Liverpool FC Forum

[devaney]

Is it just me lads or do you think the sentences totalling 102 years for the Rotheram gang that abused young girls is far too lenient? This collection of utter scum in my opinion do not simply deserve incarceration at the tax payers expense. We are far too soft. If I had my way I would let the abused girls families publicly stone them to death. I appreciate that would be considered by some as barbaric and I wouldn't disagree but do they really deserve anything better. Their revolting actions will have left permanent scars on their female victims for life.

In cases of multiple child abuse/rape and murder where there is unquestional proof I would not hesitate to impose a sentence of capital punishment. Judges should  be made to decide based on the evidence that is presented before them. Imposing or suggesting a capital punishment should not be the responsibilty of a jury.

To think that these individuals will at some stage be allowed to freely walk amongst us is simply wrong. If you cannot behave like a human being then don't expect to be treated like one.

What do you think? If one of the girls had been your daughter or grandaughter what punishmenta would have satisfied you?

[7_Kewell]

strip their dual nationality and deport them. It'll be far worse for them back in Pakistan...

[woof woof !]

What do you think? If one of the girls had been your daughter or grandaughter what punishmenta would have satisfied you?

Give me a bottle of sulphuric acid, a pair of pliers, a hammer, a blow torch and and a month or more (why make their suffering quick ? ) locked in a room with these animals .

Not saying that by the end of the month I would have killed them BUT they would be wishing I had  .

***** sake dev , you bring out the worst in me   

[devaney]

You know Woof finding an appropriate punishment for these cretins is challenging. Some years ago when Ian Brady started his hunger strike I simply said let the piece of vermin die. My female assistant at the time said no no no let him live because that is a far greater punishment. He has to wake up every morning knowing what he has done !!! Just maybe she was right but I would still like to see these excuses for human beings stoned to death.

There is a very good chance Kewell that these individuals are Muslim's and perhaps on this occasion Sharia law would have been more apprpriate. Generally I do not subscribe to the extremes of Sharia law but in the case of this filth I would make an exception.

[Boocity]

Castration. Also the people in authority who closed their eyes to what was happening as not to be accused of racism and left these young girls to their fates should be locked up as well

[Soupyzrx]

In answer to your question Dev, if it was my daughter, I can honestly say that I would count down every day of their incarceration just waiting for them to get out, because I would definitely want them dead. If the state is too PC to do it for me, then I'd have to do it myself.
Woof's right though, deport the fuckers and have the Pakistani legal system try them there. They'd have no qualms about killing the worthless scumbags.
Not only will we have to pay to keep the ***** alive and well in prison, but when they get out we'll probably have the pleasure of paying for their benefits for the rest of their lives.
Ultimately, if it happened to either of my daughters, I would not be able to control myself, which would end with me having dire consequences to face, but my desire for vengeance is in proportion to my love for my family, and both would be too strong to ignore.

[Reg]

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, so You'd castrate Adam Johnson, or hang him as well?

In your defense, in Nelson's day, there were just three main crimes that had mandatory hanging on board a ship: mutiny, buggery and paedophilia so clearly the protection of children has always been a highly rate priority within society with severe consequences for delinquents. 

China executes 1,000+ a year, Iran/Saudi also high numbers, but for some reason Western society no longer feels it correct to take a life in any form. Personally I wouldn't mind if these fellas were to slip in the showers whilst in prison and accidently bang their heads rather hard.

[devaney]

Reg you have hit the nail on the head and that is perhaps one of the reasons we have a questionable legal system in terms of the punishment fitting the crime. This is the fundamental reason why I think that judges should have the power to impose capital punishment when the evidence is unquestionable in crimes of such magnitude that incarceration is not a satisfactory alternative.

I think that it is highly unlikely that Johnson, and I am not defending his actions,will be jailed for 35 years for his crimes. There are lines of comparison that can be drawn but the extent of his crimes bare little resemblance to the Rotheram gang. Common sense has to prevail. The evidence from the victim is extremely questionable and it is her word against his and obviously a judge would have to take that into account when passing sentence.

