mass murderer brutally executed in Iran

[RedWolf]

i can't believe no one caught this little gem

um, you've never heard of people in prison killing other prisoners and/or prison guards?

Firstly... assuming we lock murderers away with other murderers the other prisoners they MIGHT kill are other murderers - so why do you care all of a sudden?

As for guard deaths - absolutely unfortunate but how often does it REALLY happen? It's not as if they're dropping left right and centre. And if 1 in 7 death row inmates are innocent as the stat says then it probably means we're killing more innocent people then the number of guards killed by inmates. And in addition to that guards CHOOSE the dangerous job - like cops and soldiers and therefore must take SOME responsibility for the consequences. I'm quite frankly more concerned about the 1 in 7 railroaded by the police and justice system.

 

[King Alexander]

As for guard deaths - absolutely unfortunate but how often does it REALLY happen? It's not as if they're dropping left right and centre. And if 1 in 7 death row inmates are innocent as the stat says then it probably means we're killing more innocent people then the number of guards killed by inmates. And in addition to that guards CHOOSE the dangerous job - like cops and soldiers and therefore must take SOME responsibility for the consequences. I'm quite frankly more concerned about the 1 in 7 railroaded by the police and justice system.

I'm also very concerned about the innocents that are executed: people should find a better way of assuring justice works much better - e.g.: REAL EVIDENCE, eye-witnesses, etc.. OTHERWISE, we should also hang the lawyers and judges that helped to the convition/execution of an innocent man without the first having clear evidence - This is a paradox, but it should be solved ASAP.

There can't be innocents that are executed and the ones that convicted them go unjudged, with all due respect.

 

[Sanaz]

The pro-death penalty advocates would be the first ones to jump on Iran as a brutal dictatorship that should be toppled by the mightly lightning bolts from Bush's arse.. yet when it comes to the death penalty they all of a sudden put their faith in their (Iran's) police forces/justice system.

You're wrong.

 

[RedWolf]

am i saying that cops never make misstakes?

i am talkin abvout this one specifik case, the serial killer screwed up and left the last victim alive!

it hardly gets any clearer than that, i cant think of any better evidence, unless that kid had a camera strapped to him or something!

I see no mention in that article of "leaving the last victim alive". Regardless - eyewitness testimony is terribly unreliable in traumatic events. Humans instinctively assumethat our memories/observations are enhanced un times of crisis but studies have shown again and again that the opposite is untrue. We have "gaps" in what we remember and later our brains fill in the holes - often with erroneous information. This what makes police lineups so dangerous for witnesses. Memory gaps combined with pressure from police cause a witness to pick someone - anyone... to the point where they even believe they chose the right person. Some police forces are even abandoning the tradional lineup in favour of alternatives to decrease these occurances.

Now - regardless of what I said above... The death penalty debate isn't about THIS case. It's about the validity and morality of the death penalty on a whole. Will there be VERY occasional cases where guilt is assured? Of course. The Bernardo case in Canada is one such example. But for the most part we will never know for SURE if someone committed a crime. Right now the jury system is the best system we have but it is not perfect by any means - and I'd rather not kill people based on it.

 

[RedWolf]

You're wrong.

How am I wrong? Everyone here that is says this guy deserves the death penalty has put their complete faith in the iranian justice system. As sysyphus said earlier - I don't even have any faith in the Canadian justice system.

 

[RedWolf]

I'm also very concerned about the innocents that are executed: people should find a better way of assuring justice works much better - e.g.: REAL EVIDENCE, eye-witnesses, etc.. OTHERWISE, we should also hang the lawyers and judges that helped to the convition/execution of an innocent man without the first having clear evidence - This is a paradox, but it should be solved ASAP.

There can't be innocents that are executed and the ones that convicted them go unjudged, with all due respect.

WOAH! Hold on.

The entire problem that I've tried to point out is that our system is falliable. So we can't just solve that problem by turning around and executing INSTEAD the lawyers, judges police. I think you've missed the point.

As for REAL evidence please see my previous post. What is REAL evidence? The only thing thats REAL is maybe video tape and how often does THAT happen? 1 in 10,000? Playing devils advocate even that can be manipulated although far less likely because it would imply a TRUE conspiracy instead of just political pressure and human nature.

 

[King Alexander]

I'm not an expert on what changes should be made for the judicial system to work much better, BUT, if someone is proved to be innocent, someone SHOULD pay for this, either by being imprisoned or losing their jobs, be it lawyers or judges or even policemen who didn't do their work correct: we're not play 'find-the-word' here but we're playing with humans that go as convicts to jails and become 'destroyed'/ruin their lifes.

 

[Sanaz]

How am I wrong? Everyone here that is says this guy deserves the death penalty has put their complete faith in the iranian justice system. As sysyphus said earlier - I don't even have any faith in the Canadian justice system.

