Capitol Punishment: Is it really this clear cut?

I’ve been hearing a lot of talk lately on the subject of the capitol punishment. The latest was related to the murder of 15 year old Rebecca Aylward by her ex-boyfriend Joshua Davies. Following Davies’ sentencing to life imprisonment, the victim’s mother said that she: “would welcome the return of capitol punishment for the likes of Joshua Davies, who forfeited his human rights.”

You can find more on that story here.

I had a discussion with some of my friends not too long ago on the death penalty, and when we thought it could be a justified course of action. We came to the conclusion that if certain crimes (murder, perhaps rape) could be proven beyond any doubt then it could possibly be acceptable. However, we could not think of many situations which could fit such a criteria.

It is my opinion that this is a subject that requires much in the way of debate and commentary. If only to remind people that it is not something to be taken lightly.

The first of the e-petitions (an online form of petitioning which allow public prompting of parliamentary discussion) were recently published by the government. Among those with the most signatures were several calling for the return of capitol punishment. One of these says, and I quote: “With todays technoligy,ie DNA,there is no lilkliy hood of an innocent person being found guilty. [sic]” Now, atrocious spelling aside, this is a completely naïve view to hold. Yes, technologies such as DNA aid hugely in the conviction of criminals and solving of cases. But this does not mean that it is an exact science. My course at university is a part of the Innocence Project. An organisation that works to exonerate wrongly convicted individuals. One ongoing case, which my university is involved in, is looking into a man convicted of a quadruple murder, with forensic evidence being part of that which led to his sentencing. It is far too complicated to go into on the blog (trust me, it makes an Eastenders plotline look like it was written by  a five year-old) but Panorama conducted an investigation into it, entitled "Fair Cops?" you can find out more about the programme, and the case on this page (be sure to look at the ‘see also’ links).

The point I’m trying to make is that forensic evidence cannot necessarily be trusted 100 percent, especially when life is at stake. This isn’t even taking into account the possibility of human error or forensic misconduct.

Staines' blog: http://order-order.com/

Paul Staines, a right wing blogger that goes by the pseudonym ‘Guido Fawkes’ is a major supporter of the reinstatement of capitol punishment. He claims that politicians are “completely out of sync with the public” and that “all political parties have been out of step on crime, immigration." Presumably he’d just have everyone killed? He says that there is a majority of people, everywhere, in favour of the death penalty. I have to say, I don’t remember being asked. I have to wonder whether “everywhere” is wherever he thought he’d get the most support. Whether his is the vocal majority that drown out the quiet minority, who believe that this needn’t even be considered?

You can find an interview with Mr. Staines, as well as some more information on e-petitions here.

If you want to put across another point, or say anything at all about this post. Feel free to leave a comment below.

Much love, Internet.