A quick mini-rant about the death penalty, inspired by this recent article in The Age: Ross cleared of murder nearly 90 years ago.
Seems there was once a guy who was charged of committing a (pretty horrible) crime, the prosecution used some trumped up evidence in his trial, and he was sentenced to death...and then hanged for it.
Turns out - he was clearly innocent.
The Victorian Government has now taken the brave step of posthumously pardoning him, which removes the stain from his character, but, obviously, not the noose from his neck.
However unlikely such a turn of events may be these days (pause for sarcastic effect), this case highlights how final, but also how flawed, the death penalty can be.
Problem is, how do we know that the persons responsible for enforcing the law (e.g., the police, the prosecutor's office, even the judiciary) are doing their job correctly? Or even competently?
We don't.
I agree that the people who commit some crimes may be deserving of death. But in light of the fact that the community is rarely likely to be 100% certain of the guilt, or extent of the guilt, of any one person (quite apart from the fact that a Government should probably not be responsible for killing its own citizens), we should keep the death penalty off the table.
Anyway - that's what lynch mobs and vigilante justice are for.
Seems there was once a guy who was charged of committing a (pretty horrible) crime, the prosecution used some trumped up evidence in his trial, and he was sentenced to death...and then hanged for it.
Turns out - he was clearly innocent.
The Victorian Government has now taken the brave step of posthumously pardoning him, which removes the stain from his character, but, obviously, not the noose from his neck.
However unlikely such a turn of events may be these days (pause for sarcastic effect), this case highlights how final, but also how flawed, the death penalty can be.
Problem is, how do we know that the persons responsible for enforcing the law (e.g., the police, the prosecutor's office, even the judiciary) are doing their job correctly? Or even competently?
We don't.
I agree that the people who commit some crimes may be deserving of death. But in light of the fact that the community is rarely likely to be 100% certain of the guilt, or extent of the guilt, of any one person (quite apart from the fact that a Government should probably not be responsible for killing its own citizens), we should keep the death penalty off the table.
Anyway - that's what lynch mobs and vigilante justice are for.
