I was brought up as anti-death penalty advocate and in the 1990s, I wrote to several men on death row in America to befriend them, this included one who was later executed.
I think what changed my opinion - a little - was my growing awareness of the violent nature of some murders and that some victims were not only murdered but tortured as well. The problem that clouded the issue for me was how people were executed and how this was fast becoming a circus, i.e, the recent problem with America not being able to obtain the required toxic ingredients to carry out executions by 'lethal injection'.
So many executions have beene 'botched' whether by hanging, shooting, gassing, electrocution or lethal injection, and this results in the process making the authorities appear incompetent and not in control.
I have come to the conclusion that murder should mean life imprisonment and that 'life' should mean 'life' and any privileges in prison, not matter how small, should be earned.
In the case of particularly brutal or multiple murders, then sadly, the punishment should be death by the most humane means and carried out as quickly as possible (in the UK, I believe that when there were executions, these had to be carrried out within a month of the sentence).
There is the further problem that the wealthy who murder can and do get off with just a term of imprisonment because of being able to hire clever lawyers, while the poor person gets the death penalty for the same crime.
In the case of the men in indonesia, I cannot believe that execution is appropriate for what they allegedly did. 25-40 years' imprisonment is more appropriate. Remember that with capital punishment, the punishment ends when death occurs, but with long-term imprisonment, the punishment lasts.