I watched the Oscar Pistorius and O J Simpson trials and it was frightening to watch their respective defence councils try and persuade the jury/judge with a concocted load of nonsense to create reasonable doubt. The ordinary man in the street would not have been able to afford this type of distasteful defence and it should not be available to those that can afford it simply so that they can abuse the system.Both of these individuals IMHO were as guilty as sin and committed murder. I seem to remember in the Simpson case his defence council spent an obscene amount of money going to the factory in Italy that produced the shoes that Simpson was wearing to determine tread pattern variations due to the hand made nature of the shoes. They used every possible trick in the book to try and display reasonable doubt to get Simpson off when they probably knew that he was guilty. The lawyers in some cases are little better than the criminals. They know when through their actions they are allowing certain undeserving individuals to walk freely amongst us. Everybody should be entitled to a reasonable defence. The defence in the cases of Pistorius and Simpson could hardly be regarded as reasonable. The system leaves a massive amount to be desired.

In Singapore some years ago (1994) the son of an American was sententenced to a sufficient number of lashes with the rattan cane that could potentially cause disfigurement. His crime was to have vandalised a number of cars. It therefore comes as no surprise to discover that Singapore has one of the lowest crime rates in the world. Violent crime is also extremely rare. Are their sentences barbaric or do they protect the majority of law abiding individuals in a far more satisfactory manner? Caning is a widely used form of legal corporal punishment in Singapore. Somewhat ironically these practices of caning are largely a legacy of, and are influenced by, British colonial rule in Singapore.

[Reg]

Hey Devany, good post mate. The discussion is very broad and introducing children makes the crime more sensitive and the need for justice more demanding. Murder in comparison, adult on adult is rather dull but you highlight 2 celebrity cases that used the media to create a reality show atmosphere which the BBC and CNN duly obliged by showing needless obsessive hour of trila coverage on the box. A travesty of justice. If that had been Liverpool Crown Court with 2 everyday folks having murdered their partners the juries would have found them rightly guilty in both cases.   

So lets compare Jimmy Savile, Adam Johnson and The Rotherham gang. Or the Catholic church. All were premeditated, guilty and vile. Similar motive, similarly callous, total disregard for their victims. The main difference is AJ was stopped before he sought a second victim.

Should AJ be caned? No. Should JS have been hung, Yes. The Rotherham lot, Yes. AJ should get 5 years because he broke a key law, he, as an adult had sex with a minor. In lieu of hanging everyone else should get life sentences.

Singapore has a low crime rate for a number of reasons, one of which is that from a very early age within the local community, then from primary school onwards, kids are taught to conform. The British education system has lost both the respect of the community and control of the kids hence kids by the age of 18 are unruly. That is not the case in Singapore.

[aCe']

Sh*t thread with Sh*t opinions from many. No offense guys but most of these arguments are ignorant as fck ! Strip nationality and deport ? Use shariaa law ? You mention Pistorius and OJ Simpson... have you considered the fact that most people who commit crimes (of different types, degrees, etc.) have low incomes, often get inadequate representation, and in many cases end up doing time for crimes they havent committed while others like the 2 you mentioned can afford attorneys who almost certainly get them out of death penalty sentences. The death penalty is often used as a bargaining chip by prosecutors to force false confessions from poor/vulnerable/uneducated/etc. suspects who would rather not put their lives in the hands of underpaid, overworked and incompetent defence council.   

I remember recently reading somewhere that 150 or so people have been released from death row because of new evidence that eventually proved their innocence. Same study suggested that in the US alone around 4-5% of those sentenced to death from the mid 1970s till early 2000s were innocent.

Besides hunger for blood, there literally isnt a single reason for anyone to support the death penalty. Every study done on the subject has said the same thing: no difference between long prison sentence and death penalty when it comes to deterrence and fear factor.

[devaney]

Sh*t thread with Sh*t opinions from many. No offense guys but most of these arguments are ignorant as fck ! Strip nationality and deport ? Use shariaa law ? You mention Pistorius and OJ Simpson... have you considered the fact that most people who commit crimes (of different types, degrees, etc.) have low incomes, often get inadequate representation, and in many cases end up doing time for crimes they havent committed while others like the 2 you mentioned can afford attorneys who almost certainly get them out of death penalty sentences. The death penalty is often used as a bargaining chip by prosecutors to force false confessions from poor/vulnerable/uneducated/etc. suspects who would rather not put their lives in the hands of underpaid, overworked and incompetent defence council.   

I remember recently reading somewhere that 150 or so people have been released from death row because of new evidence that eventually proved their innocence. Same study suggested that in the US alone around 4-5% of those sentenced to death from the mid 1970s till early 2000s were innocent.

Besides hunger for blood, there literally isnt a single reason for anyone to support the death penalty. Every study done on the subject has said the same thing: no difference between long prison sentence and death penalty when it comes to deterrence and fear factor.

THANKS FOR YOUR PATRONISING COMMENTS !!

