Hoyt Weathers

I apologize for this off-topic posting since it does not relate to travel in Europe
in the slightest, but this is the only intelligent international venue to which I
have access.

As for my background, I was born and raised in Mississippi in the United States of
America in 1934. I am proud of my southern heritage. In a sense, I am of the Old
South. I do not automatically hold to the old views of capitol punishment such as
lynching, the Iron Maiden, being drawn and quartered, being boiled in oil, or being
beheaded.

I wish to know your personal opinion and your opinion of your country's laws and
implementation of punishment for capitol crimes. Why do you feel that way?

I have my opinions and views. I seek yours.

Yes, there will be trolls seeking a division and starting a ruckus on this OT. So be
it. Let them have their way and do not feed them with a reply. I will not reply to
any replies here and I may or may not reply to any msgs to my valid address above.

Hoyt W.

Owain

"Hoyt Weathers" wrote
    | I apologize for this off-topic posting since it does not relate to
    | travel in Europe in the slightest,

It might do. If you are facing extradition to a state for a crime which can
result in capital punishment you may be able to claim asylum in the EU. :-)

    | I wish to know your personal opinion and your opinion of your country's
laws and
    | implementation of punishment for capitol crimes. Why do you feel that way?

Generally opposed to capital punishment.
1. The state does not have the right to commit murder.
2. The justice system cannot be relied upon never to make a mistake. (This
AIUI was the major rationale behind its abolition in the UK.)

On the other hand, I object to paying taxes to keep people in prison for
long periods, especially those like some serial killers and sex offenders
who will never rehabilitate, and some categories of war criminals and
terrorists. If people commit grave crimes against society they lose their
rights to the benefits and support of society. So I would support a
contemporary equivalent to medieval banishment, or deportation. Parachute
the offenders onto a remote island with a year's rations, seeds, tools, etc.
and leave them to their fate. A bit like that reality TV show, except with
interesting people instead of third-rate celebs, and the knowledge they're
never coming back.

Owain

The Reids

Following up to Hoyt Weathers

    >but this is the only intelligent international venue to which I
    >have access.

Intelligent? Us?

    >I wish to know your personal opinion and your opinion of your country's laws and
    >implementation of punishment for capitol crimes. Why do you feel that way?

We feel George Bush has committed many capitol crimes and he
should be punished for it at the ballot box. As for capital
punishment its long gone. Funnily enough there was just a
programme about the abolition of it on the radio. The last two to
be hanged having been (if I heard correctly) in one case innocent
and in the other a women who, while pregnant, was punched in the
stomach by her lover causing a miscarriage.
So, in UK, there are no capital crimes except, I believe in
theory, high treason?
--
Mike Reid
If god wanted us to be vegetarians he wouldn't have made animals out of meat.
Wasdale-Lake district-Thames path-London "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" <-- you can email us@ this site
Eat-walk-Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" <-- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

Arwel Parry

In message <[email protected]>, The Reids
<[email protected]> writes
    >Following up to Hoyt Weathers
    >>but this is the only intelligent international venue to which I
    >>have access.
    >Intelligent? Us?
    >>I wish to know your personal opinion and your opinion of your
    >>country's laws and
    >>implementation of punishment for capitol crimes. Why do you feel that way?
    >We feel George Bush has committed many capitol crimes and he
    >should be punished for it at the ballot box. As for capital
    >punishment its long gone. Funnily enough there was just a
    >programme about the abolition of it on the radio. The last two to
    >be hanged having been (if I heard correctly) in one case innocent
    >and in the other a women who, while pregnant, was punched in the
    >stomach by her lover causing a miscarriage.
    >So, in UK, there are no capital crimes except, I believe in
    >theory, high treason?

No, all provision for the death penalty in the UK was abolished when the
6th Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights was ratified on
20th May 1999. We're just coming up to the 40th anniversary of the last
executions in the UK, on 13th August 1964, when Peter Anthony Allen and
Gwynne Owen Evans were hanged for the murder of John Alan West in a
burglary -- they were guilty, alright. The last woman to be hanged was
Ruth Ellis on 13 July 1955, and there was no doubt that she'd shot her
lover.

