PC Andrew Harper.

ancienturion

LE
Book Reviewer
I'm in favour of the death penalty but only for the same reason as anyone else, eye for an eye etc. In reality I know there's no good reason for it.

Surely it would be enough to have the Death Penalty on the books so as to plant some doubt in the brain of the average criminal?
 
Surely it would be enough to have the Death Penalty on the books so as to plant some doubt in the brain of the average criminal?
For what? If it's on the books but never used it serves no function. If it is used it hits the same drawbacks as given, risk of killing someone innocent, both early use or late use has problems, and most criminals don't expect to be caught. Those that it could be used against, mass child killing serial killers, are deranged and won't care anyway.
 

ancienturion

LE
Book Reviewer
For what? If it's on the books but never used it serves no function. If it is used it hits the same drawbacks as given, risk of killing someone innocent, both early use or late use has problems, and most criminals don't expect to be caught. Those that it could be used against, mass child killing serial killers, are deranged and won't care anyway.

Simply for the reason given in my post.
 

Gout Man

LE
Book Reviewer
Ah, but they didn't mean it. They just neglected to tell the rest of us..................

Life nowadays equates to 15 years so murder someone and serve half of that sentence.

*******.
Very tempting, very tempting:slow:
 
There is a difference between manslaughter and murder.
So? My post was about gross negligence manslaughter not murder.
Which is the point of Harper's Law, any non-murder (illegal) killing of an on duty emergency worker must attract a life sentence. My observation was that for some killings the victims occupation had no bearing on the death

RumRationReject has pointed out that there must be a crime being committed as well so, subject to the wording of the actual law, gross negligence manslaughter shouldn't be affected.
 

Gout Man

LE
Book Reviewer
I watched American Court room last night. They are bloody mad over there.
One chap in court bit of history for kicking off so he has a bracelet strapped to his calf, a remote controlled zapper bracelet which at a press of a button delivers a powerful electric shock. He wouldn’t shut up, he was just trying to talk over the judge, not violent, but the judge ordered the court officer to zap him, “do it”, bang down he went with yells of pain. Juudge was subsequently fined $5,000 and forced to resign.
Another one a murderer found guilty of four 1st Degree murders. Sentence, Four Death Sentences plus 450 years. Now that’s justice!
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
the judge ordered the court officer to zap him, “do it”, bang down he went with yells of pain. Juudge was subsequently fined $5,000 and forced to resign.
The court offr should have gone down, "I vas only followink orderz" ceased to be a defence seventy-five years ago.
 

FEASG

LE
Ah, but they didn't mean it. They just neglected to tell the rest of us..................

Life nowadays equates to 15 years so murder someone and serve half of that sentence.

*******.
To be fair as far as I am aware life is life (in theory) but with a minimum tariff (12-15 normally) then liable for recall there after. The 50 present and out on licence is for everything else. Well it is now, up until a few years ago it was up to 10 years, after that it was the old parole system. That's what happens when you Talk Tough on crime. But end up filling the nicks with junky shop lifters every six months, for six weeks. When their normal habits would probably kill them, in any other system.
 
Surely it would be enough to have the Death Penalty on the books so as to plant some doubt in the brain of the average criminal?
You'd have trouble getting anything into the brain of the average criminal, not only are they thick as pig manure, they assume they are actually normal or better and everyone else is as thick or thicker than them.
 

ancienturion

LE
Book Reviewer
You'd have trouble getting anything into the brain of the average criminal, not only are they thick as pig manure, they assume they are actually normal or better and everyone else is as thick or thicker than them.

True.
 
I'm in favour of the death penalty but only for the same reason as anyone else, eye for an eye etc. In reality I know there's no good reason for it.
Costs, save the money feeding/housing them for ever instead of heating little old dears for free that lost their husbands in the war.
 
Last edited:
Some crimes are so vile those who commit them deserve to die. Anything less isn't justice; it's an obscene joke.

Is it beyond the power of the Judge to order her to face the court by means of her being dragged there if necessary?

Vile human being, as is the Father.
Her barrister stated "these were evil acts but she is not an evil person".
I beg to differ.
 
One thing I will add about this appalling case, is that according to one news report, Arthur's paternal Grandmother had gone to the house several times to check on him.
Complaints were made to the Police that she was harassing them & she was warned off.
 
Some crimes are so vile those who commit them deserve to die. Anything less isn't justice; it's an obscene joke.

At some point these creatures will be allowed out of jail and back into society to live their last years in relative freedom.

The death penalty is not just a matter of revenge; in my view animals like her have no right to life.
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
At some point these creatures will be allowed out of jail and back into society to live their last years in relative freedom.

The death penalty is not just a matter of revenge; in my view animals like her have no right to life.
I'm informed it's morally wrong to execute anyone at all.

If the father doesn't get remission for good behaviour, (ie. doesn't torture any children to death while inside,) and serves his full sentence, it'll only cost the taxpayer about £950,000 if he was sent to a normal prison.

As the other inmates might not appreciate his crimes he's more likely to end up at Frankland or somewhere similar, which means you'll shell out over £1.3M
(Neither sum takes account of inflation or other cost increases.)

This is a fair price to assuage the painful conscience of the fluffies, although it's a bit late to assuage the physical and mental torment of six year old Arthur.

But holding the moral high ground is of course far more important.
A six year old wouldn't understand.
 
I'm informed it's morally wrong to execute anyone at all.

If the father doesn't get remission for good behaviour, (ie. doesn't torture any children to death while inside,) and serves his full sentence, it'll only cost the taxpayer about £950,000 if he was sent to a normal prison.

As the other inmates might not appreciate his crimes he's more likely to end up at Frankland or somewhere similar, which means you'll shell out over £1.3M
(Neither sum takes account of inflation or other cost increases.)

This is a fair price to assuage the painful conscience of the fluffies, although it's a bit late to assuage the physical and mental torment of six year old Arthur.

But holding the moral high ground is of course far more important.
A six year old wouldn't understand.
Indeed, and it’s for society to understand the pain of the six-year old and put that first, not the ‘rights’ of the abuser/murderer.

I don’t know who first stated it, but it is said that the measure of a society is how well it treats its criminals, but I would counter that by saying the measure of a society is how much it values the protection of its citizens, especially children.

Recent events would suggest that in the UK at the moment the answer would be ‘not enough’.
 
Indeed, and it’s for society to understand the pain of the six-year old and put that first, not the ‘rights’ of the abuser/murderer.

I don’t know who first stated it, but it is said that the measure of a society is how well it treats its criminals, but I would counter that by saying the measure of a society is how much it values the protection of its citizens, especially children.

Recent events would suggest that in the UK at the moment the answer would be ‘not enough’.
People often misquote Winston Churchill as having said that we can judge the level of civilisation in a society by the way it treats its prisoners. In fact, it was Fyodor Dostoyevsky who said: "The degree of civilisation in a society is revealed by entering its prisons." Winston Churchill actually said that a society's attitude to its prisoners, its "criminals", is the measure of "the stored up strength of a nation".
The Guardian.June 2007.
 

Latest Threads

Top