Ace mate you're entitled to your opinion however you seem to have ignored words such as unquestionable proof when you're quoting the figures of 150 released. I would be interested to see your source.

You also seem to totally agree with what I am saying with regards to Simpson and Pistorius so excuse me if I haven't got a clue what you are talking about.

It's not about hunger for blood. It is certainly not about deterrent or fear factor because absolutely nothing would probably work with the likes of the Rotherham gang. It is about allowing individuals that fail to display the ability to behave like a human being the right to walk amongst us either in jail or when they are finally released. A dangerous dogs law was introduced in this country and certain breeds such as Pit Bulls were put down because of it. Would you happily allow extremely dangerous dogs like this to uncontrollably walk amongst us? I actually rate the Rotherham gang a lot worse than a Pit Bull terrier !!

No doubt you are happy that the likes of the  Sutcliffe's, Brady's, West's and the Rotherham gang are all being incarcerated at huge cost to the tax payer when they have absolutely nothing to offer to society other than a potential danger. Please explain to me why any of them have the right to live? They cannot in any form be regarded as normal human beings. Just how much has it cost the taxpayer to keep Brady alive? IN ALL OF THESE CASES THERE WAS UNQUESTIONABLE PROOF AND THAT IS MY MAIN POINT WHICH YOU SEEM TO HAVE OVERLOOKED !!

Personally I think the various styles of capital punishment are disgraceful. Hanging, electric chair, gas chamber, firing squad and the guillotine etc etc have all contributed towards the view that capital punishment is wrong. Other more humane methods would serve the same purpose without the unnecessary drama.

Levi Bellfield who murdered Milly Dowler, is suing for £30,000 after suffering cuts and bruises !! Ace this is the reality of the nanny state that we live in. Your happy with the system and seem to unconvincingly suggest that your views are correct. Forgive me if I don't agree !! Parliamentary votes on the reintroduction of capital punishment have typically been two thirds against and one third for, very broadly speaking. Last time subject was seriously debated a third of MP's  subscribe to the view that there is most definitely a single and possibly a lot more reasons for reintroducing capital punishment. No doubt you regard their opinions as shit and ignorant. 

So back to the question Ace if your daughter or granddaughter was a victim of the Rotherham gang what punishment would you like them to receive ?

[aCe']

Sh*t thread with Sh*t opinions from many. No offense guys but most of these arguments are ignorant as fck ! Strip nationality and deport ? Use shariaa law ? You mention Pistorius and OJ Simpson... have you considered the fact that most people who commit crimes (of different types, degrees, etc.) have low incomes, often get inadequate representation, and in many cases end up doing time for crimes they havent committed while others like the 2 you mentioned can afford attorneys who almost certainly get them out of death penalty sentences. The death penalty is often used as a bargaining chip by prosecutors to force false confessions from poor/vulnerable/uneducated/etc. suspects who would rather not put their lives in the hands of underpaid, overworked and incompetent defence council.   

I remember recently reading somewhere that 150 or so people have been released from death row because of new evidence that eventually proved their innocence. Same study suggested that in the US alone around 4-5% of those sentenced to death from the mid 1970s till early 2000s were innocent.

Besides hunger for blood, there literally isnt a single reason for anyone to support the death penalty. Every study done on the subject has said the same thing: no difference between long prison sentence and death penalty when it comes to deterrence and fear factor.

THANKS FOR YOUR PATRONISING COMMENTS !!

Ace mate you're entitled to your opinion however you seem to have ignored words such as unquestionable proof when you're quoting the figures of 150 released. I would be interested to see your source.

You also seem to totally agree with what I am saying with regards to Simpson and Pistorius so excuse me if I haven't got a clue what you are talking about.

It's not about hunger for blood. It is certainly not about deterrent or fear factor because absolutely nothing would probably work with the likes of the Rotherham gang. It is about allowing individuals that fail to display the ability to behave like a human being the right to walk amongst us either in jail or when they are finally released. A dangerous dogs law was introduced in this country and certain breeds such as Pit Bulls were put down because of it. Would you happily allow extremely dangerous dogs like this to uncontrollably walk amongst us? I actually rate the Rotherham gang a lot worse than a Pit Bull terrier !!

No doubt you are happy that the likes of the  Sutcliffe's, Brady's, West's and the Rotherham gang are all being incarcerated at huge cost to the tax payer when they have absolutely nothing to offer to society other than a potential danger. Please explain to me why any of them have the right to live? They cannot in any form be regarded as normal human beings. Just how much has it cost the taxpayer to keep Brady alive? IN ALL OF THESE CASES THERE WAS UNQUESTIONABLE PROOF AND THAT IS MY MAIN POINT WHICH YOU SEEM TO HAVE OVERLOOKED !!

