I was shocked by the number of people ready to condemn fellow human beings to death unjudged and perhaps innocent of the offences alleged to have been committed. Does the ancient wisdom "two wrongs do not make a right" no longer hold?

Do these people believe sinking to the level of those they condemn advances civilisation and human happiness?

Did they wonder, when a Nigerian woman was sentenced to death by stoning, who would be "chosen" to throw the stones at her until she died in torment?

Would they have been willing to join the stoning party?

Would Robert Goodwill? Would he be willing to be hangman if his apparent desire for vengeance were ever to become law again in this country?

It may be worth reflecting on the words of Jesus, when confronted by an angry mob ready to stone an adulteress to death (where was the man who had had sex with her, one wonders?) who said: "Let the one who is without fault throw the first stone."

They all, one by one, dropped their stones and slunk away. Who among your angry and depraved "hanging brigade" would be the one without fault? Shakespeare wrote: "If every man had his deserts, then who should escape whipping?"

Quite so.

Joyce Pickard,

Saville Grove, York.

...IT was a bad day for this country when capital punishment was abolished. It should never have happened. I don't say hanging should be brought back, but I agree with lethal injections.

There is nothing to deter any of these low-life creatures who abduct, abuse and murder children, attack and rape the elderly, terrorise and rob shopkeepers or commit any one of the many horrific crimes one hears about these days. These days children are attacked and robbed for their mobile phone.

There should be standardisation of punishments throughout the country and these should be harsh enough to give the criminals second thoughts. Those who murder should expect the same treatment they give their victims, with no recourse to 'human rights'.

They forfeit their human rights.

Human rights belong to victims, not perpetrators, and it's about time the victims were put first and the criminals last. The do-gooders and "turn-the-other-cheek" brigade must now see the damage they have caused to society with their continual interfering.

If those who murder knew there was a chance of the death penalty being used against them, maybe potential victims would be safe.

Capital punishment will not be reintroduced because this Government signed away the right even to debate its reintroduction under the Human Rights Act, dictated to us by Europe.

Why should the people of this country, including the families of those who are murdered, have to pay taxes which keep the criminals in a really good lifestyle?

Janet S Kitchen,

Ashley Park Road, York.

...WE should not restore the death penalty. It is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. It violates the right to life. It is irrevocable and can be inflicted on the innocent and has never been shown to deter crime more effectively than other punishments.

More than half the countries in the world have now abolished the death penalty in law or in practice. Why would Britain want to reintroduce it?

Robert Goodwill (August 28) suggests capital punishment fullfils the three main criteria any punishment should have: it would act as a deterrent, prevent re-offending and reflect the public perception of justice.

Scientific studies have consistently failed to find convincing evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than other punishments. A recent survey for the United Nations found no relation between the death penalty and homicide rates.

Effective criminal rehabilitation programmes offer an alternative to capital punishment in the prevention of re-offending.

Capital punishment is irrevocable and, as Frank Ormston points out, the possibility of executing innocent people is "'too great a price to pay for this so-called 'justice'".

In the USA, since 1973, 99 prisoners have been released from death row after evidence emerged of their innocence of the crimes for which they were sentenced to death. Some had come close to execution.

Mr Goodwill's third point, that punishment should reflect the public perception of justice, is a dangerous one.

Is the immediate aftermath of a terrible murder like those of Holly and Jessica a time when feelings will be running high?

Fiona Mitchell,

Amnesty International UK - York group,

Belle Vue Street, York.

...HAVE any of the people who oppose the death penalty suffered sexual abuse or suffered because their children were sexually abused and/or murdered?

I think not. Some of us can forgive which is wonderful for that person, that is what Christianity is about, but it does not mean the person should be allowed to commit murder again.

It is wrong to compare war with this issue. In war people are trained to kill. The murder of children is a premeditated, calculated act of violence.

Robert Goodwill is right when he states that mistakes are few with DNA now, otherwise we save adults while children continue to be murdered.

In America there is a completely different scenario, over there it is normal to carry guns so the provocation is constantly there, that is another issue.

What right do we have to say a child killer, who may have done unspeakable things then killed the child, should live, and not just live but in the luxury of supporting them in jail?

S Howland,

Shaw Crescent,

Huby, York.

...YES, bring back the death penalty for people who murder innocent children.

Why should they be locked up when the families of the children have to live knowing their taxes are paying for the killer to be in jail?

D Napier,

Silverdale Court, York.

...CHRIS Titley (August 28) echoes my thoughts exactly - chemical castration, or life imprisonment for all known paedophiles, no second chance.

They re-offend, and often tragically. There can only be one end to abduction, the victims cannot be released, to reveal all.

As Mr Titley remarks, some guilt-ridden child abusers may welcome this option to control their baser instincts.

Above all it is our duty to protect our children, not tie them to our apron strings, but allow them to lead a normal, happy, free childhood without fear. Mrs A M Kett,

Orchard Road,

Malton.

...I BELIEVE in an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. People who murder, and it is proven - with the exception of crimes of passion (self-defence) - should pay with their life.

If the death penalty were still lawfulmany of those murdered would be alive today.

Look also at the savings in keeping these people in jail. I urge our spineless politicians to act and for the public to lobby Parliament.

John Booth,

Whitehouse Gardens,

Tadcaster Road, York.

...I AGREE wholeheartedly with Chris Titley's 'Too great a penalty to pay' (August 28). I oppose the reinstatement of the death penalty with every fibre of my being.

However, I found his list of despots interesting in that there were a couple of notable absences who, by my reckoning, have more deaths on their hands than any of the ones he mentioned. I of course mean those bastions of freedom and democracy, the Bush dynasty.

These people are completely addicted to killing. Pappa Bush had a right old go at genocide, and now it is Dubya's turn to cause havoc, while brother Jeb just gets on with killing lots of black prisoners in his state, trying to compete with his sibling, no doubt.

What happened to Jessica and Holly was sickening. To see people screaming and throwing objects at the police van because of something they read in the right wing press is equally sickening.

That is why I also agree with Frank Ormston: as a civilised society we should look for the causes. If we all acted more kindly to our fellow humans maybe this crime and countless others would not have happened.

James Stewart,

Beech Grove, York.

...WHY should the death penalty be used only for crimes against children and police officers?

So many death penalty advocates specify this, but who says the life of a child or a police officer is worth more than any other? In some ways, the loss of an adult breadwinner is more grievous than that of a child, when one considers the knock-on effect on families.

In reality, of course, all such comparisons are invidious, and the loss of any human being is tragic.

Although I do not agree with their conclusions, I can comprehend and sympathise with the motives of people such as Gillian Chambers.

However, if I were cynical, I may say that some other death penalty advocates know they would get far less support for a call to re-instate hanging for the murder of, say, prostitutes and social workers than for children and police officers.

As a society we need to look at ways of protecting the vulnerable and punishing those whose actions put them beyond the bounds of human tolerance.

But all human life is precious, and we need to think long, hard and very clearly before we give ourselves the right to take it away.

Jane Roberts,

Irwin Avenue

Heworth

York.

Updated: 10:28 Tuesday, September 03, 2002