Australian Politics Forum - The Death Penalty is still drawin' a crowd (pt 2)

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: The Death Penalty is still drawin' a crowd (pt 2)
Reply #225 - Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:23pm

Bobby. wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:06pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:02pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 11:56am:

Bobby. wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 11:50am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 11:43am:

Luke Fowler wrote on Jul 8^th, 2013 at 7:26pm:

Oh, and another thing, arguing against the death penalty does not in anyway mean that you support or excuse what a violent killer or rapist has done. Resorting to this kind of attack just shows weakness in your own argument.

That's exactly right.

Opponents of the death penalty despise these criminals and their horrendous crimes just as much as those advocating capital punishment. Nobody here is excusing the actions of criminals. Far from it.

However, the death penalty advocates seem to think that there are only two choices: capital punishment or freedom.

It's only once they manage to get past that ridiculous notion that they will be taken seriously.

Opposing premeditated state-sanctioned killing as a form of punishment is in no way condoning the action of criminals.

There is NO DOUBT that Bayly did it.

He led the cops to the body.

Bayly should be hanged.

I'm not talking about Bayley.

I'm talking about premeditated state-sanctioned killing used as a form of punishment.

Stay focused bobby. This debate isn't about individual cases.

booby gets very easily distracted and moves to examples rather than principles. I assume that he doesn't understand the concept of 'principle'.

Longweekend,

The principle is that of there is no doubt e.g. Bayly case -
where he led the cops to the body -
then they should be hanged.

If there is any doubt as in e.g. Chamberlain -
then they should be locked up waiting for an appeal.

Do you understand now?

cheers
Bobby

because you only ever thing using examples you don't seem to understand that law is not written that way. there is not act of parliament related to Bayley. Law operates on PRINCIPLES and PRECEDENTS. you say there is no doubt that bayley is guilty and he is clearly guilty although you can never say 100%. The problem you fail to understand is that very few convictions are that clear cut. Many convictions are made purely on circumstantial evidence.

We had a case in Adelaide when a man was on trial for murder and the supposed 'victim' walked into the court to say she was still alive!!! THIS is the standard that so many trials are conducted at - variable levels of evidence. Your definition of 'absolute guilt' is not particularly good. How would you define it?

confessions are not absolute proof
identifications are not absolute proof
forensics are not absolute guilt

so what are you going to rely on to give you this 'absolute proof'. And before you go with 'showing the body' argument there was a case where a homeless mentally ill man admitted to murder and let cops to the body. The actual truth was that he WITNESSED the murder and desperately wanted to be noticed and so confessed to it.

absolute truth is an extraordinary rarity.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 104641
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: The Death Penalty is still drawin' a crowd (pt 2)
Reply #226 - Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:23pm

BigOl64 wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:18pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:10pm:

Do you trust our courts to know when theres no doubt though? They would have hung lindy chamberlain.

SOB

No they would not, didn't even come close to meeting the requirements of a capital case, also she was exonerated through the normal appeals process, so I have no idea where you come to that belief.

Also meat is hung, humans are hanged.

Yes BigOl,

the principle of beyond reasonable doubt is not good enough to hang someone -
there has to be no doubt whatsoever.

Back to top

IP Logged

Bobby. Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 104641 Melbourne Gender:	Re: The Death Penalty is still drawin' a crowd (pt 2) Reply #227 - Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:24pm .
Back to top	IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: The Death Penalty is still drawin' a crowd (pt 2)
Reply #228 - Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:25pm

BigOl64 wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:11pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 11:56am:

I'm not talking about Bayley.

I'm talking about premeditated state-sanctioned killing used as a form of punishment.

Stay focused bobby. This debate isn't about individual cases.

It is always easier to stay on your high horse if your aren't weighed down by the names of victims.

The DP is very much about individual case and perpetrators, otherwise it is too easy to ignore the crimes deserving of proper punishment.

Longy loves to use dodgy studies that support his argument and you like to ignore the very reason to execute certain criminals.

Make your stance very easy to defend when you have nothing of any substance to discuss other than repeating 'Killing is bad ..... Mmmkay'.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/DNA_Exonerations_Nationwide.php

http://www.innocenceprojectwa.org.au/

http://www.analyticbridge.com/profiles/blogs/misuse-of-statistics-in-court-leads-to-wrongful-conviction-and

read them and tell me again how the DP can be applied accurately.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 104641
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: The Death Penalty is still drawin' a crowd (pt 2)
Reply #229 - Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:25pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:23pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:06pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:02pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 11:56am:

Bobby. wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 11:50am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 11:43am:

Luke Fowler wrote on Jul 8^th, 2013 at 7:26pm:

Oh, and another thing, arguing against the death penalty does not in anyway mean that you support or excuse what a violent killer or rapist has done. Resorting to this kind of attack just shows weakness in your own argument.

