Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gogogo
I've only recently changed my mind on this topic. I think there is a need now for the death penalty, providing the defendant is proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt and the jury is unanimous. Certainly, it should apply with the murder of police officers, multiple murders and terrorist acts.
|
That would be the majority of cases then ... For a start, beyond reasonable doubt is the standard that
all criminal cases have to pass. You can't convict someone otherwise. As for jury unanimity, I have no statistics on that, but I know that judges do not accept majority verdicts unless jury deliberations have failed to produce a verdict after an extended period.
I wonder whether the Guildford Four were unanimously convicted? Or the Birmingham Six? I mean, they were Irish, weren't they? They were in the IRA whether we could prove it or not, they were definitely up to no good. No need for the well-meaning jury to know the confessions were beaten out of them, or forged, eh?
I wonder whether Angela Cannings was unanimously convicted of murdering two of her babies thanks to the dodgy evidence of that arrogant ar$e of an 'expert' witness, Roy Meadow? I would have thought multiple murderers would be prime candidates for the hemp fandango, were we to return to such barbarism.