If the death penalty was brought back, someone innocent would inevitably be killed at some point
Right-wing blogger Guido Fawkes (Paul Staines) is pushing a Number 10 e-petition to reinstate the death penalty. His campaign has already gained widespread support, from Murdoch newspaper The Sun to Tory MP Philip Davies (from ‘let the disabled be exploited at below the minimum wage’ and ‘can’t we bring back blacking up’ fame). Mr Davies said:
“It’s something where once again the public are a long way ahead of the politicians. I’d go further and restore it for all murderers.”
However, a quick google search and look through the ‘Innocent‘ database finds that murder charges are fairly regularly overturned in the British Courts. People whose original conviction for murder that have been quashed include:
Andrew Adams who was convicted of murdering science teacher Jack Royal in 1990. Members of the jury later come forward to say they had considered evidence not put before the court, the police had been in contact with witnesses during the trial, and that verdicts of not guilty were returned on others involved in the case, inconsistent with Adams’ guilty verdict
Soldier Andrew Evans, who was convicted of the murder of 14-year-old Judith Roberts on the basis of a dream he experienced
Sean Hodgson, who was convicted of the murder of bar worker Theresa de Simone in 1979, and served 27 years despite David Lace confessing to the murder in 1983
Josephine Smith, whose conviction of murder for her husband was changed to manslaughter, after it was established he had repeatedly beat her and subject her to sexual abuse. Smith had originally pleaded guilty to manslaughter
Tony Martin, whose conviction of murder was reduced to manslaughter for shooting burglars who entered his home, which he had done in a ‘blind panic’
And there are dozens more. It seems odd that a libertarian such as Staines thinks that the state is incompetent to do almost anything other than decide who to kill. Under Davies’s policy, all these people would have now been killed by the state in cold blood.
Under Staines’s plan (cop-killers and child murderers would be liable for the death penalty), Andrew Evans would now have been killed.
So what price a life? Is it right that some innocent people are killed so that others receive thier comeuppance? If, as MP Priti Patel believes, deterence did work (which would imply murderers rationally weigh out risks and benefits to actions, and that a life sentence is seen as a fair risk), how many is it OK to kill to ensure that murderers are put off?
All this ‘ends justifies the means’ thinking and trading of lives feels bizarrely stalinist for conservatives and libertarians. If the death penalty is brought back, it is only a matter of time until someone is innocent is killed – an odd outcome to a campaign based on abhorrence of murder.
85 Responses to “Five good reasons why the death penalty should not be reinstated”
Extradition Game
@ekklesiaComment @catholicherald @NewsFromAmnesty 5 good reasons why the death penalty should not be reinstated: http://t.co/szcVGZU :
Anon E Mouse
Leon Wolfson – I never mentioned ContactPoint – you did. You clearly do not realise that like DNA databases and other New Labour control freakery, ContactPoint was universally hated, never worked properly and was just another excuse to spend our money unwisely.
I certainly know what ContactPoint wasn’t doing Wolfser – it wasn’t doing what it should and it cost a fortune. Couple that with the civil liberties issues involved and only the vested interests and those with a socialist agenda wanted the thing.
Your remarks about “different incidents” regarding crime is pathetic frankly. My point is that if people engaged in that type of crime were locked up on their first offence they couldn’t do it again. You are being deliberately awkward because your point doesn’t pass muster.
That’s because prison works and your remarks show your selfish attitude towards others, exemplified by not acknowledging the deaths, manslaughters, kidnappings and rapes of the people I mentioned earlier. Every one by a released prisoner previously incarcerated for similar crimes.
Your blind desire for state control shows that whatever deterrence was in place was not suitable because it didn’t work – that’s the point Wolfy.
Capital punishment may work because what is currently in place clearly doesn’t. Most people who have swung from a rope would be pretty much incapacitated don’t you think?
DUH!
Anon E Mouse
Tom White – Some research from an establishment in the US, Pepperdine University, showed that for every execution it resulted in 74 less deaths the next year:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-smerconish/death-penalty-deters_b_72075.html
What evidence do you have that it doesn’t work?
Johann Koehler
Dear Anon E Mouse:
I had a look at the links you’ve provided. Many thanks.
After some research, I found that both the study by Adler and Summers (from the HuffPo piece) and the study by Mocan (from the Newsmax piece) have been examined and discredited by some of the big names, in highly reputable journals: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2009.01168.x/full, and http://aler.oxfordjournals.org/content/11/2/335.short, respectively.
A much more rigorous test of the hypothesis can be found here: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2009.00596.x/abstract
This could easily descend into a back-and-forth of competing conclusions. Suffice it to say that the top criminologists working in the fields of capital punishment and deterrence, namely Frank Zimring, Jeff Fagan, John Donohue, Richard Berk, Dan Nagin, Michael Tonry, and countless others all recognise that there is no deterrent effect of capital punishment. People selling you a different story are simply doing bad science.
Leon Wolfson
There are a half-dozen people publishing papers claiming that. And many many more publishing papers claiming otherwise, and moreover it’s extremely – and typically – bad practice to be claiming data from the US, and only the US, maps closely to other systems, especially given the higher homicide rates in America – there are significant differences in crime profiles between the EU and US, for instance.
Many papers calling the death penalty as a deterrence make no attempt to avoid the cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. This is not-a-coincidence…and coverups in America continue in cases like Cameron Todd Willingham’s, so the blooded-handed state murder machine can roll on.