If I remember correctly his defence was that he had killed them but it was a tragic accident.

Yes, he confessed to killing them but denied murder. I understand that the version he gave about how they died did not match the medical reports. It could be taken two ways. He was attempting to cover up a murder, or he was trying to describe deaths which he hadn't actually witnessed. Or maybe he was covering for someone else.

I think it's important to question these verdicts. If they are correct, they will hold up. If they are not, then the questioning might help undo a wrong. People who are 100% certain of a person's guilt should not fear such questions.

while I respect your views how can you be 100% sure someone is guilty ?. Police evidence or a guilty verdict in a court ?.

I think not-given the number of people jailed falsely.

Think the Leslie Molseed case ( although perhaps it would have been more humane to have hanged that poor innocent soul given the utter misery he must have suffered )..Barry George etc etc.

And that's just this year and the ones we know of.

This is what happens when you elect gutless policticians who take their clues from gutter tabloids when forming their policies.

The simple fact is that there are thousands in prison unnecessarily. I don't like the idea of punishment, let alone the death penalty.

The only question should be whether the person is a danger to society. If they are, then we have to lock them away simply to protect the public. If not, we must find other ways to deal with them.

Even the above paragraph becomes tainted when we live in a state which appears incapable of convicting the right person, or indeed even caring whether they've got the right man.

Harsh conditions merely brutalise the prisoners, when they are released they will be less fit to be in society - what is the good of that.

More importantly, as they go home every day, it brutalises the guards.

Those who want prisoners to be constantly punished should look to themselves and consider why they have these sadistic impulses.

Crikey! I'm glad you guys are not in charge of this country.
I keep hear people banging on about treating the criminals with humanity.
Since when did the criminals treat their victims with humanity?
This is why this country has had it, too many do gooders.
Every murderer or potential murderer must be rubbing their hands with glee after reading some of the comments on this board.
In my mind if you cant do the time dont do the crime.
I just hope that some day a convicted murderer, rapist or whatever comes into contact with a member of your family and shows you what it's like to feel real pain, perhaps then you would not keep banging on about how we should humanely treat the monsters of this world.

None of us disagree with you Keith (and your fellow posters who seem to share the IP number).

We all think it's dreadful to commit crimes against people and we all feel sad for those victims of crimes.

It's just that some of us feel compassion should not be limited. Perpetrators are victims too.

But you are quite entitled to feel there's not enough compassion to go around, as in your case.

Just don't force us to limit our compassion.

On the BBC at the moment - prisons.

Virtually no discussion of the quantity of innocent people in prison or the fact that many prisoners rehabilitate very quickly.

And a quick point about "do gooders" that you Keith (as well as Arthur and others) keep slagging off.

Would you prefer us to be "do badders"?

Some facts for Keith and his various incarnations.

1. Very few people will be kept in prison for life. Not enough room or money, and most crimes are not serious enough.

2. Once inmates are released into the society we have two choices. a) encourage them to lead law abiding lives and be useful members or b) deny them any kind of acceptance and drive them back into crime.

3. Not everyone in prison is guilty. Plenty of high profile examples, and countless more which are not reported.

"Do-gooders" help criminals to go straight and reduce crime levels. This is the best way forward.

Keith wrote:

I just hope that some day a convicted murderer, rapist or whatever comes into contact with a member of your family and shows you what it's like to feel real pain, perhaps then you would not keep banging on about how we should humanely treat the monsters of this world.

The difference between you and me, Keith, is that I don't hope that one day you or a member of your family fall victim to a wrongful conviction and feel the real pain of that.

Anthony wrote:
Keith wrote:

I just hope that some day a convicted murderer, rapist or whatever comes into contact with a member of your family and shows you what it's like to feel real pain, perhaps then you would not keep banging on about how we should humanely treat the monsters of this world.

The difference between you and me, Keith, is that I don't hope that one day you or a member of your family fall victim to a wrongful conviction and feel the real pain of that.

Ditto. Very ditto.

PLEASE SIGN MY PETITION TO PARLIAMENT REGARDING INNOCENT PEOPLE IN PRISON. THIS SORT OF THING IS NOT HELPING THE OVERCROWDING PROBLEM WHEN INNOCENT PEOPLE ARE BEING KEPT THERE INDEFINITELY.

petitions.pm.gov.uk/OUTRAGEOUS/

MANY THANKS