Annamaria wrote: ↑Fri May 19, 2017 9:38 pm
In a nutshell yes after all that's what judges do
And do you accept that there is somewhat
Of a difference between Brady and Blackman ?
Brady's was a prime candidate for the death penalty was he not ?
But no the do gooders decided that it was
Better to spend millions trying to reabilitat
The nutter fat lot of good that did ...
I rest my case
I have to say, it isn't a brilliant case to rest on...
Blackman was convicted of murder and could (in your ideal world) now be dead based on the arbitrary decision of a judge - as it is he is a free man.
Brady wasn't kept alive by 'do gooders', the law had changed by the time he was convicted.
What if Brady had been apprehended after the first killing...? Would he still qualify for death or would he be a 'lifer' at taxpayer's expense?
What if you have a judge who is known to favour the death penalty compared to another who is not? Would it be reasonable to put somebody to death because they happened to get the 'wrong' judge...?
Do you honestly think it would be better to save a few million Pounds (which the government will waste anyway) keeping somebody in prison for life than taking the life of somebody who may later have been found innocent?
NOTE: i am not saying that Brady was innocent but miscarriages of justice happen all the time - and once you are dead an apology or compo for your relatives doesn't change that.
CG
If you will permit me to say so your analysis is not totally accurate - prior to the abolition of the death penalty Judges had no alternative but to impose the death penalty that was the legal tariff as determined by Parliament - it was then open to the Home Secretary on submission of pleas for mercy to determine whether or not that sentence should be commuted in the absence of any evidence to the contrary as to guilt.
It was the hanging of Ruth Ellis which to a great extent resulted in the discomfort of many who were both anti and pro execution. I recall when many years ago I was a law student sitting in the Old Bailey listening to the trial of Craig and Bentley (you will recall that this involved the death of a policeman by shooting on a rooftop following a robbery by the two). Craig was under age at the time of the offence and so was spared the death sentence receiving a lengthy prison sentence. Bentley by contrast was an adult but what perturbed me at the time was the fact that he was "under arrest" (on the rooftop where the offence occurred) and the decision to find him guilty rested on the words he uttered when the policeman asked Craig to "hand over the gun". Bentley said "Give it to him Chris" which was interpreted by the Defence team to mean "hand it over" but the Prosecution team suggested he meant "shoot the policeman" which he did and the Jury found him guilty. Bentley did, of course, receive the death penalty which I believe many years later was turned into a pardon.
That case more than any other convinced me State Executions were unwise.
Annamaria wrote: ↑Fri May 19, 2017 9:38 pm
In a nutshell yes after all that's what judges do
And do you accept that there is somewhat
Of a difference between Brady and Blackman ?
Brady's was a prime candidate for the death penalty was he not ?
But no the do gooders decided that it was
Better to spend millions trying to reabilitat
The nutter fat lot of good that did ...
I rest my case
I have to say, it isn't a brilliant case to rest on...
Blackman was convicted of murder and could (in your ideal world) now be dead based on the arbitrary decision of a judge - as it is he is a free man.
Brady wasn't kept alive by 'do gooders', the law had changed by the time he was convicted.
What if Brady had been apprehended after the first killing...? Would he still qualify for death or would he be a 'lifer' at taxpayer's expense?
What if you have a judge who is known to favour the death penalty compared to another who is not? Would it be reasonable to put somebody to death because they happened to get the 'wrong' judge...?
Do you honestly think it would be better to save a few million Pounds (which the government will waste anyway) keeping somebody in prison for life than taking the life of somebody who may later have been found innocent?
NOTE: i am not saying that Brady was innocent but miscarriages of justice happen all the time - and once you are dead an apology or compo for your relatives doesn't change that.
CG
If you will permit me to say so your analysis is not totally accurate - prior to the abolition of the death penalty Judges had no alternative but to impose the death penalty that was the legal tariff as determined by Parliament - it was then open to the Home Secretary on submission of pleas for mercy to determine whether or not that sentence should be commuted in the absence of any evidence to the contrary as to guilt.
It was the hanging of Ruth Ellis which to a great extent resulted in the discomfort of many who were both anti and pro execution. I recall when many years ago I was a law student sitting in the Old Bailey listening to the trial of Craig and Bentley (you will recall that this involved the death of a policeman by shooting on a rooftop following a robbery by the two). Craig was under age at the time of the offence and so was spared the death sentence receiving a lengthy prison sentence. Bentley by contrast was an adult but what perturbed me at the time was the fact that he was "under arrest" (on the rooftop where the offence occurred) and the decision to find him guilty rested on the words he uttered when the policeman asked Craig to "hand over the gun". Bentley said "Give it to him Chris" which was interpreted by the Defence team to mean "hand it over" but the Prosecution team suggested he meant "shoot the policeman" which he did and the Jury found him guilty. Bentley did, of course, receive the death penalty which I believe many years later was turned into a pardon.
