Killing the killers

Royal Gazette Opinion, Thursday 29 September 2005

Earlier this year, Dame Lois Browne Evans made a rather odd comment. During a meeting of the Bermuda Independence Commission, she suggested that independence could pave the way for the reintroduction of capital and corporal punishment, should an independent Bermuda decide to replace the Privy Council with the Caribbean Court of Justice.

“Some of the islands in Jamaica don’t want the Privy Council any more, or in the Caribbean, because they don’t believe in hanging,” said Dame Lois. “[The Privy Council has] been overturning all these appeals on hanging for the last 10, 15 or 20 years now and it’s gotten under the skin of some attorney generals and some of those islands who believe like Bermudians, bring back the whip, bring back the cat-o-9-tails, bring back hanging.”

It was a strange thing for Dame Lois to say given her own feelings about the death penalty. When the PLP abolished capital and corporal punishment in 1999 she said that these forms of punishment hearkened back to the barbarisms of slavery and the colonial era, and that it was “time for us to stop treating wrong-doers as if they were animals”.

Do Bermudians really want to bring back hanging? If they still feel the way they did in 1990, perhaps they do. In a referendum that year, 78% voted to retain capital punishment for premeditated murder, although only one-third of the electorate turned out.

The subject will be in the news again the week after next. On Monday 10 October, the World Coalition against the Death Penalty, an umbrella organisation, is organising a World Day against the Death Penalty. This year it’s dedicated to abolition in Africa.

I have never been comfortable with the idea of state-sponsored executions, even for the most egregious of crimes. Mainly, it’s the prospect of accidentally executing the wrong person. In the UK, the Birmingham Six were sentenced to life imprisonment in 1975 for two pub bombings that killed 21 people; the Guildford Four were convicted of another pub bombing in the same year. It later emerged that their convictions were unsafe; all were eventually cleared and released. Although they had served fifteen or more years in prison, had they been executed no amends could have been made.

Some supporters of the death penalty argue that more innocents have been killed by released or paroled murderers than have been executed. They say that the death penalty is the only guaranteed way to prevent a murderer from killing again. They’re wrong. Imprisonment without parole for the length of the murderer’s natural life would achieve the same effect.

I have often wondered whether support for capital punishment would drop if everyone had to watch the executions, particularly the ones that go wrong. When Bert Leroy Hunter was executed by lethal injection in Missouri in 2000, he suffered a violent and agonising death, convulsing, coughing and gasping for air. When Frank Coppola was electrocuted, it took two 55-second jolts to kill him, producing a sizzling sound and the smell of burning flesh; his head and leg caught on fire. Botched hangings can behead the prisoner.

A fitting end, those from the “eye for an eye” school of justice might think. But that isn’t justice, it’s revenge.

Worse, there’s little evidence that the death penalty deters others. It may even make juries less likely to convict if they know that the defendant will lose his life as a result. This would probably be a particular problem in close-knit Bermuda.

Nevertheless, there have been calls to reintroduce the death penalty here to stem Bermuda’s rising level of violent crime. Last year, Shadow Home Affairs Minister Maxwell Burgess suggested that he would be prepared to bring an amendment to reinstate capital punishment. Shadow Deputy Leader John Barritt said that he too would like to see the death penalty back on the books. “[Mr. Burgess] reflects a sentiment not only within our party but in the community,” he said. “The challenge is how to do it.”

If that’s true, then the UBP and the community are out of touch with the way the capital punishment debate is going. In 1977 only 16 countries had abolished capital punishment for all crimes. Today, 80 countries have done so. Every year since 1997, the UN Commission on Human Rights has passed a resolution calling for a moratorium on executions in those countries that have not abolished the death penalty; a record 81 states sponsored this year’s resolution, five more than in 2004.

In 1998, in a letter to the Bermuda Sun, Eugene Carmichael pointed out that the further we are from a crime, the easier it is to condemn, but the closer we are, the easier it is to lose our objectivity. He proposed a better test for us to judge how we really feel about capital punishment: would we favour the death penalty for premeditated murder if both the murderer and the victim were our loved ones?

Bermuda made the right decision when it abolished the death penalty. It should never look back.

Comments

[sandgrownan on 29.09.05 at 09:38]

A couple of comments. The Dame is becomming increasingly irrelevant and her views increasingly extreme and bizarre. Almost Bermuda's own Pat Robinson!

