Most horrible criminal case in recent history?

I'm doing an essay about capital punishment and using a point in favour of the death point that some people simply cannot be rehabilitated and deserve death? who comes to mind when you think of the most horrible criminal case?mine are.... bulger incident - thompson and venables or baby p case?any other cases to back up my point? thanks



Similar Asks:





Both comments and pings are currently closed.

16 Responses to “Most horrible criminal case in recent history?”

  1. spirillotropism says:

    The genocide of the Iraqi people by New Labour under the leadership of Tony Blaire. Over one million innocent men women and little helpless children were mercilessly slaughtered. an illegal war based on deliberate and calculated lies and deception carried out by new labour even though over one million people took to the streets of London in protest against it. That is the biggest crime of the 21st century.

  2. proflogger says:

    Gerry Adams helped kill 1800 people over the course of 30 years. Because of political cowardice he is now a wealthy man and has never spent a significant amount of time in jail.That man in Austria who kept his daughter in the basement and had multiple babies with her about 2 years ago.Rogue American soldiers kill children in Afghanistan and cut off their body parts as trophies. See Rolling Stone magazine who did the special.The Dunblane massacre in the mid 90′s is probably the most horrific thing to happen in the UK since WW2 and is the reason hand guns are banned. Similarly the madman in Cumbria who killed lots of people this time last year,However while I would not shed a tear if a single one of these above mentioned were to die horribly I am still against the death penalty. The simple reason is that I do not want to live in a country where a judge or government can decide I am not allowed to live; crimes worthy of death vary by government, in Nazi Germany being a Stone Mason, Gypsy, Homo-sexual, intellectual, Jewish and plenty of others would have you sent to a death camp and there was nothing illegal about it.

  3. humeroscapular says:

    in the 1960′s myra hindly and ian brady killed several children. brady is still in prison and refusing to tell the mother of one of the children where he is buried, which is somewhere one the yorkshire moors, so that she can give him a proper burial, and have some form of peace.even though it isnt recent, it is still in the news regularly.to have a woman help choose children for him to murder was truly horrible, and they should have been hanged for it.look up, moors murders.

  4. cinnabars says:

    definitely the Securitas depot robbery. It involved robber of millions of pounds- and kidnappingim sorry if you are in america- in which case this is not local to youbut still very good to write about

  5. sensitive says:

    It cannot be decided whether someone can be rehabilitated based on the crime they commit (least of all when the offender is 10 years old) but rather the outcome of an attempt to rehabilitate.

  6. pagurid says:

    osama binladen kanye westbill clintonhope i help

  7. premonarchial says:

    Peter TobinDennis NilsenPeter SutcliffeDr. Harold ShipmanAll Brits, all serial killers. Shipman is known to have killed 218 people but in actuality probably killed a lot more. Nilsen’s crimes were probably the most grotesque.

  8. thoough says:

    The Austrian guy who raped, impregnated and imprisoned his own daughter for decades.

  9. grapiest says:

    Obama

  10. haggardness says:

    Casey Anthony.

  11. Marcello says:

    I’m American and my answer is based on the system we have here- where murder rates are higher than in the UK.For the worst crimes, life without parole is better, for many reasons. I’m against the death penalty not because of sympathy for criminals but because it isn’t effective in reducing crime, prolongs the anguish of families of murder victims, costs a whole lot more than life in prison, and, worst of all, risks executions of innocent people.The worst thing about it. Errors:The system can make tragic mistakes. In 2004, the state of Texas executed Cameron Todd Willingham for starting the fire that killed his children. The Texas Forensic Science Commission found that the arson testimony that led to his conviction was based on flawed science. As of today, 138 wrongly convicted people on death row have been exonerated. DNA is rarely available in homicides, often irrelevant (as in Willingham’s case) and can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people. Capital juries are dominated by people who favor the death penalty and are more likely to vote to convict. Keeping killers off the streets for good:Life without parole, on the books in most states, also prevents reoffending. It means what it says, and spending the rest of your life locked up, knowing you’ll never be free, is no picnic. Two big advantages: -an innocent person serving life can be released from prison -life without parole costs less than the death penaltyCosts, a surprise to many people:Study after study has found that the death penalty is much more expensive than life in prison. Since the stakes are so high, the process is far more complex than for any other kind of criminal case. The largest costs come at the pre-trial and trial stages. The tremendous expenses in a death penalty case apply whether or not the defendant is convicted, let alone sentenced to death. Crime reduction (deterrence):The death penalty doesn’t keep us safer. Homicide rates for states that use the death penalty are consistently higher than for those that don’t. The most recent FBI data confirms this. For people who lack a conscience, fear of being caught is the best deterrent.Who gets it:Contrary to popular belief, the death penalty isn’t reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn’t apply to people with money. Practically everyone sentenced to death had to rely on an overworked public defender. How many people with money have been executed?Victims: People assume that families of murder victims want the death penalty imposed. It isn’t necessarily so. Some are against it on moral grounds. But even families who have supported the death penalty in principle have testified to the protracted and unavoidable damage that the death penalty process does to families like theirs and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.It comes down to whether we should keep a system for the sake of retribution or revenge even though it isn’t effective in reducing violent crime, costs much more than life sentences and, worst of all, can lead to the nightmare of executing someone for a crime he didn’t commit.

  12. unthreatened says:

    General Tommy Franks was allowed to retire with a fourth star.

  13. Cirratulidae says:

    In the UK. Fred & Rosemary West.

  14. bryophyta says:

    I would add Fred and Rosemary West to that list. Fred did us all a favour and killed himself but Rosemary is still alive

  15. pollock says:

    In most cases, death penalty can be replaced by life imprisonment. But some cases really do not. Let’s say Osama Bin Laden is sentenced life-imprisonment, hundreds of Americans will be kidnapped by Al Qaeda every year in order to exchange with their leader.

  16. HASSIE says:

    The people behind such events like 9/11. Also the leader in Libya these people have killed hundreds of people for no real reason