M.Dancer Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 Who are they? Who did? Why not? David Milgard, Guy Paul Morin to name but two... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 David Milgard, Guy Paul Morin to name but two... Who did these guys convicted knowing they are innocent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 Who did these guys convicted knowing they are innocent? ummmm...english? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 ummmm...english? Is English still in jail? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 Is English still in jail? Must be because I don't think you are using it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 Must be because I don't think you are using it. What that has to do with your answer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 (edited) Who did these guys convicted knowing they are innocent? One more time. Could you rephrase this so it might be understood by english speakers? Edited October 28, 2010 by M.Dancer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 Sure we'll go back to where it started. In next post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 TrueMetis, on 27 October 2010 - 05:50 AM, said:Except for all the cases where they knew at the time he was innocent Who are "they"? covered up evidence and convicted him anyway. Who did? And we can never have a 100% success rate. Why not? Some are even recorded on video as they did it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handsome Rob Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 It is not the punishment method that works. It is the way how the system designed that controls the crime rate. When a system that has defined too many behavior as crime, so that too many people be defined as criminals, that simplify the legal peocess only according to the finial action, do not care about the fundamental reason that make lots of people to perform those action that has been listed in the criminal code, don't think more on making poor people able to live better life on their own, don't punish those who legaly bully others and rob others legaly, and kidnap others legaly, there will be people who will risk to crime, who will become mantally ill, who can not control their anger, who will do extream for money, and more. The way to reduce crime rate is to make the society more fair, make more people more happy, no punishment can solve the problem if you youself don't like to be threaten. I would argue, that their is a very strong argument, on a very strong inverse correlation between crime rate and mode wealth. Talk about America all you want, but compare Abbotsford/Mission BC (Murder Capital of Canada) to Omaha Nebraska, or in the opposite of Detroit compared to York Ontario. Crime statistics are a measure of how the society as a whole is functioning, not the justice system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 Except for all the cases where they knew at the time he was innocent but covered up evidence and convicted him anyway. And we can never have a 100% success rate. Even if for every thousand guilty people we execute only one innocent person dies that's to many. I hate to think about how many innocent people have been executed over the years...no doubt a lot of those executed who protested all the way to their doom were telling the truth...I recall a documentary on an american the "lipstick killer" a 17 yr old with no evidence against was tortured by police relentlessly, he finally confessed to three murders after being told confess and you get life otherwise it's the death penalty...he's 81yrs old and still in prison the case against him is a judicial nightmare Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 I hate to think about how many innocent people have been executed over the years...no doubt a lot of those executed who protested all the way to their doom were telling the truth... I recall a documentary on an american the "lipstick killer" a 17 yr old with no evidence against was tortured by police relentlessly, he finally confessed to three murders after being told confess and you get life otherwise it's the death penalty...he's 81yrs old and still in prison the case against him is a judicial nightmare That's why no one here is proposing capital punishment for circumstantial cases. Only clear case with clear evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 I hate to think about how many innocent people have been executed over the years...no doubt a lot of those executed who protested all the way to their doom were telling the truth... I don't know how many times this happened but if it was only once, it's one too many. I don't agree with the death penalty for two reasons. One is that humans who, from judges to juries, dispense the ultimate penalty are humans and just for that reason alone they are prone to errors. The second is that I want convicted and guilty murderers to spend the rest of their miserable lives 23 hours a day in a four by six cell having to relive the deeds that led to their lifetime incarceration. In the case of wrongful conviction, at least if the convicted person is alive, there is time to right a wrong if new evidence is uncovered. That said, I think the debate over capital punishment is over in Canada. It's interesting to talk about but capital punishment here is essentially shelved and murderers will (hopefully) be permanent guests in our prisons. And BTW, I read it's cheaper for taxpayers to incarcerate a murderer for life than to pay for years of appeal against a death sentence. Right there, that's a bonus IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 That's why no one here is proposing capital punishment for circumstantial cases. Only clear case with clear evidence. and some those past canadian cases like David Milgaard were clear cases with eye witnesses, who lied...other than catching someone in the act commiting the crime a clear case is rare...and even then it costs more to execute than to imprison for life,a life in prison is not a pleasant experience...at least when there is an error now they can have part of their life back, make an error with capital punishment and there is no way to reverse the mistake... