Forum menu
In reality with what’s going to happen to him in prison the death penalty is probably more humane in a weird way.
Someone with a knowledge of the prison system pointed out that he’s now the undisputed number one target on the hit list of the entire UK prison population and every terrifying lunatic is going to gunning to see who can get to him first.
For someone who has been repeatedly described as being ‘obsessed with violence’, he’s going to be spending the rest of his life being educated in it by some of its most enthusiastic exponents
By being more efficient and having better/tighter laws around it bringing the cost down to under £2.2MM (ignoring inflation which is clearly considerable over 52 years)
Oh give over. I’m not arguing for capital punishment to be brought back, just trying to be honest on what the point is in keeping him in prison for the best part of a century when he’ll never be released or rehabbed.
Yes you are arguing for capital punishment to be brought back, unless you believe that he should be illegally executed, or maybe just have his food stopped?
Otherwise how do you propose "not keeping him in prison for the best part of a century"?
I think this argument was mostly settled globally last century. Only 27% of the world's countries still have capital punishment on their statute books, about 55, and generally they tend to be not very nice countries - which also have a poor record on respecting basic human rights. And out of those 55 countries only about 10 regularly execute people.
I am surprised that it is still even a topic of discussion in 2025 in a Europe. The only European which still has capital punishment is Belarus. Perhaps we should also be discussing the pros and cons of 'trial by ordeal' to establish someone's guilt or innocence, if we are going to look for solutions from the Dark Ages?
By being more efficient
Tesco value rope and last meal requests limited to "what flavour crisps"?
A quick Google finds a ton of studies, here’s a precis of one
They are American studies with a very different economic model for both the lawyers, courts and prison system.
The average cost of an average prisoner in the U.K. was £51724 per year in 22/23. That’s £2.7m with no inflation from 22/23 costs and he will cost more than the average prisoner
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1202172/cost-per-prisoner-england-and-wales/
Tesco value rope and last meal requests limited to “what flavour crisps”?
Your representation when appealing your place on death row...
They are American studies with a very different economic model for both the lawyers, courts and prison system.
When I find a UK study on the UK model of capitsl punishment, I'll let you know.
The average cost of an average prisoner in the U.K. was £51724 per year in 22/23. That’s £2.7m with no inflation from 22/23 costs and he will cost more than the average prisoner
And what?
I am genuinely gobsmacked that people on here would make the argument that judicial killing is better than incarceration, because <checks notes> "it's cheaper" 🙁
Spare us your thoughts on state funding of social care for vulnerable adults, children at risk, the elderly.
People saying it's for x y and z, but seems to be not mentioning they don't get to choose how it's used.
Spare us your thoughts on state funding of social care for vulnerable adults, children at risk, the elderly.
All of whom would be infinitely more deserving of having huge amounts of taxpayers money spent on them.
And what?
It means with even a conservative estimate for inflation of 2.5% we are going to spend £6m on his prison stay.
I'm loving the mental gymnastics involved in calling for this guy to be killed, and then a few posts later claiming that you're not calling for a return of the death penalty! Peak internet logic right there!
It means with even a conservative estimate for inflation of 2.5% we are going to spend £6m on his prison stay.
I am actually surprised that it costs as little as £1k a week to keep someone in a maximum security prison, it sounds like a small price to pay to help keep the public safe. costs more than that to employ 1 police officer.
But be that as it may if you add up all the costs of keeping the 65 individuals currently serving whole life tariffs in UK prisons that's a fair wad of cash *strokes chin*
All of whom would be infinitely more deserving of having huge amounts of taxpayers money spent on them.
The trouble is, once you've set the moral precedent of saying it's too costly to house and feed people at taxpayers expense, some people will try to expand that arguement beyond just prisoners.
Oh give over. I’m not arguing for capital punishment to be brought back, just trying to be honest on what the point is in keeping him in prison for the best part of a century when he’ll never be released or rehabbed.
Still trying to figure out what it is you are arguing for, because it’s clear there’s only one actual option, you just won’t state what it is. Go ahead, don’t be coy, we won’t take you out and stone you.
The trouble is, once you’ve set the moral precedent of saying it’s too costly to house and feed people at taxpayers expense, some people will try to expand that arguement beyond just prisoners.
We already ration healthcare and people die as a result.
But yeah executing people, though potentially expedient, ain't a great look
Well for fear of loosing the moral highground on STW I'd happily see him shut in a cell with nothing but a rope for a month and see what happens when we reopen the door. Can't bicker any longer as cooking tea for the kids because luckily none of them were stabbed over 50 times in daycare today.
The whole reducing it to a figure of 'tax payer money' is such a grim reductivist neoliberal trait. In the context of public spending, £6m over 60 years is like an infinitesimally small amount! 2023/24 prison budget was nearly £7 billion.
£50k of 'tax payer money' per annum is a small price to pay to be a country that doesn't execute prisoners.
I took would probably be happy to see him shut in a cell for a month with nothing but a rope. This is exactly why we take the emotions out of it and have a legal framework that prevents the state from killing prisoners.
I am actually surprised that it costs as little as £1k a week to keep someone in a maximum security prison,
It does the £1k a week is the average for all categories of prisons. Maximum security will be higher than the average
Still trying to figure out what it is you are arguing for, because it’s clear there’s only one actual option, you just won’t state what it is. Go ahead, don’t be coy, we won’t take you out and stone you.
Penal battalions?
Oh give over. I’m not arguing for capital punishment to be brought back, just trying to be honest on what the point is in keeping him in prison for the best part of a century when he’ll never be released or rehabbed.