However the main reason for not executing people is that in far too many
cases evidence later comes to light that the person convicted didn't do
it. It's no good saying "sorry" to a corpse, but if they're still in
jail at least you can make some amends. Back when we did still hang
people, the executions normally took place between 3 and 7 weeks after
the trial, which I think was a lot kinder than the barbaric US practice
of keeping people on death row for about 20 years before doing them in,
but it didn't allow much time for new evidence to come to light.
http://murderfile.net/ is interesting -- it contains details of all UK
executions between 1900 and 1964.

It may perhaps be significant that even Albert Pierrepoint, Chief
Executioner of the UK 1941-1956, who officiated at 450 executions, did
not think that the death penalty deterred people from committing murder,
writing in his autobiography: "I have come to the conclusion that
executions solve nothing, and are only an antiquated relic of a
primitive desire for revenge which takes the easy way and hands over the
responsibility for revenge to other people...The trouble with the death
penalty has always been that nobody wanted it for everybody, but
everybody differed about who should get off."

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Pierrepoint

--
Arwel Parry
http://www.cartref.demon.co.uk/

The Reids

Following up to Arwel Parry

    > The last woman to be hanged was
    >Ruth Ellis on 13 July 1955, and there was no doubt that she'd shot her
    >lover.

It was her who was punched in her pregnant abdomen. In France I
think that would have mitigated the case.

    >However the main reason for not executing people is that in far too many
    >cases evidence later comes to light that the person convicted didn't do
    >it. It's no good saying "sorry" to a corpse

Yes, a good practical reason that saves even worrying about
"higher" issues.
--
Mike Reid
If god wanted us to be vegetarians he wouldn't have made animals out of meat.
Wasdale-Lake district-Thames path-London "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" <-- you can email us@ this site
Eat-walk-Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" <-- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

Olivers

The Reids extrapolated from data available...

    > Following up to Hoyt Weathers
    >
    >>but this is the only intelligent international venue to which I
    >>have access.
    >
    > Intelligent? Us?
    >
    >>I wish to know your personal opinion and your opinion of your
    >>country's laws and implementation of punishment for capitol crimes.
    >>Why do you feel that way?
    >
    > We feel George Bush has committed many capitol crimes and he
    > should be punished for it at the ballot box. As for capital
    > punishment its long gone. Funnily enough there was just a
    > programme about the abolition of it on the radio. The last two to
    > be hanged having been (if I heard correctly) in one case innocent
    > and in the other a women who, while pregnant, was punched in the
    > stomach by her lover causing a miscarriage.
    > So, in UK, there are no capital crimes except, I believe in
    > theory, high treason?

A. It's "Capital", not "Capitol" (which is a building).

B. As for President Bush, he just as his predecessor as Governor, the
Democrat and Liberal Ann Richards, allowed the execution of folks sentenced
to death by juries in the state. IIRC, the "quickest" recent execution, a
guy who refused to appeal or to accept the aid of appellate counsel, took
about 8 years, so nobody sentenced to death while Bush was Governor has
even been executed yet.

C. The voters and the state Legislatures of states which have adopted
capital punishment have spoken pretty overwhelmingly in its favor. In
every case, they have defined the nature of the crimes for which capital
punishment can be awarded as substantially more heinous than your everyday
murder, generally involving either the commission of another violent crime
such as armed robbery or kidnapping, "murder for hire", etc., and the
process required for a death sentence is even more complex. The average
wait for the exhausting of state and federal appeals processes is well over
a decade. There are states which have no capital punishment. Their voters
and legislatures have the right and privilege to determine the fate of
those convicted of crimes within their states.

D. Federal executions are few and far between, and the only recent
example, Tim McVeigh, the OKC bomber with 169 or so deaths to his credit,
was sentenced to death during the Clinton administration. There was
certainly no great ground swell, even among opponents to capital
punishment, to save his sorry hide. Momentarily, I think there is one
other person under a federal death sentence, a convicted drug smuggler who
controlled competiton by having his competitors and a few innocent
witnesses killed.

E. The US Supreme Court has for practical purposes banned the execution of
the mentally retarded (a sort of generic classification extending to anyone
whose tested IQ falls below 70, a standard questionale in both "quantity"
and the fact that a clever criminal-to-be might hope to avoid death by
starting early to do poorly on IQ tests and cozen school counselors as to
his actual capacity. Next on the Court's list are the infrequent death
sentences awarded to those who commit capital crimes before their 18th
birthdays (of whom there are few around, including a lad who shot an
elderly couple to death in the garage one evening after robbing them, by
his own admission to eliminate identifying witnesses and was likely made
even more liable for harsh punishment since the couple were the parents of
a federal judge which tended to stimulate local state court prosecutors who
might otherwise have let the kid "cop a plea").

