Captain Ray wrote: I don't see why this is so complicated for you.
Person "a" commits an evil act. Person "a" is thoroughly investigated and been found to have committed said evil act. Person "a" is executed in at least as kind a fashion that one would offer to an innocent unborn child.
Why is that so problematic in your world?
Raymond
That there are enough cases where person A is later proven to have been totally innocent that exicution is not an option.
How are you going to bring person A back?
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
You can't.. what you can do is give them a fair trial and have them judged by a jury of their peers.
That is the system.. Many safeguards a built in.. which explains the 53 incidents that you mentioned.
These people who are on death row don't deserve your mercy.. They are ruthless killers.. each and every one of them. Your wife, mother, sisters, brothers, friends.. whomever.. are safer because these savages are locked up and awaiting the needle.
I do understand your point if you are coming from the angle of preservation of human life.. I too am very concerned about preserving human life.. that's why I am glad to see these murderous thugs put to death. To save the life of people like you who disagree with me..
Raymond
That is the system.. Many safeguards a built in.. which explains the 53 incidents that you mentioned.
These people who are on death row don't deserve your mercy.. They are ruthless killers.. each and every one of them. Your wife, mother, sisters, brothers, friends.. whomever.. are safer because these savages are locked up and awaiting the needle.
I do understand your point if you are coming from the angle of preservation of human life.. I too am very concerned about preserving human life.. that's why I am glad to see these murderous thugs put to death. To save the life of people like you who disagree with me..
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: You can't.. what you can do is give them a fair trial and have them judged by a jury of their peers.
That is the system.. Many safeguards a built in.. which explains the 53 incidents that you mentioned.
These people who are on death row don't deserve your mercy.. They are ruthless killers.. each and every one of them. Your wife, mother, sisters, brothers, friends.. whomever.. are safer because these savages are locked up and awaiting the needle.
I do understand your point if you are coming from the angle of preservation of human life.. I too am very concerned about preserving human life.. that's why I am glad to see these murderous thugs put to death. To save the life of people like you who disagree with me..
Raymond
Can you not see that the one precludes certainty over the other?
My wife, mother, sisters, brothers, friends.. whomever.. are safer because these savages are locked up - what need for the needle?
How are you saving my life?
That is the system.. Many safeguards a built in.. which explains the 53 incidents that you mentioned.
These people who are on death row don't deserve your mercy.. They are ruthless killers.. each and every one of them. Your wife, mother, sisters, brothers, friends.. whomever.. are safer because these savages are locked up and awaiting the needle.
I do understand your point if you are coming from the angle of preservation of human life.. I too am very concerned about preserving human life.. that's why I am glad to see these murderous thugs put to death. To save the life of people like you who disagree with me..
Raymond
Can you not see that the one precludes certainty over the other?
My wife, mother, sisters, brothers, friends.. whomever.. are safer because these savages are locked up - what need for the needle?
How are you saving my life?
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
I'm not saving your life.. You are a man.. presumably.. you can protect yourself.. your wife, mother, sisters etc.... however will benefit from these freaks being put down like the rabid dogs that they are.
What benefit comes from feeding these animals? Their crimes were heinous.. their punishment should befit the crimes that they commit. Not for the sake of deterrence.. these animals are beyond that.. They should be put down because their life serves no purpose and can only harm normal people like you and I.
Raymond
What benefit comes from feeding these animals? Their crimes were heinous.. their punishment should befit the crimes that they commit. Not for the sake of deterrence.. these animals are beyond that.. They should be put down because their life serves no purpose and can only harm normal people like you and I.
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: I'm not saving your life.. You are a man.. presumably.. you can protect yourself.. your wife, mother, sisters etc.... however will benefit from these freaks being put down like the rabid dogs that they are.
What benefit comes from feeding these animals? Their crimes were heinous.. their punishment should befit the crimes that they commit. Not for the sake of deterrence.. these animals are beyond that.. They should be put down because their life serves no purpose and can only harm normal people like you and I.
Then why suggest that you are protecting my life?
How will my wife, mother, sisters etc.... benefit from these freaks being put down like the rabid dogs that they are. If they are kept in prison then the public is in no danger from them.
Captain Ray wrote: What benefit comes from feeding these animals? Their crimes were heinous.. their punishment should befit the crimes that they commit. Not for the sake of deterrence.. these animals are beyond that.. They should be put down because their life serves no purpose and can only harm normal people like you and I.
Here is where we differ. Whilst most of them may be murderers, not all of them are and I believe that more harm is done to normal people like you and I by killing the innocent than by keeping the guilty in jail for the rest of their natural.
Do you want to be guilty of the murder of an innocent man through condoning state killing to save $0.01 tax?
What benefit comes from feeding these animals? Their crimes were heinous.. their punishment should befit the crimes that they commit. Not for the sake of deterrence.. these animals are beyond that.. They should be put down because their life serves no purpose and can only harm normal people like you and I.
Then why suggest that you are protecting my life?
How will my wife, mother, sisters etc.... benefit from these freaks being put down like the rabid dogs that they are. If they are kept in prison then the public is in no danger from them.
Captain Ray wrote: What benefit comes from feeding these animals? Their crimes were heinous.. their punishment should befit the crimes that they commit. Not for the sake of deterrence.. these animals are beyond that.. They should be put down because their life serves no purpose and can only harm normal people like you and I.
Here is where we differ. Whilst most of them may be murderers, not all of them are and I believe that more harm is done to normal people like you and I by killing the innocent than by keeping the guilty in jail for the rest of their natural.
Do you want to be guilty of the murder of an innocent man through condoning state killing to save $0.01 tax?
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Bryn Mawr wrote: Then why suggest that you are protecting my life?
How will my wife, mother, sisters etc.... benefit from these freaks being put down like the rabid dogs that they are. If they are kept in prison then the public is in no danger from them.
Here is where we differ. Whilst most of them may be murderers, not all of them are and I believe that more harm is done to normal people like you and I by killing the innocent than by keeping the guilty in jail for the rest of their natural.
Do you want to be guilty of the murder of an innocent man through condoning state killing to save $0.01 tax?
HELLO!! They tend to let these freaks out of jail after a while!! Then they go out and murder some woman at a nearby circle K and all the liberals scratch their heads and wonder what the heck just happened?!
I just gave you four examples of people who were sentenced to life in jail.. who got out and murdered....
And what the hell are you talking about saying that people on death row are not convicted of murders? They don't put people on death row for tax evasion?!?! Of course they are there for murderers.. that was kind of a dumb thing to say.
Raymond
How will my wife, mother, sisters etc.... benefit from these freaks being put down like the rabid dogs that they are. If they are kept in prison then the public is in no danger from them.
Here is where we differ. Whilst most of them may be murderers, not all of them are and I believe that more harm is done to normal people like you and I by killing the innocent than by keeping the guilty in jail for the rest of their natural.
Do you want to be guilty of the murder of an innocent man through condoning state killing to save $0.01 tax?
HELLO!! They tend to let these freaks out of jail after a while!! Then they go out and murder some woman at a nearby circle K and all the liberals scratch their heads and wonder what the heck just happened?!
I just gave you four examples of people who were sentenced to life in jail.. who got out and murdered....
And what the hell are you talking about saying that people on death row are not convicted of murders? They don't put people on death row for tax evasion?!?! Of course they are there for murderers.. that was kind of a dumb thing to say.
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: HELLO!! They tend to let these freaks out of jail after a while!! Then they go out and murder some woman at a nearby circle K and all the liberals scratch their heads and wonder what the heck just happened?!
I just gave you four examples of people who were sentenced to life in jail.. who got out and murdered....
And what the hell are you talking about saying that people on death row are not convicted of murders? They don't put people on death row for tax evasion?!?! Of course they are there for murderers.. that was kind of a dumb thing to say.
Raymond
Whilst all of them are convicted muderers not all of them have committed murder - have you not been listening for the past two hours?
If you objection is that the sentences are too lax then address that problem - do not insist that we murder them all as an alternative.
I just gave you four examples of people who were sentenced to life in jail.. who got out and murdered....
