Death Penalty in Bali

[Russ77]

I am totally against the death penalty, but I cannot see how our politicians can get involved in this case because two very powerful countries who are our allies (US and Saudi Arabia), both use the death penalty on a regular basis and we say nothing, no criticism - nada.
We will never know the real "facts" behind this case, except that she went to Bali via Thailand (where the drugs were allegedly stitched into her suitcase lining - by someone else?) and was caught.
It is commonplace for people to make up stories, but at the end of the day, it is up to every individual to make choices in life, and this includes who you mix with, where you go and what you do.
If you mix with bad people and make the wrong choices, then it is only a matter of time before you have to pay the price.
My missus and I do not mix with certain relations who do not care about the law, and they have tried to blackmail us into doing things which are illegal (not drugs though). The result is that we have cut ourselves off from them, and that would apply to anyone who tried to involve us in anything.

It's all very well saying you choose not to mix with unsavoury characters but lets assume this woman is a saint and doesn't mix with unsavoury characters.

We've all seen films were people are in a foreign land and find themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time.......

Let's say you and your wife were in Thailand taking a walk and this happens to you and you stumble across a gang carrying out an illegal activity. The spot you and stop you leaving.

The gang leader grabs your wife and gives you the choice "Take these drugs to Bali or you'll never see your wife again"

OK, it's tough to imagine it, in films there's normally a double cross or the superhero saves the day. In real life that doesn't happen and you have a choice to make........

 

[Laudrup]

Then dealers should be terminated with out trial. Save money and time.


What a load of tosh. It does not work never has. Time to go back to capital and corporal punishment. 3 1/4s of crooks do it again and again because they know our nambi pambi justice systemwill not do squat.


Sorry John i have respect for you and your photography but the liberal minded kack is what has made this Country a joke.time to clean up and drop rights for prisoners.
murderers, pedos and rapists death penalty.

All others should get Hard labour.

All this bleeding heart liberal minded tosh is why the world thinks we have gone soft.

You could always kill them before they have committed a crime and save even more time?

 

[andya700]

Let's say you and your wife were in Thailand taking a walk and this happens to you and you stumble across a gang carrying out an illegal activity. The spot you and stop you leaving.

This "flight of fancy" (you really must stop watching Liam Neeson films) bears no relation to what happened in this case.
Everyone knew each other in this case, the whole thing had been planned in the UK.

 

[onomatopoeia]

So glad you picked out one piece. That line was out of order but I feel angry with all the 'Yes they did wrong but slap their wrists and tell they are very naughty' stuff that is coming out.

Because when something happens to a loved one or someone close lets just see if they still think let them get sent down for 10 years.

Of course they shoulds have a trail.
So that a damn fine Barrister gets them off so they can do it again.

Police curruption? You watch too much telly. Police fabricating the evidence...... Very very rare.

What is the point of locking them up for life? Paying to keep them there. The cell can be used for lesser offences.

The CPS should have its own damn fine barristers as well. The vast majority of cases criminal and civil get decided on the facts, not who has the best barrister. To suggest otherwise implies that the public that form juries are incompetent and incapable of understanding the evidence in a criminal case.

Police corruption. Hmm. Birmingham six? Guilford four? Cases which would likely have resulted in the death penalty, had it still been available when they were tried. They were locked up for 15+ years before the convictions were quashed as unsafe due to the police fabricating and suppressing evidence, and they were subsequently compensated. You can't compensate someone who has been executed, they are too dead. Of course locking them up was very expensive, as were all the appeals, the programmes made by World in Action (back when ITV was actually capable of good investigative journalism) etc etc. But it's a good job they were locked up rather than executed, given that they didn't do the crimes.

 

[Laudrup]

For the - we do not kill in any circumstances in order to protect our moral superiority - believers , a hypothetical

A maniac with a knife runs at you screaming that he's going to kill you , you have a hand gun and are trained in its use - do you shoot him, or let him kill you ? ( I imagine some will say that they'd reason with him, get him to put down the knife then go off to knit tofu together, but for the purposes of this lets assume that isnt an option )

Now imagine its your child he is attacking , do you kill him or let your child die ?

what about if he's attacking a stranger , or a strangers child ?

my view is that i'd answer kill him to all three of the above, as I believe its perfectly possible to have a strong moral code which includes the taking of life, in defence of yourself, your family, your society, your country etc.

Why are you carrying a concealed hand gun in the UK? The police will have to deal with that scenario you describe every day, you don't hear of scores of mentally ill people being killed daily to satisfy some bloodlust.