Personally I think the various styles of capital punishment are disgraceful. Hanging, electric chair, gas chamber, firing squad and the guillotine etc etc have all contributed towards the view that capital punishment is wrong. Other more humane methods would serve the same purpose without the unnecessary drama.

Levi Bellfield who murdered Milly Dowler, is suing for £30,000 after suffering cuts and bruises !! Ace this is the reality of the nanny state that we live in. Your happy with the system and seem to unconvincingly suggest that your views are correct. Forgive me if I don't agree !! Parliamentary votes on the reintroduction of capital punishment have typically been two thirds against and one third for, very broadly speaking. Last time subject was seriously debated a third of MP's  subscribe to the view that there is most definitely a single and possibly a lot more reasons for reintroducing capital punishment. No doubt you regard their opinions as shit and ignorant. 

So back to the question Ace if your daughter or granddaughter was a victim of the Rotherham gang what punishment would you like them to receive ?

I wasnt talking about a specific case and I honestly have very little interest in getting dragged into a lengthy discussion about this. I will however try to respond to some of your points and that will be the last I say about this...

Heres a link to the names of 156 death row exoneration cases since 1973:

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocen ... -death-row

Heres another link that states that "Researchers estimate that more than 340 U.S. inmates that could have been exonerated were sentenced to death since 1973". It also quotes a 4.1% wrong conviction record and other stats that you'll no doubt argue against.


Edit: http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... convicted/


With regards to the Simpson/Pistorious thing, my opinion is that these cases if anything support a ban on capital punishment. The fact that the people who would be in most need of decent representation and a fair trial dont get it where they at least get a chance of proving their innocence down the line without the threat of death looming.

The dog situation is nowhere near the same. For starters, no one is suggesting you let anyone walk for rape, murder, etc.   

With regards to costs, you probably dont know this, but it actually costs a whole lot more in terms of tax payer money to give someone the death penalty than it does to sentence them to life in prison. I trust Google will be able to give you all the sources you need for this one.

With regards to the more humane methods, can you enlighten me with what these methods are ? Last I heard on the topic was that they botched a few executions in the States and that most death penalty sentences are on hold since no drug/drug combination can be found that kills without torture. The drug companies refuse to cooperate with governments because they dont want their drugs used for executions and I cant blame them.

To answer your last question, life imprisonment does the job.

[Reg]

Sh*t thread with Sh*t opinions from many.

I resemble that remark.   

[parchpea]

Least they have served a form of justice unlike our lords and masters in the aristocracy or from westminster who never will for identical crimes.

They are untouchable and we have always allowed it.

[devaney]

Ace considering that you have no interest in being dragged into the discussion you seem to have a  lot to say on the matter.

Not sure that I understand your Pistorius/Simpson argument. Sorry I am obviously missing something.

I am not interested in the ridiculous American appeal system and the time it actually takes to execute somebody that has been found guilty. Very little wonder with such a bizarre system that it actually costs more to execute. UNQUESTIONABLE PROOF IS THE ISSUE THAT CONCERNS ME. In all of the examples that I have mentioned there was UNQUESTIONABLE PROOF. Judges in circumstance such as these would have the authority to deny the right to appeal. These individuals would be executed as soon as practically possible after the guilty verdict had been passed.

As for the "dangerous dogs" comparison I totally disagree with you. If life imprisonment actually meant that then it would be another matter. Unfortunately that is not the case and at some stage individuals who have committed the most disgusting crimes will be released from prison and ALLOWED TO WALK AMONGST US !! There have been numerous examples of instances of reoffending after release and simply carrying on what they started prior to incarceration

In Switzerland Dignitas who offer assisted end of life to the terminally ill utilise a lethal, fast-acting and completely painless barbiturate. Perhaps the American incompetents should have a word with them. As for the drug company argument it has very little to do with the respective companies not wanting their drugs associated with executions. The drug companies are far more concerned about potential litigation if something goes wrong and the bad press that they would inevitably receive. There is also the strong possibility that they could be sued for millions of dollars and dragged through the courts at enormous expense in both time and money.

Ace so far you have done very little to alter my way of thinking with regards to the death sentence in cases of UNQUESTIONABLE PROOF that warrant that level of punishment. I simply believe that these individuals have forfeited the right to live by their own barbaric actions.