And what the hell are you talking about saying that people on death row are not convicted of murders? They don't put people on death row for tax evasion?!?! Of course they are there for murderers.. that was kind of a dumb thing to say.
Raymond
Whilst all of them are convicted muderers not all of them have committed murder - have you not been listening for the past two hours?
If you objection is that the sentences are too lax then address that problem - do not insist that we murder them all as an alternative.
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Bryn Mawr wrote: Whilst all of them are convicted muderers not all of them have committed murder - have you not been listening for the past two hours?
If you objection is that the sentences are too lax then address that problem - do not insist that we murder them all as an alternative.
Ok.. maybe you got me... could you please give me the name of any and or all of the people on death row who have not been convicted of murder.
Raymond
If you objection is that the sentences are too lax then address that problem - do not insist that we murder them all as an alternative.
Ok.. maybe you got me... could you please give me the name of any and or all of the people on death row who have not been convicted of murder.
Raymond
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
If you objection is that the sentences are too lax then address that problem - do not insist that we murder them all as an alternative.
If we (as a people) sentence these people to death.. they should be put to death. quickly, humanely, and justly.
Raymond
If we (as a people) sentence these people to death.. they should be put to death. quickly, humanely, and justly.
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: Ok.. maybe you got me... could you please give me the name of any and or all of the people on death row who have not been convicted of murder.
Raymond
I repeat, "all of them are convicted muderers not all of them have committed murder".
Do you not listen?
Raymond
I repeat, "all of them are convicted muderers not all of them have committed murder".
Do you not listen?
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: If we (as a people) sentence these people to death.. they should be put to death. quickly, humanely, and justly.
Raymond
It is you justification, as a people, to sentence these people to death, that I am querying.
Raymond
It is you justification, as a people, to sentence these people to death, that I am querying.
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Bryn Mawr wrote: I repeat, "all of them are convicted muderers not all of them have committed murder".
Do you not listen?
Good lord!! You talk in circles.. This is why I avoid talking to liberals.. you make no sense!!
Ok.. which ones were convicted of murder that did not actdually murder anybody? Did they just rape and torture? Are they just victims themselves of a system that convicts people of murder where no murder occured? Would you feel better about this whole thing if we only put to death murderers who commited murder, but let murderers who didn't murder anybody spend eternity in a comfortable jail cell with cable t.v.?
Raymond
Do you not listen?
Good lord!! You talk in circles.. This is why I avoid talking to liberals.. you make no sense!!
Ok.. which ones were convicted of murder that did not actdually murder anybody? Did they just rape and torture? Are they just victims themselves of a system that convicts people of murder where no murder occured? Would you feel better about this whole thing if we only put to death murderers who commited murder, but let murderers who didn't murder anybody spend eternity in a comfortable jail cell with cable t.v.?
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: Good lord!! You talk in circles.. This is why I avoid talking to liberals.. you make no sense!!
Ok.. which ones were convicted of murder that did not actdually murder anybody? Did they just rape and torture? Are they just victims themselves of a system that convicts people of murder where no murder occured? Would you feel better about this whole thing if we only put to death murderers who commited murder, but let murderers who didn't murder anybody spend eternity in a comfortable jail cell with cable t.v.?
Raymond
I've been saying the same thing all night!
In ten or twenty year time I'll answer your question - when the innocent (or some of them) have been reprieved. Until then, who knows? The flaws in the system will hide them.
And no, the innocent are innocent - victims of a flawed judiciary. Given the demonstrable flaws in the system there is no such thing as a proven murderer - only one whost guilt is "beyond reasonable doubt" and that is NOT the same thing.
Ok.. which ones were convicted of murder that did not actdually murder anybody? Did they just rape and torture? Are they just victims themselves of a system that convicts people of murder where no murder occured? Would you feel better about this whole thing if we only put to death murderers who commited murder, but let murderers who didn't murder anybody spend eternity in a comfortable jail cell with cable t.v.?
Raymond
I've been saying the same thing all night!
In ten or twenty year time I'll answer your question - when the innocent (or some of them) have been reprieved. Until then, who knows? The flaws in the system will hide them.
And no, the innocent are innocent - victims of a flawed judiciary. Given the demonstrable flaws in the system there is no such thing as a proven murderer - only one whost guilt is "beyond reasonable doubt" and that is NOT the same thing.
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
It's not night here.. it's not even 5:00 pm...
So what you are saying.. is that it is OK to kill the perps as long as we are reasonably sure that the perp is the one who commited the crime.. right?
Or are you saying that no amount of certainty is enough to dispatch appropriate justice?
Raymond
So what you are saying.. is that it is OK to kill the perps as long as we are reasonably sure that the perp is the one who commited the crime.. right?
Or are you saying that no amount of certainty is enough to dispatch appropriate justice?
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: It's not night here.. it's not even 5:00 pm...
So what you are saying.. is that it is OK to kill the perps as long as we are reasonably sure that the perp is the one who commited the crime.. right?
Or are you saying that no amount of certainty is enough to dispatch appropriate justice?
Raymond
It's 01:00 here and I'm off to bed.
I'm saying you do not have enough certainty to kill anybody.
Why do you always see everything as on or off?
Why not listen to what is being said?
If you had a way of being 100% certain of guilt then OK.
There is no way of having that level of certainty so not OK.
So what you are saying.. is that it is OK to kill the perps as long as we are reasonably sure that the perp is the one who commited the crime.. right?
Or are you saying that no amount of certainty is enough to dispatch appropriate justice?
Raymond
It's 01:00 here and I'm off to bed.
I'm saying you do not have enough certainty to kill anybody.
Why do you always see everything as on or off?
Why not listen to what is being said?
If you had a way of being 100% certain of guilt then OK.
There is no way of having that level of certainty so not OK.
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Well.. it's late for you.. and when you wake up refreshed and thinking clearly.. you will still be wrong.
That we have a system here.. where we can dispassionately hand out justice is a marvel!!! That we can do this without some guy like me having to hunt some dumb ass who is evil should be applauded! But people like me should not have to sit around waiting for justice to be done.. the evil doers should be dispatched immediately. It serves nobodies interest to let them lanker in jail.. just kill them and get it over with.
Raymond
That we have a system here.. where we can dispassionately hand out justice is a marvel!!! That we can do this without some guy like me having to hunt some dumb ass who is evil should be applauded! But people like me should not have to sit around waiting for justice to be done.. the evil doers should be dispatched immediately. It serves nobodies interest to let them lanker in jail.. just kill them and get it over with.
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote:
That we have a system here.. where we can dispassionately hand out justice is a marvel!!! That we can do this without some guy like me having to hunt some dumb ass who is evil should be applauded!
Finally something I can agree with you on! Except I'd change the placement of one descriptive phrase.
"That we can do this without some dumb ass like [you] having to hunt some guy who is evil should be applauded!"
We are all safer without the justice system in your hands.
That we have a system here.. where we can dispassionately hand out justice is a marvel!!! That we can do this without some guy like me having to hunt some dumb ass who is evil should be applauded!
Finally something I can agree with you on! Except I'd change the placement of one descriptive phrase.
"That we can do this without some dumb ass like [you] having to hunt some guy who is evil should be applauded!"
We are all safer without the justice system in your hands.
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
koan wrote: Finally something I can agree with you on! Except I'd change the placement of one descriptive phrase.
"That we can do this without some dumb ass like [you] having to hunt some guy who is evil should be applauded!"
We are all safer without the justice system in your hands.
agreed. Frankly.. I don't want the responsibility.
That is why people who are accused of crimes are judged by a jury of their peers.. If it were just me sentencing people to death.. well.. that would not be fair.. It's fair minded individuals who, having heard all the evidence, that sentence these people to death.
Get'r' done!!
Raymond
"That we can do this without some dumb ass like [you] having to hunt some guy who is evil should be applauded!"
We are all safer without the justice system in your hands.
agreed. Frankly.. I don't want the responsibility.
That is why people who are accused of crimes are judged by a jury of their peers.. If it were just me sentencing people to death.. well.. that would not be fair.. It's fair minded individuals who, having heard all the evidence, that sentence these people to death.
Get'r' done!!