 

[PatrickO]

And for those who have put forth that this is a thread about the death penalty in general, it is not. It is a thread about one woman, one case, one guilty verdict as a result of hard evidence and one sentence of death by firing squad.

I disagree. Whenever "death penalty" appear in the thread title the argument neatly divides into two camps. Those who feel the death penalty is good and those who feel is wrong. And nobody's mind is going to be changed by the arguments. The details of the specific case become almost irrelevant.

Personally I am against the death penalty ( because it's immoral, ineffective and results in horrifying miscarriages of justice). My guess is that you approve of the death penalty. And our views will never coincide.

 

[The Greek]

The gang leader grabs your wife and gives you the choice "Take these drugs to Bali or you'll never see your wife again"

I should be so lucky!

 

[Russ77]

This "flight of fancy" (you really must stop watching Liam Neeson films) bears no relation to what happened in this case.
Everyone knew each other in this case, the whole thing had been planned in the UK.

I wasn't aware that this woman knew these other people and it had been planned in the UK, hence my caveat "the facts as I see them".

You still didn't give any response to my flight of fancy though......

 

[Nod]

How many people have been killed due to the proliferation of drugs ... two today just because of ecstacy - you want to deal in misery, accept the consequences.

And those 2 didn't die because of MDMA, they died because it had been cut with something even worse.

And how many people died last year as a result of alcohol? Pretty sure it'll be more than have died as a result of illegal drugs since the laws were changed.

Doesn't escape the consequences of the use of drugs and hence the culpability of those who traffic it. Drug abuse will never benefit from a proliferation of the drug.

Use or abuse? Huge difference. Queen Victoria used cannabis to relieve her period pains and plenty of people use it as an anti emetic. Plenty more abuse it for enjoyment too (indeed, I used to), although in that context, the abuse refers purely to the illegality.

 

[Daryl]

I'm opposed to the death penalty for several reasons, but we've debated this on the forums before. Just as a matter of interest, will all the people who are in favour of executing this woman feel exactly the same way about it if it was their own grandmother, mother, wife, sister or daughter in this situation? I hope so. Hypocrisy is a sad thing.

Ok lets put it to this way Martyn.

Three men break into your house tie you up, rape and torture your wife and kids and then kill them.

They get a fancy expensive law firm that gets them minimum sentance. one does 10years and the other two get out on good behaviour in 8 years.

Are telling me that is fine?
that justice is done....

10 years later they are free to do what they want?
Whilst you and all your family and wifes family have to go forward knowing that your wife and kids won't be there to see it with you?

If that happened you would let it go?

I'd want medievil hung drawn and quartered to some one like that.

As for the woman smuggling drugs through customs.... How many 100's will that effect? then 100's + with friends and family of those that take those drugs?

Yes, let them live because we are civilised and the perps don't give a s h i t.

 

[Daryl]

Birmingham six? Guilford four?

Please Mark........ And I forget now which group it was but they were all involved in it somewhere. And one lot came out when freed and gave their compensation to the IRA.

So don't even go there.


Anyway this is too heated so I'm out. And seems those with a 'let live' policy have never had or been close to some one died from drugs or been murdered.

But when it does happen to them then see if they still say 'Live and let live.'

 

[gramps]

And those 2 didn't die because of MDMA, they died because it had been cut with something even worse.

Even the police didn't know that as of yesterday, how do you?

And how many people died last year as a result of alcohol? Pretty sure it'll be more than have died as a result of illegal drugs since the laws were changed.

Evidence?
I condemn the misuse of alcohol in the same way as the misuse of drugs.

Use or abuse? Huge difference. Queen Victoria used cannabis to relieve her period pains and plenty of people use it as an anti emetic. Plenty more abuse it for enjoyment too (indeed, I used to), although in that context, the abuse refers purely to the illegality.

No abuse is not just an issue of legal/illegal - people abuse 'legal' drugs ... including alcohol, (even hospital alcohol-based hand cleanser!), painkillers etc. Misuse as far as I am concerned refers to non-medical (i.e. prescribed by a doctor) use more commonly referred to as 'recreational use' of drugs including cannabis, heroin and cocaine.

 

[ACW]

"Coerced by gangsters" into smuggling the narcotics. Has one shred of evidence been presented that this was indeed the case? It's a nice try at a one-size-fits-all get out clause. Nice try, but as we have seen, epic fail.

