Peckham man guilty of murdering French students

[Sherwick]

Just on the news that Dano Sonnex of Peckham has been found guilty of murdering the two French students.

He sounds like quite a basketcase with a very bad history by all accounts:

"Sonnex, 23, comes from a family with a history of violence and crime.

The court heard his brother, Bernie Junior, had served 10 separate prison sentences, while his father, Bernie Senior, had been convicted of 47 offences, including gun and drug offences, and had served six jail sentences.

His sister, Louise, is currently in jail after being convicted of wounding and causing grievous bodily harm.

At the time of the murders Sonnex was on licence after being released early from a five-year sentence he received after, at the age of 16, he stabbed a man he barely knew three times. " http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8030777.stm

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Dano and/or his family have been involved in burglaries and other crime in East Dulwich in the past...

[pommie]

I actually went to school with his sister!! Scarey stuff

[Eliza.D]

They sound like a right shower of shite. I hope the two responsible for these terrible crimes rot in prison.

[bigbadwolf]

I'm personally against the death sentence because it's the easy way out. However, I think, when the economy is back on it's feet the Home office should follow the American example of the Supermax prison. ADX Florence in Colorado would be a good template. When I say the death penalty is the easy way out I mean that if I was given the choice to spend the rest of my life in a cell for 23 hours a day with no human contact for those 23 hours or take the rope I know what my answer would be. This style of prison is only reserved for America's most dangerous criminals and are on a federal mandate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADX_Florence

[ClareC]

If only life did mean life! Unfortunately it doesn't, offenders get out after a fraction of their sentence is served and (in the case of some) reoffend again increasing their victims.

There have been some disgustingly short sentences recently, Baby P's mother etc springing to immediate mind.

If you could eliminate the risk of the innocent being found guilty I think the death penalty although the easy option on the offender (although still would involve a long time in jail given the number of appeals and time they take) would be a great solution from the reoffending point of view (no chance)!!

[legalbeagle]

The death penalty might prevent reoffending but it is the wrong way to go. You can't kill someone who has killed someone to prove that killing someone is wrong. Offending rates in the US show that the death penalty is neither cheaper (lenghty and expensive appeals process) nor an effective deterent. If the state kills its own citizens then we are all made less humane. It's not about who they are, it's about who we are.

[????]

Wot legal said - murder is murder by individual or state and I don't think there's a grey area in this. I'm anti.

[daizie]

This case has particularly disturbed me . I would very happily knife to death these scum . I am beyond words .

[blah]

you can guage alot about a society by the quality of its mercy

- we have swallowed much awful US culture with glee , lets not go too far please

[legalbeagle]

Daizie - I wouldn't defend or excuse what they did for a second. I would lock them up for life, and not in a "please help yourself to sky TV and a snooker table" type way. And if it was my children they had killed I'd probably be at the front of the queue with that knife you've just mentioned.

But I still say that the state should never ever kill its own citizens.

[Keef]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Wot legal said - murder is murder by individual or

> state and I don't think there's a grey area in

> this. I'm anti.

What Quids said!!!

I'm also getting so fecked off with Channel 4 news, which has always been quality in the past. Much like after Baby P, they are just trying to expose what has gone wrong with the system, and naming a single worker, like it was their bloody fault!

Not saying the probation service is free of blame here, but come on, this wasn't just a street stabbing, this was a nasty nasty murder. Calling for a load of resignations is not going to sort anything out!

[TillieTrotter]

Totally agree with you Keef.

[Brendan]

I have no moral objections to someone being killed in order to remove them from society and I do believe that people who have committed pre meditated, self serving murder or attempted murder or rape should be removed from society permanently. In fact I think that it is a more humane way of removing them from society than locking them up for life is. It?s not really about revenge or payback it?s just about protecting the innocent.

But , and this is a big ?but?

I don?t think that there is a government or judiciary in this world that is beyond reproach to a point where they can be trusted with the power of life or death over their people.