As for the death penalty. I'm staggered that this is even a topic for discussion. Is this yet another indication of Bemruda's slide backwards instead of marching forwards?

[sandgrownan on 29.09.05 at 09:51]

I just also saw the poll results which is even more disturbing. I'll make a couple of assumptions. Most poll contributors would be the folks that regulalrly post on this site? Although I don't agree with all the comments here, I think that generally most posters are intelligent and consider their comments.

So why do so many think that a return to capital punishemnt is required? Do we follow the Brunai example, as Dale Butler saw, and cut off the hands of thieves?

[Raptor on 29.09.05 at 10:03]

I am shocked at the response. I can see it now: Bermuda's new tourism brochures--with a little noose dangling in the background. Want to get Bermuda in the news in a big way? A hanging or two will put the island in international media. Tourism will decline even further--no exaggeration.

Take a look at "Bard Prison Initiative" and read the Karpowitz Kenner report "Education as Crime Prevention: The Case for Reinstating Pell Grant Eligibility for the Incarcerated." This report uses only U.S. state and federal government data. If you want to reinstate something, how about reinstating education in Bermuda?

The U.S. is the only country ahead of Bermuda in terms of incarceration--about 2 million inmates. 19% of adult inmates are illiterate; 60% are functionally illiterate; recidivism is as high as 70%. Simply attending school behind bars reduces it by 29%; education beyond that and the rate drops far more; every dollar spent on education returned more than $2. The report speaks to "the NORMALIZING effects of education itself."

In one state the average literacy level is mid 8th grade for male inmates, and two grades lower for females. Substance abuse runs about 85%. One inmate, a participant in an educational program, wrote, "thank you for GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO BECOME A MAN."

Do I think good education is going to totally stop murder? Of course not. But why in God's name is the Dame focusing on something so backward as killing people when the focus should be on prevention in the first place. Education gives people hope and a future and helps them think things through to become productive citizens. It will lower murder rates. With such a high incarceration rate and such a low education rate, Bermuda is a sitting duck for more murders. But the answer is not execution. The answer is education both in the schools and in prisons, where lives can be changed, and the prison population can be influenced for the better.

[Big Bad Wolf ^..^ on 29.09.05 at 10:03]

Actually for sometime the figures were evenly split....I think the interesting development is the large growth of the not sure votes on the LIME's POLL.Levels of violent crime are not on the increase but the violent crime that has happened with a knife or gun instead of bare fists have increased.Bermudian society is very Conservative and hence the swing back towards dealing with murder with state sanctioned death therapy....hanging.Remember the UK pushed banning Capital punishment in with the single seat reform....sort of a carrot for a carrot....Referendum on Capital punishment 15 years ago was heavily in favour of Hang THEM HIGH. The House was nearer 50 50 for sometime...Go figure.All research has proven that Capital punishment is not a deterrent.THE Last Hangman of the UK wrote a very compelling account of his experiences.

[Yet Another Limey on 29.09.05 at 10:13]

The death penalty is one good example of why politicians should not always listen to popular opinion. In the UK it’s well known that if there was ever a referendum to bring back capital punishment there would be a yes vote, though none on the mainstream political parties would support this.

A couple of years ago in the UK an MP (I forget who) had the opportunity to bring forth a private members bill – and with no great cause of his own to fight for, he approached BBC radio 4 (perceived as having ‘up market’ listeners) to have a poll of suggestions for what law he should try and bring in. The people voted for a ‘Tony Martin’ bill to allow people to protect their property by any means necessary [Tony Martin was a farmer who went to jail for shooting a couple of burglars who were robbing his house – I believe one of the burglars is now suing Mr Martin for damages]. The MP refused to go through with his promise.

Right thinking people will never sanction state sponsored violence (with the exception of war).

One question for people who want to bring back capital punishment: If your wife murdered you because they thought you were cheating on them, would you really want them to die in return?

[Full Fullish on 29.09.05 at 10:31]

Hmmm I'm probably going to take some heat for this...oh well.

I think we have become too easy on the inmates. I'm using time as the reason why I say this. In the past decade or a bit longer, Bermuda has been on a steady spiral downwards in terms of crime. The corrections facility has become a revolving door for repeat offenders. People are commiting crimes that were almost unthinkable and quite rare. These crimes are almost common place now. I'm one of those people who think that we need to revist our legal system and give the corrections department some teeth back, cause clearly it's not working.

