Sutcliffe launches legal challenge against 'die in jail' ruling.

[caz]

My --you have got it in for me Caz.
Well, fair enough:I am not for public floggings,the birch etc.And I dispute that there is any similarity between the public beheadings and stonings of women for adultery say,in certain Middle and far East countries and a lethal injection for Hindley,Sutcliffe and co.No comparison in either the crime or the punishment .There is a question of degree in all this in my view -but I am not going to debate the merits of stoning or hanging versus a lethal injection.

Regarding the mentally ill.Absolutely no question that there should be no death penalty if the person can be shown to have taken "instructions" from his auditory or visual hallucinations-in other words if the person was suffering from a psychotic episode.The person here is so clearly not responsible for their actions.
Sutcliffe was assessed and found not insane.So were Brady, Hindley and Huntley.It is however the case that Sutcliffe feigned insanity but several psychiatrists said he was faking it.

Hi Nats,

Infamy, infamy...

I agree with you actually on the no similarity thing, which is why I couldn't understand why you sought to compare poor Robert's views on hanging scum like Hindley and Brady with public beheadings and stonings of women for mere adultery. I'm not responsible for what you post, Nats, but I have the right to point out when you are being inconsistent, especially when you are busy criticising other posters for arguments you have made yourself!

I'm glad to hear you don't really take Sutcliffe's 'mission' claim seriously. But I'm pretty sure you used this to make a comparison between him and Alphon on the A6 thread, suggesting that Alphon may have seen himself on a similar mission to clean the streets of courting couples in cars!

Love,

Caz
X

[cappuccina]

(*popping more popcorn, and enjoying the show...*)

[Natalie Severn]

I agree with you actually on the no similarity thing, which is why I couldn't understand why you sought to compare poor Robert's views on hanging scum like Hindley and Brady with public beheadings and stonings of women for mere adultery.

Robert happens to be a mate of mine I"ll have you know,Caz.A very ,good friend too and someone I have posted with on casebook for years, is Robert , so don"t come that one,Caz. It wont work. It was on a different thread anyway,as I recall-the Burka thread I think. I probably don"t agree with Robert over what he was saying back then but it doesnt matter,we agree on enough to still be good friends.
Caz, by "decontextualising" my posts like this I can"t even find them-when or where they were posted-Oh Well no matter!But you seem to really love "digging up" my old posts --especially ones that were posted last week ---and are bound to be "last week " by the time you have decontextualised them and represented them! Oh well--you dig away--if thats what you enjoy doing, but I may not bother to reply if its too much of a drag---especially if you now intend monopolizing this thread ,like you have on others, because of the problems you have with me.

[Natalie Severn]

(*popping more popcorn, and enjoying the show...*)

Well have fun Caps---

[Garry Wroe]

That, Caz, was a demolition job of which Fred Dibnah himself would have been proud. But then, what do I know? I am, after all, of a certain age.

Regards.

Garry Wroe.

[caz]

Robert happens to be a mate of mine I"ll have you know,Caz.A very ,good friend too and someone I have posted with on casebook for years, is Robert , so don"t come that one,Caz. It wont work. It was on a different thread anyway,as I recall-the Burka thread I think. I probably don"t agree with Robert over what he was saying back then but it doesnt matter,we agree on enough to still be good friends.
Caz, by "decontextualising" my posts like this I can"t even find them-when or where they were posted-Oh Well no matter!But you seem to really love "digging up" my old posts --especially ones that were posted last week ---and are bound to be "last week " by the time you have decontextualised them and represented them! Oh well--you dig away--if thats what you enjoy doing, but I may not bother to reply if its too much of a drag---especially if you now intend monopolizing this thread ,like you have on others, because of the problems you have with me.

What a very strange post, Nats.

You strongly disagreed with Robert for favouring the death penalty, which was absolutely fair enough - he's a big boy and he can obviously take it, although I'm not sure what being a 'good friend' has to do with anything. This is a debate, where good friends and strangers and everyone in between should be on an equal footing, and only what we write and how we express it should matter.

But then you attacked Fish and told him to 'bugger off' for not favouring the death penalty. You justified this by saying that you'd had a sudden change of heart on the matter - which is fine, but hardly Fish's fault.

And it's hardly my fault that your posts were on different threads and you can't keep up with where you wrote what about whom. It's all very recent and I had no trouble at all remembering and finding it.

Love,

Caz
X

[Natalie Severn]

Caz,
I am getting sick and tired of you playing these stupid games.If you want to discredit me and what I write and say ,just say so --and explain why, instead of raking up old posts from other threads all the time .You drone on and on and on like a stuck needle .As Claire told you a week or so ago when you decided to have a go at her ---- its so tiresome -go find someone else to pick on .

[Stephen Thomas]

Oh dear, ok the bottom line is this....

Let someone devise a watertight foolproof worldwide formula for who gets executed and who doesn't for taking a life.

Tricky isn't it?

[Robert]

Stephen, maybe the liberals could come up with a watertight foolproof worldwide formula for whether to release such "people."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10735857

Even trickier!

[mariab]

Yes, I can imagine the feasibility of a “watertight foolproof formula“ on criminal law! I wonder how come that the only instance I can think of is the sharia?
Pertaining to “watertight“, I already find it an attainment that my cheap waterproof watch manages to hold up under the pouring rain.

[Natalie Severn]

******* hell. Whisky. Back slaps. The odd kiss, if I'm of a mind. Here's the reality: life sucks. Sometimes things hurt so badly that we don't even know our own minds anymore. The only thing we can do is struggle through it the best we can, and reach out hands to others from time to time.

You know, maybe somewhere between all of this, there's some truth, or at least some resolution, that can be attained. Getting there, though, requires at least considering the opposite perspective. I don't see how else we can recalibrate our moral compasses from time to time.

Then again, maybe not. Maybe it's just too complicated an issue to do anything but yell and generalise. And maybe, in the end, that's what makes us human: both our failing and our salvation.

I'm off fer a gin.

Lovely post---and yes life can "suck" ,Claire-too true---but lets take a leaf out of Pollyanna"s book and look on the bright side! It can be beautiful too!

[Natalie Severn]

Yes, I can imagine the feasibility of a “watertight foolproof formula“ on criminal law! I wonder how come that the only instance I can think of is the sharia?
Pertaining to “watertight“, I already find it an attainment that my cheap waterproof watch manages to hold up under the pouring rain.

But tonight"s news Maria---from Iran.......

[claire]

Okay, Nats, I am giving it a go and am making like Pollyanna, pigtails and all...actually, not a good look at my age... But you've a point, actually--there're plenty of things to celebrate...but I'd best hold off til the conference to let fly on that front! My liver's not what it was...

And, ugh, the stuff in Iran...what is that cr*p about judicial discretion, allowing them to say guilty in the absence of evidence? Sheesh. Makes me grateful I won the lottery of birth-place.

[Roy Corduroy]

Good evening Zodiac and crew

Why did he not get the "whole life tariff" at the original sentencing?

Roy

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks Claire......looking forward to seeing you at the conference
Iran-certainly sobering and a reminder that here,in the UK we have come a long way in terms of human rights in the past 150 years!