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
In reply to Cheshire Cat’s comment “shame on you†for my assertion regarding terrorists, especially “religious†terrorists, "then they should be put down like a dog. Coldly, mercilessly, with no comfort of any form, simply either taken outside and shot or tied down and euthanised."
Shame on me? Not at all. Maybe if you had seen first hand the dismembered civilians and especially children following a homicide bomb attack you might also see the justice in such a sentence.
You write that in your profession you am involved death on a daily basis.
As a now some time retired member of the IDF I also have spent a considerable time in the past involved with death on a daily basis. Too often I’ve seen my comrades, and worse yet our women and kids blown apart or terribly maimed by cowardly sons of bitches who always scream for mercy when confronted by the imminence of their own death.
Believe me, being simply taken outside and shot or tied down and euthanised Is far too good for them and their kind.
When you’ve been there and experienced it for yourself, especially when members of your own family have been victims, then and only then have you any right to pass judgment, let alone criticise, anyone who has.
Koan writes
“golem,
the way you state your opinion as fact has me wondering if you believe precisely what you say or if you are taking that line for debate purposes. Can you clarify before I respond?â€
I believe precisely what I write. Never doubt it for a second. What you see is what there is.
Bryn Mawr comments regarding the execution of the innocent.
Turn the question on its head. How many guilty have walked free especially from your British courts? How many have been innocent have been murdered, raped, or sexually used as children compared with the number of accused who were given a sentence that amounts to only a few years or worse yet acquitted?
I know all about the “rather a hundred guilt men walk free than one innocent man should hang†but that doesn’t work for me. In your country the crime rates are a disgrace. Even the guilty who have managed to twist a jury that their convictions were “unsafe†get off and amazingly are then considered completely innocent.
Personally I would much rather a number of innocent men were victims of a miscarriage of justice if the mass of guilty who either walk free or even never come to trial was to be reduced.
The numbers involved clearly show that with the way that it presently is in your country far more innocent people are suffering and loosing out because of the lack of real justice, than the number who would suffer as a result of a tightening up of the processes of law and the return of the death penalty.
Shame on me? Not at all. Maybe if you had seen first hand the dismembered civilians and especially children following a homicide bomb attack you might also see the justice in such a sentence.
You write that in your profession you am involved death on a daily basis.
As a now some time retired member of the IDF I also have spent a considerable time in the past involved with death on a daily basis. Too often I’ve seen my comrades, and worse yet our women and kids blown apart or terribly maimed by cowardly sons of bitches who always scream for mercy when confronted by the imminence of their own death.
Believe me, being simply taken outside and shot or tied down and euthanised Is far too good for them and their kind.
When you’ve been there and experienced it for yourself, especially when members of your own family have been victims, then and only then have you any right to pass judgment, let alone criticise, anyone who has.
Koan writes
“golem,
the way you state your opinion as fact has me wondering if you believe precisely what you say or if you are taking that line for debate purposes. Can you clarify before I respond?â€
I believe precisely what I write. Never doubt it for a second. What you see is what there is.
Bryn Mawr comments regarding the execution of the innocent.
Turn the question on its head. How many guilty have walked free especially from your British courts? How many have been innocent have been murdered, raped, or sexually used as children compared with the number of accused who were given a sentence that amounts to only a few years or worse yet acquitted?
I know all about the “rather a hundred guilt men walk free than one innocent man should hang†but that doesn’t work for me. In your country the crime rates are a disgrace. Even the guilty who have managed to twist a jury that their convictions were “unsafe†get off and amazingly are then considered completely innocent.
Personally I would much rather a number of innocent men were victims of a miscarriage of justice if the mass of guilty who either walk free or even never come to trial was to be reduced.
The numbers involved clearly show that with the way that it presently is in your country far more innocent people are suffering and loosing out because of the lack of real justice, than the number who would suffer as a result of a tightening up of the processes of law and the return of the death penalty.
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: You can't.. what you can do is give them a fair trial and have them judged by a jury of their peers.
That is the system.. Many safeguards a built in.. which explains the 53 incidents that you mentioned.
These people who are on death row don't deserve your mercy.. They are ruthless killers.. each and every one of them. Your wife, mother, sisters, brothers, friends.. whomever.. are safer because these savages are locked up and awaiting the needle.
I do understand your point if you are coming from the angle of preservation of human life.. I too am very concerned about preserving human life.. that's why I am glad to see these murderous thugs put to death. To save the life of people like you who disagree with me..
Raymond
That is why people who are accused of crimes are judged by a jury of their peers.. If it were just me sentencing people to death.. well.. that would not be fair.. It's fair minded individuals who, having heard all the evidence, that sentence these people to death.
It was only later that their innocence became clear. They were not deserving of mercy and weren't given mercy they were actually innocent of the crime they were accused off. A mistake was made. On the other hand 53 guilty people got away with it.
without going in to specific cases since I don't know the details Those 53 were given a fair trial a and judged by a jury of their peers all fair minded people no doubt but juries can only decide on the evidence presented to them, if that is flawed or simply perverted then they will make a wrong decision. Juries can be prejudiced and ignore the evidence deciding guilt or innocence on the belief that that type of person could have done it.
You talk about rape. How often do rapists go free because the jury believes the girl was asking for it, shouldn't have been there, her skirt was too short, she shouldn't have got herself drunk, she knew the guy anyway and probably did consent, most women enjoy a bit of rough. The guy is well spoken wearing a suit and she's a slut.
You have a case in the US somewhere just now where a stripper claims she was gang raped by the high school football team. What do you reckon her chances are in court? How many in the jury will think-What did she expect- Justice is blind sometimes it doesn't see the whole story
What you seem to be advocating is that all the safeguards be removed and those found guilty are executed straight away without right of appeal in all cases. Does it not concern you that had that been done in the above 53 murderers were left free to walk around because the poloice thought they had their culprit.
No one is advocating releasing them but rather being very sure you have the right one before you execute them.
You still haven't answered my question from earlier-if it was you in court charged with murder how thorough would you like the case against you to be. Would be be content that found guilty on flawed evidence you will be executed without the right to appeal the decision or would you sit in the chair and think-gee tough break, who knows maybe you would become convinced you were guilty.
Personally I am against the death penalty because state murder is still murder however you dress it up. As a deterrent it doesn't work.
posted by golem
I know all about the “rather a hundred guilt men walk free than one innocent man should hang†but that doesn’t work for me. In your country the crime rates are a disgrace. Even the guilty who have managed to twist a jury that their convictions were “unsafe†get off and amazingly are then considered completely innocent.
Personally I would much rather a number of innocent men were victims of a miscarriage of justice if the mass of guilty who either walk free or even never come to trial was to be reduced.
The numbers involved clearly show that with the way that it presently is in your country far more innocent people are suffering and loosing out because of the lack of real justice, than the number who would suffer as a result of a tightening up of the processes of law and the return of the death penalty.
Our legal system, and yours is modelled on it, like all such systems needs to be constantly reviewed and kept up to date. It has developed over centuries and is still one of the best systems in the world but it is not perfect. But just because it creaks a bit doen't mean you should throw away the principles on which it is founded.
What you propose to replace it is the same as the taliban or any other religious fundamentalist or political extremist group propose. summary justice with no right of appeal. The judges in the UK giving lenient sentences are actually following guidelines in sentencing laid down by-in our case parliament and in many cases are restricted in the length if sentence they cabn give. We now have TB and his cronies trying to pretend they have nothing to do with it and pass the blame. (They are the ones that brougfht in being up for parole after a quarter of the sentence is served and reduced sentences if they plead guilty). Most of us don't buy it and the last thing we want is politicians dictating to the courts.
If you are daft enough to want to live in a country where the citizens give their govt such power over you then I feel for you. This idea that people do not have the right to a fair trial with a right of appeal is opening the door to dictatorship and the end of liberty. If you allow the rights of others to be taken away because they are somehow less worthy than you then you are well on the way and have been suckered. It's sophistry of the worst kind much beloved of those who believe that only they and such as they should be allowed to rule and dictate to others how they should live their lives.
Personally I would stand up for liberal values-individual liberty and freedom and both the right and left in politics and the religious nutters can go play with themselves. I'm afraid I'm always going to be in the crowd shouting who do you think you are pal.
