This is the right way to do Justice

[mercyshooter]

badbadboy, everyone has the right to appeal. It's a given, you don't have to EARN it. Your highlighted phrase, if I'm not mistaken, jc means what he typed becasue:
1) at that time, from what the police had, every single evidence was against him. They use some types of tactics to make him the sure one based on this drug history and stuff.
2) he was just there at the wrong time.
Based on these, the jury was also convinced that he's the one. Therefore, people wanted the death penalty on him.
But then I don't know what happened during the time of his appeal, the AUTHORITIES admitted that they were wrong the first place and changed everything. Gradually, found the real killer.
Death penalty is needed because
1) we have to make sure that the AUTHORITIES will do an excellent job all in one shot so that they will not wrongly accuse a person and will not connive real criminals
2) we have to remind everyone that these kinds of stuff are VERY VERY VERY SERIOUS.

HankQuinlan, we stop replying because we've "been" there literally. So, what you guys are discussing is lacking some depth!

 

[mercyshooter]

alinburnaby, if you are a jury and you sense that the whole hearing is not right, then you are responsible to give the reasonable doubt to not convict the person. JURY IS ALSO PART OF THE AUTHORITIES! If you guys wrongfully accused and put him to death, then the public will know how b******t the government and the system are doing for the people. Then the government will have to change somehow. If Milgaard was to put to death, then the government will have to cover up another lie. Right? If we have all these harsh punishments in the system, the chance of wrong doing will be minimized. It forces people to use their brain to do their job. In other words, it's humanity again and life doesn't have second chance. Like I said "will not wrongly accuse a person and will not connive real criminals". The other reason for the death penalty is retributive justice which exists since we are born to this world!

 

[somedude]

If you want "fair" wait until you get to heaven. This is real life, and it isn't "fair." Are you 14 years old, by any chance?

Resorting to calling people children? Bazinga, you sure told him, way to show him how much of a grown up you are.

You assume that there is a Heaven Hank, but I can see that you can't see the viewpoint of others who might believe in re-incarnation, or just straight pergatory/hell.

 

[somedude]

AND THERE IS FRIGGIN' AFTERLIFE, so what I said is not true.

What's it like Hank? Did you get jetlag when you got back from your last trip? :thumb:

 

[mercyshooter]

PeaceGuy, you just give a wrong analogy. The whole thread is about one person kills another person! And then whether or not death penalty is right. PeaceGuy, ever heard of "illegally processing crime scene"? That's exactly what you are saying and it's illegal!
alinburnaby, informants are expendable. And it is the police's responsibility to make sure their informants report everything. if informants cross the lines, then you don't have to protect them. And hire another informant. This is what we call "screw up by police".

 

[mercyshooter]

somedude, we are dealing with frogs in the wells! :crazy:

 

[badbadboy]

badbadboy, everyone has the right to appeal. It's a given, you don't have to EARN it. Your highlighted phrase, if I'm not mistaken, jc means what he typed becasue:
1) at that time, from what the police had, every single evidence was against him. They use some types of tactics to make him the sure one based on this drug history and stuff.
2) he was just there at the wrong time.
Based on these, the jury was also convinced that he's the one. Therefore, people wanted the death penalty on him.
But then I don't know what happened during the time of his appeal, the AUTHORITIES admitted that they were wrong the first place and changed everything. Gradually, found the real killer.
Death penalty is needed because
1) we have to make sure that the AUTHORITIES will do an excellent job all in one shot so that they will not wrongly accuse a person and will not connive real criminals
2) we have to remind everyone that these kinds of stuff are VERY VERY VERY SERIOUS.

HankQuinlan, we stop replying because we've "been" there literally. So, what you guys are discussing is lacking some depth!

The Authorities, the courts, the juries have shown they consistently get things wrong. As Alininburnaby has already said, we have an imperfect system. With an imperfect system you will always have mistakes and its everyone's responsibility to mitigate the mistakes so no one is killed wrongly by a system. Milgaard was in prison for 21 years. I am quite certain with a Death Penalty in Canada he would have been killed by the system. The system would not review his file and sat upon the request for a retrial for years.


The Saskatoon Police chose the path of least resistance and got one of Milgaard's friends to testify against him.

From Wiki:

Both Ron and Nichol were also called to testify against him. They had told police that they had been with Milgaard the entire day and that they believed him to be innocent, but they changed their stories for the court. Ron later recanted his testimony claiming that he had been told he was personally under suspicion and wanted to alleviate the pressure on himself.

