The dismembered bodies of a young mother and her child brutally murdered, cut up and disposed of like trash at the dump has sickened me and changed the level of what I knew evil to be. The Latin phrase malum in se, used to represent one of the two scales in the image of justice, which means "evil in itself," completely and tragically applies here. Make no mistake, and regardless of the circumstances surrounding this gruesome act, how we deal with this particular murder and the person/people who committed it will say much about how we view human life and what we are willing to accept.
Why? Because in circumstances such as these, bleeding hearts and the loony fringe descend like vultures in defence of the life of the perpetrator, ignoring, almost explaining away as collateral damage (wrong place, wrong time) the life of the victim, to the detriment of the society as a whole. The unwritten social contract demands that the State acts on behalf of the citizenry and exacts punishment so severe as to prevent the perpetrator from ever committing such an act again, and sends so powerful a message to all would-be perpetrators that this behaviour will not be tolerated under any circumstances. The Government has called for a return to hanging, and I fully support this position. Yet we have properly educated people spewing nonsense (possibly to give their own lives purpose) that does no good for no one else, save and except of course cold-blooded killers.
It is my view that cold, calculated murder (popularised as murder in the first degree) be rewarded with the death penalty once the case has been proven. It is the responsibility of the Government to put such things in place that guarantee a fair trial and right to justice and, after all that, if the accused is found guilty as charged, the State should be mandated to execute 12 months from sentence, so as to give adequate time for appeal, but not enough time to frustrate the system.
You literally have 12 months from conviction, so hire lawyers who can work by the clock and not by the sound byte. I am being deliberately obtuse on this matter because I believe the abolitionist movement is a contributing factor to a breakdown in the justice system, which is in turn blamed for the slow delivery of said justice, and a cycle of dysfunction is created where none needs be.
Someone needs to take up the fight in support of the call for a return to execution as the final penalty for acts that are considered evil in themselves. In this particular instant it is really time to stop playing smart with foolishness. Having brought up the subject of hanging previously, I was surprised at the lack of information and the level of misinformation used by abolitionists, and this particular case allows me to encourage "justifiable state-sponsored homicide" or execution in as humane a way as possible. I have been argued with ad nauseam by one particular "specialist," long on deflection and self-propagation but woefully short on statistical data that even attempts to justify the abolitionist position, and shorter still on anything remotely sounding like an effective alternative to hanging, this country's choice when it comes to execution.
Tired of going round and round the mulberry bush and getting nowhere, I was forced to do my own research on global trends of violent crimes, murder and capital punishment. Needless to say, I was shocked at the raw statistical data which not only made a lie of the abolitionists' theory that "execution does not affect murder rates" (it absolutely does), it so completely debunked it as to make me ask why would anyone buy this "cat in bag" without verifying the research. The countries with the lowest rates of murder in the world are those that practise swift and sure justice, as in the Middle East. With punishment meted out to Biblical and Quranic standards, an eye for an eye, or in this case a hand for a hand or a life for a life, is carried out so swiftly that both killer and victim can usually be buried on the same day.
The "civilised" world (read western), bent on proving its "civility" at the expense of the weak and the innocent, is now reviewing its position on capital punishment, as trends in those countries continue to rise and make a lie of the original abolition stance. In fact, in states with a strong anti-capital punishment bent, murder rates rise so sharply you do not need words to identify the point at which the decision was made to abolish the final judgment. Prior to my recent call for a limited return to hanging, I too was something of an abolitionist. But if pressed, like most Trinidadians, I was more of a "I-don't-really-care-one-way-or-the-other-ist." My research has changed my mind, and while I abhor murder of any kind, I understand the need for execution both as a deterrent and as a means of removing convicted murderers from society.
I support a strong civic-minded, social services-driven, community-involved approach to governance, and I fully endorse the concept that it takes a village to raise a child. These are issues we can all agree on, but we must also agree to act decisively when all of these measures fail. This topic has become a very divisive one spurred on by the abolitionist movement, but it needn't be. When looked at unemotionally and dispassionately, one cannot help but realise that, in refusing to hang, we are causing more of the people we are sworn to protect to be killed. More than in any other case that requires the intervention of the law, in circumstances such as murder, justice must definitely be seen to be done.