And for those who have put forth that this is a thread about the death penalty in general, it is not. It is a thread about one woman, one case, one guilty verdict as a result of hard evidence and one sentence of death by firing squad.

Read the thread again and say that.

It's been derailed by badly formulated arguments and people who bizarrely think being anti capital punishment makes you a left wing socialist.

I wouldn't say anyone's stance on capital punishment is indicative of where they lie on the political spectrum.

While I don't necessarily agree with the anti capital punishment arguments in this thread, they have put their point across so much more intelligently that the "kill them, they are scum" brigade.

Capital punishment is too expensive in a first world country.

Yes these tin pot, backwards nations can have someone executed without an expensive trial. But trials in developed countries aren't cheap.

Keeping a prisoner on death row is $90000 a year more expensive than someone on life imprisonment. Would all of you pro capital punishment lot foot the bill?

California has spent more than $4 billion on capital punishment since it was reinstated in 1978 (about $308 million for each of the 13 executions carried out)

Figures are from the 'Report of the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice (2008)'

As evil as those executed may be, is it really good value for money?

I'd much rather a murderers death sentence was commuted to life in prison and all that saved money was put into the police, fire department, or NHS budget.

 

[pepi1967]

Read the thread again and say that.

It's been derailed by badly formulated arguments and people who bizarrely think being anti capital punishment makes you a left wing socialist.

I wouldn't say anyone's stance on capital punishment is indicative of where they lie on the political spectrum.

While I don't necessarily agree with the anti capital punishment arguments in this thread, they have put their point across so much more intelligently that the "kill them, they are scum" brigade.

Capital punishment is too expensive in a first world country.

Yes these tin pot, backwards nations can have someone executed without an expensive trial. But trials in developed countries aren't cheap.

Keeping a prisoner on death row is $90000 a year more expensive than someone on life imprisonment. Would all of you pro capital punishment lot foot the bill?

California has spent more than $4 billion on capital punishment since it was reinstated in 1978 (about $308 million for each of the 13 executions carried out)

Figures are from the 'Report of the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice (2008)'

As evil as those executed may be, is it really good value for money?

I'd much rather a murderers death sentence was commuted to life in prison and all that saved money was put into the police, fire department, or NHS budget.

Your point is mute in the fact of your talking about the USA this case is not in the USA their laws are obviously not the same. Our laws are not the same. She committed the crime there she is being punished under their law. Those are the facts of the case in question.

But just for arguments sake going back to the figures you pointed out for death row inmates well that's simply sorted. Don't keep them on death row. You get sentenced to death complete sentence the same day no money wasted on years and years on going back and forth simple.

 

[PatrickO]

Read the thread again and say that.

It's been derailed by badly formulated arguments and people who bizarrely think being anti capital punishment makes you a left wing socialist.

I wouldn't say anyone's stance on capital punishment is indicative of where they lie on the political spectrum.

While I don't necessarily agree with the anti capital punishment arguments in this thread, they have put their point across so much more intelligently that the "kill them, they are scum" brigade.

Capital punishment is too expensive in a first world country.

Yes these tin pot, backwards nations can have someone executed without an expensive trial. But trials in developed countries aren't cheap.

Keeping a prisoner on death row is $90000 a year more expensive than someone on life imprisonment. Would all of you pro capital punishment lot foot the bill?

California has spent more than $4 billion on capital punishment since it was reinstated in 1978 (about $308 million for each of the 13 executions carried out)

Figures are from the 'Report of the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice (2008)'

As evil as those executed may be, is it really good value for money?

I'd much rather a murderers death sentence was commuted to life in prison and all that saved money was put into the police, fire department, or NHS budget.

A thoughtful and well articulated post. Thanks.


.

 

[Mark Anthony]

You get sentenced to death complete sentence the same day no money wasted on years and years on going back and forth simple.

Bang on.. Pardon the pun.

Total cost = 1 bullet! Maybe a couple to be sure!

 

[ACW]

Your point is mute in the fact of your talking about the USA this case is not in the USA their laws are obviously not the same. Our laws are not the same. She committed the crime there she is being punished under their law. Those are the facts of the case in question.

But just for arguments sake going back to the figures you pointed out for death row inmates well that's simply sorted. Don't keep them on death row. You get sentenced to death complete sentence the same day no money wasted on years and years on going back and forth simple.

My reply is obviously directed at all of those in the thread talking about capital punishment as a whole, not just this Indonesian debacle. Therefore it's not mute, it's just not strictly on topic in an already off topic thread.