That case more than any other convinced me State Executions were unwise.
Rita Sherry wrote: ↑Thu May 18, 2017 6:58 pm
Errors have certainly been made by the police and will no doubt do so again but at least they are investigated but to make sweeping generalised statements as you have done is not, in my opinion, appropriate to this post. For what it is worth I personally consider the Birmingham Six and the Guildford Four were as guilty as hell.
Rita
The entire purpose of relating to police miscarriages is to prove that if corporal punishment had been in place, many, many people would have lost their lives, unnecessarily.
As to the Guildford and Birmingham cases, if you examine the fact that even families of victims have realised that miscarriages took place..... what makes it even worse, is that NO police officer was ever reprimanded, despite PROOF that they lied and extorted/tortured so-called admissions. In fact, the officers were promoted. I'd ask you to read into these cases, rather than presume. No doubt others should have been held to account and that's a travesty.
Jimgward
And if you read mine you will see I was and am against State Executions but believe life should mean life in cases of deliberate murder. I dont need to read up on the cases you refer to I was to a degree involved and that is all I am saying.
Rita
BBC article detailing another person who admitted responsibility for Birmingham bombs and innocence of Birmingham Six..
This doesn't prove the innocence of the Birmingham Six, he refuses to name anyone else involved. Why now, well it may be that he has a terminal illness, and wants to clear his conscience, I can't think he is doing it for the good of anyone else except himself. He states that the bombs weren't meant to kill, that statement is proof that he's a complete idiot, or deluded, or both.
Jackie
It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.
Annamaria wrote: ↑Fri May 19, 2017 9:38 pm
In a nutshell yes after all that's what judges do
And do you accept that there is somewhat
Of a difference between Brady and Blackman ?
Brady's was a prime candidate for the death penalty was he not ?
But no the do gooders decided that it was
Better to spend millions trying to reabilitat
The nutter fat lot of good that did ...
I rest my case
I have to say, it isn't a brilliant case to rest on...
Blackman was convicted of murder and could (in your ideal world) now be dead based on the arbitrary decision of a judge - as it is he is a free man.
Brady wasn't kept alive by 'do gooders', the law had changed by the time he was convicted.
What if Brady had been apprehended after the first killing...? Would he still qualify for death or would he be a 'lifer' at taxpayer's expense?
What if you have a judge who is known to favour the death penalty compared to another who is not? Would it be reasonable to put somebody to death because they happened to get the 'wrong' judge...?
Do you honestly think it would be better to save a few million Pounds (which the government will waste anyway) keeping somebody in prison for life than taking the life of somebody who may later have been found innocent?
NOTE: i am not saying that Brady was innocent but miscarriages of justice happen all the time - and once you are dead an apology or compo for your relatives doesn't change that.
CG
If you will permit me to say so your analysis is not totally accurate - prior to the abolition of the death penalty Judges had no alternative but to impose the death penalty that was the legal tariff as determined by Parliament - it was then open to the Home Secretary on submission of pleas for mercy to determine whether or not that sentence should be commuted in the absence of any evidence to the contrary as to guilt.
It was the hanging of Ruth Ellis which to a great extent resulted in the discomfort of many who were both anti and pro execution. I recall when many years ago I was a law student sitting in the Old Bailey listening to the trial of Craig and Bentley (you will recall that this involved the death of a policeman by shooting on a rooftop following a robbery by the two). Craig was under age at the time of the offence and so was spared the death sentence receiving a lengthy prison sentence. Bentley by contrast was an adult but what perturbed me at the time was the fact that he was "under arrest" (on the rooftop where the offence occurred) and the decision to find him guilty rested on the words he uttered when the policeman asked Craig to "hand over the gun". Bentley said "Give it to him Chris" which was interpreted by the Defence team to mean "hand it over" but the Prosecution team suggested he meant "shoot the policeman" which he did and the Jury found him guilty. Bentley did, of course, receive the death penalty which I believe many years later was turned into a pardon.
That case more than any other convinced me State Executions were unwise.
Rita
And let's not forget the appalling state murder of Timothy Evans.
