Halibut Posted March 13, 2014 Share Posted March 13, 2014 erm yes it does No, it doesn't - why do you think otherwise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted March 13, 2014 Share Posted March 13, 2014 No idea what he lost in pay since I dont know what he worked at before. No doubt he'll be compensated eventually. Jurors are only human however. If the evidence at the time looked enough for a conviction they've done nothing wrong in finding him guilty. 25 years ago DNA was unknown but since it's introduction it's provided new evidence to either confirm the murdere's guilt or absolve him or her of any guilt. When a person gets sent to death row they have by law the right to appeal their sentence all the way up to the highest courts and lawyers working for them are given oporrtunities to present any new evidence they've found along the way to warrant a new trial. That can take years. Richard Ramirez the serial killer who broke into homes at night and murdered several people before being recognized and arrested on the street spent over 23 years on San Quentin death row. During that time he got a few thousand dollars worth of dental treatment and was allowed to marry the goony bird who became interested him while he was in prison and later fell in love with him. During all that time the appeal process went on and on although the evidence against him was overwhelming. A moratorium on the death penalty in Calfornia probably saved him for the last seven years of his life before he died of natural causes about a year and a half ago. There's nothing wrong with the sytem here overall. At least Ramirez was luckier than Timothy Evans who was hanged for murders that his landlord John Halliday Christie committed. The British system back then was if found guilty one appeal to the Home Secretary and if that was denied a date with Albert Pierpoint very shortly after that Very interesting. One thing that is striking is the interminable appeals process when a death sentence is passed. it obviously adds a whole different dimension to the appeals because a life is at stake. Must cost a fortune, perhaps well in excess of the cost of keeping somebody in prison for a whole life sentence. Sure it keeps the lawyers happy though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASGOWOODS Posted March 13, 2014 Share Posted March 13, 2014 You're going to need to explain why. I don't have to explain anything to you, but, just this once. Paedophiles who murder kids should be executed. However, if some government had the guts to introduce these into our prisons... Basic food only. No communication with the outside world, or family visits No tv and basic cells (no cell sharing) 12 hours hard labour 7 days a week (Alcatraz like Island ) Life sentence meaning you don't leave until you're dead. Then I would change my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted March 13, 2014 Share Posted March 13, 2014 I don't have to explain anything to you, but, just this once. Paedophiles who murder kids should be executed. Why? Before you answer read up on the Lesley Molseed case, and the plight of the man (Stefan Kiszko) wrongly convicted of her murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASGOWOODS Posted March 13, 2014 Share Posted March 13, 2014 Why? Before you answer read up on the Lesley Molseed case, and the plight of the man (Stefan Kiszko) wrongly convicted of her murder. And you read up on children/babies raped, murdered and thrown into shallow graves. Oh! and what their families suffered. It is awful when innocent people are locked up for years. I do understand this you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted March 13, 2014 Share Posted March 13, 2014 Paedophiles who murder kids should be executed. What do you think the minimum age should be? Would a person get life for killing a twelve year old and death for an 11 year old - where would you draw the line? What about people who aren't paedophiles who murder kids? Sends out a strange message if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted March 13, 2014 Share Posted March 13, 2014 And you read up on children/babies raped, murdered and thrown into shallow graves. Oh! and what their families suffered. It is awful when innocent people are locked up for years. I do understand this you know. Would you want the same punishment for raping a child - i.e. execution, as someone would get for raping and then murdering a child? If so could you see that if you have the same punishments for both it may well encourage the vile child rapist to kill the poor child as well, maybe to get rid of the witness. After all, the punishment would be the same if they were caught. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted March 13, 2014 Share Posted March 13, 2014 And you read up on children/babies raped, murdered and thrown into shallow graves. Oh! and what their families suffered. It is awful when innocent people are locked up for years. I do understand this you know. I'll ignore the first comment. I'm not going to have anybody say that I don't care about the victims and families of such crimes. But if you had the death penalty for the crimes you describe then innocent people would not just be locked up, innocent people would be executed. You shouldn't allow your anger to cloud that possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Clowning Posted March 13, 2014 Share Posted March 13, 2014 No idea what he lost in pay since I dont know what he worked at before. No doubt he'll be compensated eventually. Jurors are only human however. If the evidence at the time looked enough for a conviction they've done nothing wrong in finding him guilty. 25 years ago DNA was unknown but since it's introduction it's provided new evidence to either confirm the murdere's guilt or absolve him or her of any guilt. When a person gets sent to death row they have by law the right to appeal their sentence all the way up to the highest courts and lawyers working for them are given oporrtunities to present any new evidence they've found along the way to warrant a new trial. That can take years. Richard Ramirez the serial killer who broke into homes at night and murdered several people before being recognized and arrested on the street spent over 23 years on San Quentin death row. During that time he got a few thousand dollars worth of dental treatment and was allowed to marry the goony bird who became interested him while he was in prison and later fell in love with him. During all that time the appeal process went on and on although the evidence against him was overwhelming. A moratorium on the death penalty in Calfornia probably saved him for the last seven years of his life before he died of natural causes about a year and a half ago. There's nothing wrong with the sytem here overall. At least Ramirez was luckier than Timothy Evans who was hanged for murders that his landlord John Halliday Christie committed. The British system back then was if found guilty one appeal to the Home Secretary and if that was denied a date with Albert Pierpoint very shortly after that Your absolutely right, the system here was that flawed that we did away with it and overhauled it all. You will agree that the compensation for this man is peanuts for his years of incarceration though ? Whatever he gets, the fact is it could have been far worse so... No system can be perfect I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted March 13, 2014 Share Posted March 13, 2014 Your absolutely right, the system here was that flawed that we did away with it and overhauled it all. You will agree that the compensation for this man is peanuts for his years of incarceration though ? Whatever he gets, the fact is it could have been far worse so... No system can be perfect I guess. I remember reading somewhere that the people in this country who were incarcerated but later found not guilty had rent and board deducted from their compensation. That must sting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.