Do you support death sentances for arsonist, rapist?

[bayman]

Rooster, I think what bayman was suggesting is that when the death penalty is given a higher standard of proof i.e. 'beyond all doubt' is required rather than the usual 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

spot on

[TroyGFC]

my fault I should have put child molesters/rapist.

[Hondo]

my fault I should have put child molesters/rapist.

So it's OK to rape on adult?

What is she's 17 and legally still a child? Does the death penalty have an age limit? What if she's 13 and it's consentual from her POV, but not from her parents?

Not having a direct go at you, just trying to highlight the fine line that gets crossed once you open the death penalty door and how technical it would become

You'd end up with such a small sample of crimes that any deterrent value is lost anyway + you let the lawyers have huge scope to argue out of the death penalty. Same for murder, what does "beyond all doubt" mean ... would Bryant be the only one put to death? "Beyond all reasonable doubt" is a fundamental part of our justice system it's meant to mean they definitely did it. ie, there's no "reasonable doubt". Put another layer on top and you fundamentally change the system. Does that mean the "reasonable doubt" people aren't actually guilty anymore? How can you be more "guilty"? If you're proven guilty then you did it.

PS: I know you weren't the one talking about "beyond all doubt".

[asert]

most definetly. rape will mess someone up for life arson should be murder and at least attempted murder. im all for it might make people think twice

[bayman]

hondo are you a lawyer ?

[Hondo]

hondo are you a lawyer ?

No I have had exposure to legal matters in my normal job and a good mate is a lawyer but that's it.

So I'm happy to be corrected if someone on here is. I'm pretty sure if you remove the word "reasonable" from what's needed to trigger capital punishment, then the lawyers would make sure that no-one is ever put to death. It would make it virtually impossible for the prosecution to prove "beyond all doubt". I think you'd almost need clear video footage of the crime

You're either guilty or your not. If you have capital punishment it has to be based on the crime itself, not the level of "guilty"-ness.

[Thiele]

Reckon they should be locked up and chuck away the key

[The Big Shrek]

my fault I should have put child molesters/rapist.

So it's OK to rape on adult?

What is she's 17 and legally still a child? Does the death penalty have an age limit? What if she's 13 and it's consentual from her POV, but not from her parents?

Not having a direct go at you, just trying to highlight the fine line that gets crossed once you open the death penalty door and how technical it would become

You'd end up with such a small sample of crimes that any deterrent value is lost anyway + you let the lawyers have huge scope to argue out of the death penalty. Same for murder, what does "beyond all doubt" mean ... would Bryant be the only one put to death? "Beyond all reasonable doubt" is a fundamental part of our justice system it's meant to mean they definitely did it. ie, there's no "reasonable doubt". Put another layer on top and you fundamentally change the system. Does that mean the "reasonable doubt" people aren't actually guilty anymore? How can you be more "guilty"? If you're proven guilty then you did it.

PS: I know you weren't the one talking about "beyond all doubt".

Try explaining what beyond reasonable doubt means though Hondo. Judges aren't allowed to explain it to juries because they'll all **** it up.

Very funny case I came across trying to explain why you can't put level of guilt as a percentage(as some knob was trying to do).

A bloke had parked his car and got a ticket for over staying the time limit. He claimed he had left and came back. Parking inspector testified that the chalk mark/valve where in exactly the same spot. Court found that there was a 1 in 144 chance that the car would be reparked with the mark/valve in the same position.

Is the guy 99% guilty? Of course not, he either did it or he didn't. This isn't quantum mechanics were there are multiple histories with different probabilities! He got off by the way.

I'm not sure why I went of on this tangent but it does show the kind of difficulty in expressing BRD in any other terms. In the examples before no-one got to imaginative, but even in a situation where 50 million people saw someone do something and they caught it on video, one could argue it was a hologram created by aliens. You can't prove it wasn't.

I am dribbling shit aren't I?

[heater31]

I am dribbling s***t aren't I?

What's new

[JAS]

I still can't agree with the death penalty for anything...not because I'm against killing them...I want them to suffer. I think the death penalty is too easy, a cop out. I want them locked up for good, in a cell like the old Victorian (19th century not the State) prisons and not with facilities that are better than when I lived in barracks....I want them to be given hard, really hard, labour and made to spend the rest of the time with constant reminders of the lives they ruined...for the rest of their natural lives.