Now theres a thing. How did the term liberal become so pejorative to many americans. most I would have thought would by nature be liberal in their attitudes. tolerant of others, live let live so long as you don't bother me. beiliving in freedom of the individual and not subservient to the state.
Golem. I do not profess to have an answer to terrorism-we can go all round the houses with the reason for it all. But I do think that if you behave as they do and just kill out of hand then you have become like them in which case they are winning because they have made you hate as they do.
You seem to have a demented picture of the UK with us all hiding from the criminals terrified to go out at night, scared our neighbour is going to attack us with us all defenceless because the nasty government had taken away all our guns. reality is very different. I think you are projecting your own fears on to others.
That is the system.. Many safeguards a built in.. which explains the 53 incidents that you mentioned.
These people who are on death row don't deserve your mercy.. They are ruthless killers.. each and every one of them. Your wife, mother, sisters, brothers, friends.. whomever.. are safer because these savages are locked up and awaiting the needle.
I do understand your point if you are coming from the angle of preservation of human life.. I too am very concerned about preserving human life.. that's why I am glad to see these murderous thugs put to death. To save the life of people like you who disagree with me..
Raymond
That is why people who are accused of crimes are judged by a jury of their peers.. If it were just me sentencing people to death.. well.. that would not be fair.. It's fair minded individuals who, having heard all the evidence, that sentence these people to death.
It was only later that their innocence became clear. They were not deserving of mercy and weren't given mercy they were actually innocent of the crime they were accused off. A mistake was made. On the other hand 53 guilty people got away with it.
without going in to specific cases since I don't know the details Those 53 were given a fair trial a and judged by a jury of their peers all fair minded people no doubt but juries can only decide on the evidence presented to them, if that is flawed or simply perverted then they will make a wrong decision. Juries can be prejudiced and ignore the evidence deciding guilt or innocence on the belief that that type of person could have done it.
You talk about rape. How often do rapists go free because the jury believes the girl was asking for it, shouldn't have been there, her skirt was too short, she shouldn't have got herself drunk, she knew the guy anyway and probably did consent, most women enjoy a bit of rough. The guy is well spoken wearing a suit and she's a slut.
You have a case in the US somewhere just now where a stripper claims she was gang raped by the high school football team. What do you reckon her chances are in court? How many in the jury will think-What did she expect- Justice is blind sometimes it doesn't see the whole story
What you seem to be advocating is that all the safeguards be removed and those found guilty are executed straight away without right of appeal in all cases. Does it not concern you that had that been done in the above 53 murderers were left free to walk around because the poloice thought they had their culprit.
No one is advocating releasing them but rather being very sure you have the right one before you execute them.
You still haven't answered my question from earlier-if it was you in court charged with murder how thorough would you like the case against you to be. Would be be content that found guilty on flawed evidence you will be executed without the right to appeal the decision or would you sit in the chair and think-gee tough break, who knows maybe you would become convinced you were guilty.
Personally I am against the death penalty because state murder is still murder however you dress it up. As a deterrent it doesn't work.
posted by golem
I know all about the “rather a hundred guilt men walk free than one innocent man should hang†but that doesn’t work for me. In your country the crime rates are a disgrace. Even the guilty who have managed to twist a jury that their convictions were “unsafe†get off and amazingly are then considered completely innocent.
Personally I would much rather a number of innocent men were victims of a miscarriage of justice if the mass of guilty who either walk free or even never come to trial was to be reduced.
The numbers involved clearly show that with the way that it presently is in your country far more innocent people are suffering and loosing out because of the lack of real justice, than the number who would suffer as a result of a tightening up of the processes of law and the return of the death penalty.
Our legal system, and yours is modelled on it, like all such systems needs to be constantly reviewed and kept up to date. It has developed over centuries and is still one of the best systems in the world but it is not perfect. But just because it creaks a bit doen't mean you should throw away the principles on which it is founded.
What you propose to replace it is the same as the taliban or any other religious fundamentalist or political extremist group propose. summary justice with no right of appeal. The judges in the UK giving lenient sentences are actually following guidelines in sentencing laid down by-in our case parliament and in many cases are restricted in the length if sentence they cabn give. We now have TB and his cronies trying to pretend they have nothing to do with it and pass the blame. (They are the ones that brougfht in being up for parole after a quarter of the sentence is served and reduced sentences if they plead guilty). Most of us don't buy it and the last thing we want is politicians dictating to the courts.
If you are daft enough to want to live in a country where the citizens give their govt such power over you then I feel for you. This idea that people do not have the right to a fair trial with a right of appeal is opening the door to dictatorship and the end of liberty. If you allow the rights of others to be taken away because they are somehow less worthy than you then you are well on the way and have been suckered. It's sophistry of the worst kind much beloved of those who believe that only they and such as they should be allowed to rule and dictate to others how they should live their lives.
Personally I would stand up for liberal values-individual liberty and freedom and both the right and left in politics and the religious nutters can go play with themselves. I'm afraid I'm always going to be in the crowd shouting who do you think you are pal.
Now theres a thing. How did the term liberal become so pejorative to many americans. most I would have thought would by nature be liberal in their attitudes. tolerant of others, live let live so long as you don't bother me. beiliving in freedom of the individual and not subservient to the state.
Golem. I do not profess to have an answer to terrorism-we can go all round the houses with the reason for it all. But I do think that if you behave as they do and just kill out of hand then you have become like them in which case they are winning because they have made you hate as they do.
You seem to have a demented picture of the UK with us all hiding from the criminals terrified to go out at night, scared our neighbour is going to attack us with us all defenceless because the nasty government had taken away all our guns. reality is very different. I think you are projecting your own fears on to others.
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: That is why people who are accused of crimes are judged by a jury of their peers.. If it were just me sentencing people to death.. well.. that would not be fair.. It's fair minded individuals who, having heard all the evidence, that sentence these people to death.The specific emotive case you raised is, strangely enough, one of the more troubling ones in this regard.
In England we have several cases of young men interrogated for extended periods by police who confess to a crime - including murder. One the sole evidential basis of that confession and on nothing else they have been convicted and sentenced. We don't execute them here. After twenty years, new evidence is brought forward which exonerates the convict. To a large extent is becomes clear to everyone that the evidence was never strong and the conviction was a travesty. Up until that quashing of the conviction, the "common man" says "he should have hanged for it". After his release the "common man" says "damn fool police, why can't they get their act together and find the real killer".
So, to your case of Robert Glen Coe:
When Cary Ann Medlin was found dead in 1979, police quickly arrested Donald Gant, a man connected to the crime by no less than three eyewitnesses. He had fresh scratch marks on his neck, blood on his clothes, and a car that not only matched a description of the abduction vehicle, but had tire treads which matched marks lifted from the mud near Cary Ann Medlin's lifeless body. Gant had no alibi for the time of the kidnaping and repeatedly changed the story he gave to police.
Conversely, Robert had alibi witnesses who could place him in a different town at the time of Cary's abduction. Furthermore, there was no physical evidence conclusively tying Robert to the victim, or the murder scene.
The only thing that did link Robert to Cary's murder was a confession; a confession viewed skeptically by Robert's attorneys given their client's mental condition. As a boy, Robert not only endured brutal beatings by his father, but was forced to watch as his sisters suffered sexual abuse by the same hand. In the years just prior to Cary's murder, Robert was diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenic. People with this sort of background are known to have a propensity for trying to please authority figures. After hours of interrogation, Robert's attorneys maintain that their client was most likely anxious to tell police what they wanted to hear.
Unfortunately, the jury which condemned Robert heard neither the exculpatory nor the mitigating evidence laid out above. His conviction was based almost completely on his confession.
I can see so many parallels between this case and those in England which I have described. I would not be the least bit surprised if this were not also a miscarriage of justice. The difference is that the man is now dead and the case closed for all time.
It would benefit American justice if some "liberal" group, to use your word, put sufficient money into the re-tracing of the evidence as to demonstrate conclusively that this confession-only execution was actually and in fact the killing of someone convicted of murder who did not commit the crime.