I'm not sure what to say on the death penality, however one thing does spring to mind, I truely wished it for the Jessica Middleton murder. Before one of you come back to me and say, what if it were my child who commited that crime, I don't think I would want someone who committed such a crime as a son or daughter, father, sister, mother for that matter. This isn't a revenge thing, this is a we don't want or need someone like that in our society thing. Ultimately that's what jail is, the removal of an individual from society as they have broken the rules and trust. That's why they don't have any rights, nor should be afforded rights while in prison, except the basics, shelter and food. However there are many examples of people who you can't rehibilitate and who have done things so wrong that to release them back into public would shake the common citizen to the point where they feel unsafe.

I guess after reading this I would say that lately I am leaning towards the death penality, but under very strick regulations. However I am VERY for harsher punishments in the judicial system, to include work details to contribute back to the same society that they have taken away from. The punishment should fit the crime though. This hasn't been happening for along time...

[jake on 29.09.05 at 10:44]

I am all for being more tough on crime, but I am firmly against the death penalty.

I am in favor of techniques used against the Mafia in the US and in Italy. There they use solitary confinement and sentences of 20, and 30 years as a stick to wield against criminals.

It has the benefit of encouraging people to "flip". "Flipping" is where you agree to testify against your former criminal associates. Little happens here because the punishments are tolerable. When you are facing 25 years with food and water and little else, you can withstand it for a little while, but soon see the wisdom in giving up someone on the outside in exchange for family visits, television, and the possibility of a reduced sentence.

It is humane in that we torture no-one, we kill no-one, and no-one is in danger (meaning the public). It is a deterence because spending time alone without stimulation of any kind is terrible.

That is what makes it a punishment, and why it has been the single best weapon in the fight against organized crime. It is the very aspect of organization (the strength) that undermines it (the weakness).

[loki on 29.09.05 at 10:47]

When I graduated from law school, I was firmly against the death penalty. Having been involved in criminal defence work, however, I'm not so sure.

[Yet Another Limey on 29.09.05 at 10:52]

Full Fullish wrote: The corrections facility has become a revolving door for repeat offenders

We don't need to punish them more, we need to rehabilitate them better. Can you imagine how hard it is to get a decent job in Bermuda that can support you and your family once you have a criminal record? It's not a cheep place to live, and westgate hotel is free room and board.

[Cancundreaming on 29.09.05 at 11:06]

I think you are all off base in this argument, although I cede the fact that only skimmed the posts, so it's possible that I might be wrong.

Those that speak of the death penalty, either those who argue for it or against it, misstep terribly when the speak of the issue in regards to revenge, appropriate punishment, the safety of the society at large or even expediency.

The MOST significant, and perhaps most fundamental flaw is it's finality. I think we all can agree that some crimes, in regards to punishment, deserve the taking of a life, but I suppose that is if you don't have a problem with the state taking a life.

However, throw it all out, it doesn't matter as far as I’m concerned. The flaw with the death penalty is that is can never be undone. We all have confidence in our judicial, some believe in it, some just accept it as the best we have, but we all recognize on some level that it is flawed, and it will always be flawed because people are one the main instrument in it and we are fallible.

In any and every death penalty system there will be innocent men and women killed by the state. Yes you can and should put up stringent procedures and a number of checks and balances, but it will inevitably fail and it will fail repeatedly. Yes only 2% or 3% of DP prisoners may fall in category, but any state that kills an innocent person, violates a law so fundamental to all of us that is tarnishes the whole system, and it questions the very nature of the society and the people that would permit such a thing.

That’s my problem with the death penalty and there’s simply no way to argue against it.

[Big Bad Wolf ^..^ on 29.09.05 at 11:13]

To GO ON THE RECORD DA WOLF IS AGAINST CAPITAL PUNISHMENT>

[Full Fullish on 29.09.05 at 11:25]

Yet another Limey - Your asking me to have sympathy for criminals, the very same element that detracts from our society. I'm sorry I don't. You made your bed, now you have to lie in it. We are all faced with difficult times, I know I have been when I first moved out. There were many nights where I didn't have enough money for food on the plate for the night and had to resort to a bag of chips. Did I resort to stealing, mugging or anything else along those lines? No, cause I was raised that way, so why should I have any sympathy for people who take the easy way out?