Regards
JAS

[therisingblues]

I think Hondo is pretty spot on with the gray areas that appear when we start to dick around with legal wordings.
It makes me think about the John Grisham book "An Innocent Man" which was more a documentary of a true story rather than a novel. Basically what happens is the cops of Aida county are looking a little stupid after failing to solve a murder, so they grab the first half lead that comes their way. They then detain some guy for about 36 hours and interrogate him so forcefully that he cracks under the pressure and goes along with their suggestion that perhaps he had a dream about commiting the murder, complete with details of where the body was buried, murder weapon etc. Absolutely none of the details checked out, witnesses placed the guy almost too impossibly far away to commit the murder, he had no contact with the victim, no history of violence or any police record, but with the so called confession (to a dream that he didn't actually have) they were able to convict the poor guy in a court of law "beyond a reasonable doubt" in the town of Aida.
He later died in prison. The cops that put him away later had two or three other convictions overturned when the age of DNA testing came into being. The people of Aida county are now extremely averse to any mention of the scandal and usually insist that the DNA testing was false and the cleared offenders should be thrown back in jail. How they arrive at that conclusion seems to be wholly based on the bad reputation their town has inherited as a result of the miscarriage of justice. Hence they'd prefer to believe that the system has victimised their town rather than take the adult step and admit that they wronged some of their citizens.
Beyond a reasonable doubt can mean anything to many different people.

[TroyGFC]

my fault I should have put child molesters/rapist.

So it's OK to rape on adult?

What is she's 17 and legally still a child? Does the death penalty have an age limit? What if she's 13 and it's consentual from her POV, but not from her parents?

Not having a direct go at you, just trying to highlight the fine line that gets crossed once you open the death penalty door and how technical it would become

You'd end up with such a small sample of crimes that any deterrent value is lost anyway + you let the lawyers have huge scope to argue out of the death penalty. Same for murder, what does "beyond all doubt" mean ... would Bryant be the only one put to death? "Beyond all reasonable doubt" is a fundamental part of our justice system it's meant to mean they definitely did it. ie, there's no "reasonable doubt". Put another layer on top and you fundamentally change the system. Does that mean the "reasonable doubt" people aren't actually guilty anymore? How can you be more "guilty"? If you're proven guilty then you did it.

PS: I know you weren't the one talking about "beyond all doubt".

I still personally want the death penatly for any rape, bashing of flamingos, throwing kid off bridge , etc. I like the old saying of an eye for a eye but with interest.

[Pseudo]

I still personally want the death penatly for any rape, bashing of flamingos, throwing kid off bridge , etc. I like the old saying of an eye for a eye but with interest.

So you're on top of the missus doing a bit of horizontal folk dancing. All of a sudden she gasps "I've had enough TroyGFC, I want you to stop". However you are just nearing the vinegar strokes, so you shut your eyes and grind away for another 30 seconds. Once your seed is spilled you disengage.

I am too lazy to dig up any references, and indeed I don't necessarily agree with the verdict, but I am certain that blokes have been convicted of rape for scenarios similar to the above.

Would you put someone to death if he was convicted for rape in such circumstances?

I would suggest that a whole spectrum of punishments could apply to rape convictions. Death might possibly be at the extreme end of the spectrum.

[overloaded]

I would bring in the death penalty for graffiti artists, it would clean up the streets a lot. my suburb is a disgrace and an embarresment to me.

[Snaggletooth Tiger]

Taking someone's life no matter how heinous their crime brings ya down to their level...
Mob mentality is for unthinking sheep!
Ya gotta let the perps live so ya can find out exactly what made em do what they did in the first place!
Prevention is better than the cure!

[overloaded]

cant agree snaggle

[TroyGFC]

gIVE THE POLICE jUDGE dREDD authority!

[Magpiespower]

Kill two birds with one stone...

Put those who commit heinous crimes in general population.

[Q.]

Poetic justice. Can't remember where I read it, but it was suggested that the arsonists should be made to help pull the charred bodies from houses. However, a part of me thinks they're so mentally ill they'd probably get a kick out of it.

[Pseudo]

Kill two birds with one stone...

Put those who commit heinous crimes in general population.

Or at the very least, assign them "appropriate" bunkmates. For example, stick Jeffery Dahmer and Mike Tyson in the same cell. Each would have gotten what he deserved.