We know from certain experience that the milk of human kindness flows through the breast of Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Ms Paula Llewellyn; hence, we were taken aback by her announcement that she would be going for the death penalty against accused killer Mr Rushane Barnett.

Ms Llewellyn had better prepare to face the wrath of the more vocal of the countless number of anti-death penalty groups across the world, not the least of which is our own Jamaicans For Justice (JFJ).

On Tuesday, she said her office had proferred a voluntary bill of indictment against Mr Barnett and filed the death penalty notice, citing the provisions of section 3 (1) of the Offences Against the Person Act which states that “every person who falls within section 3 (1A) shall be sentenced to imprisonment for life or to death” — these are people who are convicted for multiple murders which arise out of the same incident.

With the last hanging taking place in Jamaica 34 years ago, the prospect of resumption of capital punishment is a big deal, and we expect that the age-old debate for and against the death penalty will heat up.

As with all issues having to do with life and death, positions are hardened, the blinkers are stuck in place, the arguments are the old ones, and in the end the needle will hardly be moved one way or another.

What has always kept the hangman idle is the threat of Jamaica being deprived of economic aid and an attack on the country’s image, whether it is coming from the likes of the powerful European Union or influential organisations like Amnesty International.

The argument for not hanging people has seemingly been won by those who say that it is mostly the poor and minority people who are affected, because the well-to-do can always afford the most powerful lawyers or use connected parties to avoid facing the courts.

Some people are persuaded by the view that the death penalty is too final. If a mistake is made and a man wrongly convicted, hanging leaves no chance for correcting that wrong. There is no resurrection from the grave in this life.

Yet, for reasons still to be fully explored Jamaicans have solidly been on the side of having the death penalty, believing that it is the best deterrent to murder, and justice for the victims of murder. Every poll in modern times has shown this to be so.

It may have something to do with Jamaicans being tired of the dreadful fact of murders running over 1,000 annually since 2011, hitting a dastardly peak of 1,647 in 2017 and a mind-bending 1,463 last year, according to Statista 2022.

Jamaican politicians, stuck between a rock and a hard place, have compromised by having the death penalty for certain types of homicides and life imprisonment for others — capital and non-capital punishment.

For example, the death penalty is mandatory for the murder of police officers, judges and certain other categories of people, as well as committing a murder in the course of a robbery and, apparently, multiple killings as in the case of Mr Barnett who is accused of snuffing out the life of a mother and her four children.

We find the compromise to be a decent attempt at finding a solution, but at the same time hope that the 23-year-old Mr Barnett, will be afforded every opportunity to have his case fully aired.