[Bill Cook on 29.09.05 at 11:51]

At present a life sentence for murder means you will walk free after 15yrs or less served.

What the public at large want is protection more than anything else,and a sense that justice has been done with a punishment that fits the crime.

If one is to gauge the publics opinion regarding that, it appears that they lack confidence that the judicial system does that.

There are several difficulties with the death penalty, not least of all that someone has to carry it out,not just the person who actually does it but all others present while it takes place,and that is a life changing experience.

If a poll were taken I feel sure it would find that the majority would favour prison for life to be just that,life.

We know that there is no cure for paedophiles and they will reoffend and do quite often, yet they are released anyway, which makes no sense as they often murder their victims.

If a murderer is released and murders again he will get another life sentence even if he murders 10 people or 20 people.

Clearly there is something wrong here.

It is quite fanciful to think you can put an inmate in solitary confinement on bread and water etc. in Bermuda.

It is also easy to say rehabilitate the prisoners and for judges to recommend but quite another to actually be able to do it.

Prison officers are just ordinary people with few skills and I would venture if the prisoner does not rehabilitate himself because he really wants to it wont happen.
Its a bit like a drug addict in that sense.

The trouble with people who put forward suggestions in a well meaning way is that they really have little knowledge of just what we can do in our Bermudian prison system and what is unrealistic.

What we can realise and be aware of is that a great deal of things and how we deal with them are in dire need of review.

[Yet Another Limey on 29.09.05 at 11:54]

Full Fullish - Not everyone has the same moral fortitude as yourself.

Unfortunately in any society there will be people who will commit crime regardless of their circumstance or upbringing. For these sociopaths and psychopaths, sure lock them up and keep them out of society.

But for the morally weak, who through personal circumstance fall from the moral path, these people need a ‘leg up’ back onto that path rather than a chastisement for falling.

[Jimmy on 29.09.05 at 12:15]

One thing that alot of people fail to realize is that the citizens of the country pay for all the prisons and their upkeep. It really pisses me off when I see these guys in jail smoking butts, playing ping pong, pool and watching cable t.v. The only way to make a prison truly a penalizing place to be is to go back to hard labour. No more cable, no games no nothing. Give them a room,which they have to clean, 3 meals a day and make them work for 10-12 hours EVERY DAY! The last thing that anyone of these individuals wants to do is go to prison and bust their ass for the term of their sentence. Also give them the opportunity to educate themselves and better their lives once they are released.
IN the case of executions I am all for it if the situation is warranted. I don't see how anyone could say that Lee Malvo and John Muhammed didn't deserve the death penalty after what they did. But to hell with the hanging and electrocution. Put an IV in em and shoot them up with a serum that simply stops their heart. They will get off easy that way if you ask me.

[H Reardon on 29.09.05 at 12:22]

"I have often wondered whether support for capital punishment would drop if everyone had to watch the executions, particularly the ones that go wrong. "

Not really an argument against capital punishment, but rather an argument for a more humane process - - lethal injection for instance.

"It may even make juries less likely to convict if they know that the defendant will lose his life as a result. "

This is handled in the US system by having a seperate hearing. Once the defendent is found guilty, then the penalty phase begins--at which time the jury can decide on life in prison or dealth penalty.

"Worse, there’s little evidence that the death penalty deters others."

I believe the jury is still out on this point. Professor Isaac Ehrlich published a paper claiming that for every execution, 8 homocides were adverted. Prof. Ehrlich's research was even used in a Supreme Court trial of Gregg v. Georgia for use to uphold Georgia's capital punishment laws. I recall a much publicized trial in which the defendent followed his prey from Texas to Colorado in order to murder the victim in a more lenient state. Recently there have been studies claiming there is no deterent. I'm not convinced either way. At the end of the day, you can probably make the statistics say whatever you want them to say.

[Full Fullish on 29.09.05 at 12:29]

Yet another Limey -
For the psychopaths...And why should the we, the society, be burdened with the responsiblity and financial obligation of "locking them up" What good is that going to server. Can I point out that it's $60,000 per year per inmate at the moment? That's more than some honest working people make in a year and they are contributing to society peacefully. Again, sympathy scale reading zero here.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all about rehabilitation as well, I just thing that prison life should be what it was meant to be, a deterent. You commit the crime, now as such, you have been found guilty by your peers and are sentenced to 5 years in prison, hard labour (consisting of road works, and any other job that the W&E guys on the streets do), during which time you can also recieve rehabilitation to reintegrate back into the society you plundered.