Is capital punishment good or bad? Likely neither answer really matters,
and in final analysis, it may be no crueler than a lifetime in prison
without hope of release.

Is it a deterrent? Of course, for not a single person ever executed has
killed again.

TMO

barney

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Olivers) wrote:

    > The Reids extrapolated from data available...
    >
    > > Following up to Hoyt Weathers
    > >
    > >>but this is the only intelligent international venue to which I
    > >>have access.
    > >
    > > Intelligent? Us?
    > >
    > >>I wish to know your personal opinion and your opinion of your
    > >>country's laws and implementation of punishment for capitol crimes.
    > >>Why do you feel that way?
    > >
    > > We feel George Bush has committed many capitol crimes and he
    > > should be punished for it at the ballot box. As for capital
    > > punishment its long gone. Funnily enough there was just a
    > > programme about the abolition of it on the radio. The last two to
    > > be hanged having been (if I heard correctly) in one case innocent
    > > and in the other a women who, while pregnant, was punched in the
    > > stomach by her lover causing a miscarriage.
    > > So, in UK, there are no capital crimes except, I believe in
    > > theory, high treason?
    >
    > A. It's "Capital", not "Capitol" (which is a building).
    >
    > B. As for President Bush, he just as his predecessor as Governor, the
    > Democrat and Liberal Ann Richards, allowed the execution of folks
    > sentenced to death by juries in the state. IIRC, the "quickest" recent
    > execution, a guy who refused to appeal or to accept the aid of
    > appellate counsel, took about 8 years, so nobody sentenced to death
    > while Bush was Governor has even been executed yet.
    >
    > C. The voters and the state Legislatures of states which have adopted
    > capital punishment have spoken pretty overwhelmingly in its favor. In
    > every case, they have defined the nature of the crimes for which
    > capital punishment can be awarded as substantially more heinous than
    > your everyday murder, generally involving either the commission of
    > another violent crime such as armed robbery or kidnapping, "murder for
    > hire", etc., and the process required for a death sentence is even more
    > complex. The average wait for the exhausting of state and federal
    > appeals processes is well over a decade. There are states which have
    > no capital punishment. Their voters and legislatures have the right
    > and privilege to determine the fate of those convicted of crimes within
    > their states.
    >
    > D. Federal executions are few and far between, and the only recent
    > example, Tim McVeigh, the OKC bomber with 169 or so deaths to his
    > credit, was sentenced to death during the Clinton administration.
    > There was certainly no great ground swell, even among opponents to
    > capital punishment, to save his sorry hide. Momentarily, I think there
    > is one other person under a federal death sentence, a convicted drug
    > smuggler who controlled competiton by having his competitors and a few
    > innocent witnesses killed.
    >
    > E. The US Supreme Court has for practical purposes banned the execution
    > of the mentally retarded (a sort of generic classification extending to
    > anyone whose tested IQ falls below 70, a standard questionale in both
    > "quantity" and the fact that a clever criminal-to-be might hope to
    > avoid death by starting early to do poorly on IQ tests and cozen school
    > counselors as to his actual capacity. Next on the Court's list are the
    > infrequent death sentences awarded to those who commit capital crimes
    > before their 18th birthdays (of whom there are few around, including a
    > lad who shot an elderly couple to death in the garage one evening after
    > robbing them, by his own admission to eliminate identifying witnesses
    > and was likely made even more liable for harsh punishment since the
    > couple were the parents of a federal judge which tended to stimulate
    > local state court prosecutors who might otherwise have let the kid "cop
    > a plea").
    >
    > Is capital punishment good or bad? Likely neither answer really
    > matters, and in final analysis, it may be no crueler than a lifetime in
    > prison without hope of release.
    >
    > Is it a deterrent? Of course, for not a single person ever executed
    > has killed again.
    >
    > TMO

Sjoerd

"Hoyt Weathers" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...
    > I apologize for this off-topic posting since it does not relate to travel
in Europe
    > in the slightest, but this is the only intelligent international venue to
which I
    > have access.
    > As for my background, I was born and raised in Mississippi in the United
States of
    > America in 1934. I am proud of my southern heritage. In a sense, I am of
the Old
    > South. I do not automatically hold to the old views of capitol punishment
such as
    > lynching, the Iron Maiden, being drawn and quartered, being boiled in oil,
or being
    > beheaded.
    > I wish to know your personal opinion and your opinion of your country's
laws and
    > implementation of punishment for capitol crimes. Why do you feel that way?
    > I have my opinions and views. I seek yours.

