Philips, your comments attempt to deprive me of MY piece of mind, in so much as 'I' will feel will feel 'peace' and 'tranquility'.

I care not what happens to the crim, he obviously didn't.

He knew full well what he was in for if he got caught.

HE GOT CAUGHT!

Sounds like you need to read my last post again a little more carefully, ALTRAV. Nothing you just said is even remotely related to my comments.

Alt Raver,

Back when I was a kid, a bloke in England named Evans was hanged for murders committed by another bloke named Christie. Christie went on to commit more murders, was arrested, properly tried, found guilty and hanged. By then, it was a bit late for Evans.

'Never to be released': that always allows for the possibility that a convicted person was actually innocent. It seems to be a superior procedure rather than their speedy execution.

Joe

Loudmouth, I feel the urge to agree with you, BUT, the risk of the real crim getting pardoned because of some highly paid scum lawyer is too much for me to justify letting him live.

As for the poor bastard who was wrongly convicted and consequently executed, I would punish all those involved in this poor man being charged and convicted. Now 'they' should go to jail.

The mis-carriage of justice started with the lazy, stupid law enforcement, then on through to the judiciary, and finally the stupid people of the jury.

As long as people keep duck shoveling their responsibilities to their fellow man, we will always just keep on stuffing up. So let's lay the blame where it is due. You, the people.

ALTRAV,

I am happy to report that pardons only happen in the US (in the civilised world, at least), and only presidents can issue them. Furthermore, I am not aware of a POTUS pardoning a dangerous or deranged criminal.

<<As for the poor bastard who was wrongly convicted and consequently executed, I would punish all those involved in this poor man being charged and convicted. Now 'they' should go to jail.>>

Your plan wouldn’t work, I’m afraid. All this would mean is that no-one would be willing to become a criminal lawyer, serve on a jury, or become an investigative cop. Your idea is flawed. There are certain cases in which immunity is required.

Worst of all, it wouldn’t bring back the poor bastard who was wrongfully executed, and there have been many of them.

<<As long as people keep duck shoveling their responsibilities to their fellow man, we will always just keep on stuffing up. So let's lay the blame where it is due. You, the people.>>

Would that then include you, as a supporter of outdated and unusual punishments?

P.S. Can I take your silence on my last post to you as an indication that you have now actually read it properly and have nothing to say in response?

Philips, in answer to your last question. I give your posts a cursory glance these days. It's very astute of you to pick up on the fact I don't read your posts anymore.

I have to accept I am only human and therefore flawed. As you have pointed out time and again. You are an educated and qualified man and therefore know best.

As for laying the blame on 'you the people', I do not include myself because I am aware of and always arguing for the people's participation in important matters and that we should keep on top of these scumbags.

Regarding the complete desertion of legal scumbags, good, it will make it easier to replace them with people who actually understand and live by the mantra of, 'duty of care', and not 'she'll be right mate'.

As for juries, what an asinine idea in the first place. Asking a dozen morons to decide the fate of another. That's only because the judge hand-balled the unpopular decision so he could not be held accountable for a wrong conviction.

Honestly who are these twelve extremely intelligent people who can come up with the right decision every time?