From Wiki:



Linda Fisher, ex-wife of Gail's murderer Larry Fisher, visited the Saskatoon police department in 1980. Linda told the police that she believed Larry had likely killed Gail. The Saskatoon Police Department did not follow up on Linda's statement.[2] The inquiry report released by Justice MacCallum states that “[w]hile MacCallum noted that Milgaard's family members mounted a formidable public awareness campaign, their efforts also created tension and resentment within the police and the Crown's office.”[3] This is seen by some as an excuse for the failure of the Saskatoon police to investigate Larry Fisher.



Supreme Court of Canada reference and subsequent events

The federal government submitted a reference question to the Supreme Court of Canada, which recommended that Milgaard's conviction be set aside. Kim Campbell, then the federal Minister of Justice, ordered, pursuant to section 690 of the Criminal Code, that a new trial be held on the murder charge against Milgaard. However, the Government of Saskatchewan announced that it would not hold a new trial, instead entering a stay of proceedings in the case against Milgaard, on April 16, 1992. On July 18, 1997, a DNA laboratory in the United Kingdom released a report confirming that semen samples on the victim's clothing did not originate with Milgaard -- for all intents and purposes clearing Milgaard of the crime. The Saskatchewan government then apologized for the wrongful conviction. On July 25, 1997, Larry Fisher was arrested for the murder and rape of Ms. Miller. On May 17, 1999, the Saskatchewan government announced that a settlement had been reached with Milgaard, and that he would be paid compensation of C$10 million.
On September 30, 2003, the Saskatchewan government announced that a Royal Commission would investigate Milgaard's wrongful conviction, and on February 20, 2004, Justice Edward P. MacCallum was announced as the Commissioner.[1] Douglas Hodson was later appointed as commission counsel.

These people would all be long dead with your views on Capital Punishment. How would you justify your lusting for a death penalty and make amends to the families whose sons would have been murdered wrongfully?

High-profile cases

James Driskell
Anthony Hanemaayer
Donald Marshall Jr.
Simon Marshall
David Milgaard
Guy Paul Morin
William Mullins-Johnson
Romeo Phillion
Thomas Sophonow
Steven Truscott
Kyle Unger
Erin Walsh

Note Clifford Olsen is not on the list because he sold his information to the police in return for $10K per child murdered. The police did not have enough evidence to convict Olsen. Olsen did it so his wife and son would have some money once he went to jail.

That really hasn't cleared things up for me. I have occasionally asked crackheads for directions while driving and been able to follow their disjointed, illogical & rambling narratives enough to get where they were telling me. You, not so much. I do see the words, but they really do not form any logical thoughts. I gave it my best shot, but you say that that isn't what you mean, so I have to accept that you don't have any meaning to convey.

Absolutely, I have read and re read his words and even moved my lips the way the writer would to try to understand his wall of words. Still doe not compute.

 

[mercyshooter]

PeaceGuy, your analogy tells me that i accidentally killed myself and someone has to clean up my mess, right? When we see crackheads, we run away from them. We even ignore them. They are pieces of s**ts to the country. They have no contributions to the country or the communities! They don't even pay tax and we have to support their livings! What's wrong with this country?! :crazy: Have you ever heard of no pain no gain?!

badbadboy, if the system is imperfect, it's the government's responsibility to make it perfect. The government represents the people. That's why we have a f**king government! Otherwise, we make our own rules!

 

[HankQuinlan]

That really hasn't cleared things up for me. I have occasionally asked crackheads for directions while driving and been able to follow their disjointed, illogical & rambling narratives enough to get where they were telling me. You, not so much. I do see the words, but they really do not form any logical thoughts. I gave it my best shot, but you say that that isn't what you mean, so I have to accept that you don't have any meaning to convey.

See above. The reading comprehension equals the writing clarity.

 

[badbadboy]

The Authorities, the courts, the juries have shown they consistently get things wrong. As Alininburnaby has already said, we have an imperfect system. With an imperfect system you will always have mistakes and its everyone's responsibility to mitigate the mistakes so no one is killed wrongly by a system. Milgaard was in prison for 21 years. I am quite certain with a Death Penalty in Canada he would have been killed by the system. The system would not review his file and sat upon the request for a retrial for years.


The Saskatoon Police chose the path of least resistance and got one of Milgaard's friends to testify against him.

From Wiki:

Both Ron and Nichol were also called to testify against him. They had told police that they had been with Milgaard the entire day and that they believed him to be innocent, but they changed their stories for the court. Ron later recanted his testimony claiming that he had been told he was personally under suspicion and wanted to alleviate the pressure on himself.

