Independent Leyton Orient Forum

LSN did you bother doing some research about this poor lady, that I highlighted in the original posting? Or is it too much for your brain ( if it exists )? You posting on here are totally off target. Focus, man!

Harlow wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 10:21 pm What a waste of money. And, yes, i do support hanging, modern forensic evidence provides conclusive evidence

No it does not

it might provide evidence that makes people believe today they are guilty. There are innumerable cases of people convicted beyond all reasonable doubt on scientific evidence said to prove their guilt that is later proved to be unreliable.

The Maguire Seven
Barry Bulsara
Stefan Kisko

to name a few


Even the so called DNA evidence is not as infallible as you are lead to believe.

CEB wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 11:05 am

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 10:48 am Are you saying no case can ever be 100% proven?

Can you provide the meaningful distinction between a case you believe to be 99% proven and 100% proven, and clarify whether you believe the death penalty appropriate for only one?

You're just inventing things now.

Lets come up with an example of something '100% proven' something there's video evidence, forensic evidence of. You'd think the death penalty inappropriate still?

Friend or faux wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 10:13 pm https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-64879662


Wrongly hanged woman set to be exonerated for her alleged crimes.,,,,

Her case has been referred to the Criminal Cases Review commission, it is too early to say she is set to be exonerated

What do you think “I am against the death penalty” means?

But I love the idea that you consider “video evidence” to be a key factor.

Had an argument with a colleague about this once, and I thought I'd persuade her with 'innocent people will inevitably end up being executed', and she replied 'as long as 9 out of 10 are guilty, I think that's OK'. Had to just leave it.

CEB wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 11:23 am What do you think “I am against the death penalty” means?

But I love the idea that you consider “video evidence” to be a key factor.

It could be, depends on the case doesnt it?

You have to admit that there's plenty of cases that are as provable as anything can be.

Spen 69:-Her case has been referred to the Criminal Cases Review commission, it is too early to say she is set to be exonerated
Top

You obviously have not researched this mis-carriage either; or you wouldn't have given such a crass response.

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 11:26 am

CEB wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 11:23 am What do you think “I am against the death penalty” means?

But I love the idea that you consider “video evidence” to be a key factor.

It could be, depends on the case doesnt it?

You have to admit that there's plenty of cases that are as provable as anything can be.

You accused me of moving goalposts and yet you’ve gone from “100% proven” to “as provable as anything can be” (while also focusing on the probability and ignoring other factors you’d mentioned earlier such as severity of crime, potential for rehabilitation)

You’ve also not yet mentioned how it’d be workable to introduce tiers of guilt.

Friend or faux wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 11:28 am Spen 69:-Her case has been referred to the Criminal Cases Review commission, it is too early to say she is set to be exonerated
Top

You obviously have researched this mis-carriage either; or you wouldn't have given such a crass response.

In fairness to spedant, he's just making a factual distinction here. The story is that the case has been referred for review, not that a favourable decision will necessarily be made. I don't see how that's crass.

So you admit that there's plenty of cases that are as provable as anything can be?

Every case is unique, are there no criminals in British history you'd give your approval to execute?

What’s a ciminal?

With the improvements in deep fake tech you couldn't even rely on video evidence, nowadays.

Since nothing can be proven according to ceb, then is it ethical to even lock people up?

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 12:05 pm Since nothing can be proven according to ceb, then is it ethical to even lock people up?

Clearly. Because you can lock someone up because a case has been proven "beyond reasonable doubt" (which isn't 100%), secure in the knowledge that if you've got it wrong, you can open the cell door and make amends.

How many jurors would be less inclined to convict, with even the tiniest bit of doubt, if they knew a guilty verdict would lead to execution? Do you want monsters roaming the streets?

StillSpike wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 12:07 pm

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 12:05 pm Since nothing can be proven according to ceb, then is it ethical to even lock people up?

Clearly. Because you can lock someone up because a case has been proven "beyond reasonable doubt" (which isn't 100%), secure in the knowledge that if you've got it wrong, you can open the cell door and make amends.

How many jurors would be less inclined to convict, with even the tiniest bit of doubt, if they knew a guilty verdict would lead to execution? Do you want monsters roaming the streets?

You cant give that person the time back though.

Do countries that have the death penalty have a problem with convicting 'monsters'?

CEB wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 11:05 am

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 10:48 am Are you saying no case can ever be 100% proven?

Can you provide the meaningful distinction between a case you believe to be 99% proven and 100% proven, and clarify whether you believe the death penalty appropriate for only one?

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/re ... -doubt.asp

In a criminal case, it is the job of the prosecution to convince the jury that the defendant is guilty of the crime with which he has been charged and, therefore, should be convicted.  The phrase "beyond a reasonable doubt"



99% isnt really Guilty is it

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 12:16 pm

StillSpike wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 12:07 pm

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 12:05 pm Since nothing can be proven according to ceb, then is it ethical to even lock people up?

Clearly. Because you can lock someone up because a case has been proven "beyond reasonable doubt" (which isn't 100%), secure in the knowledge that if you've got it wrong, you can open the cell door and make amends.

How many jurors would be less inclined to convict, with even the tiniest bit of doubt, if they knew a guilty verdict would lead to execution? Do you want monsters roaming the streets?

You cant give that person the time back though.

Do countries that have the death penalty have a problem with convicting 'monsters'?

“You can’t give that person the time back”

…therefore, kill them?

Me, stuck in a Post Office queue: "well, guess I'll never get this time back, may as well end it all".

Friend or faux wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 11:28 am Spen 69:-Her case has been referred to the Criminal Cases Review commission, it is too early to say she is set to be exonerated
Top

You obviously have researched this mis-carriage either; or you wouldn't have given such a crass response.

What is crass about stating a perfectly correct factual point.

The case has been referred to the Criminal Cases Review Commission.

They have to investigate the matter, then decide whether they believe there was a miscarriage of justice, THEN the Court of Appeal have to make a decision.


As I said it is too early to say she is set to be exonerated.



I am not saying anything about the outcome of the CCRC investigation, or if it goes that far, and application to the Court of Appeal




Looking at the CCRC's own figures, since it was set up in 1997, it has had 29,569 cases referred to it of those 809 were referred after investigation to the Court of Appeal and 548 of those appeals resulted in the convictions being overturned - 219 cases had convictions upheld. Some referrals still await determination by the Court of Appeal

So out of 29,569 cases referred to the CCRC, only 548 have resulted in convictions being overturned. That is around 1.8% of cases referred to the CCRC resulting in convictions being overturned.

I think the statistics say it is too early to say her conviction is set to be overturned.


https://ccrc.gov.uk/facts-figures/

CEB- Nope.

So are you in favour of imprisoning the potentially innocent?

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 12:37 pm Me, stuck in a Post Office queue: "well, guess I'll never get this time back, may as well end it all".

Are there revolving doors ?You might enjoy that .

Can't recall seeing a Post Office with revolving doors but yes, that would be fun.

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 12:39 pm CEB- Nope.

So are you in favour of imprisoning the potentially innocent?

Yes.

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 12:53 pm Can't recall seeing a Post Office with revolving doors but yes, that would be fun.

Obviously before your time