Yes I know she's being prosecuted under their law, I'm fully aware said execution will be legal. I should be arguing the morality and ethics of their corrupt legal system. Something being immoral and illegal are hugely different, lets not forget that.

These undeveloped nations haven't quite got the hang of this law thing yet. They are following practices that were outdated here centuries ago.

Are you seriously suggesting that enforcing a death sentence on the day it's given is a good idea? Yes that would save on costs, but also it would mean the many people exonerated (throughout the world) each year would be dead. It's quite hard to apologise to a corpse for finding them guilty by mistake.

The appeal process is there for a reason, and it is, and always will be expensive.

 

[Deleted member 49549]

Ok lets put it to this way Martyn.

Three men break into your house tie you up, rape and torture your wife and kids and then kill them.

They get a fancy expensive law firm that gets them minimum sentance. one does 10years and the other two get out on good behaviour in 8 years.

Are telling me that is fine?
that justice is done....

10 years later they are free to do what they want?
Whilst you and all your family and wifes family have to go forward knowing that your wife and kids won't be there to see it with you?

If that happened you would let it go?

I'd want medievil hung drawn and quartered to some one like that.

As for the woman smuggling drugs through customs.... How many 100's will that effect? then 100's + with friends and family of those that take those drugs?

Yes, let them live because we are civilised and the perps don't give a s h i t.

Daryl,

i dont believe a position of anger is the best state to be deciding laws...

 

[viv1969]

................
These undeveloped nations haven't quite got the hang of this law thing yet. They are following practices that were outdated here centuries ago.
..............

My goodness. I wonder, if you tried very hard, could you be any more condescending towards countries you seem to believe to be inferior? :shrug:

 

[ACW]

My goodness. I wonder, if you tried very hard, could you be any more condescending towards countries you seem to believe to be inferior? :shrug:

I'd love you to tell me how their legal system isn't inferior to ours?

I eagerly await your reply.

 

[Deleted member 49549]

My goodness. I wonder, if you tried very hard, could you be any more condescending towards countries you seem to believe to be inferior? :shrug:

I think the suggestion that many other countries are more lax in their attitude to law enforcement and justice is entirely correct. Do i think some British institutions are something other countries could learn from - yes!

 

[ACW]

A thoughtful and well articulated post. Thanks.

.

Thanks Patrick

 

[gramps]

These undeveloped nations haven't quite got the hang of this law thing yet. They are following practices that were outdated here centuries ago.

My goodness. I wonder, if you tried very hard, could you be any more condescending towards countries you seem to believe to be inferior? :shrug:

Not to mention a bit presumptuous to assume that 'we' have got it right!

 

[ACW]

I think the suggestion that many other countries are more lax in their attitude to law enforcement and justice is entirely correct. Do i think some British institutions are something other countries could learn from - yes!

+1

 

[ACW]

Not to mention a bit presumptuous to assume that 'we' have got it right!

Really? I can't believe this is even a defence to this argument.

Please see my above reply to Viv.

 

[PMK]

And seems those with a 'let live' policy have never had or been close to some one died from drugs

Why would you lay the blame on the smuggler or dealer for someone dying due to an overdose or misuse of drugs?

 

[pepi1967]

Why is their way of doing things outdated? By who's standards yours?

 

[ACW]

Why is their way of doing things outdated? By who's standards yours?

Because we've 'been there done that' so to speak. It didn't work then, we've legally evolved since.

 

[viv1969]

Also, the point made by ACW that "They are following practices that were outdated here centuries ago. "....... Really? Were we ourselves not happily sentencing people to swing less that 50 years ago?

 

[gramps]

Really? I can't believe this is even a defence to this argument.

The fact that you can't believe it is irrelevant to the fact, very many intelligent people agree that the liberal laws of the Western world have reduced public safety and security, not to mention increased losses to crime.
The law in the Western world today often focuses entirely on the welfare of the offender rather than on the victim ... in this instance there is an outpouring over the person caught running the drugs but little or no thought for the misery and worse where those drugs were destined to end up.

 

[pepi1967]

Because we've 'been there done that' so to speak. It didn't work then, we've legally evolved since.

Legally evolved? Us? You mean we have gone soft.

 

[ACW]

Also, the point made by ACW that "They are following practices that were outdated here centuries ago. "....... Really? Were we ourselves not happily sentencing people to swing less that 50 years ago?

I see you ignored my reply, do you concede?

I was not referring to the maximum sentence available.

