Mitch Cronin Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 ... then who's guilty of murder?Clemency denied for Georgia death row inmate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 The American fascination with punishment is akin to that of Islamic Sharia punishment in many third world countries. The methods are different, the reasons are different, the Ends are the same. The public is satiated. One difference is that many American states want to publicize executions. Something you won't see as a rule on Al Jazeera...So what are we fighting for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UpperDeck Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 The American fascination with punishment is akin to that of Islamic Sharia punishment in many third world countries. The methods are different, the reasons are different, the Ends are the same. The public is satiated. One difference is that many American states want to publicize executions. Something you won't see as a rule on Al Jazeera...So what are we fighting for?I want to opine based on reason. And then I ask myself; how would I feel if it was my wife or child who was brutally murdered? Would I be so sympathetic to the hardships this now repentant and unfortunate perpetrator suffered in his (or her) youth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 I'm in favor of the death penalty if the person is guilty. Really guilty, beyond any doubt. That means, for example, video tape or photo evidence (especially if taken by the guilty party).The problem I have with the death penalty is that sometimes innocent people are given the ultimate punishment and then found to have been wrongly convicted. Because there have been several wrongful convictions up here I do support Canada's (no death penalty) laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innuendo Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Here are a few wrongful convictions from our judicial system.http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2009/08/06/f-wrongfully-convicted.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagger Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 "this now repentant and unfortunate perpetrator suffered in his (or her) youth?"The issue in the Davis case is that seven of nine witnesses at his trial have recanted their testimony, the Savannah police are accused of framing critical evidence to induce positive identifications, and another man confessed to committing the crime.There is no actual evidence linking Davis to the crime scene, and no motive for his involvement in the murder.This is one of many cases where white judges and juries in the South have convicted a black man on dubious grounds. It's reached a point where the US Supreme Court has begun to take appeals for stays of execution on purely racial bias grounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conehead Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 "The case has been through a series of appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court took the rare step in August 2009 of ordering a new hearing for Davis to assess what his lawyers said was new evidence showing his innocence.The justices transferred the case to a U.S. District Court in Georgia for a hearing and determination of his claims that new witnesses will clearly establish his innocence. A year later, the judge, William Moore, rejected Davis' claims of innocence."So maybe he's guilty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 So maybe he's guilty?So you'd see him executed because maybe he is guilty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 So you'd see him executed because maybe he is guilty? I think what conehead is saying is that based on what we have as information, all of it being second hand, the guy might actually be guilty.I don't know how anyone can say he is guilty or not guilty without knowing ALL the facts....and none of us do, nor does the Press so...maybe he is guilty or maybe he is not.......all we have here are opinions...Yes????You know...sorta like screaming "Pilot Error" the moment an aircraft goes down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 "The case has been through a series of appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court took the rare step in August 2009 of ordering a new hearing for Davis to assess what his lawyers said was new evidence showing his innocence.The justices transferred the case to a U.S. District Court in Georgia for a hearing and determination of his claims that new witnesses will clearly establish his innocence. A year later, the judge, William Moore, rejected Davis' claims of innocence."So maybe he's guilty?"The justices transferred the case to a U.S. District Court in Georgia for a hearing and determination of his claims that new witnesses will clearly establish his innocence. A year later, the judge, William Moore, rejected Davis' claims of innocence." "No blood or DNA tied Davis to the crime and the weapon was never located.Davis' attorneys say seven of nine key witnesses who testified at his trial have disputed all or parts of their testimony.Quiana Glover, who did not testify at the original trial, said one of the witnesses who did not recant told her he was the real shooter. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airband Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 .Sooner or later they get where they're going.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Conehead.... "MAybe He's guilty" infers reasonable doubt and therefore requires aquittal...With all of the inconsistencies in the testimony This case should have been tossed. Reasonalble Doubt people.... I would like to meet the jury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Conehead.... "MAybe He's guilty" infers reasonable doubt and therefore requires aquittal...With all of the inconsistencies in the testimony This case should have been tossed. Reasonalble Doubt people.... I would like to meet the jury.Nit pickin'...I know..... but..Conehead was NOT a member of the jury..his opinion is just that...an opinion and has no bearing on the guys guilt or innocence ergo our input on this forum means diddly squat...in the big picture.. :stirthepot: AND in other news...Clifford Olsen, Canada's poster boy for bringing back Capital punishment is dying of cancer and could be "gone" in less than a week.....(about 30 years too late in my opinion.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 AND in other news...Clifford Olsen, Canada's poster boy for bringing back Capital punishment is dying of cancer and could be "gone" in less than a week.....