[newfette]

why do you have trouble believing me?

I think there are more important things then wasting money on something from 86 years ago.
at that time they did something they though was right based on the information they had. i honestly believe that the money they spent on this could have been better spent on something usefull and relative to this day and age

[Robair]

I'm sure the victims and the victims families pay taxes...

[Alta_redneck]

newfette wrote:

you dont have to be on board with the death penalty to agre this was a waste of tax payers dollars that could have been spent on something much more useful

why open a can of worms from 86 years ago?

I think it has more to do with clearing the family name, than trying to bring back a dead man. Now the family tree can read, “ Uncle Colin businessman, saloon owner,” instead of “Uncle Colin pedophile, hung for rape and murder”

[lily]

Robair wrote:

newfette wrote:

ok I'm not talking about wither or not the death penalty is right or not...

I believe in in, you dont.. you think its murder... i think its justified but that a different debate for another day... ok moving on

No, actually, I'm not that good at being Catholic. What you just listed, I believe, is Lily's argument against the death penalty.

My argument is that you'll never have a flawless justice system. What happened to the poor guy in this news story 80 some odd years ago is murder.

I thought we more or less agreed on this.

Quote:

newfette wrote:

what I'm saying is that money that could have been spent on health care or edcuation or hell improving sheep farming for all i care was wasted my discrediting the old evidence

I have trouble believing you. You think justice has an expiry date?

Good point.

[newfette]

Alta_redneck wrote:

newfette wrote:

you dont have to be on board with the death penalty to agre this was a waste of tax payers dollars that could have been spent on something much more useful

why open a can of worms from 86 years ago?

I think it has more to do with clearing the family name, than trying to bring back a dead man. Now the family tree can read, “ Uncle Colin businessman, saloon owner,” instead of “Uncle Colin pedophile, hung for rape and murder”

I just dont think that matters. it doesn't to me anyways. the actions of some family member almost 90 years ago has no bearing on who i am today as a person.

my family used to be pirates does that make me a criminal? hell no, and no one judges me that way.

chances are anyone outside the family doesn't even know that this guy was hanged. hell i'm willing to bet that most people don't know anything about their family member who died that long ago.



and while I'm sure the family is thrilled, I just don't know how their government can justify spending money on that

[Alta_redneck]

So i guess you'd say, why did this woman bother to report and have her dad charged for raping her nearly 40 years later, after all it's not going to get her virginity back. I bet no one outside of the family knew that happened..

Quote:

A 70-year-old Edmonton man publicly confessed today to repeatedly raping his own daughter over a six-year period when she was between 11 and 16 years old.
The perverted senior also admitted in provincial court to molesting one of his two sons during a hunting trip when the boy was between nine and 12.

The man, who cannot be named under a court-ordered publication ban to protect the identity of the victims, pleaded guilty to one count of incest and one count of committing an indecent assault.

After the guilty pleas were accepted, the case was adjourned until Aug. 19 for a sentencing hearing. The judge also ordered a pre-sentence report and a forensic psychiatric assessment.

According to an agreed statement of facts, the man had forced sex with his daughter between 1973 and 1979, sometimes as often as once per week.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Edmonto ... 54411.html

[newfette]

no that guy is still alive and can be punished for his crime. not that he will because everyone will be all "oh he's too old to go to prison" but at lease he has to face his actions.

but again you're missing my point. I'm saying the money could have been better spent

[hurley_108]

newfette wrote:

these people got nothing better to do then discredit evidence from 86 years ago??

So if a truth is old, it's not worth discovering?

[hurley_108]

Brenda wrote:

they better find the real culprit now eh?

Talking about wasting taxpayers money...

If the truth costs money, we should ignore it?

[hurley_108]

commanderkai wrote:

Brenda wrote:

newfette wrote:

you dont have to be on board with the death penalty to agre this was a waste of tax payers dollars that could have been spent on something much more useful

why open a can of worms from 86 years ago?

Agreed as well. The only good this might do is if we create a Time machine to save people or something.

The truth is the truth, and when we're talking about an INNOCENT person having been EXECUTED by the state, that truth needs to be known 10, 100, 1000 years later.

An innocent man being executed is murder. There is no statute of limitations on murder. This is one of the BEST ways taxpayer money can be spent - holding teh state to account for its actions.

[hurley_108]

newfette wrote:

no that guy is still alive and can be punished for his crime. not that he will because everyone will be all "oh he's too old to go to prison" but at lease he has to face his actions.

but again you're missing my point. I'm saying the money could have been better spent

The state never dies, therefore there is always cause to investigate its past bad actions, almost no matter what the cost.

[commanderkai]

hurley_108 wrote:

The truth is the truth, and when we're talking about an INNOCENT person having been EXECUTED by the state, that truth needs to be known 10, 100, 1000 years later.

An innocent man being executed is murder. There is no statute of limitations on murder. This is one of the BEST ways taxpayer money can be spent - holding teh state to account for its actions.

I don't disagree its murder. The government killed a man 86 years ago. But that changes nothing in the grand scheme of things. The Death Penalty is over in Canada. The man will still be dead.

The State might be held accountable, but its not like the state in 1922 is the same state today. Shit has changed here. The process that led this man to his death is over, it can't be done. Hell, even the evidence processes that we have today has greatly changed, using DNA is something ALIEN to the Courts of 86 years ago.

His death, sadly, changes nothing in Canada today. Unless you're willing to blame the current government for mistakes of 86 years ago, then holding the "state accountable" when the state already changed its policies that caused this mistake...what exactly can we do?

[hurley_108]

commanderkai wrote:

hurley_108 wrote:

The truth is the truth, and when we're talking about an INNOCENT person having been EXECUTED by the state, that truth needs to be known 10, 100, 1000 years later.

An innocent man being executed is murder. There is no statute of limitations on murder. This is one of the BEST ways taxpayer money can be spent - holding teh state to account for its actions.

I don't disagree its murder. The government killed a man 86 years ago. But that changes nothing in the grand scheme of things. The Death Penalty is over in Canada. The man will still be dead.

The State might be held accountable, but its not like the state in 1922 is the same state today. Shit has changed here. The process that led this man to his death is over, it can't be done. Hell, even the evidence processes that we have today has greatly changed, using DNA is something ALIEN to the Courts of 86 years ago.

His death, sadly, changes nothing in Canada today. Unless you're willing to blame the current government for mistakes of 86 years ago, then holding the "state accountable" when the state already changed its policies that caused this mistake...what exactly can we do?

No kidding this won't have much impact in Canada. It happened in AUSTRALIA. Try to keep up.

We can remember why the death penalty is wrong - because it's fallible, and now we have at least one proven case of an innocent man being executed. We can remember this so that we never reinstate the policy.

The religious right likes to bleat about how the only sure fire way to avoid gettign pregnant is to not have sex. Well the only sure fire way to make sure you don't execute an innocent man is to not execute anybody.

We hold the state accountable for past wrongs all the time. Residential schools. Forced sterilization. Internment of Japanese during WWII.

Just because a truth is old, just because an injustice was committed by people who are probably dead by a government that's no longer in power doesn't make it okay, doesn't mean we can ignore it.

[newfette]

the death penalty is wrong only if you believe it is..

I dont think it is

but yet again I BELIEVE the money could have been better spent elsewhere

[hurley_108]

newfette wrote:

the death penalty is wrong only if you believe it is..

I dont think it is

but yet again I BELIEVE the money could have been better spent elsewhere

For Colin Campbell Ross, it was wrong no matter what you believe.