My point is that the sentences no longer fit the crimes. Prison should be a hard life which would also serve as part of rehabilitation. Prison should be feared. Part of rehabilitation should be the wrong do-er saying "Man I don't EVER want to go back in there".

As for being released, while I think that once the crime is done their debt to society has been paid, however it's hard to say that if a pedaphile is looking for a job working with kids, a theif is applying for a job as a casheir, a rapest is applying for a job as a security person at a hotel. You see where I'm going with this. They have broken fundamental trusts, while society has been repaid, I still don't feel bad for them if people don't want to put them back in a position of trust again. Trust is earned, not given. As for my moral fiber, well I attribute that to life lessons and part of parenting. Maybe after a hard life after a life of crime, they may instil better moral values in their own children so they dont' make the same mistake they did. After all, as parents, we all want better for our children than we had. And that my friend is rehabilitation....

[TJL on 29.09.05 at 12:37]

"An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind." - Gandhi

[loki on 29.09.05 at 12:43]

"Far across the distance
And spaces between us
You have come to show you go on." - C. Dion

[The Limey on 29.09.05 at 12:47]

Bill

It is quite fanciful to think you can put an inmate in solitary confinement on bread and water etc. in Bermuda.

Why?

Reardon

Not really an argument against capital punishment, but rather an argument for a more humane process - - lethal injection for instance.

Lethal injection may be more humane than electrocution, say, but there are plenty of examples of botched lethal injection executions that resulted in suffering. I gave one in my article. There are others here.

And are you not concerned about executing the innocent?

[Big Bad Wolf ^..^ on 29.09.05 at 12:49]

Its interesting how for many people in Bermuda Moral questions are always put in dollar terms.I think that crime levels are also a good indicator of how society as a whole is not working.How we live and treat others are also creating some of our mess in this society.If all drugs were legalized, you would clear about sixty to seventy percent of our prision.Over night we would have a great deal of money to tackle some of our social flaws. Yes I am in favour of legalizing ALL drugs and regulating their use. Prohibition does'nt work and drug wars over money has produced most of the recent murders.

[Full Fullish on 29.09.05 at 13:07]

BBW wrote:

Yes I am in favour of legalizing ALL drugs and regulating their use.

Wolfie, please tell me this is a joke. Your saying that you would make crack legal. How would you regulate the use of a substance which addicts the users almost after the first use? By doing this you would reduce the prison's by 60%, however I bet the hospitol population would skyrocket at the same time.

While my stance isn't for drugs, I can see something like weed maybe getting through, but to allow all drugs, even harmfull ones that's just insane.

Anyways off topic....but I had to respond to this one....

[Bill Cook on 29.09.05 at 13:10]

Limey,

Just like we have rules and regulations in everyday life so we have stipulated rules and regulations within prison.

When an inmate breaks rules he can be punished by due process.

He goes before the Warden or deputy and is sentenced to a period of solitary with a reduced diet.

There are strict rules on the duration of that and stipulated period of daily exercise etc.

These rules generally follow systems in other countries and would require a major revision in order to put into effect.

[Yet Another Limey on 29.09.05 at 13:12]

Full Fullish - I don't disagree with hard work (or even boot camp) as part of a prison regime. By all means it should punish and shouldn’t be seen as an alternative to Bermuda College for a vocational education. But due to the high rate of recidivism, the inmates need to be given the skills to survive in the outside world once they are released (which I think we also agree on).

Unfortunately to do this properly you need to invest in decent psychologists and enthusiastic educators as well as creating an incentive for employers to give someone a second chance, and that costs money. If it costs $60,000 to let a guy do nothing all day can you imagine what it would cost the country to do the right thing? But can society afford not to?

[Nicolette on 29.09.05 at 13:24]

I think it far, far worse for an innocent to be killed by the system than a guilty person be set free by it. Only if the judiciary system worked flawlessly which is inherently impossible should capital punishment even be mentioned as a penalty and then it should be dismissed as barbaric and unbecoming of a civilized nation. The jails here have too large a portion of ganja smokers and victims of addiction rather than the dealers who don;t use the product they sell. I think confiscation of assets attained through illegal industry is the way to go but you simply can't consider taking huge steps backward in prison reform simply because we have a backwards slide in crime statistics.... the UK has had loads of success with a prison reformer called David Jenkins - we need someone like that advising government here.