I won't speak for anyone else, but I have no faith in the current Iranian justice system. They do horrible things. I am also completely against an American attack on Iran, as I was against an invasion in Iraq. I am as anti-Bush as you will find. And I am pro-death penalty in cases of crimes against children, and I have no reason to doubt the guilt of this person. As someone else said, some cases show clear-cut guilt. I am not universally in favor of the death penalty. If you were wrong about me, I will assume that you were wrong about other people. That is why making sweeping generalizations about the ideas of others usually detracts from any point you are actually trying to make.

 

[Jawz II]

And I care what any of the "holy" books say because why? Sorry - I try not to base my laws on a 2000 year old book.

good for you, why are you telling me?

I see no mention in that article of "leaving the last victim alive".

sometimes, when you jump in a conversation halfways, its a good idea to read the whole damn thing, so you know what youre talking about

Regardless - eyewitness testimony is terribly unreliable in traumatic events. Humans instinctively assumethat our memories/observations are enhanced un times of crisis but studies have shown again and again that the opposite is untrue. We have "gaps" in what we remember and later our brains fill in the holes - often with erroneous information. This what makes police lineups so dangerous for witnesses. Memory gaps combined with pressure from police cause a witness to pick someone - anyone... to the point where they even believe they chose the right person. Some police forces are even abandoning the tradional lineup in favour of alternatives to decrease these occurances.

by that logic, any crime that isnt caught on high resolution cameras, that happen to capture the right details, should go unpunished?

Now - regardless of what I said above... The death penalty debate isn't about THIS case.

so what? this thread IS about this case

It's about the validity and morality of the death penalty on a whole. Will there be VERY occasional cases where guilt is assured? Of course. The Bernardo case in Canada is one such example. But for the most part we will never know for SURE if someone committed a crime. Right now the jury system is the best system we have but it is not perfect by any means - and I'd rather not kill people based on it.

i dont know anything about the bernardo case you keep mentioning, for the second time (pay attention here) i never said innocent people have never been convicted, im saying this guy wasnt innocent

i asked earlier, why is it wrong to want revenge?

only answer i got was:

open your eyes than

 

[RedWolf]

good for you, why are you telling me?

Ummm... because you used the "holy books" as justification for capital punishment?

Remember:
"i still fail to see why revenge is so wrong?

i thought revenge was the only reason for the whole judicial system....

why is it immoral to revenge?

which one of the holy books said "an eye for an eye" ?

i think all 3 ?"

 

[RedWolf]

I won't speak for anyone else, but I have no faith in the current Iranian justice system. They do horrible things. I am also completely against an American attack on Iran, as I was against an invasion in Iraq. I am as anti-Bush as you will find. And I am pro-death penalty in cases of crimes against children, and I have no reason to doubt the guilt of this person. As someone else said, some cases show clear-cut guilt. I am not universally in favor of the death penalty. If you were wrong about me, I will assume that you were wrong about other people. That is why making sweeping generalizations about the ideas of others usually detracts from any point you are actually trying to make.

If you have "absolute faith" in the guilt of this man after reading only that artcile (which pretty much fails to give ANY of the details of the case or "evidence") then you ARE putting your faith in the Iranian justice system. After all - what are you basing your assumption of guilt on?

Are sweeping generalizations wrong? Absolutely. Yet on the other hand you're going to find "in general" the right supports capital punishment and the left does not.

 

[Jawz II]

Ummm... because you used the "holy books" as justification for capital punishment?

Remember:
"i still fail to see why revenge is so wrong?

i thought revenge was the only reason for the whole judicial system....

why is it immoral to revenge?

which one of the holy books said "an eye for an eye" ?

i think all 3 ?"

im not using them for a damn thing, im just mentioning it

someone said the jesus people are against death penalty, im pointing out that they are big on punishment, soddom and gommora and lakes of fire etc

my question:why is it immoral to revenge?

has not been answered yet

If you have "absolute faith" in the guilt of this man after reading only that artcile (which pretty much fails to give ANY of the details of the case or "evidence") then you ARE putting your faith in the Iranian justice system. After all - what are you basing your assumption of guilt on?

Are sweeping generalizations wrong? Absolutely. Yet on the other hand you're going to find "in general" the right supports capital punishment and the left does not.

sure im putting faith in their system, they have no reasons to lie about a thing like this, its not political

why should i trust the candian justice system more than the iranian?

if anything, the iranian police dont have to cover their asses and lie to get good press, unlike the canadian authorities, who would get fired if they shot the wrong guy for example

 

[RedWolf]

sometimes, when you jump in a conversation halfways, its a good idea to read the whole damn thing, so you know what youre talking about

I did "read the whole damn thing" so please don't talk to me as if i'm a child. I admit i may have missed something - please enlighten me.

