---

@upthecreekyetagain wrote:

---

@suzieseaside wrote:

I was about to mention that the cost in the US of imposing the death penalty is considered to be higher than imprisonment, but I think that is because of the endless appeals that are allowed.  I haven't read your link yet so maybe it says that.

 

I would only be for the death penalty in the cases I mentioned above (terrorists and mass murderers), and only if there is no conceivable doubt about their crimes. If there is no doubt, why not get on with it instead of leaving people on death row for decades? Who benefits, other than lawyers?

---

There are very few cases where there is no conceivable doubt - the murder of Lee Rigby for example.

 

In the case under discussion the jury has decided the couple are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, reading the reports I have no reason to believe they got it wrong.

 

However the most serious crime they have been found guilty of is planning to carry out a terrorist attack and the intention to do so.  In such a case there can never be 100% certainty.

---

Yes, and I have said repeatedly that I would not advocate a death penalty where there might be doubt. But there are cases where there is no doubt, and advances in forensic science have helped compared with decades ago. Do you doubt that the West’s or Christie were guilty (bodies buried around the properties), Brady (admitted it and told where some of the bodies were), Sutcliffe?

Thank heavens the most serious crime that Rehman and Khan actually committed was the planning stage, fortunately being caught before they caused mass murder. Rehman tweeted about it, discussed London Underground as targets vs Westfield Shopping Centre, had a house full of explosives, filmed a test explosion, and said "I have rigged my house to blow at the push of a button by my bedside if the popo [police] try to raid man. Nobody gets in the way of my jihad."

You say there can never be 100% certainty in such a case. About what? Do you think all that preparation and posts on social media might have just been a sick joke, and not intended?

Do you think that terrorists should be given more lenience if they are caught before they carry out their planned atrocities? I think you are nit-picking, or being devil’s advocate in this example. Conspiracy and planning a terrorist attack is treason and extremely serious and in my opinion deserves the same sentence as if they had carried out their threats. If we had capital punishment for Daesh terrorists I don’t feel that being caught in the planning stage should allow them any more favourable treatment.