Photo: Feggy Art (flickr)
The death of drummer Lee Rigby is one of the most upsetting events seen in the U.K. in a long time. Nothing but sympathy for the family and horror can be felt, after the victim was stabbed and hacked to death by those delivering a series of Islamist messages. The anger caused from the cruel nature of the attack has led again to the question of whether the death penalty should be introduced. Can the death penalty be seen as the ultimate punishment or immoral behaviour? Writes Amber Larner-Bird.
28-year-old Michael Adebolajo and 22-year-old Michael Adebowale are known as the suspects of the murder of Lee Rigby of the 2nd Battalion the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers. Since the event took place more has come to light on their links to extremist Islamic groups, and even more interestingly how they were already known to the police and Mi5. Many questions could be asked about why more wasn’t done to watch and stop these individuals; however the more common question on everyone’s mind has been what penalty is deserving for the crime these men have committed.
The answer to this question for some seems to be the death penalty. What could be more deserving for those who have taken someone’s life but to take theirs in return? Our criminal system is based on the ideal of retribution, being that real justice requires people to suffer for their wrongdoing and to suffer in a way appropriate for the crime. To quote the saying from the Old Testament, “an eye for an eye” – introducing the death penalty would be taking a life for a life.
A strong argument for the case of the death penalty is deterrence, and I don’t believe there could be any greater deterrence for an action such as murder. Participants in the recent, although very controversial, programme Skint on Channel 4 made a very good point, if prison was such a bad experience why would people not be afraid to go back again and again? Therefore, perhaps the argument is right that the death penalty would create a greater deterrence and consequently fewer murders in our country.
It is also undeniable that there would be no risk of further re-offending of such individuals. The death penalty would only be used for such serious immoral crimes which some argue are deserving of ultimate harsh punishment. The killing of Lee Rigby has been so moving for so many people because the actions of Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale where so inhuman. Can life in prison really ever help individuals that could harm an unknown person in such a horrific way?
However, although the anger and thought process behind the arguments for the death penalty can be understood, overall the process is morally flawed. As many of us were taught throughout our childhood and life – two wrongs don’t make a right. How can you teach that killing is wrong if you yourselves are killing? Morals and cultures are so wide-ranging, who really has the power to lord over our country and say what is and isn’t moral. I don’t believe any of us would be happy in giving the Courts, and an extremely un-diverse judiciary, the right to rule on morality and I don’t believe the Courts would be comfortable with that job either.
There has also been no proof to find that using the death penalty actually works as a deterrent. In fact the work done by the American Death Penalty Information Centre has actually found that in 2011 there were 18% more murders in American States that did use the death penalty than those who didn’t. Worryingly, it has been argued that introducing the death penalty actually brutalises the country. Capital punishment is said to produce an unacceptable link between law and violence and by referencing similar statistics as above, it can be seen that more murders take place in american states that use the death penalty.
The most worrying factor for me, amongst others, is the killing of innocent people. Our legal system is not perfect, and just as I believe guilty men and women manage to abuse and use the system to be found innocent when they are not, mistakes do happen and innocent people are found guilty. This can occur for a number of reasons, because of witnesses for example or even the jury system itself and uninterested jury members. The research and help of Amnesty International has found that in the U.S., 130 people sentenced to death have been found innocent since 1973 and released from death row. This only goes to prove the underlying issue that by using the death penalty you could be sentencing the lives of innocent citizens to death.
The death penalty will always be a controversial and heavily contested topic because both sides of the argument present equally strong cases. I agree, however, with many in the aftermath of Woolwich who say that prison just isn’t enough. The worry that these men could be released someday and that they will never really comprehend what they have done, is overwhelming. However taking the lives of these men is not going to bring back innocent Lee Rigby, all that can happen now is that we respect and remember his life.
The further underlying issue of Woolwich is that, rightly or wrongly, Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale had such strong religious beliefs that they did not value the lives of others. For this reason, as their beliefs were so radical, I do not believe they value their own lives and in turn they would arguably sacrifice their lives for their extremist beliefs. Therefore taking their lives would not be a hardship for them and for this reason the death penalty would achieve nothing here.
As I have said above, the anger found from such horrific and inhuman actions is understandable. The want for serious, overreaching punishment and consequence is also comprehendable as this crime goes over and above the devastation of the majority of crimes committed in the U.K. However, society must realise that the anger generated from this atrocity comes from the right motives. Social media and conversation after the event has been full of misconception and misdirected anger, some even bordering on racist. The two individuals stand alone as extremists. They may have had religious motives, but overall they are simply just extremists and their actions can not and should not be stereotyped as Muslim. In the months ahead, where these men will be trialled and ultimately sentenced, the call for a serious sentence must be considered in line with the crime committed in order for us to remain a diverse but equal society.
By Amber Larner-Bird.
Statisfied 