Hurrah for the US justice system

bamacellist says on Apr 4, 2008, 05:36:

Because of their ages and the lack of premeditation, it's not easy to predict what would happen to them here. What is the British court likely to do? Is "custodial sentence" another way of saying jail time?

"The great thing about human language is that it prevents us from sticking to the matter at hand."

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kalder says on Apr 4, 2008, 06:24:

Yes, jail time. The typical manslaughter sentence here is anything between 2-7 years. The factors you mention (age etc.) will mean it'll be more at the '2' end of things. They'll probably watch a bit of TV and be out in 14 months.

"kalder- have you ever had a woman?"--Sam Salmon

0 funny, 0 helpful.

morphus says on Apr 4, 2008, 06:46:

He might have a future in boxing after he gets out.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kalder says on Apr 4, 2008, 06:49:

He wouldn't have any future at all if it was up to me.

"kalder- have you ever had a woman?"--Sam Salmon

0 funny, 0 helpful.

morphus says on Apr 4, 2008, 06:52:

Perhaps it was a "lucky" punch.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kalder says on Apr 4, 2008, 06:58:

I was thinking that. An elbow strike could do that kind of damage consistently, but a hook wouldn't unless you were trained and/or particularly experienced.

"kalder- have you ever had a woman?"--Sam Salmon

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Robert Jorge says on Apr 4, 2008, 10:06:

Kalder, justice in the US is hit or miss. I had a friend murdered in Homestead, Florida on New Years Eve '97. The kid who shot him, 18 yrs. old at the time, was convicted of 2nd degree murder and spent less than 5 years in prison. He has since been married and has children from what I have heard.

--"I believe in making the world safe for our children. But not for our children's children, because I don't think that children should be having sex." - Jack Handy

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Lcacique says on Apr 4, 2008, 10:45:

"Despite great philosophical differences, supporters and opponents of the death penalty agree on one basic fact: the government should never put an innocent person to death.
In recent years, however, numerous studies have found that one in seven people sent to death row are later proven innocent. And in one disturbing recent case, a prisoner was 48 hours from execution when he was proven innocent. In the last 25 years, 102 innocent people have been released from death row."

It's not always that great.

http://www.aclu.org/capital/innocence/10362res20030510.html

I remember the scandal in Illinois a few years back when it was found that several Blacks on Death Row were tortured into confessing that they committed crimes. They were eventually released and the Governor revamped the death penalty.

Hoy se nota en la floresta un ambiente de alegría. ¡Y el rumor de ranchería es mas dulce y sabe a fiesta!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kalder says on Apr 4, 2008, 12:37:

You're right- I was only venting. Having a death penalty almost automatically means some innocent men will be killed alongside the guilty. It's not a good thing.

I'm sorry to hear about your friend Robert. It was echoed this evening over here when the sentences were announced on the news- the two killers got 4 years apiece. They'll be out in 2. Some justice huh?

"kalder- have you ever had a woman?"--Sam Salmon

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Robert Jorge says on Apr 4, 2008, 21:55:

I hear ya Kalder. And no worries about my buddy. That was a long time ago.

I am not anti-death penalty. I know there have been a few people who have later been found innocent after being sentenced to death. But they are very few, and most cases go decades in the past. "1 in 7" found innocent .... nahhh, I don't buy that. 1 is too many, but I would like to see real stats with references that 1 in 7 death penalty sentences involve an innocent offender. I would guess 1 in a 1000. But again, once is too many.

--"I believe in making the world safe for our children. But not for our children's children, because I don't think that children should be having sex." - Jack Handy

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Lcacique says on Apr 4, 2008, 23:54:

I think 1 in 7 sounds crazy as well; however, I do think the number is higher than a lot of people would imagine. And as you point out RJ, 1 is too many.

Hoy se nota en la floresta un ambiente de alegría. ¡Y el rumor de ranchería es mas dulce y sabe a fiesta!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid says on Apr 5, 2008, 09:26:

the problem with the death penalty is that you don't need any evidence whatsoever prior to the murder to convict someone; you don't need a body, for instance.

all the prosecution needs for a conviction is for the suspect to 'act guilty' after the murder.

even though i think scott peterson is guilty of the murder of his wife lacy, i would rather let these kinds of suspects released rather than convict an innocent person.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid says on Apr 5, 2008, 09:32:

this is one of the sadder parts of the U.S. criminal justice system:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080323-rick-rolled-to-child-por...

the fbi plants phony sites with no child porn and you get arrested for just clicking on it.

i'm for prosecuting child pornographers just like the next guy but the FBI is now planting phony sites and if any of you are to just click on the link.........you're arrested.

lots of innocent people have been arrested that the FBI freely admits had nothing to do with porn.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kalder says on Apr 6, 2008, 07:44:

An enormous British anti-paedophile campaign collapsed because Scotland Yard was using that kind of non-evidence, as had been supplied to them by the FBI.

"kalder- have you ever had a woman?"--Sam Salmon

0 funny, 0 helpful.

britabroad says on Apr 8, 2008, 10:43:

It's "Agent Provocateur", which is illegal in the UK. You'd think that Scotland Yard would have known that.
In the UK it's not enough to click on a porn link. You need evidence other than that, so only those who have downloaded or printed images from a site are prosecuted, as that's tangible.
Can't remember the name of the actor or entertainer (was it Matthew Kelly?) who was tried for looking at paedophilia web sites but found not guilty as he had not "acted" on what he found.
Seems like those making the laws ensure there's a loop hole somewhere, which they then exploit themselves. How many MP's have been arrested for sexual offences in the past?

Leave the big stick at home...carry a cannon!

0 funny, 0 helpful.