From Wiki:



Linda Fisher, ex-wife of Gail's murderer Larry Fisher, visited the Saskatoon police department in 1980. Linda told the police that she believed Larry had likely killed Gail. The Saskatoon Police Department did not follow up on Linda's statement.[2] The inquiry report released by Justice MacCallum states that “[w]hile MacCallum noted that Milgaard's family members mounted a formidable public awareness campaign, their efforts also created tension and resentment within the police and the Crown's office.”[3] This is seen by some as an excuse for the failure of the Saskatoon police to investigate Larry Fisher.



Supreme Court of Canada reference and subsequent events

The federal government submitted a reference question to the Supreme Court of Canada, which recommended that Milgaard's conviction be set aside. Kim Campbell, then the federal Minister of Justice, ordered, pursuant to section 690 of the Criminal Code, that a new trial be held on the murder charge against Milgaard. However, the Government of Saskatchewan announced that it would not hold a new trial, instead entering a stay of proceedings in the case against Milgaard, on April 16, 1992. On July 18, 1997, a DNA laboratory in the United Kingdom released a report confirming that semen samples on the victim's clothing did not originate with Milgaard -- for all intents and purposes clearing Milgaard of the crime. The Saskatchewan government then apologized for the wrongful conviction. On July 25, 1997, Larry Fisher was arrested for the murder and rape of Ms. Miller. On May 17, 1999, the Saskatchewan government announced that a settlement had been reached with Milgaard, and that he would be paid compensation of C$10 million.
On September 30, 2003, the Saskatchewan government announced that a Royal Commission would investigate Milgaard's wrongful conviction, and on February 20, 2004, Justice Edward P. MacCallum was announced as the Commissioner.[1] Douglas Hodson was later appointed as commission counsel.

These people would all be long dead with your views on Capital Punishment. How would you justify your lusting for a death penalty and make amends to the families whose sons would have been murdered wrongfully?

High-profile cases

James Driskell
Anthony Hanemaayer
Donald Marshall Jr.
Simon Marshall
David Milgaard
Guy Paul Morin
William Mullins-Johnson
Romeo Phillion
Thomas Sophonow
Steven Truscott
Kyle Unger
Erin Walsh

Note Clifford Olsen is not on the list because he sold his information to the police in return for $10K per child murdered. The police did not have enough evidence to convict Olsen. Olsen did it so his wife and son would have some money once he went to jail.





Absolutely, I have read and re read his words and even moved my lips the way the writer would to try to understand his wall of words. Still doe not compute.

To which this is your retort?

I thought this was a SERIOUS SUBJECT to you?

PeaceGuy, your analogy tells me that i accidentally killed myself and someone has to clean up my mess, right? When we see crackheads, we run away from them. We even ignore them. They are pieces of s**ts to the country. They have no contributions to the country or the communities! They don't even pay tax and we have to support their livings! What's wrong with this country?! :crazy: Have you ever heard of no pain no gain?!

badbadboy, if the system is imperfect, it's the government's responsibility to make it perfect. The government represents the people. That's why we have a f**king government! Otherwise, we make our own rules!

Some words there but zero substance.

QED

go ahead look it up - its Latin.

 

[mercyshooter]

Any other wanna join the discussion?

 

[mercyshooter]

To which this is your retort?

I thought this was a SERIOUS SUBJECT to you?



Some words there but zero substance.

QED

go ahead look it up - its Latin.

By SERIOUS SUBJECT, you mean you are trying to convince me that we should not have the death penalty?! Well then, your definition is different than mine! You people seem to forget the history of China and the elements of justice. To most Asian people, all your SERIOUS SUBJECTS are now become MINORS. The reason is that we have experienced and learnt since the day we born to this world. It's all in our knowledge! This is why Asian countries have harsh justice systems! Sometimes, you never know why you die in there. PERIOD. QED.

 

[badbadboy]

2) we have to remind everyone that these kinds of stuff are VERY VERY VERY SERIOUS.

By SERIOUS SUBJECT, you mean you are trying to convince me that we should not have the death penalty?! Well then, your definition is different than mine! You people seem to forget the history of China and the elements of justice. To most Asian people, all your SERIOUS SUBJECTS are now become MINORS. The reason is that we have experienced and learnt since the day we born to this world. It's all in our knowledge! This is why Asian countries have harsh justice systems! Sometimes, you never know why you die in there. PERIOD. QED.

I bolded Serious to remind you of your own quote.

If the justice system in China is so great, why don't you go live there?

BTW, inappropriate use of QED, you didn't prove jack shit with your useless post once again.