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TrueMetis Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 Who are they? Who did? Guy Paul Morin David Milgaard Guy Paul Morin An inquiry culminating in the Kaufman Report into Morin's case also uncovered evidence of police and prosecutorial misconduct, and of misrepresentation of forensic evidence by the Ontario Centre of Forensic Sciences. David MilgaardLinda 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. I was going to look up my own but M.Dancer posted good enough ones. Why not? Because humans are not perfect and can never be perfect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 I don't know how many times this happened but if it was only once, it's one too many. I don't agree with the death penalty for two reasons. One is that humans who, from judges to juries, dispense the ultimate penalty are humans and just for that reason alone they are prone to errors. The second is that I want convicted and guilty murderers to spend the rest of their miserable lives 23 hours a day in a four by six cell having to relive the deeds that led to their lifetime incarceration. In the case of wrongful conviction, at least if the convicted person is alive, there is time to right a wrong if new evidence is uncovered. That said, I think the debate over capital punishment is over in Canada. It's interesting to talk about but capital punishment here is essentially shelved and murderers will (hopefully) be permanent guests in our prisons. And BTW, I read it's cheaper for taxpayers to incarcerate a murderer for life than to pay for years of appeal against a death sentence. Right there, that's a bonus IMO. well we don't agree on many issues capricorn but on this one I agree 110% ...I can think of about 5 murder cases in canada where innocent people were convicted and later released... I can't imagine the the hellish nightmare those people went through, they deserve every dollar then gain in compensation not that they can ever be compensated for years lost in prison, in one case 23 years... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 Guy Paul Morin David Milgaard Milgaard case was horrendous, a serial rapist (Fischer) lived right by the rape/murder scene...police had severe tunnel vision and refused to look at any other suspects...witnesses were pressured by police to testify they saw things they did not in order to get a conviction...Because humans are not perfect and can never be perfect. the justice system will never be perfect just when we think we know it all a new technology or a new insight into human behaviour proves us wrong... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 That's why no one here is proposing capital punishment for circumstantial cases. Only clear case with clear evidence. Like the Truscott case, perhaps? Even the Supreme Court of Canada, in 1967, had confirmed the original verdict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 well we don't agree on many issues capricorn but on this one I agree 110% ... I'm sure there are other things we agree on wyly. Life doesn't begin and end with our political views. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 (edited) The continued exoneration of people previously convicted of what would otherwise be capital crimes makes me MORE in favour of the death penalty now, not less. The advancements in forensic science and investigative techniques that led to their convictions being overturned also means that we can be far more certain that those who are convicted now actually are guilty. Really? People were also sure each and every people sentenced for child murder as a result of the expert testimony of Toronto's pathologist Charles Smith was guilty. Good thing that none of them could be sentenced to death, because the good doctor had made mistakes in 20 of the 45 cases he had testified on as an expert, leading to 13 convictions, many of them having been squashed since. A Royal Commission concluded in 2005 that the doctor was unqualified for the task involved, had committed serious professional mistakes and had actually lied or mislead courts on his competence, qualifications or even his findings. In Texas, Cameron Todd Willingham was executed in 2004 for the murder of his three children. The basis for the conviction was a forensic report that the fire that killed the children had been arson. Reports submitted before and after the execution by top experts in the field have concluded that the fire was without a doubt accidental, likely caused by faulty wires. judicial and administrative reviews of the case have been stalled by the State's Governor and attorney's. No amount of techniques or resources will change the fact that factors such as incompetence, errors in judgements or downright miscarriage of justice can and will happen. If anything, advances in techniques that have led to wrongful convictions being overturned make it clear that in most cases the problem was not the state of science at the time the crimes were prosecuted, but entirely human factors. Edited October 29, 2010 by CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 People were also sure each and every people sentenced for child murder "Sure" and clear evidence are two very different things. Example of clear evidence is million TV viwers witnessing the shooting by Denis Lortie. Another would be Bernardo own video tapes.... etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 That's why no one here is proposing capital punishment for circumstantial cases. Only clear case with clear evidence. And if it was that easy, we would never have had miscarriages. Unfortunately, "clear evidence" does not seem to be something easily defined. Does it include confessions? What if the confession turns out to have been coerced? Does it include video evidence? What happens if it turns out the video evidence has been altered? Is it eye witness testimony? There are no lack of examples of the dangers of eyewitness testimony. Like I said, want me to agree to sign on to capital punishment, then make a clause that everyone involved in the conviction are to be immediately taken out and shot if it turns out they executed an innocent man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 " Another would be Bernardo own video tapes.... etc. Except they never showed anyone being killed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 Except they never showed anyone being killed. Denis Lortie was watched by million viewers. As for Bernardo, not even his own defence denied who did it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 Denis Lortie was watched by million viewers. As for Bernardo, not even his own defence denied who did it. he could have pointed the finger at his wife, and she accused him, then who are you going to convict Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.