Is it unreasonable of me to doubt the jury's decision, given the parallels between this and other cases?
In England we have several cases of young men interrogated for extended periods by police who confess to a crime - including murder. One the sole evidential basis of that confession and on nothing else they have been convicted and sentenced. We don't execute them here. After twenty years, new evidence is brought forward which exonerates the convict. To a large extent is becomes clear to everyone that the evidence was never strong and the conviction was a travesty. Up until that quashing of the conviction, the "common man" says "he should have hanged for it". After his release the "common man" says "damn fool police, why can't they get their act together and find the real killer".
So, to your case of Robert Glen Coe:
When Cary Ann Medlin was found dead in 1979, police quickly arrested Donald Gant, a man connected to the crime by no less than three eyewitnesses. He had fresh scratch marks on his neck, blood on his clothes, and a car that not only matched a description of the abduction vehicle, but had tire treads which matched marks lifted from the mud near Cary Ann Medlin's lifeless body. Gant had no alibi for the time of the kidnaping and repeatedly changed the story he gave to police.
Conversely, Robert had alibi witnesses who could place him in a different town at the time of Cary's abduction. Furthermore, there was no physical evidence conclusively tying Robert to the victim, or the murder scene.
The only thing that did link Robert to Cary's murder was a confession; a confession viewed skeptically by Robert's attorneys given their client's mental condition. As a boy, Robert not only endured brutal beatings by his father, but was forced to watch as his sisters suffered sexual abuse by the same hand. In the years just prior to Cary's murder, Robert was diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenic. People with this sort of background are known to have a propensity for trying to please authority figures. After hours of interrogation, Robert's attorneys maintain that their client was most likely anxious to tell police what they wanted to hear.
Unfortunately, the jury which condemned Robert heard neither the exculpatory nor the mitigating evidence laid out above. His conviction was based almost completely on his confession.
I can see so many parallels between this case and those in England which I have described. I would not be the least bit surprised if this were not also a miscarriage of justice. The difference is that the man is now dead and the case closed for all time.
It would benefit American justice if some "liberal" group, to use your word, put sufficient money into the re-tracing of the evidence as to demonstrate conclusively that this confession-only execution was actually and in fact the killing of someone convicted of murder who did not commit the crime.
Is it unreasonable of me to doubt the jury's decision, given the parallels between this and other cases?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Nicely done, spot.
I, too, wonder whether justice has been served in that case. That is the problem in gathering the numbers of wrongful convictions. Once they are dead it is unlikely anyone will continue investigating.
It would ease my mind at least a little if the innocent victims had volunteered for service. If golem and Ray feel it's for the betterment of society they could sign their names to the innocent victim list then, when police are hard pressed to solve a crime during an election time, they could go through the volunteer list of self sacrificers to choose their lamb.
I, too, wonder whether justice has been served in that case. That is the problem in gathering the numbers of wrongful convictions. Once they are dead it is unlikely anyone will continue investigating.
It would ease my mind at least a little if the innocent victims had volunteered for service. If golem and Ray feel it's for the betterment of society they could sign their names to the innocent victim list then, when police are hard pressed to solve a crime during an election time, they could go through the volunteer list of self sacrificers to choose their lamb.
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
golem wrote:
Bryn Mawr comments regarding the execution of the innocent.
Turn the question on its head. How many guilty have walked free especially from your British courts? How many have been innocent have been murdered, raped, or sexually used as children compared with the number of accused who were given a sentence that amounts to only a few years or worse yet acquitted?
I know all about the “rather a hundred guilt men walk free than one innocent man should hang†but that doesn’t work for me. In your country the crime rates are a disgrace. Even the guilty who have managed to twist a jury that their convictions were “unsafe†get off and amazingly are then considered completely innocent.
Personally I would much rather a number of innocent men were victims of a miscarriage of justice if the mass of guilty who either walk free or even never come to trial was to be reduced.
The numbers involved clearly show that with the way that it presently is in your country far more innocent people are suffering and loosing out because of the lack of real justice, than the number who would suffer as a result of a tightening up of the processes of law and the return of the death penalty.
The lax sentencing and early release of people who still pose a threat to society is a totally different subject to the killing of prisoner who might later prove to be innocent.
If there is a fault with one (and there is) do not try to fix it by going overboard on the other.
Fix it with more realistic sentences and life without parole for those who might re-offend.
Bryn Mawr comments regarding the execution of the innocent.
Turn the question on its head. How many guilty have walked free especially from your British courts? How many have been innocent have been murdered, raped, or sexually used as children compared with the number of accused who were given a sentence that amounts to only a few years or worse yet acquitted?
I know all about the “rather a hundred guilt men walk free than one innocent man should hang†but that doesn’t work for me. In your country the crime rates are a disgrace. Even the guilty who have managed to twist a jury that their convictions were “unsafe†get off and amazingly are then considered completely innocent.
Personally I would much rather a number of innocent men were victims of a miscarriage of justice if the mass of guilty who either walk free or even never come to trial was to be reduced.
The numbers involved clearly show that with the way that it presently is in your country far more innocent people are suffering and loosing out because of the lack of real justice, than the number who would suffer as a result of a tightening up of the processes of law and the return of the death penalty.
The lax sentencing and early release of people who still pose a threat to society is a totally different subject to the killing of prisoner who might later prove to be innocent.
If there is a fault with one (and there is) do not try to fix it by going overboard on the other.
Fix it with more realistic sentences and life without parole for those who might re-offend.
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
The problem I have with the prison system is that criminals (or the innocent) spend their days pumping weights and teaching each other new crimes. What you get out of that system is not a reformed citizen, but a super-criminal.
I'd like to see a couple of things happen in prison:
1. Every prisoner must have a job, and not just doing laundry. I'm talking about a job that can be learned and used to find meaningful employment when they get out. Jobs like electronics repair, automotive repair, carpentry, engineering and design, and computer programming.
2. Whenever you are awake and not working you should be going to classes. Language Arts, mathematics, and reading for a start. Business management, leadership training, and systems effectiveness later.
3. Weight lifting should be out. We don't need to be breeding muscle-bound monstrosities out of men that have commited violent felonies already. That's just crazy. Substitute running, aerobics, and calesthentics instead.
4. TV - Should a violent felon be watching "Sin City" or "Kill Bill" on TV? Absolutely not. Let them have all the TV they want, and make sure that every TV is tuned to the Learning channel or the Discovery channel. That's it.
Finally...prison is supposed to be punishment for a crime. We can debate all day long about whether occasional innocents get sent there (but we all know that's true.)
What's more important, however, is that by far the VAST majority of inmates are guilty.
Prison should not be a place that anyone ever wants to go back to. So:
1. Solitary confinement - no gangs or the opportunity to form them.
2. No smoking.
3. No personal TVs.
4. No Xbox 360s.
5. All the books you want to read.
6. Zero tolerance for violence.
7. Professional counseling.
8. The ability to gain high school or even college diplomas online in prison.
9. Prisoners should help to pay for their own incarceration. (Community projects such as roadwork, bridge-building, and national monument upkeep would help.)
I'd like to see a couple of things happen in prison:
1. Every prisoner must have a job, and not just doing laundry. I'm talking about a job that can be learned and used to find meaningful employment when they get out. Jobs like electronics repair, automotive repair, carpentry, engineering and design, and computer programming.
2. Whenever you are awake and not working you should be going to classes. Language Arts, mathematics, and reading for a start. Business management, leadership training, and systems effectiveness later.
3. Weight lifting should be out. We don't need to be breeding muscle-bound monstrosities out of men that have commited violent felonies already. That's just crazy. Substitute running, aerobics, and calesthentics instead.
4. TV - Should a violent felon be watching "Sin City" or "Kill Bill" on TV? Absolutely not. Let them have all the TV they want, and make sure that every TV is tuned to the Learning channel or the Discovery channel. That's it.
Finally...prison is supposed to be punishment for a crime. We can debate all day long about whether occasional innocents get sent there (but we all know that's true.)
What's more important, however, is that by far the VAST majority of inmates are guilty.