 

[mercyshooter]

PeaceGuy, where is retribution? It's life that we are discussing about. RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICE exists! You don't believe in it doesn't mean it does not exist.

badbadboy, yes, murder is a VERY VERY VERY SERIOUS crime. That's because it takes other people's lives. Like I said RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICE exists whether you like it or not. So, death penalty is a must in order to complete the whole definition of justice. If we don't put death penalty in, then who's gonna give back the victim's life?

 

[Webster]

Any other wanna join the discussion?

Sure. You have made NO arguments that have held up. None. Yet you keep writing the same things. It seems obvious to me that everybody who's arguing against you can make a better pro-death-penalty argument than you can. So why not just ask someone for a better argument than you can make?

 

[mercyshooter]

Even if we kill the murderer, we aren't giving back the victim's life.

What society owes the victim's family is making sure that the murderer can't murder again. We do that by locking them up for life.

7 years later, the murderer can parole and then have a second chance to re-offend again? :crazy:

Sure. You have made NO arguments that have held up. None. Yet you keep writing the same things. It seems obvious to me that everybody who's arguing against you can make a better pro-death-penalty argument than you can. So why not just ask someone for a better argument than you can make?

I'm just doing a short version.

 

[Lancaster]

Even if we kill the murderer, we aren't giving back the victim's life.

What society owes the victim's family is making sure that the murderer can't murder again. We do that by locking them up for life.

They ought to make the offenders forfeit their lives and just be in indebted servitude to the victim's family forever.

 

[badbadboy]

PeaceGuy, where is retribution? It's life that we are discussing about. RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICE exists! You don't believe in it doesn't mean it does not exist.

badbadboy, yes, murder is a VERY VERY VERY SERIOUS crime. That's because it takes other people's lives. Like I said RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICE exists whether you like it or not. So, death penalty is a must in order to complete the whole definition of justice. If we don't put death penalty in, then who's gonna give back the victim's life?

Since you have not responded to any of the details I posted about David Milgaard, I can only assume that you are ok with killing an innocent person convicted of murder because it is the most expedient way for you to achieve retribution for another murder.

I am actually quite sorry for you and how you diminish the value of a human life. I am thankful that our Government of Canada has not made any changes to the penal code and people like yourself will never have the satisfaction of retribution.

 

[mercyshooter]

check your dictionaries, retribution is another form of justice which really exists. you can verify with asians and europeans and our neighbour country, USA.

as for the milgaard case, he has the right to appeal if he's really innocent and the authorities should have investigated thoroughly before charging him. if we put death penalty on the table before charging him, don't you think that he won't keep saying he's innocent? Meaning that the investigators should have noticed something wrong during the investigation.

death penalty doesn't diminish the value of a human life. it just tells you that if you can take one's life that easy, so can we. In other words, it tells you to value human lives! Why can't you guys think of the worst case scenerio? the opposite direction? :crazy: And if you have read my response correctly, you should be able to see through it! See post #94 for God's sake!

 

[HankQuinlan]

check your dictionaries, retribution is another form of justice which really exists. you can verify with asians and europeans and our neighbour country, USA.

as for the milgaard case, he has the right to appeal if he's really innocent and the authorities should have investigated thoroughly before charging him. if we put death penalty on the table before charging him, don't you think that he won't keep saying he's innocent? Meaning that the investigators should have noticed something wrong during the investigation.

death penalty doesn't diminish the value of a human life. it just tells you that if you can take one's life that easy, so can we. In other words, it tells you to value human lives! Why can't you guys think of the worst case scenerio? the opposite direction? :crazy: And if you have read my response correctly, you should be able to see through it! See post #94 for God's sake!

Oh, man. More unintelligible garble...but I keep feeding the troll too.

The only country in Europe that has the death penalty on the books is Belarus.

The only countries that actually use the death penalty regularly are China (for 55 crimes!), North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, the Hamas government in Gaza, Libya (at least under Ghadaffi), Somalia (which has no real government), and Syria....and the USA (the only nominal democracy in the world that kills its own citizens regularly). Not really a club that any civilized society wants to join. It is legal for serious crimes, and used sparingly, in a number of other countries.

The rest of the post -- it is impossible to understand what you are trying to say.

My guess is that you are from another country (that doesn't speak English), and possibly lost a loved one to murder. If that is so, my condolences for your loss. It is understandable that your emotions would overpower your logic. If I am wrong, then you are just a very illiterate person who has no ability to understand another's writing, or to outline your own logic, and with a strong compulsion to kill people.