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

[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

[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.

[Natalie Severn]

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

Well have fun Caps---

[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.

[cappuccina]

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

[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

[caz]

By the way--why not you ask yourself a few questions:Ever changed your mind about anything at all, Caz? Ever wondered whether you were wrong over anything at all,Caz? You seem full of "certainty" that you are able to find so many faults in my posts!

All the time, Nats, all the time.

That's why I find it frustrating when I see anyone being totally dogmatic in a debating situation. I try to be open to all alternative views, unless they seem to be at total odds with the available facts.

I applaud you for being willing and able to change your own views, and you have a perfect right to do so, as often and as completely as you like. It's just that here you appeared to be having a go at Fish for a view you were quite strongly expressing yourself only a matter of days ago. That seemed more than a tad unfair.

Love,

Caz
X

[Natalie Severn]

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.

[Natalie Severn]

You did well Caz, even the "emboldening" was fair enough! Congratulations!
Ok. Well I think Ally and others have brought me round to more of an acceptance of the death penalty when it is carried out by a "lethal injection".I have always been untroubled by the death penalty for the crimes against humanity carried out by Hitler and his henchmen.And so long as there is no question of guilt or the wrong person being executed, for crimes of torture and murder carried out on children,for example those committed by Hindley and Brady -and I would include Ian Huntley here and his like; for the serial murders,rapes and mutilations that comprised the types of crimes against women that Sutcliffe committed .For these and similar murders I believe in the death penalty ie death by lethal injection.
Norma

By the way--why not you ask yourself a few questions:Ever changed your mind about anything at all, Caz? Ever wondered whether you were wrong over anything at all,Caz? You seem full of "certainty" that you are able to find so many faults in my posts!

[caz]

And this Nats:

'So what happens if a person who has killed as a result of mental health problems arising from an illness such as paranoid schizophrenia, ie due to an illness of the mind that was beyond his or her control? Do we hang these people by the neck too?'

I thought you were arguing recently on yet another thread that Sutcliffe genuinely saw himself on a moral 'mission' to clean the streets - which would make him mentally ill if you were correct, wouldn't it? Must be my mistake again.

And this:

'I was honestly a bit surprised there still was a 'Bring Back Hanging" lobby? Are you going to volunteer as Britain"s next hangman then Robert? Is this all to do with supporting fundamentalism of one kind or another?
I know there is a lot of public flogging ,public beheadings and a fair bit of public stoning in quite a few countries where fundamentalism is rife- and some thousands of women languishing in jails because they would prefer to live in a secular society ----in fact they would prefer to live under some sort of Democracy if possible.........but where is this going to end---are we actually going to lobby for widow burning to be allowed as well in honour of certain fundamentalist religious "revivals"?'

I'm not sure I see any significant difference between Robert's rope and your lethal injection in a 'where is this going to end' sense. I don't see why either need go any further, do you? Colonel Mustard with the rope in the library or Mrs White with the needle in the kitchen doesn't have to lead on to the Rev Green with fire or (brim)stones in the public square.

'But Robert,you havent answered my question.Why not go the whole hog and have public hangings ,the birch,the stocks, the pillory ,hands cut off for stealing a sheep .whoops---I forgot -it was a hanging offence wasnt it ? So why not go the whole hog?'

Why not ask the same questions of yourself, with your lethal injections?

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Yes Caz,but I am against public stonings and beheadings -not lethal injection for the likes of Sutcliffe.

Ah, sorry Nats, I must have entirely misunderstood what you were saying elsewhere regarding a female equivalent of Sutcliffe:

Very, very few people were taken in by this monstrous woman,who many did wish dead along with her grotesque lover,
but wishing someone dead is one thing, actually carrying out murder by law - state execution quite another.
I wouldnt want to go back to this primitive and quite revolting state punishment....

Love,

Caz
X

[mariab]

Quote:Is Pollyanna starting to understand the concept of despair through her struggles with Methuselah?
Nah, probably the other way around. Polyanna's despair pertains to more immediate, tangible troubles.

Caz, as always you're the voice of reason.

[Natalie Severn]

Yes Caz,but I am against public stonings and beheadings -not lethal injection for the likes of Sutcliffe.

[caz]

I must admit I don't really 'get' what's going on here.

Nats slags Fish off for expressing his dislike of the death penalty here on the Sutcliffe thread and I could have sworn I read her expressing the same dislike of the death penalty on the burka thread.

I do get why victims of serious crimes feel strongly about the subject and feel offended when they think others would have the offenders get off more lightly if it were up to them. But why does that apply here? Nobody to my knowledge has suggested that Sutcliffe has been treated too harshly up until now, and, if anything, most people here (apart from Ally) appear to think that a lethal injection would have been far too kind to the "street cleaning" scumbag. Street cleaning my arse.

It's all a wee bit academic if there is no way that Sutcliffe is ever going to be set free with a slap on the wrist, and no way he is ever going to face legal execution either. But if our politicians had the balls to introduce measures that would stop offenders like this having access to a penny more of taxpayer's money than is absolutely necessary for their barest survival needs, until the grim reaper sees fit to pay a visit, I imagine we would all sing with one voice and not keep beating each other up over stuff we either can't change or wouldn't want to change.

Love,

Caz
X

[Natalie Severn]

Is Pollyanna starting to understand the concept of despair through her struggles with Methuselah?.....