Sign in to follow this  
BIkerider

A bit of common sense

Recommended Posts

It has just been announced that the European Courts of Justice have ruled that a ban on a convicted murderer in France who was denied a vote in Europe was Legal and overturns the previous judgement that went against the UK, when David C imposed a ban on all prisoners voting.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about his HUMAN RIGHTS ;)

 

He doesn't have any! It is a pity that like all murderers in these sad & sorry days of non-justice, he wasn't put down. The only thing I admire about the French is that their method of execution was swift ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He doesn't have any! It is a pity that like all murderers in these sad & sorry days of non-justice, he wasn't put down. The only thing I admire about the French is that their method of execution was swift ;)

And if they had made a mistake and incorrectly convicted him.....?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there is the age-old 'argument'.

 

Of course.  There are murderers out there are who, without any doubt, guilty.................

 

But that is a bit off the topic............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if they had made a mistake and incorrectly convicted him.....?

 

That would be sad but, in the scheme of things, mistakes are made - the burden is on the investigating and the judicial authorities to "get it right". Society as a whole has to be protected and where there is no doubt - condign punishment should follow.

 

I am also of the view that other classes of criminal should be executed - those who carry weapons in furtherance of crime (on the basis that they are reckless as to the safety of society) and recidivists serious criminals (assaults, burglary etc) - all of whom by their actions give up their right to live in society. It may be harsh but in today's society, there is no room for deviant behaviour that affects all society. This may seem harsh but, if you look at other elements of society, action is being taken to remove "supportive" structure - why should serious criminals be dealt with differently?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be sad but, in the scheme of things, mistakes are made - the burden is on the investigating and the judicial authorities to "get it right". Society as a whole has to be protected and where there is no doubt - condign punishment should follow.

I am also of the view that other classes of criminal should be executed - those who carry weapons in furtherance of crime (on the basis that they are reckless as to the safety of society) and recidivists serious criminals (assaults, burglary etc) - all of whom by their actions give up their right to live in society. It may be harsh but in today's society, there is no room for deviant behaviour that affects all society. This may seem harsh but, if you look at other elements of society, action is being taken to remove "supportive" structure - why should serious criminals be dealt with differently?

If we had such a robust investigatory and judicial organisation that meant that mistakes weren't made then I could see your point, even if I didn't agree with it. Sadly we don't, we convict innocent people all the time. Same in the U.S. but unfortunately they execute them there which makes it kind of tricky to say sorry!

As for executing people who carry weapons in furtherance of a crime... I pity the poor police officer who makes a mistake and hits someone with his ASP, which is subsequently found unlawful and he is convicted of assault. Yes, he may have committed an offence and deserves to be punished, but to execute him under your rules, seems rather draconian.

Presumably forgetting to put your bins out at night is merely life imprisonment?

What about squeezing the toothpaste tube in the middle, misplaced apostrophes or holding your eating knife like a pencil - five years hard labour or just a public flogging?

Edited by cheese_puff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We could just turn to the old capital murder criteria. The only doubtful one hanged was John Evans who was framed by Christie in Rivington Place. Don't forget that DNA exists now to make things beyond doubt.

In the US they have a very dubious justice system with farcical plea bargaining to corrupt cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly we don't, we convict innocent people all the time.

 

For those of murder?  All the time?

 

I don't think that's right.  "All the time"??

 

The murderers of Lee Rigby?  They, are guilty..........

 

The murderer of Nicola Hughes and Fiona Bone?  He, is guilty.......

 

 

So.  Whilst you may well come up with three (or more) people who were/have been found guilty when they were innocent, those three are, without any doubt, absolutely guilty of the crimes of murder........without any sort of glint of innocence.........

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those of murder?  All the time?

 

I don't think that's right.  "All the time"??

 

The murderers of Lee Rigby?  They, are guilty..........

 

The murderer of Nicola Hughes and Fiona Bone?  He, is guilty.......

 

 

So.  Whilst you may well come up with three (or more) people who were/have been found guilty when they were innocent, those three are, without any doubt, absolutely guilty of the crimes of murder........without any sort of glint of innocence.........

 

Well I didn't mention murder specifically, but yes - all the time. Not obviously every single case as that would be absurd, but continually over the years innocent people are getting convicted which are later being overturned. 

 

No criminal justice system is perfect; we use lots of different types of evidence, many of which are inherently unreliable, such as eyewitness evidence, expert witnesses etc, all of which contribute to this. I'm not even suggesting that our system could be improved massively either.

 

You've come up with three people who are guilty - I could probably add loads more to that. The list of people who have been wrongfully convicted for murder is (thankfully) short and a tiny percentage compared to those who have been correctly convicted. But the fact remains that there have been people wrongfully convicted and it has continued to occur over the years to the present day. Some of them involve horrific circumstances; West Yorks Police's investigation into Stefan Kiszco is one of the worst examples of incompetence and corruption, but there are many others.

 

My point to OAH is that all the while we are making mistakes; and we will continue to do so because we are human; I don't think we have the right to take someone's life on that basis. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be honest about this, there is a massive number of guilty people who have been aquitted. We have all sat in court and wondered, how on earth did they get off. In the past 20 years there have been some horrendous murders where people have been rightly convicted, Brady, Hindley, Neilsen, Sutcliffe, Cregan, the West's, and several other notorious child killers, and Police killers.

A large number of appeals are won, not because the accused was innocent, but because of some legal or procedural cock up, where the conviction is held "unsafe", and the accused is given the benefit of doubt. There are many people who are so evil that they do not deserve to live

Edited by Zulu 22
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be honest about this, there is a massive number of guilty people who have been aquitted. We have all sat in court and wondered, how on earth did they get off. In the past 20 years there have been some horrendous murders where people have been rightly convicted, Brady, Hindley, Neilsen, Sutcliffe, Cregan, the West's, and several other notorious child killers, and Police killers.

A large number of appeals are won, not because the accused was innocent, but because of some legal or procedural cock up, where the conviction is held "unsafe", and the accused is given the benefit of doubt. There are many people who are so evil that they do not deserve to live

 

And there are many people who have been convicted and then acquitted because they didn't do it and consequently other people have been found and convicted for the same offence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are 8 hidden replies in this thread that you do not currently have access to as a Guest User of our forum. To unlock the forum register for an account for FREE today by clicking HERE
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.