Prison should not be a place that anyone ever wants to go back to. So:
1. Solitary confinement - no gangs or the opportunity to form them.
2. No smoking.
3. No personal TVs.
4. No Xbox 360s.
5. All the books you want to read.
6. Zero tolerance for violence.
7. Professional counseling.
8. The ability to gain high school or even college diplomas online in prison.
9. Prisoners should help to pay for their own incarceration. (Community projects such as roadwork, bridge-building, and national monument upkeep would help.)
All the world's a stage and the men and women merely players...Shakespeare
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Jives,
Whilst I agree with most of your points I see a few slight problems.
Solution point 1 appears to preclude wishlist point 1 and, with solution point 3 makes wishlist point 4 difficult
Solution point 9 is OK for low risk prisoners but, unless you want to bring back the chain gangs, is difficult for higher risk offenders
Wishlist 1 and 2 could end up with people breaking into jail to get the life training on offer.
As to your final point - once a person is found guilty and becomes a prisoner then he is presumed guilty until proven innocent and should be treated as such.
(just don't shoot the bastard - he might prove to be innocent in the end)
Whilst I agree with most of your points I see a few slight problems.
Solution point 1 appears to preclude wishlist point 1 and, with solution point 3 makes wishlist point 4 difficult
Solution point 9 is OK for low risk prisoners but, unless you want to bring back the chain gangs, is difficult for higher risk offenders
Wishlist 1 and 2 could end up with people breaking into jail to get the life training on offer.
As to your final point - once a person is found guilty and becomes a prisoner then he is presumed guilty until proven innocent and should be treated as such.
(just don't shoot the bastard - he might prove to be innocent in the end)
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
I haven't read the mighty postings that went on before, but from a purely simple point of view, why is it called 'life'?
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Spot wrote: As a boy, Robert not only endured brutal beatings by his father, but was forced to watch as his sisters suffered sexual abuse by the same hand. In the years just prior to Cary's murder, Robert was diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenic.
Sounds like the kind of guy that grows up and rapes and kills little girls. Apperantly the Jury found his confession to be compelling enough to sentence him to death. 21 years later he's finally dead. It's about time.
Raymond
Sounds like the kind of guy that grows up and rapes and kills little girls. Apperantly the Jury found his confession to be compelling enough to sentence him to death. 21 years later he's finally dead. It's about time.
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: [QUOTE=spot]As a boy, Robert not only endured brutal beatings by his father, but was forced to watch as his sisters suffered sexual abuse by the same hand. In the years just prior to Cary's murder, Robert was diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenic.Sounds like the kind of guy that grows up and rapes and kills little girls.[/QUOTE]So in your opinion there's a "kind of guy" that does this sort of thing, and they can be distinguished from the other kinds of guys who don't do this sort of thing by the beatings and abuse they received as children?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
spot wrote: So in your opinion there's a "kind of guy" that does this sort of thing, and they can be distinguished from the other kinds of guys who don't do this sort of thing by the beatings and abuse they received as children?
The guy was a phsyco who may or may not have been abused as a kid. Now he's dead because he tortured and raped a little girl. Life sucks eh?
Raymond
The guy was a phsyco who may or may not have been abused as a kid. Now he's dead because he tortured and raped a little girl. Life sucks eh?
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: The guy was a phsyco who may or may not have been abused as a kid. Now he's dead because he tortured and raped a little girl. Life sucks eh?
Raymond
So you see absolutely nothing in :-
http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showp ... tcount=122
that suggests there might be any doubt about his guilt?
Raymond
So you see absolutely nothing in :-
http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showp ... tcount=122
that suggests there might be any doubt about his guilt?
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Bryn Mawr wrote: So you see absolutely nothing in :-
http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showp ... tcount=122
that suggests there might be any doubt about his guilt?
No.What I see, is a back alley barrister trying to come up with reasons why this turd shouldn't have been put to death. If this other man were a more likely suspect.. why wasn't he arrested? I don't have any reason to believe that he had anything to do with the rape and murder of the girl.. The accused confessed to what he had done.
And throwing in the little tid-bit about his tough childhood and his diagnosed paranoid schizophrenia does nothing for me. I don't really care about his allegedly rough childhood.. I don't care if he is a complete nutcase.. what I care about is that he needed to put to death because he raped and murdered a little girl.
Raymond
http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showp ... tcount=122
that suggests there might be any doubt about his guilt?
No.What I see, is a back alley barrister trying to come up with reasons why this turd shouldn't have been put to death. If this other man were a more likely suspect.. why wasn't he arrested? I don't have any reason to believe that he had anything to do with the rape and murder of the girl.. The accused confessed to what he had done.
And throwing in the little tid-bit about his tough childhood and his diagnosed paranoid schizophrenia does nothing for me. I don't really care about his allegedly rough childhood.. I don't care if he is a complete nutcase.. what I care about is that he needed to put to death because he raped and murdered a little girl.
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: No.What I see, is a back alley barrister trying to come up with reasons why this turd shouldn't have been put to death. If this other man were a more likely suspect.. why wasn't he arrested? I don't have any reason to believe that he had anything to do with the rape and murder of the girl.. The accused confessed to what he had done.
And throwing in the little tid-bit about his tough childhood and his diagnosed paranoid schizophrenia does nothing for me. I don't really care about his allegedly rough childhood.. I don't care if he is a complete nutcase.. what I care about is that he needed to put to death because he raped and murdered a little girl.
Raymond
So you really believe if some nutcase confesses to a crime it's O.K. to execute them and leave the real killer free to do it again?
And throwing in the little tid-bit about his tough childhood and his diagnosed paranoid schizophrenia does nothing for me. I don't really care about his allegedly rough childhood.. I don't care if he is a complete nutcase.. what I care about is that he needed to put to death because he raped and murdered a little girl.
Raymond
So you really believe if some nutcase confesses to a crime it's O.K. to execute them and leave the real killer free to do it again?
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: No.What I see, is a back alley barrister trying to come up with reasons why this turd shouldn't have been put to death. If this other man were a more likely suspect.. why wasn't he arrested? I don't have any reason to believe that he had anything to do with the rape and murder of the girl.. The accused confessed to what he had done.
And throwing in the little tid-bit about his tough childhood and his diagnosed paranoid schizophrenia does nothing for me. I don't really care about his allegedly rough childhood.. I don't care if he is a complete nutcase.. what I care about is that he needed to put to death because he raped and murdered a little girl.
Raymond
Oh to have your blind faith in the jusstice system. It must be very comforting.
And throwing in the little tid-bit about his tough childhood and his diagnosed paranoid schizophrenia does nothing for me. I don't really care about his allegedly rough childhood.. I don't care if he is a complete nutcase.. what I care about is that he needed to put to death because he raped and murdered a little girl.
Raymond
Oh to have your blind faith in the jusstice system. It must be very comforting.
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
gmc wrote: So you really believe if some nutcase confesses to a crime it's O.K. to execute them and leave the real killer free to do it again?
Two things.. I don't consider him being a nutcase is relevent... of course he's a nutcase.. he raped and killed a little girl! Second.. ha confessed to the crime, and was found guilty.. I don't want him to be set free so that he can do it again.
Raymond
Two things.. I don't consider him being a nutcase is relevent... of course he's a nutcase.. he raped and killed a little girl! Second.. ha confessed to the crime, and was found guilty.. I don't want him to be set free so that he can do it again.
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: Two things.. I don't consider him being a nutcase is relevent... of course he's a nutcase.. he raped and killed a little girl! Second.. ha confessed to the crime, and was found guilty.. I don't want him to be set free so that he can do it again.
Raymond
He's a delusional nutcase that wasn't anywhere the crime scene. Just because he says he did a thing doesn't mean he did. The real killer is still around. around.
Mind you believing everything someone insane tells you must make life interesting. If he had said he was a space alien and that the voices from the cupboard told him to do it would you have believed him then?
Raymond
He's a delusional nutcase that wasn't anywhere the crime scene. Just because he says he did a thing doesn't mean he did. The real killer is still around. around.
Mind you believing everything someone insane tells you must make life interesting. If he had said he was a space alien and that the voices from the cupboard told him to do it would you have believed him then?