My opinion: capital punishment is Medieval and backward and all real
democracies should get rid of it. Men should not kill other men. I know
murders happen, and murderers who are caught should be safely locked away.

Sjoerd

Tam

On 30/7/04 10:20, in article [email protected], "Owain"
<[email protected]> wrote:

    > "Hoyt Weathers" wrote
    > | I apologize for this off-topic posting since it does not relate to
    > | travel in Europe in the slightest,
    >
    > It might do. If you are facing extradition to a state for a crime which can
    > result in capital punishment you may be able to claim asylum in the EU. :-)

That's the Soering case of the ECHR, which concerned the extradition to the
USA of a German national who had murdered his girlfriend's father in the USA
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/Hudoc2doc\HEJUD\sift\204.txt

The inquirer, in addition to misspelling the term, hasn't done any homework.
It's irksome to have even seriously-intended queries that ask, in the
aggregate, for a lot of thought and effort, when the answer is easily found
on Google.

The matter of the death penalty in Europe is largely overseen, i.e. Studied
and argued and decided, in the context of the Council of Europe, Strasbourg.
There is a rather complete file on the subject, at
http://www.coe.int/T/E/Com/Files/The...ty/default.asp

Virtually all European countries have abolished the death penalty and have
committed themselves by treaty never to impose it.

Arwel Parry

In message <BD30604E.1E1C0%[email protected]>, Tam
<[email protected]> writes
    >On 30/7/04 10:20, in article [email protected], "Owain"
    ><[email protected]> wrote:
    >> "Hoyt Weathers" wrote
    >> | I apologize for this off-topic posting since it does not relate to
    >> | travel in Europe in the slightest,
    >> It might do. If you are facing extradition to a state for a crime which can
    >> result in capital punishment you may be able to claim asylum in the EU. :-)
    >That's the Soering case of the ECHR, which concerned the extradition to the
    >USA of a German national who had murdered his girlfriend's father in the USA
    >http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/Hudoc2doc\HEJUD\sift\204.txt
    >The inquirer, in addition to misspelling the term, hasn't done any homework.
    >It's irksome to have even seriously-intended queries that ask, in the
    >aggregate, for a lot of thought and effort, when the answer is easily found
    >on Google.
    >The matter of the death penalty in Europe is largely overseen, i.e. Studied
    >and argued and decided, in the context of the Council of Europe, Strasbourg.
    >There is a rather complete file on the subject, at
    >http://www.coe.int/T/E/Com/Files/The...ty/default.asp
    >Virtually all European countries have abolished the death penalty and have
    >committed themselves by treaty never to impose it.

Ireland went even further. The last execution there was in 1954, and the
death penalty was removed from the laws in 1990. In 2001 the 21st
amendment to the Irish Constitution was passed which prevents the
Oireachtas (Parliament) from re-instating the death penalty. (The
Constitution has provisions to allow the government to do virtually
anything during a "national emergency"; this amendment makes imposing
capital punishment the only thing the government is forbidden to do).

--
Arwel Parry
http://www.cartref.demon.co.uk/

EvelynVogtGamble

Owain wrote:


    > On the other hand, I object to paying taxes to keep people in prison for
    > long periods, especially those like some serial killers and sex offenders
    > who will never rehabilitate, and some categories of war criminals and
    > terrorists. If people commit grave crimes against society they lose their
    > rights to the benefits and support of society. So I would support a
    > contemporary equivalent to medieval banishment, or deportation. Parachute
    > the offenders onto a remote island with a year's rations, seeds, tools, etc.
    > and leave them to their fate. A bit like that reality TV show, except with
    > interesting people instead of third-rate celebs, and the knowledge they're
    > never coming back.

Better yet, send them to perform the "hard labor" of creating habitable
colonies on other planets! (It worked for Australia - which is now a
thriving and respected nation, rather than the original colony of "hard
core" criminals.)