[The Limey on 29.09.05 at 13:29]

Let's not get sidetracked with another drug legalisation debate here, please.

[Uncle Elvis on 29.09.05 at 14:03]

Me, I think murder is wrong.

Even when the Government does it.

Killing is killing is killing.
End of story.

[H Reardon on 29.09.05 at 14:05]

"And are you not concerned about executing the innocent?"

Posted by The Limey on 29.09.05 at 12:47

Of course, the application of the death penalty needs an extremely high degree of certainty. Recent exonerations in Illinois of former death row inmates is very concerning. I don't feel; however, that this is strong enough to completely throw out the death penalty all together. Allow defense attorneys during the penalty phase to show juries evidence of mistakes made in the past. Drill into the jury that they must be absolutely certain that this is the guy/girl and that he/she should die.

Regarding the humaneness of lethal injection or other forms, I would venture to guess that in 99% of the cases, those killers died much more peacefully than their victims. In any event, it seems that the main issue with lethal injections seems to be finding a vein. I don't find that particularly disturbing. The other issues seem to stem around the inexperience of the death squad. With more death sentences carried out, that should happen less often. (how do I add the sarcasm point?)

[Longtime Lurker on 29.09.05 at 14:13]

The $60,000 figure seems irrelevant to me. Just how much is a killer's life worth? If it only cost $15,000 a year to keep an inmate would we let him live? What is the exact dollar figure at which point it no longer becomes worth saving someone's life?

The fact is that we can afford to keep these people alive. While it would be nice to cut the costs, I'm not willing to take a life to do so.

I think that the legal system should have two goals: protecting the innocent from criminals, and rehabilitating criminals to be productive members of society. Punishment is not a factor (though harsh sentences can be beneficial in rehabilitation). If we can protect the innocent without killing anyone ourselves, we should do so.

[Longtime Lurker on 29.09.05 at 14:16]

"Regarding the humaneness of lethal injection or other forms, I would venture to guess that in 99% of the cases, those killers died much more peacefully than their victims."

I see the same justification for practicing torture on captured terrorists. My answer is the same: What kind of society are we when we judge our morality in comparison to that of killers?

[Yet Another Limey on 29.09.05 at 14:27]

"What is the exact dollar figure at which point it no longer becomes worth saving someone's life?"

I don't think anybody has ever said that the death sentence is a cheap alternative to prison. Prisoners on death row tend to appeal and retrial as much as possible, which in legal fees alone would be astronomical never mind the (on average) 10 years in prison.

[H Reardon on 29.09.05 at 14:32]

Lurker,

Your "Star Trek" morals, while nice to contemplate, are not the way the world works. If everyone felt about murder as you do, there wouldn't be a need to discuss the death penalty. People are vengeful, and fearful and the death penalty helps to satisfy both of those feelings, however irrational.

Limey, I apologize for going slightly off topic, but has anyone else read "Freakonomics" by Steven Levitt? One of the more intriguing arguments that Levitt makes (and backs up) is that the decline in crime seen throughout the US over the last decade is due to Roe v. Wade. The legalization of abortion has led to fewer unwanted children which has led to fewer criminals once they are older. The decline in crime began precisely 18 years after Roe v. Wade, or when these unwanted children would have been out in society committing crimes.

[Uncle Elvis on 29.09.05 at 14:39]

"People are vengeful..."

But that's the point. The death penalty is carried out by the system of Justice. Not the system of Vengeance.

If you truly want a nice combination of Justice and Vengeance, leave the prisoner in the room with his victim's family for a couple of hours, handcuffed to the wall or to a chair.
Each family member is allowed to bring one (1) copy of the murder weapon.

How's that for an idea?

[Longtime Lurker on 29.09.05 at 14:46]

People are vengeful, legal systems shouldn't be. I do acknowledge that the death penalty can give the victim's families a sense of closure, but I don't think that makes it ok to take someone's life. If we could make sure that "life in prison" means just that, perhaps the families would get some sense of closure anyway.

