We learnt about this at school in drama (we had to create a play around it) and I don’t believe someone should be executed if they didn’t commit the actual murder. But again, for me it would have to be a case by case thing. If they were part of a gang that robbed a bank and someone was shot dead but they didn’t pull the trigger, I don’t think they should be executed. But if there was a gang who kidnapped and tortured someone then shot them to death, I think possibly the ones who also just did the torture should also be executed. It’s a really thought provoking topic, for me anyway, I don’t find it black and white I think there are a lot of grey areas.I always think of this case https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_Bentley_case
We studied it at uni. Looking at linguistics. The whole criminal enterprise thing seems a crazy thing to execute someone on to me. I’ve seen a lot of death row documentaries were people are on there for seemingly being in the proximity- obviously there could be a lot moee to it than what is covered in the docs.We learnt about this at school in drama (we had to create a play around it) and I don’t believe someone should be executed if they didn’t commit the actual murder. But again, for me it would have to be a case by case thing. If they were part of a gang that robbed a bank and someone was shot dead but they didn’t pull the trigger, I don’t think they should be executed. But if there was a gang who kidnapped and tortured someone then shot them to death, I think possibly the ones who also just did the torture should also be executed. It’s a really thought provoking topic, for me anyway, I don’t find it black and white I think there are a lot of grey areas.
Doesnt beyond reasonable doubt always apply? You cant reach a guilty verdict without it.For crimes against children yes, but the beyond reasonable doubt rule would have to apply.
No. People do time based on circumstantial evdience. There the no body ever found cases where people have been put away.If even one innocent person is executed, the whole system is broken. The justice system is too full of holes to have such severe consequences.
As for "extreme circumstances" - too difficult to define in terms of the law. How would one define extreme?
Doesnt beyond reasonable doubt always apply? You cant reach a guilty verdict without it.
Some juries do reach a guilty verdict, beyond all reasonable doubt, with only circumstantial evidence though.No. People do time based on circumstantial evdience. There the no body ever found cases where people have been put away.
Beyond reasonable doubt, for example the cctv footage showing lee rigby being murdered and no question who by. I know there were supposedly mental health issues involved but that too would need thoroughly examining and not just accepting the push by the defence.Some juries do reach a guilty verdict, beyond all reasonable doubt, with only circumstantial evidence though.
Would you propose then that only cases with direct evidence then i.e. eye witnesses to the crime, be allowed to be considered for death penalty then? All other cases, like those built heavily on circumstantial evidence, could only lead to life sentences, severe jail time etc.?
I agree with this I actually think there would be some benefit to professional jurors that would at least understand the forensics and the legal process.I think on a personal level, it’s the right thing to do in a relatively small number of cases where crimes are especially heinous, there’s an admission or irrefutable evidence and no chance of rehabilitation. I don’t see why the state spends money keeping absolute monsters with no remorse in better conditions and comfort than many of our ex service people or pensioners.
That all said, I believe it is too divisive an issue and would potentially skew jury verdicts. I believe that there is great potential for a juror who was very against the death penalty to find a person not guilty because they didn’t agree with the potential sentence they’d get. I also frequently despair at the level of intelligence of the average person so again I’m not sure that the average juror is equipped to make a life or death decision but I think its open to abuse of those decisions are made elsewhere within the justice system, so for the most part I agree with us not having it even though there are some vile animals that are much deserving of death.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?