Regardless of whether or or not someone witnessed this crime I've already addressed the usefullness of eyewitness testimony.

by that logic, any crime that isnt caught on high resolution cameras, that happen to capture the right details, should go unpunished?

Umm.. I never said that. You're making a leap. My point is (and we've been trying to make this over and over) is that our justice system makes mistakes (honest mistakes but also outright fabrications by dirty police and crown attorneys). However it's the best system we have. The result is that innocent people despite our best intenions will get convicted. Unfortunate but true. Letting all criminals walk the streets is not an option for society as you know SO we have two options. Put them to death possibly killing MORe innocent people (1 in 8). OR we can lock them up for life which accomplishes the same goal (protects society) AND leaves the door open for later appeals and exoneration.

so what? this thread IS about this case

No it's not. It's turned into a debate about the death penalty.

i dont know anything about the bernardo case you keep mentioning, for the second time (pay attention here) i never said innocent people have never been convicted, im saying this guy wasnt innocent

Once again - stop treating me like a child and grow up. It's a debate. Secondly this isn't the second time you've told me that you know nothing about the bernardo case because this was my first mention of it. Pay attention here.

Bernardo was a serial rapist/torturer who video taped his crimes. The tapes were later found and used as evidence. He is one of the VERY VERY rare cases in which we know for absolute certainy that he committed his crimes.

So let's pass a law saying "Capital Punishment will only be used when the criminals are stupid enough to video tape themselves". Let's face it we would probably never execute another person. So the idea of executing ONLY when we know for SURE is essentially an workable concept.

i asked earlier, why is it wrong to want revenge?

only answer i got was:

I didn't answer because I thought the answer was obvious. The risk of killing an innocent person is not worth making people "feel better" my "making someone pay".

Nothings WRONG with wanting revenge. The point is that as a state we have to make more rational decisions for the good of all instead of one based on emotions of hate and anger.

 

[RedWolf]

im not using them for a damn thing, im just mentioning it

someone said the jesus people are against death penalty, im pointing out that they are big on punishment, soddom and gommora and lakes of fire etc

By mentioning it you were "using it". Otherwise why mention it. This is going nowhere.

sure im putting faith in their system, they have no reasons to lie about a thing like this, its not political

why should i trust the candian justice system more than the iranian?

if anything, the iranian police dont have to cover their asses and lie to get good press, unlike the canadian authorities, who would get fired if they shot the wrong guy for example

Please see the quote from the article below:

"The case provoked national outrage in Iran. Sixteen police officers were reprimanded for dereliction of duty and the Interior Ministry criticised the police for failing to catch the suspects after the first crime."

Let's face it - when you're a cop and public opinion is turning against you, and your bosses are breathing down your neck the pressure gets cranked up on you - find someone, convict someone and lets move on. SO you find someone. You plant some evidence, you beat a confession out of the person, you coax some witnesses etc. It happens - it happened HERE (minus the beating) so I'm sure it can happen in Iran. People are under the same kinds of pressures everywhere and in the end people do what they have to do to save their own skins.

 

[Jawz II]

I did "read the whole damn thing" so please don't talk to me as if i'm a child. I admit i may have missed something - please enlighten me.

Regardless of whether or or not someone witnessed this crime I've already addressed the usefullness of eyewitness testimony.

im not gonna type everything twice or go find where i typped it in the 1st place for youre convinience, read these few pages or dont, your call

hint: i know more about this specifik case than you

Umm.. I never said that. You're making a leap. My point is (and we've been trying to make this over and over) is that our justice system makes mistakes (honest mistakes but also outright fabrications by dirty police and crown attorneys). However it's the best system we have. The result is that innocent people despite our best intenions will get convicted. Unfortunate but true. Letting all criminals walk the streets is not an option for society as you know SO we have two options. Put them to death possibly killing MORe innocent people (1 in 8). OR we can lock them up for life which accomplishes the same goal (protects society) AND leaves the door open for later appeals and exoneration..

if you had bothered to read this thread, you would know that i said death penalty should only be given in really strong cases, with solid evidence

No it's not. It's turned into a debate about the death penalty..

you would know this, how? obviously you havent read it

Once again - stop treating me like a child and grow up. It's a debate. Secondly this isn't the second time you've told me that you know nothing about the bernardo case because this was my first mention of it. Pay attention here...

funny, you tell me to stop treating you like a child, and in the same breathe you call me a child? thats rich...

stop acting like a child then, im not gonna type everything twice for you, pay attention the 1st time (or read for the 1st time and pay attention while doing it)

when i say for the 2nd time, i mean im telling you im talking about this specifik case for the 2nd time, i dont care about the bernardo guy

for the 3rd time: i know cops make misstakes, in this case they got the right guy

if you dont wanna talk about this case, start a thread about capital punishment

Bernardo was a serial rapist/torturer who video taped his crimes. The tapes were later found and used as evidence. He is one of the VERY VERY rare cases in which we know for absolute certainy that he committed his crimes.