Read any of our (from the past 100 years,) law cases where hanging was given as a punishment. Then read any recent Indonesian court case also giving the death sentence, and compare. Not news reporting on, the actual court papers.

Tell me that their current proceedings aren't even a fraction of how concise ours were at least 50 years ago.

Then tell me about the quality of the legal systems.

 

[ACW]

Legally evolved? Us? You mean we have gone soft.

By soft do you mean bound by judicial precedent?

Yes sentences could be longer, I personally think the majority of sentences should be massively increased. I also think there should be no half sentences for good behaviour, but that's a different argument.

I'm debating capital punishment and the poor operating procedures of Indonesian courts.

 

[viv1969]

Adam why continually compare thier system to ours? What a pointless exercise.
This woman comitted her crimes in Indonesia. The possible consequeces of said crimes in Indonesia are well known. Hopefully she will now face those concequences.

 

[pepi1967]

By soft do you mean bound by judicial precedent?

Yes sentences could be longer, I personally think the majority of sentences should be massively increased. I also think there should be no half sentences for good behaviour, but that's a different argument.

I'm debating capital punishment and the poor operating procedures of Indonesian courts.

I personally don't think their courts or legal system has a poor operating procedure as Their punishment for a certain crime ensures that person will not commit that crime again.

It works for them and anyone going to commit a crime in another country should first read up on the courts and laws in that country and if it worries you at all that you could be shot or hung then I suggest you don't go there and commit the crime.

 

[andya700]

My goodness. I wonder, if you tried very hard, could you be any more condescending towards countries you seem to believe to be inferior? :shrug:

I agree, particularly if the countries included USA, China, Saudi Arabia and many others, which certainly can not be described as "underdeveloped".
As I said before, I am against the death penalty, but I do not have the right to tell other countries how to behave - that is the height of arrogance.

 

[tiler65]

I see you ignored my reply, do you concede?

I was not referring to the maximum sentence available.

Read any of our (from the past 100 years,) law cases where hanging was given as a punishment. Then read any recent Indonesian court case also giving the death sentence, and compare. Not news reporting on, the actual court papers.

Tell me that their current proceedings aren't even a fraction of how concise ours were at least 50 years ago.

Then tell me about the quality of the legal systems.

If we, as a nation, are given the chance to vote on capital punishment and the vote is to allow said punishment......where would that leave us according to your statement?

Would we be backward or just come to the conclusion that this particular form of justice we have now is not working?

Someone mentioned earlier about animals are killed when they are a threat to society....why shouldn't humans have the same consequence?

 

[ACW]

Adam why continually compare thier system to ours? What a pointless exercise.
This woman comitted her crimes in Indonesia. The possible consequeces of said crimes in Indonesia are well known. Hopefully she will now face those concequences.

How is this a pointless exercise? I'm highlighting the inefficiencies within their legal system.

If you read into their system in depth, it makes it blindingly obvious these courts should not even be hosting a tea party.

My argument has progressed from the physical sentence handed out to the way in which it was handed out. Which, in my, is even more worrying.

Unfortunately I must get back to work.

However I relish coming back to this when I finish work, and don't have to type all of my replies on a mobile phone! I do like a good debate.

 

[ACW]

If we, as a nation, are given the chance to vote on capital punishment and the vote is to allow said punishment......where would that leave us according to your statement?

Would we be backward or just come to the conclusion that this particular form of justice we have now is not working?

Someone mentioned earlier about animals are killed when they are a threat to society....why shouldn't humans have the same consequence?

The cases would be tried to a far far higher standard. The likelihood of mistakes would be massively lower.

 

[TriggerHappy]

I'm vehemently against the death penalty both in this case and speaking more broadly.

For me it's not a question of whether someone deserved to die - a lot of people have done a lot of terrible things - but rather whether we can call what we do moral if we speak with disgust about murderers, rapists etc. and then feel morally righteous in killing them or worse, as one poster mentioned, having them hung drawn and quartered just to inflict additional suffering.

In my opinion the justice system isn't about punishment, it's about seeking to protect the good of society from the few bad people we have. That means locking them up until they can convince a panel they are fit to return to society without harming others again, not killing them because of some self appointed right for the state to be beyond the law when it comes to murder.

And what of the individual who pulls the trigger, flicks the switch, kicks out the chair, or injects the syringe? What exempts them from being no better than any other murderer?

You can't compare capital punishment to a self-defence case where someone is endangering a life. The two are completely different circumstances.