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
By JACQUE HILLMAN
The Jackson Sun
March 20, 2000
Jack Blackwell of Somerville, TBI officer from 1968 to 1991, was chief investigator in the Cary Ann Medlin murder.
.......Alvin Daniel, TBI agent assigned to Obion and Weakley counties, called Jack Blackwell on Labor Day weekend 1979 about a missing 8-year-old named Cary Medlin....
"So Alvin was thinking kidnapping. We got up there and I asked Alvin to drive by the home. They didn't have a lot. The father worked the assembly line at Goodyear. I told Alvin I couldn't see kidnapping for ransom when I looked at the house. I said, 'This is not a kidnapping. This is an abduction. I told him not to tell the family, but this little girl is dead.
Robert Glen Coe pulled up in a Ford Gran Torino where Cary and her little brother were riding bicycles near the church. He told Cary's brother that he was taking his sister to see where their father lived. Cary got in the car.
"Then he took her out to Bean Switch Road," Blackwell said, where Coe raped and murdered her.
Blackwell didn't talk with the family; he left that to other agents. "But I took the little boy to the police department to do a composite. We showed it on TV."
A woman from Union City called and said she recognized Coe.
With that information, agents checked on Coe's background. "He had a record in Florida. He'd attempted to rape a girl and I think he used a knife there....
Investigators found the Ford Gran Torino on a used car lot. Coe had traded it off. They checked the car, but found no evidence.
Then police officers caught Coe trying to board a bus and took him to the Huntingdon police department. He had a small amount of marijuana on him when he was arrested.
"He had a bus ticket to Georgia," Blackwell said. "Innocent people don't try to run. He had tried to dye his hair with black shoe polish. It was running down the back of his neck. Biggest mess you ever saw. He'd told his family he was taking off because he'd stabbed a trooper in Camden, but that was a lie."
Blackwell said they advised Coe of his constitutional rights. Then because the medical examiner in Memphis had told him about little Cary's injuries, they strip-searched him.
Blackwell pulled back the foreskin on Coe's penis and found definitive evidence that he had sodomized the child. First Coe denied it, then he said, 'Call those guys back in here. I'm the one you're looking for.'"
Blackwell said he turned on the tape recorder and Coe described little Cary crying, "Jesus loves you." "That had made Coe so angry. He said that was when he killed her-because 'Jesus couldn't love somebody like me.' He broke down then and started crying. I said, 'Boy, you're so wrong. You had to kill her for nothing.' Then he said, 'If you don't put me away, I'll do this again.'
..."Coe was examined by half a dozen psychiatrists before trial. They said he was sane enough to stand trial. When he was incarcerated at Fort Pillow for a while, he told other prisoners he could fool any psychiatrist into thinking he was insane, and they reported it."
Blackwell said it was back when Alvin Daniel died several years ago that the lawyers got really busy saying somebody else did it because they figured since Daniel was the case agent, responsible for writing things up, some evidence would be forgotten or lost.
"The problem with the death penalty today is being sentenced for 20 years. What's cruel is having Coe in prison 20 years waiting to die," Blackwell said.
Source
What I think is that lawyers, and liberals have spent twenty years trying to figure out a way to not put this animal to death. You lose.
Raymond
The Jackson Sun
March 20, 2000
Jack Blackwell of Somerville, TBI officer from 1968 to 1991, was chief investigator in the Cary Ann Medlin murder.
.......Alvin Daniel, TBI agent assigned to Obion and Weakley counties, called Jack Blackwell on Labor Day weekend 1979 about a missing 8-year-old named Cary Medlin....
"So Alvin was thinking kidnapping. We got up there and I asked Alvin to drive by the home. They didn't have a lot. The father worked the assembly line at Goodyear. I told Alvin I couldn't see kidnapping for ransom when I looked at the house. I said, 'This is not a kidnapping. This is an abduction. I told him not to tell the family, but this little girl is dead.
Robert Glen Coe pulled up in a Ford Gran Torino where Cary and her little brother were riding bicycles near the church. He told Cary's brother that he was taking his sister to see where their father lived. Cary got in the car.
"Then he took her out to Bean Switch Road," Blackwell said, where Coe raped and murdered her.
Blackwell didn't talk with the family; he left that to other agents. "But I took the little boy to the police department to do a composite. We showed it on TV."
A woman from Union City called and said she recognized Coe.
With that information, agents checked on Coe's background. "He had a record in Florida. He'd attempted to rape a girl and I think he used a knife there....
Investigators found the Ford Gran Torino on a used car lot. Coe had traded it off. They checked the car, but found no evidence.
Then police officers caught Coe trying to board a bus and took him to the Huntingdon police department. He had a small amount of marijuana on him when he was arrested.
"He had a bus ticket to Georgia," Blackwell said. "Innocent people don't try to run. He had tried to dye his hair with black shoe polish. It was running down the back of his neck. Biggest mess you ever saw. He'd told his family he was taking off because he'd stabbed a trooper in Camden, but that was a lie."
Blackwell said they advised Coe of his constitutional rights. Then because the medical examiner in Memphis had told him about little Cary's injuries, they strip-searched him.
Blackwell pulled back the foreskin on Coe's penis and found definitive evidence that he had sodomized the child. First Coe denied it, then he said, 'Call those guys back in here. I'm the one you're looking for.'"
Blackwell said he turned on the tape recorder and Coe described little Cary crying, "Jesus loves you." "That had made Coe so angry. He said that was when he killed her-because 'Jesus couldn't love somebody like me.' He broke down then and started crying. I said, 'Boy, you're so wrong. You had to kill her for nothing.' Then he said, 'If you don't put me away, I'll do this again.'
..."Coe was examined by half a dozen psychiatrists before trial. They said he was sane enough to stand trial. When he was incarcerated at Fort Pillow for a while, he told other prisoners he could fool any psychiatrist into thinking he was insane, and they reported it."
Blackwell said it was back when Alvin Daniel died several years ago that the lawyers got really busy saying somebody else did it because they figured since Daniel was the case agent, responsible for writing things up, some evidence would be forgotten or lost.
"The problem with the death penalty today is being sentenced for 20 years. What's cruel is having Coe in prison 20 years waiting to die," Blackwell said.
Source
What I think is that lawyers, and liberals have spent twenty years trying to figure out a way to not put this animal to death. You lose.
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: Source
What I think is that lawyers, and liberals have spent twenty years trying to figure out a way to not put this animal to death. You lose.
Raymond
You're doing it again - highlighting a single case does not demonstrate anything about the rights and wrongs of the system.
Until you can see beyond the tabloid headlines you will not be able to understand the problem.
What I think is that lawyers, and liberals have spent twenty years trying to figure out a way to not put this animal to death. You lose.
Raymond
You're doing it again - highlighting a single case does not demonstrate anything about the rights and wrongs of the system.
Until you can see beyond the tabloid headlines you will not be able to understand the problem.
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Bryn Mawr wrote: You're doing it again - highlighting a single case does not demonstrate anything about the rights and wrongs of the system.
Until you can see beyond the tabloid headlines you will not be able to understand the problem.
You guys are the ones going on about this particular case! I'm just answering! You can google up IHateTheDeathPenalty.com or LiberalLawyerswhoWantSexOffendingManiacsToLive.org all day long to find specious facts not in evidence that support your theory.. This theory that all death row inmates are probably innocent, god fearing people who just ran into some tough luck!?!? ...and it sounds fairly convincing to anyone who wont take a few minutes to look into it.
When a Jury sentences a man or woman to death, they are automatically allowed to appeal.. usually multiple appeals. They are aloud to languish in an air-conditioned jail cell and eat culturally sensitive foods.. enjoy cable T.V. and rap musid... all the while their victims rot in the ground, and their victims families suffer knowing that justice delayed is justice denied.
Raymond
Until you can see beyond the tabloid headlines you will not be able to understand the problem.
You guys are the ones going on about this particular case! I'm just answering! You can google up IHateTheDeathPenalty.com or LiberalLawyerswhoWantSexOffendingManiacsToLive.org all day long to find specious facts not in evidence that support your theory.. This theory that all death row inmates are probably innocent, god fearing people who just ran into some tough luck!?!? ...and it sounds fairly convincing to anyone who wont take a few minutes to look into it.