[bigbadwolf]

Did you know the French were using the Guillotine right up until the late 70's.

[jctg]

Brendan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

It?s not really

> about revenge or payback

It ABSOLUTELY IS about revenge or payback. It is bloodlust and it is barbaric.

[Brendan]

Serves 'em right too!

[Brendan]

jctg Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It ABSOLUTELY IS about revenge or payback. It is

> bloodlust and it is barbaric.

You see that is the way people think about it which is why it leaves a bad taste in our mouths. But society should be able to rise above that and just say, right if you fail to honour another human being's right to life and safety yours will be revoked, there is no unnecessary cruelty but you have to be removed from society and we are not going to lock you up for the rest of your life.

I don't think our society is mature enough to get to that point though.

A lust for revenge or "justice" as it is often packaged is just barbaric.

I'm from Africa and have seen people not as civilised as us carrying out "justice" on the streets and believe me it's sickening to see a mob burn a person to death because they have decided he is guilty of something. But that mentality isn't any different to the, "kill the bastards, bring back hanging" mentality that you are quite rightly reacting to and that is often tapped into by the enlightened press of this great land.

What I'm suggesting is something a lot more clinical where a set of rules are in place and adhered to. But like I said I don't think society is mature or moral enough for that yet.

[Eliza.D]

I in no way support the death penalty. It is inhumane to kill another person whatever the justification.

The two individuals that carried out this hideous crime will stay in prison for a very long time and will hopefully die in prison.

My thoughts go out to the parents of the victims. No one should loose a child, let alone in such a horrible way.

They may have seen those who murdered their children sent to prison but they too will serve a life sentance.

[lozzyloz]

I'm not convinced about the death penalty. In some ways I think it lets the perpetrators off the hook too easily. Once they're dead it's not like they're feeling remorseful or suffering. And let's face it I don't think the death penalty has ever really been an effective deterrent but merely a way of satisfying public opinion and in some cases people related to the victim(s).

I'd much rather that life meant life and that guilty murderers (and rapists, paedo's etc) had a much tougher time inside and suffered from a complete loss of freedom and the ability to feel any satisfaction each day for the rest of their miserable lives. But then I'm sure that there's probably a thorny human rights issue there.

[legalbeagle]

Brendan - I understand what you are saying, but the end result is the same. A person has still died. And so I come back to my first question: how can you kill someone who has killed someone in order to demonstrate that killing someone is unacceptable?

[louisiana]

Brendan, there is a history in this country of people wrongly accused and convicted of very serious offences, only to be found innocent years later... Would you really have executed Sally Clark?

[Brendan]

You are both missing my point completely.

I am merely talking about removing someone from society not making some kind of demonstration regarding their wrongdoing.

The idea of an execution demonstrating something is miles away from my point.

Morals (ie ideas like, ?I shouldn?t kill someone? or "I should not steal") are not part of people?s consciousness just because there may be punishment if we don?t? uphold them.

And Louisiana, I if you see the last line of my earlier post,

?I don?t think that there is a government or judiciary in this world that is beyond reproach to a point where they can be trusted with the power of life or death over their people.?

you will see that I?m with you on that one.

[EdieF]

I have just been looking at Sky News' website. Sky News' website readers can comment on the stories, and on the whole the people who comment are a pretty inarticulate bunch. On this story, the commenters are all calling for the reintroduction of the death penalty. However, this particular story is about the fact that that the parents of the victims are going to sue the British government. Now that I find truly 'incroyable'.

[legalbeagle]

Brendan I think you are right, I'm not sure that I do understand your point. I'm not sure how you can have an execution that doesn't demonstrate a point. The only reason a state undertakes an execution is to demonstrate the point that what the offender has done is unacceptable.

But then again you are entitled to your view!

[lozzyloz]

Maybe the only way is to adopt Schr?dinger's cat theory where there is equal probability of the sentenced prisoner being alive or dead.