True, it would be expensive - but how much more expensive than keeping
them in prison for life? (And the entire human race might someday
benefit from their contributions.)

Tam

On 30/7/04 23:22, in article [email protected],
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Better yet, send them to perform the "hard labor" of creating habitable
    > colonies on other planets! (It worked for Australia - which is now a
    > thriving and respected nation, rather than the original colony of "hard
    > core" criminals.)

Euro-illegal. See the European Convention on Human Rights, 4th Protocol. On
the CoE web site,
http://conventions.coe.int/

David Horne

Arwel Parry <[email protected]> wrote:

    > However the main reason for not executing people is that in far too many
    > cases evidence later comes to light that the person convicted didn't do
    > it.

I don't think there is a consensus on the 'main reason' here. The reason
I don't support the DP is because I think it's barbaric- and I'd think
that even if the person being executed clearly committed the crime.

David

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

Olivers

Arwel Parry extrapolated from data available...


    >
    > Ireland went even further. The last execution there was in 1954, and
    > the death penalty was removed from the laws in 1990. In 2001 the 21st
    > amendment to the Irish Constitution was passed which prevents the
    > Oireachtas (Parliament) from re-instating the death penalty. (The
    > Constitution has provisions to allow the government to do virtually
    > anything during a "national emergency"; this amendment makes imposing
    > capital punishment the only thing the government is forbidden to do).
    >

One assumes that like most written constitutions, the people possess,
either directly or thru a legislative body, the right to amend the
document. Normally, amendments, as in the US, require some sort of
"Super Majority, i.e., approval by the legislatures of 2/3 of the states.
Having amended the Irish Constitution to ban the death penalty, what
prevents a an electorate of different sympathies generations from today's
from repealing the amendment which banned capital punishment?

Obviously, the same criteria applies to any PanEuropean governmental
structure, and that circumstances and sentiments could certainly alter the
current perspective (just as changing perspectives brought an end to
capaital punishment).

History makes it pretty easy to become cycnical when it comes to
governments and popular issues. After all, in both the Americas and in
Europe in our lifetimes, we've been amazingly cyncial about various blatant
instances of genocide when they occured at a distance and in a
communications gap which made them something other than "front page" news.
I suspect that we might haved accomplished a greater (in a numeric sense at
least) savings of life by earlier and more intensely exhibiting revulsion
at the excesses of mutual ethnic cleansing as seemed so popular in
fragmenting Yugoslavia, or doing something to halt mass murder in Rwanda
(or currently by forcing the adoption of something a little stronger than
criticism toward the government of Sudan which seems through weakness or
callous indifference ignore a grotesque array of "executions" far in excess
of even the most bloodthirst of states does away with convicted murderers).

Capital punishment is easier, "up close and personal" as it were, involving
identifiable prisoners who are at least in the US substantially privileged
with unlimited correspondence, media interviews, court and self appointed
appellate counsel and public demonstrators to make the case for banning the
"inhuman practice". One wishes that that same band of committed adhrents
and supporters would assemble outside the Sudanese embassies around the
civilized world and ask for the same treatment for the puir wee Christians
and animists of that country's Southern regions.

Perhaps the two lasses from PETA who disrobed in the nearby city yesterday
to protest the circus's wicked exploitation of elephants could raise their
sights and take off their panties in front of random Sudanese diplomats or
the UN's HQ. How many little childrens' deaths does it take to match or
exceed the sad fate of a mistreated elephant? Is one executed murderer,
his or her crime so heinous as to meet the jury's threshold of revulsion,
worth more than 10,000 African tribesmen chopped into bloody gobbets?

I'm not sure that for all the conscience and care we display (and so loudly
and self-servedly emote over) these days that our civilization has really
advanced much over that of our forefathers which had real trouble
comprehending moral responsibility when it came to Jewish refugees or any
of the countless other examples of man's mass inhumanity to man.

TMO

Donna Evleth

Dans l'article <[email protected]>, Olivers
<[email protected]> a écrit :


    > Is it a deterrent? Of course, for not a single person ever executed has
    > killed again.
    > TMO

"Deterrence" is not quite the right word here. Generally it's called
"incapacitation." Deterrence is before the fact, incapacitation after it.

Donna Evleth