could well be a closet left winger!

No idea what corbyn believes in, but it certainly isn't workers rights.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I thought the cause of death of Richard the Second was unknown, the red hot poker story just being one of several methods suggested at the time and since. But with no real evidence to back up any of them.

I assume you mean Edward II And yes, you are correct that there is considerable uncertainty about what happened to him, quite a few historians think the traditional accounts of his gruesome death were just propaganda, and at least one researcher has even questioned whether he was murdered at all.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What on earth are you on about? People don't holiday in "terrorist" hotspots. The chance of terrorism anywhere is so close to zero it is ignorable. Even amongst those dying abroad it's an insignificant cause compared with car accidents, or just plain old age. You're far more likely to be traditionally murdered abroad than killed in a terrorist outrage. But by all means keep peddling what the express tells you.

So the stories in the past of terrorist attacks in Egypt at Luxor and the 30 Britons killed on a beach in Tunisia, both in the same month of June 2015, were not to be expected despite the North African terrorism levels reported at that time by a number of security agencies.

What is this "express" that you make reference to? Why on earth do you imagine that I have any connection to the Macclesfield Express, as this is the nearest available local paper in our area?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I assume you mean Edward II And yes, you are correct that there is considerable uncertainty about what happened to him, quite a few historians think the traditional accounts of his gruesome death were just propaganda, and at least one researcher has even questioned whether he was murdered at all.

Thank you for confirming that I had name the correct monarch in my original posting. Doubts may exist and perhaps the novel method of the Blood Eagle also, though this was known to have been used in a number of countries where a certain people were in power.

Perhaps I sense some humour in your posting by the suggestion in the link that a red herring being inserted instead of a red hot poker may suggest that the bones of the red herring could inflict rather eye watering pain at the time of insertion....

 

[najaB]

So the stories in the past of terrorist attacks in Egypt at Luxor and the 30 Britons killed on a beach in Tunisia, both in the same month of June 2015, were not to be expected despite the North African terrorism levels reported at that time by a number of security agencies.

The terror threat level in the UK has been substantial* or higher since August 2006. And how many people have lost their lives in major terrorist attacks on the UK mainland in that time? And how many have died in car accidents in the same timeframe?

*SUBSTANTIAL means an attack is a strong possibility.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Would you not agree that hanging was too good for the leadership of RMT?

Not at all. The stocks would be quite sufficient, as certain union leaders cannot abide being laughed at in public.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The terror threat level in the UK has been substantial* or higher since August 2006. And how many people have lost their lives in major terrorist attacks on the UK mainland in that time? And how many have died in car accidents in the same timeframe?

*SUBSTANTIAL means an attack is a strong possibility.

The vigilance of all our security services go a long way to achieving this, but as was proved in Nice, one ISIL sympathiser with a large goods vehicle can wreak utter carnage.

Perhaps their more criminal associated elements have satisfied themselves with the grooming and sexual abuse of young teenage white British girls....