You say that being imprisoned will make him suffer. It should not be about suffering. It should be about justice.
Death is more suitable, but the sentence should be carried out within one year of his conviction, not drawn out for years and years, and the prisoner should be kept in solitary until then. Waiting for years is not only cruel to the prisoner, it is torture to the families of the victims. They should be given closure as soon as possible to help them get on with their lives.
A death sentence ensures that the offender will not be able to escape at a later date and re-offend. It will hopefully prevent others from committing the same offence if they know the death penalty WILL be enforced speedily.
A death sentence is much cheaper than keeping someone in jail until he dies. That may sound callous making finance a consideration, but when you consider that it costs ￡32371 per year in UK (according to the UK prison service website) and $47000 in US for each prisoner then I think this has to be considered. Bear in mind that the offender has also already cost the taxpayer about ￡100,000 in court costs for the trial alone. The police investigation will have notched up hundreds of man hours costing thousands and the family of the victims will have suffered financial loss too through having to take time off work through stress or illness, or to attend the trial, and if the victim was the breadwinner then the family will be financially affected for life.
So, due to the cost of already convicting the prisoner, why should the taxpayer then have to continue to support the prisoner's comfortable lifestyle in prison for the rest of his life.
Give everyone closure. Put an end to the family's suffering and torment, to the burden on the taxpayers and to the prisoner himself. That way everyone gets justice.
I'm for the death penalty, when appropriate, and he "earned" it. I understand the "plea bargain", it would've been horrific for the girls to "relive" their terror.
The problem is his free "room & board" for life, along with medical, dental, exercise and entertainment (TV, Library, etc.) His vistims were deprived of food by starvation, medical & dental attention for l0 yrs. with no "social environment". I'm glad they survived their beatings with no medical attention after aborting and giving birth. It's a miracle they're alive.
I get angry that taxpayers have to support these criminals, while people suffer in poverty with so much less. "Softies" can "thumbs down" me till the cows come home, but my sympathy lies with the victims, and poor working people struggling to put food on their tables, while Ariel gets "home delivery", rather "room service".
Solitary confinement would be punishment. (He has a better "retirement pkg" than the truly poor)
p.s. Note to "softies" - this isn't about vengence or revenge, it's about "punishment"! Hellooooo . . . .
I agree with you completley.
I also believe that no one has the right to take away anyones life no matter what the situation. Make them suffer by taking away their freedom and their rights, the way they took away another persons.
I'm still trying to find where he is jailed, I want to send him some heels and KY jelly.....I want him to live a VERY LONG TIME...I am sure the prisoners do too.....
well, if they don't tell him when he's scheduled to die. (not sure if they do that.) they could make him live in fear for the rest of his life (until they decided to give him the toxins.)
Being locked up like his victims were is entirely appropriate. As a nonce he'll get what's coming to him too, bonus.
Vengeance is mine saith the Lord !
I'm talking about Ariel Castro. While I get the argument for the death penalty, it would mean that he misses out on being imprisoned. Life means he gets his freedom taken away and can potentially suffer the way those girls did. What's your opinion? I don't think he should ever get parole though, do you agree? Or maybe you think death is a more suitable punishment. If so, why?