When a Jury sentences a man or woman to death, they are automatically allowed to appeal.. usually multiple appeals. They are aloud to languish in an air-conditioned jail cell and eat culturally sensitive foods.. enjoy cable T.V. and rap musid... all the while their victims rot in the ground, and their victims families suffer knowing that justice delayed is justice denied.
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: You guys are the ones going on about this particular case! I'm just answering! You can google up IHateTheDeathPenalty.com or LiberalLawyerswhoWantSexOffendingManiacsToLive.org all day long to find specious facts not in evidence that support your theory.. This theory that all death row inmates are probably innocent, god fearing people who just ran into some tough luck!?!? ...and it sounds fairly convincing to anyone who wont take a few minutes to look into it.
Excuse me, we are responding to a case *you* held up as an example. The theory is that, whilst the big majority of death row inmates are guilty as hell, therew are sufficient death row inmates who are innocent to make the death penalty unsuportable. In the UK we have not had the death penalty for 40 years - our murder count is still way lower than yours.
Captain Ray wrote: When a Jury sentences a man or woman to death, they are automatically allowed to appeal.. usually multiple appeals. They are aloud to languish in an air-conditioned jail cell and eat culturally sensitive foods.. enjoy cable T.V. and rap musid... all the while their victims rot in the ground, and their victims families suffer knowing that justice delayed is justice denied.
Raymond
And they're still not guaranteed to be guilty.
Excuse me, we are responding to a case *you* held up as an example. The theory is that, whilst the big majority of death row inmates are guilty as hell, therew are sufficient death row inmates who are innocent to make the death penalty unsuportable. In the UK we have not had the death penalty for 40 years - our murder count is still way lower than yours.
Captain Ray wrote: When a Jury sentences a man or woman to death, they are automatically allowed to appeal.. usually multiple appeals. They are aloud to languish in an air-conditioned jail cell and eat culturally sensitive foods.. enjoy cable T.V. and rap musid... all the while their victims rot in the ground, and their victims families suffer knowing that justice delayed is justice denied.
Raymond
And they're still not guaranteed to be guilty.
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Actually.. that is not correct. Once you are found guilty.. you are guilty.
Raymond
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: Actually.. that is not correct. Once you are found guilty.. you are guilty.
Raymond
Have you learnt nothing from past experience?
Raymond
Have you learnt nothing from past experience?
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Bryn Mawr wrote: Have you learnt nothing from past experience?
Past experience? I've never been charged with a crime.. what past experience should I compare this too?
Raymond
Past experience? I've never been charged with a crime.. what past experience should I compare this too?
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: Past experience? I've never been charged with a crime.. what past experience should I compare this too?
Raymond
The number of convicted murderers later proven beyond doubt to have been innocent.
But then I'm forgetting - in your country you murder them and close the case.
There's still ample evidence for anyone with eyes to see it.
There is life outside of yourself - you are not the centre of the universe - open your eyes and look at the world instead of just at what has happened to you.
Raymond
The number of convicted murderers later proven beyond doubt to have been innocent.
But then I'm forgetting - in your country you murder them and close the case.
There's still ample evidence for anyone with eyes to see it.
There is life outside of yourself - you are not the centre of the universe - open your eyes and look at the world instead of just at what has happened to you.
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Bryn Mawr wrote: The number of convicted murderers later proven beyond doubt to have been innocent.
But then I'm forgetting - in your country you murder them and close the case.
There's still ample evidence for anyone with eyes to see it.
There is life outside of yourself - you are not the centre of the universe - open your eyes and look at the world instead of just at what has happened to you.
I appreciate all the sage, unsolicited advice you have to hand out.. I will take into consideration.
In my country, only murderers murder. The justice system executes those who were found guilty of a heinous crime. Any examples you can find that prove a man who was convicted of a capital crime who was exonerated.. or more likely his sentence was commuted, are only proof that the system works.
Raymond
But then I'm forgetting - in your country you murder them and close the case.
There's still ample evidence for anyone with eyes to see it.
There is life outside of yourself - you are not the centre of the universe - open your eyes and look at the world instead of just at what has happened to you.
I appreciate all the sage, unsolicited advice you have to hand out.. I will take into consideration.
In my country, only murderers murder. The justice system executes those who were found guilty of a heinous crime. Any examples you can find that prove a man who was convicted of a capital crime who was exonerated.. or more likely his sentence was commuted, are only proof that the system works.
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: I appreciate all the sage, unsolicited advice you have to hand out.. I will take into consideration.
In my country, only murderers murder. The justice system executes those who were found guilty of a heinous crime. Any examples you can find that prove a man who was convicted of a capital crime who was exonerated.. or more likely his sentence was commuted, are only proof that the system works.
Raymond
You solicit the answers by posting crap on a public board.
It's the fact that the system's imperfect that leads to people convicted of a capitol crime being later exhonourated.
In my country, only murderers murder. The justice system executes those who were found guilty of a heinous crime. Any examples you can find that prove a man who was convicted of a capital crime who was exonerated.. or more likely his sentence was commuted, are only proof that the system works.
Raymond
You solicit the answers by posting crap on a public board.
It's the fact that the system's imperfect that leads to people convicted of a capitol crime being later exhonourated.
-
Captain Ray
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 pm
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Bryn Mawr wrote: You solicit the answers by posting crap on a public board.
Well.. you certainly lost the intelectual edge with that little diatribe. Thanks for making it easy....
Raymond
Well.. you certainly lost the intelectual edge with that little diatribe. Thanks for making it easy....
Raymond
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
What is the ratio of the number convicted people later proven to be either innocent or the finding of the court to be “unsafe†to the number of guilty people found guilty and executed.
Also what is the ratio of the number of guilty people found innocent against the number of innocent people found to be innocent?
Empirically the number of genuinely innocent people convicted is far less than the number rightly found guilty ad the number of guilty people found innocent significant.
Given that, the admittedly high cost of an innocent man being executed is a worthwhile price to pay to see the proportionately significantly greater number of guilty “put downâ€. Especially now that religious based terrorism is becoming such a factor and as society becomes less moral with each generation.
It’s time the “pendulum†of punishment swung back towards sanity and away from do-gooder liberals and their stupid and irrelevant principles.
No, “life†should actually mean “deathâ€. The sentence should mean “Hey, guy, guess what? You’ve going to have your life taken away for what you’ve done!â€
I go with Captain Ray.
Also what is the ratio of the number of guilty people found innocent against the number of innocent people found to be innocent?
Empirically the number of genuinely innocent people convicted is far less than the number rightly found guilty ad the number of guilty people found innocent significant.
Given that, the admittedly high cost of an innocent man being executed is a worthwhile price to pay to see the proportionately significantly greater number of guilty “put downâ€. Especially now that religious based terrorism is becoming such a factor and as society becomes less moral with each generation.
It’s time the “pendulum†of punishment swung back towards sanity and away from do-gooder liberals and their stupid and irrelevant principles.
No, “life†should actually mean “deathâ€. The sentence should mean “Hey, guy, guess what? You’ve going to have your life taken away for what you’ve done!â€
I go with Captain Ray.
Should a life sentence mean LIFE.
Captain Ray wrote: Actually.. that is not correct. Once you are found guilty.. you are guilty.
Raymond
No, sorry Ray.....that is not true. Once you have been found guilty, you are deemed guilty of 12 members of a jury who do not know you.
Do you believe my husand guilty of 2nd degreee murder for shooting at a crark-dealing piece of human excrement who shot at him first guilty of murder?
No, just because a jury FINDS you guilty does not mean that you ARE guilty. You need to do a bit more research on the subject at hand.
Raymond
No, sorry Ray.....that is not true. Once you have been found guilty, you are deemed guilty of 12 members of a jury who do not know you.
Do you believe my husand guilty of 2nd degreee murder for shooting at a crark-dealing piece of human excrement who shot at him first guilty of murder?
No, just because a jury FINDS you guilty does not mean that you ARE guilty. You need to do a bit more research on the subject at hand.
[FONT=Arial Black]I hope you cherish this sweet way of life, and I hope you know that it comes with a price.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.