That's exactly right.

Opponents of the death penalty despise these criminals and their horrendous crimes just as much as those advocating capital punishment. Nobody here is excusing the actions of criminals. Far from it.

However, the death penalty advocates seem to think that there are only two choices: capital punishment or freedom.

It's only once they manage to get past that ridiculous notion that they will be taken seriously.

Opposing premeditated state-sanctioned killing as a form of punishment is in no way condoning the action of criminals.

There is NO DOUBT that Bayly did it.

He led the cops to the body.

Bayly should be hanged.

I'm not talking about Bayley.

I'm talking about premeditated state-sanctioned killing used as a form of punishment.

Stay focused bobby. This debate isn't about individual cases.

booby gets very easily distracted and moves to examples rather than principles. I assume that he doesn't understand the concept of 'principle'.

Longweekend,

The principle is that of there is no doubt e.g. Bayly case -
where he led the cops to the body -
then they should be hanged.

If there is any doubt as in e.g. Chamberlain -
then they should be locked up waiting for an appeal.

Do you understand now?

cheers
Bobby

because you only ever thing using examples you don't seem to understand that law is not written that way. there is not act of parliament related to Bayley. Law operates on PRINCIPLES and PRECEDENTS. you say there is no doubt that bayley is guilty and he is clearly guilty although you can never say 100%. The problem you fail to understand is that very few convictions are that clear cut. Many convictions are made purely on circumstantial evidence.

We had a case in Adelaide when a man was on trial for murder and the supposed 'victim' walked into the court to say she was still alive!!! THIS is the standard that so many trials are conducted at - variable levels of evidence. Your definition of 'absolute guilt' is not particularly good. How would you define it?

confessions are not absolute proof
identifications are not absolute proof
forensics are not absolute guilt

so what are you going to rely on to give you this 'absolute proof'. And before you go with 'showing the body' argument there was a case where a homeless mentally ill man admitted to murder and let cops to the body. The actual truth was that he WITNESSED the murder and desperately wanted to be noticed and so confessed to it.

absolute truth is an extraordinary rarity.

So - should Bayley go free?
If you're not sure then he shouldn't be locked up either. Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

Bobby. Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 104641 Melbourne Gender:	Re: The Death Penalty is still drawin' a crowd (pt 2) Reply #230 - Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:27pm Quote: And before you go with 'showing the body' argument there was a case where a homeless mentally ill man admitted to murder and let cops to the body. Not the same as Bayley but do you have a link?
Back to top	IP Logged

BigOl64

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male

Re: The Death Penalty is still drawin' a crowd (pt 2)
Reply #231 - Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:28pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:03pm:

But every hanging is an individual decision.
When there is no doubt then they should be hanged.

no such thing. 9 of the 18 that have been released from death row in the USA actually confessed despite being innocent. this concept you have of 'no doubt' is simplistic. [/quote]

Yeah because that has always been the basis of beyond all doubt, beating a confession out of someone.

Your arguments are getting weaker and weaker; time to give up I think.

Of those 18 wrongful convictions, how many had their personal evidence at multiple crimes scenes or were they all one off murders; wrong place /wrong time?

You want beyond all doubt, start looking at multiple murders and multiple rapist and pretty much any active child rapist and you will find enough evidence of that person at multiple crime scenes where doubt will never be in question.

And before you go all Perry Mason trying to impress greggy, I am well aware of the fact there in no legal concept of no doubt; so don't let your panties get all bunched up. You aren't the only one here who did a law subject at Uni.

Back to top

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: The Death Penalty is still drawin' a crowd (pt 2)
Reply #232 - Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:28pm

BigOl64 wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:18pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:10pm:

Do you trust our courts to know when theres no doubt though? They would have hung lindy chamberlain.

SOB

No they would not, didn't even come close to meeting the requirements of a capital case, also she was exonerated through the normal appeals process, so I have no idea where you come to that belief.

Also meat is hung, humans are hanged.

she was convicted for murder and given a life sentence. of COURSE it met the usual requirements of capital cases in most countries that have it. just because she didn't meet YOUR criteria doesn't mean it doesn't meet the usual criteria.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: The Death Penalty is still drawin' a crowd (pt 2)
Reply #233 - Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:31pm

Bobby. wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 12:25pm: