Capital punishment only works if the punishment occurs in a timely manner, given the prison environment especially for pedophiles I believe capital punishment to be a less severe sentence than life.
|
Capital punishment only works if the punishment occurs in a timely manner, given the prison environment especially for pedophiles I believe capital punishment to be a less severe sentence than life.
If you do not believe in MAGIC, Consider how currency has value simply by printing it, and is then traded for real assets.
.
Gold is the money of kings, silver is the money of gentlemen, barter is the money of peasants - but debt is the money of slaves
.
There simply is no "Happy Spam" If you do it you will disappear from this forum.
|
I initially made a claim like that in the first one I did (the unit consisted of 3 assignments) Unfortunately I couldn't find anything to reference it to, so I lost some marks. I made an insinuation that capital punishment can be the most dignifying thing for some people, because can you imagine how a rapist or pedophile would spend their time in jail? This was of course an attempt to defend the far-flung claim that capital punishment is barbaric. Kinda like putting a sick animal out of their misery I guess.Originally Posted by Joe S.
|
I had to have my German Shepard put down, due to advanced Gastric cancer, A shot of pain killer and the potassium chloride, he was gone before he knew it, lights out. Seems like a pretty good way to go. I would sure prefer it to prison.
If you do not believe in MAGIC, Consider how currency has value simply by printing it, and is then traded for real assets.
.
Gold is the money of kings, silver is the money of gentlemen, barter is the money of peasants - but debt is the money of slaves
.
There simply is no "Happy Spam" If you do it you will disappear from this forum.
|
What does the phrase "Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" mean to you?
|
That's an easy one.
1. Eye Witness(s)
2. DNA
3. Motive
4. Possession of victim's belongings
5. The accused's belongings at the scene
Give me 3 or more of those and I'll give you a guilty verdict.
But in a rape case I'd probably return a guilty verdict from just DNA alone and a believable testimony from the victim.
Last edited by T.Jackson; - 19th March 2008 at 09:45.
|
Man accused of killing his wife.
1. Eye Witness(s) = No.
2. DNA = Yes, this is his home.
3. Motive = Not known.
4. Possession of victim's belongings = Yes, this was her home.
5. The accused's belongings at the scene = Yes, this is his home.
|
No jury would convict on that. Those big 5 assume no association with the victim. I think a lot of people would convict with just DNA & motive, when it can be proven that the accused has never been associated in any way whatsoever with the victim. But as for the guy accused of killing his wife goes, the case really needs cold hard evidence like; murder weapon, blood stains on clothing, and a really sound motive. In cases like the one you describe that lacks psychical evidence, the police would be chasing a confession. The other thing to keep in mind is that, without motive, murder is impossible to trial (unless of course the accused is some sort of deranged psychopath) No one commits homicide without reason.
Members who have read this thread : 0You do not have permission to view the list of names.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks