police brutality

[Emma two]

We, in here at least seem to have a concensus that the police cannot be trusted, at least not all of them all of the time, with the protection of society through their role of the prevention and detection of crime. Should it not then follow that they are not to be trusted to handle and present evidence in cases where an individual's (you or I) life might be taken away. if you don't trust the policing system 100% then surely that is enough to support the case for not having capital punishment?

[Guest Brumagem Phil]

We, in here at least seem to have a concensus that the police cannot be trusted, at least not all of them all of the time, with the protection of society through their role of the prevention and detection of crime. Should it not then follow that they are not to be trusted to handle and present evidence in cases where an individual's (you or I) life might be taken away. if you don't trust the policing system 100% then surely that is enough to support the case for not having capital punishment?

 

 

The amount of old cases which come to appeal now and get overturned is reason enough to not have capital punishment.

 

The policing system in our country is in decay just as the rest of the country is.

[Emma two]

The amount of old cases which come to appeal now and get overturned is reason enough to not have capital punishment.

 

The policing system in our country is in decay just as the rest of the country is.

 

That is another good reason, and may be directly linked to the first?

 

I'm not sure about the decay of the country, there is and propably always was scope for improvement, but perhaps I'm just an eternal optimist or simply a patriot.

[kleinboet]

It would appear that there have been some 90 cases of Police brutality reported (I bet Labour are kicking themselves for saturating London - and other places - with CCTV cameras!!)

 

However, I firmly believe that if we can get a police force we trust, modern forensics will stop any "mistakes" being made and the return to capital punishment would be justified, as the present "find any other punishment than touching them!" just simply hasn't worked!

 

I was watching a programme the other day about gangs and a lot of youths said they have left gangs "because to belong to a gang now you HAVE to arm yourself or die!"

Edited April 18, 2009 by kleinboet

[Guest Brumagem Phil]

It would appear that there have been some 90 cases of Police brutality reported (I bet Labour are kicking themselves for saturating London - and other places - with CCTV cameras!!)

 

However, I firmly believe that if we can get a police force we trust, modern forensics will stop any "mistakes" being made and the return to capital punishment would be justified, as the present "find any other punishment than touching them!" just simply hasn't worked!

 

I was watching a programme the other day about gangs and a lot of youths said they have left gangs "because to belong to a gang now you HAVE to arm yourself or die!"

 

except modern forensics has been the cause of a great many of the recent miscarriages of justice...its a double edged sword KB

[Emma two]

except modern forensics has been the cause of a great many of the recent miscarriages of justice...its a double edged sword KB

 

I believe that is true, and in any case not every trial has it's outcome determined by forensic evidence. Witness statements are still significant, and very often it is the statements of the police which are submitted.

Allow me to submit an example, a few years ago I took my son to the local take away, he had arrived home late at night and hungry for that type of food. An on duty and in uniform policeman grabbed him and pushed him up against a wall and was about to arrest him for an offence committed the previous weekend, that of verbally abusing the policeman. When the alleged offense took place he (my son) was on duty in Bosnia (he had been beack in the country only hours) with his regiment. Now in this case there was a clear alibi in place, but the point is that the copper was wholly sure that he had the right man, and would doubtless have sworn to it in court, regardless as to whether the charge would have been a relitivley minor public order one, or murder.

Edited April 19, 2009 by Emma two

[kleinboet]

However, I firmly believe that if we can get a police force we trust, modern forensics will stop any "mistakes" being made and the return to capital punishment would be justified, as the present "find any other punishment than touching them!" just simply hasn't worked!

[Emma two]

[modern forensics will stop any "mistakes" being made and the return to capital punishment would be justified,

 

No it won't. Consider these scenarios. Two police officers stnding over the body of a young man who has been shot. Forensic evidence shows that it was one of the officer's firearms which killed him, (uncontested by the CPS in court) Forensic tests on the dead man shows that he had recently handled a firearm (uncontested by the deceased's defence). Sworn statements by both police officers indicate that the young man failed to drop his weapon after being ordered to do so, continued to point it at the officers and so was shot dead. (contested by the defence). Witness statement from the deceased friend says that the order to drop the weapon was complied with and that the police officers replaced the gun in his friends hand after he had been killed (contested by the CPS). There were no other witnesses. Show how forensics can, beyond any reasonable doubt show, what exactly happened, what offences were committed and by who? (the deceased's illegal possesion of a fire arm is accepted and uncontested).

 

Scenario two, and I'm going to follow Ken's lead and use a film to illustrate. John Coffey was innocent yet fried in the chair (Green Mile 1999). Strange looking and acting black man is found holding the dead and bloody bodies of two little blonde white girls in the rural southern USA. Yes this is in a period setting, but show how modern forensic evidence would have ensured that poor John didn't end up in 'old sparky'? The variables which doomed him were circumstances, (he was there) witnesses (found him there), public outrage, social prejudice and initally no other suspect so none was sought. The 'real' murders's DNA may well have been found on the victims, but would have easily been explained by his defence as he was know to themand had been in recent close contact with them.

[chesters1]

No it won't. Consider these scenarios. Two police officers stnding over the body of a young man who has been shot. Forensic evidence shows that it was one of the officer's firearms which killed him, (uncontested by the CPS in court) Forensic tests on the dead man shows that he had recently handled a firearm (uncontested by the deceased's defence). Sworn statements by both police officers indicate that the young man failed to drop his weapon after being ordered to do so, continued to point it at the officers and so was shot dead. (contested by the defence). Witness statement from the deceased friend says that the order to drop the weapon was complied with and that the police officers replaced the gun in his friends hand after he had been killed (contested by the CPS). There were no other witnesses. Show how forensics can, beyond any reasonable doubt show, what exactly happened, what offences were committed and by who? (the deceased's illegal possesion of a fire arm is accepted and uncontested).

 

Scenario two, and I'm going to follow Ken's lead and use a film to illustrate. John Coffey was innocent yet fried in the chair (Green Mile 1999). Strange looking and acting black man is found holding the dead and bloody bodies of two little blonde white girls in the rural southern USA. Yes this is in a period setting, but show how modern forensic evidence would have ensured that poor John didn't end up in 'old sparky'? The variables which doomed him were circumstances, (he was there) witnesses (found him there), public outrage, social prejudice and initally no other suspect so none was sought. The 'real' murders's DNA may well have been found on the victims, but would have easily been explained by his defence as he was know to themand had been in recent close contact with them.

 

anyone think about interrogating the mouse? silly film! in that era why go to the effort of making it all up when hanging a blackman was natural for everyone ,something to do after church

you cant trust anyone with power even a tiny bit more than someone else is corrupting

Edited April 19, 2009 by chesters1

[kleinboet]

Emma2 - Do you really think that forensic specialists are going to put ALL of their breakthroughs in the public eye?? That would give someone who is guilty of a crime the opportunity of destroying the forensics and not getting caught!! And don't give me the freedom of information guff, as SOME things (even the Queen mothers thoughts) MUST be kept secret!!

 

Which is why I will print for the THIRD time :

However, I firmly believe that if we can get a police force we trust...........

Edited April 19, 2009 by kleinboet