CMC said...

Forget the death penalty and just let the parents and family have 30 minutes alone with the guy who does that to their child.


Might mean the same thing eh?

At the risk of bringing some fact to an on-line discussion...

The vast majority of episodes of sexual abuse of a child are perpetrated by a family member. This sort of justice clearly does not work

worrier said...

Davage said...

Death penalty when there is absolutly no doubt in anyones mind. Should have been given to Martin Bryant, this Batman killer should get it to.

Devils advocate here but if your found gulity in a court of law isn't there automatically "absolutely no doubt" already. I mean if their is doubt then you can't be convictedInnocent until proven guilty.
Fark that almost sounds like something out of an old episode of "law and order"
I still say shoot the prick though.
W

No, the term used is "beyond reasonable doubt"

One of the first cases that I sat in a Jury, we need the judge to give a detailed explanation of reasonable doubt to us twice.

It's a difficult thing actually where you think somebody most likely did something, but, in the absence of hard evidence, there is enough reasonable doubt in your mind - and that is the art form of the criminal defence team - to create reasonable doubt....

There are cut and dry cases - cf "the Joker"
and there are those where murderers are convicted on enough circumstantial evidence that reasonable doubt is removed (but there is still possibly some doubt) - eg the Dingo

fingerbone said...

I don't advocate for the death penalty because innocent people pay the ultimate price sometimes. However for this Baby raper I would make an exception.

To have your exception happen, you will certainly have some advocating to do. Betcha don't.

Mr Fingerbone; did you know that the death penalty was completely abolished and outlawed in Australia with the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Torture Prohibition and Death Penalty Abolition) Bill 2009 passing the Australian Senate without amendments, in March 2010 ?

What do you think of the sentence for this South African guy?
abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=130199&page=1

What do you think of the sentence for this English guy?
www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3976244/One-month-old-baby-raped-and-battered.html

What do you think of the sentence for this teenage American (aged 17)?
www.keprtv.com/news/12136781.html

Stick him in jail with a sign on his back saying what he was convicted of .

Big bubba will sort him out .

Waterloo said...

worrier said...

Davage said...

Death penalty when there is absolutly no doubt in anyones mind. Should have been given to Martin Bryant, this Batman killer should get it to.

Devils advocate here but if your found gulity in a court of law isn't there automatically "absolutely no doubt" already. I mean if their is doubt then you can't be convictedInnocent until proven guilty.
Fark that almost sounds like something out of an old episode of "law and order"
I still say shoot the prick though.
W

No, the term used is "beyond reasonable doubt"

One of the first cases that I sat in a Jury, we need the judge to give a detailed explanation of reasonable doubt to us twice.

It's a difficult thing actually where you think somebody most likely did something, but, in the absence of hard evidence, there is enough reasonable doubt in your mind - and that is the art form of the criminal defence team - to create reasonable doubt....

There are cut and dry cases - cf "the Joker"
and there are those where murderers are convicted on enough circumstantial evidence that reasonable doubt is removed (but there is still possibly some doubt) - eg the Dingo

The trouble is that in closing addresses (summing up) at the end of a trial, defence lawyers always make it sound like if you have ANY doubt you must acquit.
Therefore, many many guilty people go free.

I seriously doubt ANY innocent people are convicted nowadays.

theDoctor said...


how could you possibly have ANY idea....?

OK, give me an example of a wrongful conviction in the last 10yrs in Australia.
I mean - after a conviction in a trial, it was later proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the person was innocent.

Not just "got off on appeal because the judge forgot to say one word to the jury" or similar. I mean evidence found later that totally 100% proved they were innocent.

I still assert that many guilty go free, and no innocents are convicted, given our legal system nowadays. Feel free to prove me wrong.

Whilst we're posting wiki info. The confusion during the trial of the last person executed in Aus should deter any thoughts of bringing capital punishment back.

I'd highly recommend reading the entire exert if you have a spare 30mins, read the book or watch the film(s).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Ryan

To put it in short...

Ronald Ryan was a career criminal (burglary/theft) and was convicted of shooting a warden whilst escaping prison to see his wife, whom he heard had filed for divorce. The details & conflicting eyewitness reports were very sketchy, and although he had many opportunities to shoot whilst escaping, it coincided with a shot from a distant tower to an unarmed (I think) warden that was standing very close to him. The shot was only admitted to many years after his execution by the warden that pulled the trigger...it was argued by another warden that there was no such shot.

Eyewitnesses have come forward since the execution that claim he never fired a shot and forensics never checked the gun or found a bullet or casing. His family still grieve (I know one of his daughters, married to a mate of mine), she & her siblings still obviously claim his innocence.

what are you basing this on mark? it's your own opinion. it's not 'easier to get off' these days. if anything it's more difficult; the laws have swung back in favour of harsher penalties and less leeway for accused persons.

and you don't prove your innocence in this country, never have. it's up to the prosecution to prove you're guilty.

Chris6791 said...

stamp said...

what are you basing this on mark? it's your own opinion. it's not 'easier to get off' these days. if anything it's more difficult; the laws have swung back in favour of harsher penalties and less leeway for accused persons.

and you don't prove your innocence in this country, never have. it's up to the prosecution to prove you're guilty.

Harsher penalties have no relevance at all (none, zero, zip) when it comes to how easy or hard it is to prove innocence or guilt. And the accused still has plenty of leeway, the whole process has always been geared towards their innocence and the benefit of any doubt is always in their favour.

...the whole process has always been geared towards their innocence and the benefit of any doubt is always in their favour.

Innocent until proven guilty.

If you want otherwise I suggest you move to the middle east, or similar.

I'd have to agree with Mark, it would be extremely rare, if at all that someone truly innocent get convicted of anything these days. And that's truly innocent, not getting off on a technicality or loophole, or off on appeal without unequivocal evidence they are innocent, or someone claiming innoncence via the moral high ground because they think the applicable law is unfair or unjust.

stamp said...

Chris6791 said...



Harsher penalties have no relevance at all (none, zero, zip) when it comes to how easy or hard it is to prove innocence or guilt.

i didn't word that very well. i meant the stricter requirements for some defences (eg provocation or insanity) that have been introduced.

I don't think it has really changed that much, the magistrate/judge/jury are guided by statute law and case law, a change in govt policy has little influence over this unless they re-word the legislation and new case law is created.

The insanity defense is always a dicey one to play, it usually only gets played for the more serious crimes, they might get off the conviction but it opens up the ablilty to be detained indefinitely under mental health legislation. Four or five years in prison for manslaughter, or indefinite detention in the Franklin Ward at Graylands???