By Isle of Wight Observer
I’m too young to remember anyone being executed by the British state. Many other countries remain convinced that the worst criminals deserve to die. Sadly, I don’t fully trust our government to run anything well, including our judicial system. By default, supporters of the death penalty support the killing of innocent people. Regardless of the depravity of the crime, state-sponsored execution always seemed like something from the dark ages to me. Enthusiasts say it’s not just retribution; it saves taxpayers huge sums of money. Best of all, the person you execute cannot cause further harm once they’re six feet under. As the ultimate sanction, it’s a deterrent for would-be murderers because they fear it.
Until recently, I was comfortable with long prison terms, particularly the ‘whole life tariff’ as handed down to the worst offenders who committed the most heinous crimes. The death penalty was abolished in 1965 when the state decided it had killed too many people who, as it later turned out, had not committed the crime for which they were hanged. It wasn’t finally removed from the statute book until 1998 for all offences, including treason. Infamously, in 1952, burglars Derek Bentley and Christopher Craig were caught by police officer, Sydney Miles, on the rooftop of a Croydon warehouse. Craig pointed his gun at the constable, and Bentley – already in handcuffs – yelled, “Let him have it, Chris.” In court, the defence argued that he’d meant “hand over the gun,” while the prosecution successfully argued he’d meant “shoot him”. Upon conviction, the gunman, 16-year-old Craig, was too young to hang for murder; Bentley, who was 19 with severe learning difficulties, was hanged. His execution was widely considered a miscarriage of justice.
If capital punishment ever returns, we could introduce a minimum age limit, say 25. We could also exempt those with learning difficulties or mental disorders. I have always supported the death penalty for the murder of police officers and children. I can’t believe they released the coward, Harry Roberts, who killed three police officers in cold blood in 1966. Disgracefully, Roberts died a free man. They’ve made movies about Bentley, and of course, the creepy ‘10 Rillington Place,’ where notorious serial killer, John Christie, lived. His lodger, Timothy Evans, was executed for the murder of his pregnant wife. A few years later, Christie was caught for several similar murders, and the state had another Oops moment when it realised it had executed the wrong man again. Cases like these informed my objection to state-sanctioned killing.
Despite DNA evidence and CCTV, miscarriages of justice still happen. If we ever ditch the European Court of Human Rights and reintroduce it, we will need to be certain we have our man, because when justice goes wrong, as it did with Andrew Malkinson, there’s no way to correct the mistake. Malkinson served 17 years for a terrible crime he didn’t commit. The poor man lost 17 years of his life, and, on release, the government tried charging him for 17 years’ board and lodging! Had they executed him, would they have charged his estate for a simple coffin and basic funeral arrangements?
Recent horrific cases, including Jamie Varley, brought about my change of heart. Varley’s been handed a whole-life term for the horrific abuse and murder of Preston Davey, his 13-month-old adopted son. When I read about it, I wanted him to die for his crimes. Then I thought about how many other examples of depravity we’ve also endured in recent years. These include the merciless killer at Manchester Arena, Southport, Nottingham, and now Henry Nowak in Southampton. All of those and so many others surely justify the death penalty? Having given it careful thought, I’d even be willing to do the executions myself. What’s your view? Is it time for a rethink.