So let's pass a law saying "Capital Punishment will only be used when the criminals are stupid enough to video tape themselves". Let's face it we would probably never execute another person. So the idea of executing ONLY when we know for SURE is essentially an workable concept...

this specifik case is close enough for me, live victim/witness, accomplice arrested, dead bodies found at the site where the last boy was dumped (hey what do you know, we are debating CP and THIS case!)

I didn't answer because I thought the answer was obvious. The risk of killing an innocent person is not worth making people "feel better" my "making someone pay".

Nothings WRONG with wanting revenge. The point is that as a state we have to make more rational decisions for the good of all instead of one based on emotions of hate and anger.

what if it is the right guy?

i dare say at least 60-70 % of those convicted for example in the us are guilty, why punish them at all

the only diffrence between death and other sentences, like prison time is that death penalty is more punishment

maybe we shouldnt send anyone to prison unless we have 100% indisputabe evidence of guilt?

 

[Jawz II]

By mentioning it you were "using it". Otherwise why mention it. This is going nowhere.

you should really start using the edit button, instead of posting twice in a row, makes replying complicated

so now youre gonna tell me you know better than me, what i was arguing? thanks for telling me what i meant, i really needed that


i agree, this is going nowhere, unless you come up with something good soon, this is done

Please see the quote from the article below:

"The case provoked national outrage in Iran. Sixteen police officers were reprimanded for dereliction of duty and the Interior Ministry criticised the police for failing to catch the suspects after the first crime."

Let's face it - when you're a cop and public opinion is turning against you, and your bosses are breathing down your neck the pressure gets cranked up on you - find someone, convict someone and lets move on. SO you find someone. You plant some evidence, you beat a confession out of the person, you coax some witnesses etc. It happens - it happened HERE (minus the beating) so I'm sure it can happen in Iran. People are under the same kinds of pressures everywhere and in the end people do what they have to do to save their own skins.

saw it the first time

youre under the assumption police in iran gives a damn about public opinion

if they did, they wouldnt regularly beat the living bajesus out of the public

plus i dont see how framing the wrong guy,( and after they found the dead bodies, although only the killer knew where they were), and coercing the victim to lie so they could grab some random guy instead of the right guy would make any of those cops look good, the murders wouldve continued

 

[Sanaz]

If you have "absolute faith" in the guilt of this man after reading only that artcile (which pretty much fails to give ANY of the details of the case or "evidence") then you ARE putting your faith in the Iranian justice system. After all - what are you basing your assumption of guilt on?

Are sweeping generalizations wrong? Absolutely. Yet on the other hand you're going to find "in general" the right supports capital punishment and the left does not.

Please don't use quotes if you aren't quoting, it looks like I said something I didn't. What I said was "I have no reason to doubt the guilt of this person", and I still don't. I think that generalizing into "the left" and "the right" only works for people who don't think on their own, and is useless in any actual discussion about an issue. Most people have a mix of beliefs from "the left" and "the right", so in the world outside of talk radio, the labels are meaningless and won't help decide who may or may not be for or against the death penalty.

 

[Elrohir]

How am I wrong? Everyone here that is says this guy deserves the death penalty has put their complete faith in the iranian justice system. As sysyphus said earlier - I don't even have any faith in the Canadian justice system.

He admitted he did it, didn't he? Or am I getting mixed up with another pedophilic rapist/serial killer?

 

[FearlessLeader2]

(Out of order to group by subject for answering.)

i still fail to see why revenge is so wrong?

why is it immoral to revenge?

Revenge has historically led to vendettaism, feuds, duelling, and clan wars. All of these things have produced calamitous effects on the societies that practiced them, and the leading societies today are the ones that have abandoned them as anachronistic and wasteful. This being the case, I will let history answer for me.

which one of the holy books said "an eye for an eye" ?

i think all 3 ?

'Eye for an eye' was the means God used to curb the vendetta societythe Israelites lived in. It didn't encourage the seeking of revenge, it sought to limit its scope to reasonable bounds: IE if someone took your eye out, you didn't kill them, but only took an eye in return. Jesus, in Matt. 5:38-42, asked us to give up vengence entirely: "38 You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41 If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you."

Hardly a Biblical license to revenge.

i thought revenge was the only reason for the whole judicial system....

Whoa. Um, no, the purpose of laws to define crimes and set punishments is an orderly and harmonious society.

 

[E-Raser]

only answer i got was:

This is not the truth!

sometimes, when you jump in a conversation halfways, its a good idea to read the whole damn thing, so you know what youre talking about

Couldn't agree more

Besides, as an individual you may want revenge, this is up to you. But a civilized society shouldn't even think about revenge.