I just read "Freakonomics" last week. The abortion chapter was quite interesting, and I'd agree that it is probably a factor in the decline in crime. Unfortunately, Levitt didn't go into very much depth in the book, and I'm not sure that I completely bought his argument (I may have to look for some of his original papers).

[Thrid Degree on 29.09.05 at 15:39]

Surely taking someone’s liberty for life is the worst possible punishment. Life should mean life. If a financial responsibility is the worst of our concerns for making our society a safer place, so be it.

[Full Fullish on 29.09.05 at 16:59]

Fine if life meant life then I wouldn't have a need for the death sentence. However life meant solitary confinment from 5pm to 5am and from 5am to 5pm they work like a dog for the rest of their lives repaying back society. No chance for freedom whatsoever. Taking of someones life is impossible to pay back, and as such all your liberties should be taken away from you.

Normally I don't see $$$ figures when I look at another person. However if that person is a killer, I stop looking at them like a person and more like an animal. Maybe that's just me.

[Sunshine Lover on 29.09.05 at 21:07]

Fact the justice system is not foolproof. If you watch the events in a real life courtroom a persons liberty is dependant on the advocate representing them. Say your advocate is having a bad day they are human afterall and you are then found guilty for a crime you did not commit. You were just in the wrong place at the wrong time. For all those who vote in favour of the death penalty and find themselves say in the wrong place at the wrong time would they accept being hung for the greater good I think not! As everyone says life should mean life and you should be given the option of ending the pergortory that should face you until the day you die. If you are innocent at least you would have the hope of clearing your name. There by the grace of God go I!

[Njegos on 29.09.05 at 21:46]

Several questions for supporters of the death penalty:

1) Do you have the right to demand the dp where the family of the victim opposes capital punishment?
2) How many of you would be prepared to step forward and "pull the lever"?
3) Would you register as a supporter of the dp if you knew could be called up for hangman's duty?
4) Isn't it simply an "acceptable modern hypocrisy" to allow the state to do our dirty work?

And some questions for those who oppose the dp:

1) Is it less cruel and inhumane to lock up a convicted murderer in tiny cell for life than to execute him or her?
2) How does locking someone up for life contribute to rehabilitation of that individual?
3) Aren't you really saying that you want neither the dp nor life sentences?
4) Shouldn't a prison sentence reflect the severity of the crime?

[tilti on 29.09.05 at 23:02]

Limey has given two gruesome accounts of capital punishment. Yet, I feel that even these descriptions give little sympathy. I suggest that anyone seriously interested in the debate watch "Dancer in the Dark." Scandinavian filmmakers really know how to display emotion, and this film does an excellent job of portraying the brutality in capital punishment.

[Big Bad Wolf ^..^ on 29.09.05 at 23:22]

Yep and Bjork deserved the best actress award from Cannes....She was amazing along with her music....quite a musical for the lost and broken.

[44-40 on 30.09.05 at 14:05]

I'm in favour of capital punishment for murders. But it would only be worth bringing it back if Bermuda's corrupt legal system could be overhauled. Right now murders and attempted murders walk free, so capital puinshment would never be used. We would also have to be willing to use it on all murders despite their race. From the early 1970s to the time it was done away with we all know that no black man would be hanged, no matter how grevious his crime.

[Gray on 01.10.05 at 00:32]

Too many issues for me to comment on here, but I have to agree with Bill Cook, life should mean life.

I abhor the death penalty, and nothing will ever change my mind. It actually costs more to execute a person in the US than to lock them up for life (due to the appeals process), if you only care about the cash think about that.

The death penalty is never right, life without the possibility of parole, and an attempt to understand why is the right course of action. Some people can never be fully rehabilitated into society - and I'm not so stupid not to realise that, but then the only safe course of action is to incarcerate them.

[Bill Cook on 01.10.05 at 10:52]

The frequently used term "the convict has paid his/her debt to society" is puzzling to most people.

Just exactly how does one who murders a child ever repay that deed ?

Why is it possible to be released from prison with time off for good behaviour, while still denying guilt ?

Why have time off for good behaviour if that was a requirement when sentenced anyway.

Are we saying that we expect you to misbehave and reward you for not misbehaving ?

The entire judicial system is archaic and deeply flawed,and painfully in need of major revision.

As Clarence Darrow a successful defence lawyer once said " I can promise you the law but I can not promise you justice "