
Nonsense

So would I given the chance if my innocent unarmed young countrymen attending a festival were raped, slaughtered and taken hostage.
Well, if someone got caught stealing something worth a fiver, you wouldn’t expect them to be fined a fiver, would you? They wouldn’t learn any lessons from that and would keep returning for more.you have an exchange rate which values the lives of those innocent unarmed young people compared to the ones killed at the festival? Are they worth one tenth? One twentieth? One fiftieth?
And you have the neck to call others apologists, lol. You made the same mistake with terrorists killing off duty soldiers.They only have themselves to blame.


I think what is being proposed in this thread is similar to the lammy dodger’s proposal. That being the trial by jury is replaced by a trial by judge, where the overwhelming evidence is presented and the judge is asked to review against any doubt whatsoever. Almost like a first appearance at magistrates court, before being referred up. If the judge concludes the evidence is so strong, there is “no point in a trial by jury” he passes his order and the convicted goes in to the giant squashing machine or whatever the method is.I have avoided any reference to human rights and have been looking purely on the basis of foundational British law. But this is very complex stuff. So, I have done another AI just to flag up possible further areas of discussion. I would be interested if you could ask the same question of Anthropic:
The question I asked was:
'would a system where a tribunal decides that a particular accused won't receive a trial if they are certain of his guilt be a denial of justice under magna carta'
I don't think it's a medical problem, as it's easy to put somebody out painlessly for an op, so similar to kill them. The problem, in eg USA, is that they don't want it to be too barbaric, but don't want it to be entirely stress-free either, because where's the deterrence or retribution in that? In Belarus or China I don't suppose they're bothered.Dunno what execution method should be used ?? I suppose it should be humane ??
Lethal injection probably the most humane cleanest method ???
On the subject of Claud.Ai. It’s free to use if you want to give it a go.

Well, if someone got caught stealing something worth a fiver, you wouldn’t expect them to be fined a fiver, would you? They wouldn’t learn any lessons from that and would keep returning for more.
I think what is being proposed in this thread is similar to the lammy dodger’s proposal. That being the trial by jury is replaced by a trial by judge, where the overwhelming evidence is presented and the judge is asked to review against any doubt whatsoever. Almost like a first appearance at magistrates court, before being referred up. If the judge concludes the evidence is so strong, there is “no point in a trial by jury” he passes his order and the convicted goes in to the giant squashing machine or whatever the method is.
In this case the only steps being skipped are trial by jury, right of appeal etc. it’s important that there is no appeal otherwise there will be public outcry if an innocent person is squashed.

NO, entitled to a priest only.I think three high up judges would be needed rather than one. Would the accused have proper representation and a right to contest the evidence.

It is said that Britain executed one in ten of its population in ancient times (IT Minion disputes this)