Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Dishevelled Den]

but didn't 12 independent jurors decide he meant "kill the policeman"?

But were the jurors terrible wrong to interpret this as they did?  "Let him have it" could well have meant give the policeman the gun. That has been the BIG issue with this case, and because Bentley had been hanged by the time serious doubts were raised, it was all too late.  Hence the decision to halt the issuing of death penalties later.

I don't know.
I wasn't there.
Nor have I read the transcript of the trial.
The twelve jurors WERE there. And saw the entire trial.
Therefore I have to believe:
1. They know more of the facts than I do.
2. They had no ulterior motive to convict beyond the evidence.
3. They made the correct decision.

Hindsight is wonderful - but even if the conviction WAS wrong.
That points to the "trial by jury" system as being wrong, and NOT the death penalty [1]


[1] Cat. Pigeons. Mix

You make some reasonable points there Egg however;

but even if the conviction WAS wrong.
That points to the "trial by jury" system as being wrong, and NOT the death penalty

Is there not a degree of perversity in that statement as surely it must be quite wrong for a penalty (death in this case) to be handed down on the back of a conviction based on flawed or incorrect evidence?

[bigegg]

my daughter has just made a (I think) relevant comment.


given that the convict's family is likely to suffer much more from publicity following conviction - in the case of ian brady or fred west or the jamie bulger killers, for perhaps 10 or twenty years - maybe the convict should be given the choice of life or death?

[geoffr70]

Yes, when there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever in both legal and actual terms, especially when the victim is a police officer or a child.

I think that should include any public servant or health worker if in the line of duty.....

But surely all life is equal so how can you value one life above another? Yes if a policeman for example was killed, that would be an aggravating factor, as he would be enforcing the law, (nothing against the police here) but his life isn't worth more or less than the life of anyone else.

[waspy]

Yes, when there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever in both legal and actual terms, especially when the victim is a police officer or a child.

I think that should include any public servant or health worker if in the line of duty.....

Does that mean that their lives are worth more than someone elses :-/
Murder is murder no matter who it is.

[bigegg]

You make some reasonable points there Egg however;

but even if the conviction WAS wrong.
That points to the "trial by jury" system as being wrong, and NOT the death penalty

Is there not a degree of perversity in that statement as surely it must be quite wrong for a penalty (death in this case) to be handed down on the back of a conviction based on flawed or incorrect evidence?

hence why I believe that a conviction by jury should be backed up by psychologists, psychistrists or <whoever's> evidence as well.
perhaps 12 independent jurors + 6? independent reports based on truth drugs, lie detectors,  or whatever. I'm quite certain that there are medical techniques (not permissable in court) which can establish degree of innnocence.

And if there AREN'T.
Then I am AGAINST the death penalty.

[unlucky mark mv6]

As the old saying goes,"an eye for an eye",the law in this country is an absoloute joke.

[scimmy_man]

I have to ask, what about hindly and sutcliffe? should they not have been put down on conviction?

[cem_devecioglu]

very rarely comes an example outside the general theories.. you only get whet you crop..

of course within the equation you must be able to control the environment..  but considering that also humans make up the environment factors we again turn back to the starting point imo..

so...
we should execute the parents and teachers of the murderers as well?

that was tongue-in-cheek to be honest. but you have to start somewhere.

may be we should just sterilise the families of the convicted murderers, and ban them from having any contact with other peoples children?

I grew up with, and was best friends with, a complete toe-rag.
football hooligan. alcoholic. smackhead. smoking at 12. burgling.

he drew the line at mugging old ladies. and spent three years in yong offender's nick for putting one such in a wheelchair.

he died at 21 of a gas-sniffing heart attack.
his parents were middle=class educated "normal" people.

that statement hides the answer actually.. people seeming "normal" from outside can be really deceptive..have witnessed lots of cases.. you can never know unless you live with them 7/24..
for you to claim very similiar past and experiences  you must be the twins , no other way I'm afraid..


He and I were raised together, pretty much as a single family with four parents - effectively he and I were brought up in the same environment.

as I said, people behave different to parents/children when they are alone..

I've NEVER smoked, let alone taken drugs. I've never had any dealings with the police (except for the odd traffic offence ), I've never robbed - and I'm essentially non-violent.
How does that fit your "environment" theory?

as I said above, personality starts from the second you are inside your mother.. and all other later epxeriences shape you.. thats not only a theory , a well known fact..

and I also must note, in my opinion not everyone have the real sufficiency/competency to grow children.. most of our community problems we face now stems from that very reason  no need to search other causes..

[bigegg]

i agree.
but how do you stem the problem?
benefits only for married parents might be a start

[cem_devecioglu]

i agree.
but how do you stem the problem?
benefits only for married parents might be a start

the solution/starting point have multiple branches,
economical being the first  , political second .. and some other details which is quite long to write here..
and without doubt will take some time, planning and investment :-/

[Banjax]

As the old saying goes,"an eye for an eye",the law in this country is an absoloute joke.

so you're saying we should have state sanctioned revenge then? Ridiculous. We, unlike Iran and some states of the US are a civilised country, take your medieval preachings elsewhere 

[geoffr70]

As the old saying goes,"an eye for an eye",the law in this country is an absoloute joke.

so you're saying we should have state sanctioned revenge then? Ridiculous. We, unlike Iran and some states of the US are a civilised country, take your medieval preachings elsewhere 

and what a very thin veneer of civilisation it is.

[geoffr70]

i agree.
but how do you stem the problem?
benefits only for married parents might be a start

Marriage, or lack of marriage has got nothing to do with parenting skills or ability.

[Dishevelled Den]

As I have stated I am in favour of the death penalty "when there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever in both legal and actual terms"

This is what must be avoided at all costs; the Derek Bentley case which is still debated today and supports the view against the death penalty:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/january/28/newsid_3393000/3393807.stm

You decide.  Should he have been hanged? :-/ :-/

Quite so Lizzie.

Did the phrase "Let him have it" conveyed to Bentley mean that he should shoot the police officer or that he should surrender his weapon to him instead?

That has been the big question of course for the last 57 years.

It is interesting to note that my link makes the following present day comment:

"Scientific evidence also showed the three police officers who testified about Bentley shouting "Let him have it" had lied under oath."

Never knew this myself Zulu

had lied under oath

I must admit that it wouldn't have been for the first time although I don’t know precisely what these officers did to warrant mention.

I do have however direct experience of this in a few cases I was involved in some years ago - the officers concerned were subsequently dealt with.

Whatever the motivation their perjury rendered just evidence void and cast doubt over the integrity of the entire book of evidence presented by the prosecution in the cases concerned.

It was a sad day in my career on each of the occasions I was present to witness this.

[Psychoca]

I feel that in order to give Death as a sentance then there must be absolute certainty in that the "doer" is guilty...  Aside from that, it should depend to some amount as to the nature of the case involved...

It does anger me when I hear of the cost of keeping these creatures in prison, but, there are some instances in which I see death as being lenient, where, a murder has been so violent and cold that life obviously means nothing to the killer...  At this point blow torches and pliers come to mind...

I also believe that punishments should fit the crime and that the modern prison service needs to be reviewed.  The perception of prisons today, make them appear very comfortable places..   

With regard to Derek Bentley, I feel that he shouldn't have been executed, regardless as to what was meant by the "Let him have it!" comment...  He was mentally disabled and although he was 19, only had the mental age of an 11 yer old...