Surely in this particular case the point is very easy to understand. To keep him away from the rest of us.
£50k of ‘tax payer money’ per annum is a small price to pay to be a country that doesn’t execute prisoners.
Seems fair to me.
I suspect his time in prison will reflect his offending. I fear I'm failing my own moral high ground in not being too concerned about that.
Penal battalions?
Which then gives the disturbing follow up question of who are we going to attack to use those battalions against.
I vote for Greenland, to kiss up to Trump, or maybe Luton since that could get the entire country behind the cause.
It does the £1k a week is the average for all categories of prisons. Maximum security will be higher than the average
And. What.
Go ahead, don’t be coy, we won’t take you out and stone you.
Think I’ve made it fairly obvious what I think. I get that many are uncomfortable with it, I am too. But I don’t think keeping him in prison for potentially 70+ years is better than the alternative. We all know what’s going to happen to him in any case, why string it out?
All criminal convictions are clear cut
Guilford 4. Birmingham 6. Malkinson
This man is mentally ill and his crime should and could have been prevented . Thats the real tragedy here
Cases such as Guildford 4 are irrelevant. We are not going to be finding in 20 years time that he wasn’t guilty. And yes there is clearly a mental element to pretty much all serious crime, i.e a person in a good mental state would never have done them.
My point is that once you have done something to this level where you are without doubt the person that did it then you have blown it.
Cases such as Guildford 4 are irrelevant.
It's an example of flaws in the justice system, whether in this particular case whether he's not going to be found innocent later on isn't relevant. What's relevant is in ANY cases where the death penalty is applicable for use is there a risk of an incorrect conviction that's relevant. And you don't get to choose the bar at which the penalty becomes an option. That's at best, a collective indirect influence where you are only one of tens of millions, at worst well have zero influence and will be beholden to whichever idiots we've given that choice to, who don't honestly explain their position in an election. Have you ever been lied to by a politician? Have you ever looked at what people are voting for and thought WTF?
Half a chance that's Farage at some point. No thanks.
That's all setting aside the wider ethical questions.
This man is mentally ill and his crime should and could have been prevented .
Oh come on, I know that common to try to find an explanation for incomprehensible horrific crimes, and blame someone, but do really think that he should have been locked up the moment he displayed weird behaviour? Or maybe you think he should have been "cured" of the mental illness which you claim he has?
What sort of society do you think goes looking for people to lock up or "cure"?
Unfortunately any society can only do so much and none can make horrific crimes like the Southport stabbings impossible.
Think I’ve made it fairly obvious what I think. I get that many are uncomfortable with it, I am too. But I don’t think keeping him in prison for potentially 70+ years is better than the alternative.
The only thing that seems obvious to me is that you appear to be talking nonsense. On the one hand you are saying "give over" as you claim not to be suggesting capital punishment, and on the other hand you say that keeping him in prison is not "better than the alternative".
So can you clarify what you mean by "the alternative" to prison?
The trouble is, once you’ve set the moral precedent of saying it’s too costly to house and feed people at taxpayers expense, some people will try to expand that arguement beyond just prisoners.
pensioners are ****in expensive and they are only going to get even older and cost lots of healthcare money before they die. It’s only logical to expedite the process.
I'm strongly against the death penalty but cases like this stretch the belief. Not break it.
The economic argument is irrelevant to a civilised nation, that's the cost of being a civilised nation, as Tom-B and others have said.
As for the 'leave them in a cell with easy access to a rope' - an interesting moral argument. We don't execute criminals but should we maintain a death penalty for crimes like this where the decision on whether applied comes down to the convicted murderer - not the courts, or the victims family, or anyone else.
I can't put myself in the mind of someone like this, but faced with 50+ years in prison as a marked man and knowing that I'd done it, vs a drink of an overdose of barbiturate (akin to Dignitas) - I think I know what I'd choose. Also begs the question whether the punishment is meant to include the physical and mental punishment he'll be going through as a prisoner. Prison for someone like this is far more than loss of freedom.
Think I’ve made it fairly obvious what I think.
Eventually
Oh give over. I’m not arguing for capital punishment to be brought back
Well maybe I am
So you are after all, aligned with Farage, Tice and the hang 'em flog 'em wing of the Tory party. On this issue at least?
As I said earlier, this surprises me.
We all know what’s going to happen to him in any case, why string it out?
newsflash: you are going to die too, why string it out? I’m sure you could find a bit of rope if you set your mind to it.
pensioners are **** expensive and they are only going to get even older and cost lots of healthcare money before they die. It’s only logical to expedite the process.
Oi. Thats me you are talking about
Ernie.
Systems are in place with checks and balances and he had come to attention.
Opportunities were missed to prevent the crime
Ernie.
Systems are in place with checks and balances and he had come to attention.
Opportunities were missed to prevent the crime
I think Ernie's point is, that sadly hundreds if not thousands of kids carry knives, come from troubled backgrounds, display violent tendencies and come to the attention of the authorities because of it. Most won't go on to do what the Southport attacker did. Do we lock them all up indefinitely for what they might do?
Considering how casually some dismiss the death and injury caused to hundreds on the the roads (and eg wail endlessly about the prospect of lower speed limits) it’s odd that so often the same people will agitate for the preemptive punishment of some supposedly suspicious characters to possibly save a handful of people from violent attacks.
It’s almost like there’s a double standard at play.
Opportunities were missed to prevent the crime
So what do you think should have been done to stop the Stockport stabbings that wasn't done?