Quote:
|
Originally Posted by luvclub
That is true! Maybe we need to have more than just "proof beyond reasonable doubt" and have "proof beyond any doubt". And then have a death row period when they could appeal, before finally ending it.
In this case I think there is really no denying the evidence, but I do believe he wouldn't have pleaded guilty if he knew that he would get a death sentence instead of the automatic reduction in his sentence by a third.
|
The problem there is that, if you have 'proof beyond any doubt', there's no point in appealing. Unfortunately, having proof beyond doubt doesn't necessarily mean that you're right - in the classic case of Derek Bentley, the phrase 'Let him have it, Chris' could be used by both prosecution (ie 'shoot him, Chris) or defence (ie 'hand over the gun, Chris')
In fairness, you're probably right in that Sweeney wouldn't have pleaded guilty if there was the death penalty - however, he would have had to face a jury of his peers who would probably have found him guilty anyway...