Can you think of any moral reason why Levi Bellfield should not have suffered the death penalty?

I agree with most of your points although I would not inflict a death that involved any method that was not quick and painless. For me, the death penalty would represent the ultimate protection of society, not an act of vengeance. For such psychopaths who have no moral conscience or remorse, there is no chance of rehabititaion. In fact, its surprising how little is understood of psychopathy in the prison system itself, with psychiatrists and other well-meaning personnel engaging in lengthy therapy and counselling sessions in the belief that they may eventually help reprogramme them into having a conscience. There is documented evidence that serial killers will frequently engage in a power game with the psychoatrists, feeding them all sorts of nonsense which the psychiatrist beleives, jsus for the fun of duping them; or learning the right phrases to trot out to buy a ticket to parole. The cost of keeping a serial killer incarcerated for the remainder of their lives must be staggering; the child killers have to be kept in solitary confinement for their own protection; and there is the continual risk to the public that they may one day escape. We are too weak-minded to pull the trigger, literally, on serial killers because we can't square the act of taking a life. Odd how we would feel guilty about taking such a life, but don't feel the guilt over the new victims when serial killers are released or escape to go on and kill again. To allow a serial killer to live is to put everyone's life in danger - the death penalty is necessary.