Mick Philpott guilty of manslaughter

[fishy_taste]

Why should he not hang?

 

Please do not explain to me the difference between manslaughter and murder or any of the legal niceties.

 

If anyone can, I would like to know why British society feels it is right to tolerate the existence, at public expense and albeit in prison, of this man.

 

1. Because there IS a distinction between murder and manslaughter (and they are degrees within each of those distinctions).

 

2. Because the law does not pick on any individual or individual crime - it merely lays down the framework for the application of suitable punishments befitting those crimes when individuals are caught, tried, found guilty and convicted of breaking that law.

 

3. Because, as a society, it was decided not to have capital punishment due to the various miscarriages of justice that have occured over the years (Timothy Evans, Derek Bentley etc.,) where innocent people were hanged.

 

Whatever your personal feelings towards Mick Philpott (and I cannot help but wonder if these feelings go beyond the crime he has been convicted of - which, whether you like it or not, is manslaughter; a no point during the trial was it suggested by the prosecution that neither he nor the other defendants intentionally set out to murder those poor children; it makes little difference on a emotional level - the children have died as a result of their actions - but it makes all the difference in law), those are irrelavent. You cannot hang someone just because you don't much like them - and, by all accounts, leaving the crime he has been convicted of aside for the moment, he doesn't come across as a pleasant person.

 

Think of it in a wider context. Say someone had come home from a night out with his/her friends, had decided to have some chips or a burger. Puts on the oil or starts to cook the burger and then has a sit down. Falls asleep and is woken by the smell of smoke.

 

House is on fire, he/she gets out, but children, asleep upstairs, are trapped and die as a result of the fire.

 

Murder? Or a tragic (preventable, but nonetheless tragic) accident?

 

Guilty - let them hang?

 

Thankfully, the majority of society do not have the same views as you and, thankfully, those that do have little or no power to change things.

 

I find it strange that some should be up in arms and calling for the death penalty as a punishment for the crime of murder.

 

It's wrong to commit murder unless it's as a punishment permissable by the state.

 

Double-standard, eh?

[Chris_Sleeps]

I would like to see him pay back to his victims and society by being subjected to medical experiments

Such as what?

 

Never heard this line of thought before. This is new.

[llamatron]

Why is it 'lazy'? It's a point that should be properly considered by people who advocate the death penalty.

 

Many offenders detest prison life so much they choose to end their own, I believe when we had the death penalty, many of those who were executed who had committed the most abhorrent of crimes got off lightly.

 

why should it? I don't want to inflict as much misery as possible on anyone, murderer or not. Thats uncivilised. I just want to know they are not able to repeat their crime.

 

I just think that mentaility of wanting to punish someone forever is evil in itself.

 

There was a documentary on recently where a 13 year old boy had commited a double homicide (clearly terrible) but he was in his late 20s and in solitary confinement for the rest of his life. Why inflict that on someone? And why keep them alive to cause them misery. That attitude disgusts me.

[skinz]

That's the point I was getting at.

 

Prison is obviously a deterrent for the civilised individual, but what deterrent is it for those where prison doesn't frighten - where it gives them board & lodging, the chance to socialise with their fraternity, gain status, or segregation.

 

I have no problem with you believing the death penalty has a place in the judicial system.

 

Out of interest could you name 3 things to you personally that you think would justify the death penalty? Anyone else can have a shot too if they wish.

[Halibut]

1. Because there IS a distinction between murder and manslaughter (and they are degrees within each of those distinctions).

 

2. Because the law does not pick on any individual or individual crime - it merely lays down the framework for the application of suitable punishments befitting those crimes when individuals are caught, tried, found guilty and convicted of breaking that law.

 

3. Because, as a society, it was decided not to have capital punishment due to the various miscarriages of justice that have occured over the years (Timothy Evans, Derek Bentley etc.,) where innocent people were hanged.

 

Whatever your personal feelings towards Mick Philpott (and I cannot help but wonder if these feelings go beyond the crime he has been convicted of - which, whether you like it or not, is manslaughter; a no point during the trial was it suggested by the prosecution that neither he nor the other defendants intentionally set out to murder those poor children; it makes little difference on a emotional level - the children have died as a result of their actions - but it makes all the difference in law), those are irrelavent. You cannot hang someone just because you don't much like them - and, by all accounts, leaving the crime he has been convicted of aside for the moment, he doesn't come across as a pleasant person.

 

Think of it in a wider context. Say someone had come home from a night out with his/her friends, had decided to have some chips or a burger. Puts on the oil or starts to cook the burger and then has a sit down. Falls asleep and is woken by the smell of smoke.

 

House is on fire, he/she gets out, but children, asleep upstairs, are trapped and die as a result of the fire.

 

Murder? Or a tragic (preventable, but nonetheless tragic) accident?

 

Guilty - let them hang?

 

Thankfully, the majority of society do not have the same views as you and, thankfully, those that do have little or no power to change things.

 

I find it strange that some should be up in arms and calling for the death penalty as a punishment for the crime of murder.

 

It's wrong to commit murder unless it's as a punishment permissable by the state.

 

Double-standard, eh?

 

Top posting fishy_taste, couldn't have put it better myself.

[hyper]

Is that with or without anesthesia?

I was thinking more at trialling drugs to see side effects, rather than enjoying removing organs a la some horror film. I'm not intending to get into a discussion on vivisection, but animals are subject to medical trials and experiments with the hope that the results will be relevant to humans. Well here we have a human (in the wider sense) on which to perform those trials.

 

His victims are dead. As for rewarding society you just might find that a good percentage of those will look on the victims as the Devils spawn and deserve no sympathy.

not sure I understand, are you saying that some will have no sympathy for the ex he tried to stab and the kids that died?

[Spiky_Head]

I do hope they give him a seriously hard time in jail.

 

Not sure about his wife, I think she is something of a victim too.

 

Im glad someone else said that.

I was thinking it for much of the time i watched the progs about them on tv last night.

I thought i was going soft in my old age.

[fishy_taste]

But that's probably lost on people like him. What do we gain from keeping him in prison? In a few years time they'll be someone else who will come along and do the same.

 

Remember this?

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9007003/Teen-arrested-over-deaths-of-children-in-house-fire-at-mothers-birthday-party.html

 

If the hanging of a guilty man, one found guilty without a shadow of any doubt, prevents someone from even considering something like this in the future, I've no problem with that.

 

And how do you feel about the hanging of someone who is later found to be innocent? Say that 'someone' happens to be a relative of yours.

 

Would they be just an unfortnate casualty in the quest to rid society of those deemed undesirable?

[hyper]

Think of it in a wider context. Say someone had come home from a night out with his/her friends, had decided to have some chips or a burger. Puts on the oil or starts to cook the burger and then has a sit down. Falls asleep and is woken by the smell of smoke.

 

House is on fire, he/she gets out, but children, asleep upstairs, are trapped and die as a result of the fire.

 

Murder? Or a tragic (preventable, but nonetheless tragic) accident?

 

Guilty - let them hang?

 

for the above example, neither murder, nor manslaughter, just a stupid mistake resulting in a tragic accident. However if that someone had come home and deliberately tried to lset things on fire for his personal benefit which resulted in tragedy then that would be different.

[alchresearch]

And how do you feel about the hanging of someone who is later found to be innocent? Say that 'someone' happens to be a relative of yours

 

That's why my post clearly said "a guilty man, one found guilty without a shadow of any doubt".

 

Times and crime detecting technology have moved on since we last hung someone.