(about 30 years too late in my opinion.)NO KIDDING. I hope he is suffering. Helluva thing to say, really. Why couldn't it be Bernardo or his toy, who got away with murder? They should die young.Conehead: You post your thoughts, you gotta take your licks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Although there are many human animals clearly in need of culling, a death sentence is not imo, a proper address to a sociological problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conehead Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Wow, you guys are tough on a guy. The first time I ever heard of this case was when I read the thread this morning. I don't know any of the facts, all I know is what I read in Mitch's link to the story. But when I read that the Supreme Court had reviewed it, I figured "hey. they must know more about this than I..." Hence, the comment that "maybe he really is guilty". I don't know anything about witnesses recanting their testimony, or someone allegedly confessing, or no DNA evidence....But from what I can tell, there certainly is enough doubt to justify a stay of execution until someone can get to the bottom of this. I just finished reading John Grisham's latest fiction. Oddly enough, it's about a man that is on Death Row for a crime that he did not commit, even though the real killer comes forward and confesses. Seems that when the wheels of "Justice" get rolling, it can be pretty difficult to stop... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Although there are many human animals clearly in need of culling, a death sentence is not imo, a proper address to a sociological problem.Interesting...so you feel that we the taxpayers did OK with footing Olsons room and board for close to 30 years at, according to the MPs, is $108,000.00 per year ??? How would you address Olsons "sociological" problem and Bernardo's???I am for Capital punishment for scum like those two, for example...however if you feel there is a better way to look after the problem...please post it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deicer Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 My two cents on this...The fellow in GA has too many questions popping up. Best to keep him alive and incarcerated until definite proof comes up either way. Remember Milgaard???As for cases such as Olson and Bernardo, where there is definitive proof, execution saves the public a lot of money.And yes, I would push the button/pull the lever/pull the trigger if that kind of proof was shown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 Yes, Kip; I too favour the ‘death sentence’ for scum bags such as Olson, Bernardo & Holmoka. I absolutely do not have any form of soft spot for those that intentionally cause physical harm to others!On the other hand, the justice system of today cannot guarantee there won’t be mistakes and that makes the ‘absolute’ sentence quite unconscionable.We do need to get costs under control though and I believe some kind of major overhaul of the system is necessary. In that regard, Harper’s new laws aren’t likely to help? Another problem; too many people go into bleeding-heart mode whenever anyone sticks their head up and suggests, society needs to ‘get tough on crime’. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 Wow, you guys are tough on a guy. The first time I ever heard of this case was when I read the thread this morning. I don't know any of the facts, all I know is what I read in Mitch's link to the story. But when I read that the Supreme Court had reviewed it, I figured "hey. they must know more about this than I..." Hence, the comment that "maybe he really is guilty". I don't know anything about witnesses recanting their testimony, or someone allegedly confessing, or no DNA evidence....But from what I can tell, there certainly is enough doubt to justify a stay of execution until someone can get to the bottom of this. I just finished reading John Grisham's latest fiction. Oddly enough, it's about a man that is on Death Row for a crime that he did not commit, even though the real killer comes forward and confesses. Seems that when the wheels of "Justice" get rolling, it can be pretty difficult to stop...No worries, Cone! Just because this crowd eats its young is no reason to withhold honest opinion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 My point was the use of the word Maybe. Not picking on Conehead at all just that certain words when used in the legal system demonstrate some shred of doubt. Where ANY doubt exists in a capital case then the execution should be stayed until all doubt is removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innuendo Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 These people were convicted of murder in Canada, presumably beyond reasonable doubt in the minds of those who rendered their verdicts and, I hope, in the minds of those who passed sentence. Seems the courts got it wrong though, for whatever reasons.They at least are now free to get on with what is left of their lives.James Driskell,Donald Marshall Jr.,David Milgaard,Guy Paul Morin,William Mullins-Johnson,Romeo Phillion,Thomas Sophonow,Steven Truscott,Kyle Unger,Erin Walsh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 The discussion at hand is now moot.http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/americas/georgia-executes-troy-davis-after-top-court-rejects-last-minute-plea/article2175375/Walk The Green Mile, Troy Davis... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted September 22, 2011 Author Share Posted September 22, 2011 Cold blooded, pre-meditated murder. They had nowhere near enough evidence to convict him, let alone kill him. This society makes me sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conehead Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 No worries, Cone! Just because this crowd eats its young is no reason to withhold honest opinion! Thanks for the support, Moon. I don't hesitate to voice my opinion around here; there is an interesting variety of people here, and I enjoy the place! Anyway, they executed the poor bugger now. We'll probably never know the truth.And now; Stephen Harper is about to create a whole new industry in Canada with this "tough on crime" omni-bill. He will out-source the prison system to private industry, who will build lots of big new prisons, and hire lots of private guards to staff them, and he will fill those prisons with people convicted under his new laws... Just like America! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.