Originally Posted by BristolUK (Post 9638001)

This is the stuff that bothers me most about your posts. The options are presented as innocent or guilty. But I don't think anyone has suggested he's innocent. The reservations are about guilt. I'm not saying he's innocent. Something just doesn't look right and justice is supposed to be seen.

Originally Posted by BristolUK (Post 9638001)

Yes, one does assume the decisions were based on the evidence presented at the time. As has been stated, there was no physical evidence, just 9 witnesses.

Originally Posted by BristolUK (Post 9638001)

Since then 7 witnesses have indicated their statements were not what they would have said freely.

Originally Posted by BristolUK (Post 9638001)

You keep saying that which is now being questioned has been examined on the appeals. But with many cases in England through all their appeals it was clear from the investigations made that those people were not guilty of the crimes yet all those judges and Home Secretaries refused to recognise it. Then one day they did.

Originally Posted by BristolUK (Post 9638001)

If that can happen in the UK it can certainly happen in the US. And has.

The Death Penalty is a different issue. For now, though, I just think people would have been happy to have seen no execution while there are still doubts about more than 70% of the evidence used to convict him.

Is there no resource that you would trust to give you similar cause for concern rather than just assuming it's all been done as it should be?

Originally Posted by Almost Canadian (Post 9638020)

So if no one is suggesting he is innocent and the death penalty is the appropriate sentence, what is the issue? I don't understand how one cannot be either guilty or innocent.



I don't know, I wasn't at the trial.



When did they do this; how did they do this? Why have they not been put on trial for perjury?

I understand that one of the issues is that they were illiterate and, therefore, couldn't undertand the statements they signed. They gave oral evidence at the Trial. Don't you think that defence counsel would have made a huge issue about this? Even though, he was convicted.



Precisely. I am not suggesting that those that made the decision as to whether the appeal should go ahead acted appropriately, as I have no idea, but, I am led to believe, numerous appeals did go ahead. You are, essentially, stating that the Appeal Courts made the wrong decision as well. Maybe, just maybe, they didn't.

Originally Posted by Almost Canadian (Post 9638020)

So if no one is suggesting he is innocent and the death penalty is the appropriate sentence, what is the issue? I don't understand how one cannot be either guilty or innocent.

Originally Posted by ultrarunner (Post 9637012)

It seems everyone is against the death penalty, until an incident rings close to home for them, i.e if a drunk driver or speeding driver ran a member of your family over or broke into their house and killed them, what stance would you take?

Originally Posted by ultrarunner (Post 9637012)

It seems everyone is against the death penalty, until an incident rings close to home for them, i.e if a drunk driver or speeding driver ran a member of your family over or broke into their house and killed them, what stance would you take?

Originally Posted by Aviator (Post 9640044)

You don't think capital punishment is a bit extreme for speeding or drink driving?

Originally Posted by Almost Canadian (Post 9637938)

I have never suggested this.



I thought you were in the camp that, "All those that believe in deities are frothing loons." Why the reference to God?



Thank you for that advice. I can't quite believe it myself, but I have actually done what you suggested. It would appear from my review of what I have said, that my contributions can be summarized as follows:

a) The State is justified in executing some of its citizens - Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and the like (posts 3, 30);
b) Unless one has read all of the evidence and the judgments of those that made the decisions (to ascertain why the decision was made and upon what authority) one cannot really comment with any form of authority about the decision (posts 9, 41);
c) Those that believe that the man is innocent or guilty based upon what they read online and without reviewing all of the evidence are naive (post 13);
d) I have no knowledge of the facts of this case or the process that has been worked through (posts 21, 25, 30 and 51);
e) Is it a moral question, or a legal one? (post 15);
f) Is the US Justice System inherently racist? (posts 15, 18 & 34);
g) One wrong conviction is one too many (post 18);
h) One assumes the decisions were made based upon the evidence presented to the arbiter (posts 22, 30, 34, 41, 43 & 49);
i) What other solutions are there? (post 22);
j) Is killing during a war justified? (post 43); and
k) Where have a been a fool and responding to insults thrown by other posters? (posts 46 & 52).

I appreciate that there were a number of overlaping posts and that, interspersed with the above, other comments were made. At no point have I expressed an opinion upon whether the executed man was innocent or guilty. I really don't care, I appreciate that others do.

I don't believe that any of my posts have been insulting or offensive.

I have looked in the mirror and I noted that I am still the same overweight, middle aged, white man that I was when I went to bed last night.:p

I was not invited to join this forum by you and, IIRC, I have had a single discussion behind the scenes with the moderaters since I joined this forum. If my memory serves me correctly, that was before I came to Canada, so, some time ago.

Having taken your advice on board, here is a little for you: You don't have to read my posts, you don't have to respond to them. If you find me offensive or insulting in any way, report me to the moderators and, if they agree with you, I am confident they will take it up with me.

This is not your forum and anyone is permitted to comment on it in any way they wish, provided they stay within the rules. If you believe I have broken any such rules, again, report me to the moderators.

This is not the first time it would appear that you have attempted to chase people from the forum and, in my most respectful submission, that demonstrates extreme arrogance on your part. Should you not be the type that wishes to use the appropriate channels to complain about others, I respectfully suggest that you use the "Ignore" button.

Wishing you a very good day

Originally Posted by Aviator (Post 9640044)

You don't think capital punishment is a bit extreme for speeding or drink driving?

Originally Posted by CanadaJimmy (Post 9648842)

There have been too many incidents where Capital Punishment was used on people who were later proved to be innocent.

Originally Posted by Gremmie (Post 9648786)

No its not, you are in charge of a deadly weapon ( any vehicle) so driving drunk and killing some one should be handled as murder. The drunk arse f1ck that left me for dead on interstate 75 only got 15 years, luckily he has a very rare terminal cancer.:thumbsup::thumbsup:

Originally Posted by CanadaJimmy (Post 9648842)

There have been too many incidents where Capital Punishment was used on people who were later proved to be innocent.

Originally Posted by Gremmie (Post 9648786)

No its not, you are in charge of a deadly weapon ( any vehicle) so driving drunk and killing some one should be handled as murder. The drunk arse f1ck that left me for dead on interstate 75 only got 15 years, luckily he has a very rare terminal cancer.:thumbsup::thumbsup:

Originally Posted by iaink (Post 9648862)

I think he was referring to someone doing 100 in an 80 zone, or getting caught at a ride check, but I could be wrong.

I agree with you that killing or maiming someone if you are drunk in a car is treated far too leniently, or the charges get watered down for an easier conviction when what it really is is vehicular manslaughter, which should carry more severe penalties anyway. They were sober when they started the chain of events after all, there's no excuse.