Capital Punishment

There are some crimes that just defy any kind of sense, common or otherwise. So completely off the map of decent human behavior that only the death penalty seems to be the appropriate response of the judicial system. An emerging case here in Canada appears to be in that category. Two people have just been arrested in the abduction and murder of an eight year old girl, Tori Stafford.

Police are justifiably keeping the details of the case secret at this time so as to not jeopardize the court proceedings. What is known is that an 18 year old woman was seen walking Tori away from her school and has been charged with abduction. A 28 year old male has been charged with abduction and murder. Tori's body has yet to be found.

I can't imagine the hell the parents are going through at this time. First the not knowing what happened to their little girl along with the hope that she might be found. And now the horrible realization that she has been killed and will never be coming home. The pain and anger must be overwhelming. My heart goes out to them.

Does this crime meet the criteria for the death penalty? As a society how can we tolerate ever letting someone who took the life of this beautiful little girl back out amongst us. Has he not forfeited his rights when he chose this hedonistic and sadistic path? I don't think all murders fall into this category but when the evidence points to a premeditated act of violence, especially involving a child, that the perpetrator has gone past the point of forgiveness of any kind. Life in prison (which is only 25 years without parole) is not enough.

Capital punishment or the death penalty doesn't exist here in Canada and hasn't since 1976. This deterrent hasn't effected the rate of homicides, in fact the trend has been downward. But that is not the point. It is the nature of the crime that is at issue. When a murder is that of a child or their is a serial killer nature to it then capital punishment is the appropriate response. Why would we even want to risk rehabilitation? They don't deserve it.

How do we handle those that are clinically mentally ill? I think it goes without saying that anyone who commits murder is by some definition mentally ill. No sane person would ever take someone else's life (the battlefield notwithstanding). A ?not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder? decision by the courts should even be an option. No doubt all murders could point to some form or degree of mental illness. It is a poor excuse for serious lawbreaking, and should have no bearing on punishment. Defendants can feign mental illness, and their attorneys use this loophole as a way to confuse jurors with complicated and questionable psychiatric evaluations.

The definition spelled out in the M'Naughten Rule of insanity is that the accused is "incapable of appreciating his surroundings because of a powerful mental delusion". If this can be proven beyond all reasonable doubt then the death penalty would not be appropriate. However I believe this would be an extremely rare case.

The abduction and murder of Tori Stafford could not possibly have been done by anyone using the above definition of insanity. The crime was obviously premeditated and carried out by two people who were very aware of their surroundings. This shocking and vulgar crime needs to result in a punishment that matches the horrific act that it was.

Let's hope this renews the debate on reinstating capital punishment.