Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Abolishing the death penalty

Expand Messages
  • pinoy_infidel
    This is a welome move, IMO, given the state of our justice system where abuse and corruption is still considerably common. This will also help in our cause
    Message 1 of 16 , Jun 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      This is a welome move, IMO, given the state of our justice system
      where abuse and corruption is still considerably common. This will
      also help in our cause each time our government try to get a
      reprieve/stay/commutation for death row convicts in other countries.

      Tony



      -----------------------
      Senate to rush approval of death penalty abolition

      THE Senate will rush the approval of the bill seeking the abolition of
      the death penalty in the Philippines, Senator Joker Arroyo said on
      Thursday.

      Arroyo, who chairs the committee on justice and human rights, said he
      would sponsor the bill for plenary debates in the afternoon. He said
      he was optimistic it would be approved before Congress adjourns next week.

      http://news.inq7.net/breaking/index.php?index=1&story_id=77731
    • tekton12
      Tony, The paradox here is that if we were to abolish the death penalty on the grounds that it is cruel and inhumane - and may not be foolproof - then we can
      Message 2 of 16 , Jun 4, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Tony,

        The paradox here is that if we were to abolish the death penalty on
        the grounds that it is cruel and inhumane - and may not be foolproof -
        then we can use the same argument to abolish life imprisonment. One
        can argue that spending the rest of one's life in jail is cruel and
        inhumane as well, so why don't we just make the sentence a year
        shorter? This will go on and on until we reach the point that any
        punishment - no matter how mild and short - can be considered
        inhumane. Does anyone deserve to stay one day in jail? I bet the
        offender will say he doesn't deserve any punishment at all, not even
        a slap on the wrist.

        I give qualified support for the death penalty. It is an important
        deterrent to crime. Human beings respond to incentives. If a would-be
        criminal sees that the death penalty has been abolished and the worst
        thing that can happen to him if caught is to obtain free board and
        lodging for life in the national penitentiary, then chances are that
        he will commit the crime as planned. Not only that, but abolishing
        the death penalty will also increase the incidence of vigilantism.
        Victims of heinous crimes will be tempted to take the law into their
        own hands in order to get even, since they can no longer rely on the
        authorities to do this for them. This will lead to an escalating
        cycle of violence that may be hard to stop.

        I oppose the death penalty in countries where the judicial system is
        notoriously corrupt and the political system is totalitarian. The
        accused simply doesn't stand a chance. But in countries where there
        is a reasonable chance that the accused can get a fair judgment - and
        where mechanisms of checks and balance are in place - then the death
        penalty should be available as an option. This presents a second
        paradox: dictatorships and corrupt governments should be barred from
        using capital punishment. The only governments that have earned the
        right to use it are those found in open humane societies, namely,
        liberal democracies.

        tekton12








        --- In pinoy_atheists@yahoogroups.com, "pinoy_infidel"
        <paetenian@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > This is a welome move, IMO, given the state of our justice system
        > where abuse and corruption is still considerably common. This will
        > also help in our cause each time our government try to get a
        > reprieve/stay/commutation for death row convicts in other
        countries.
        >
        > Tony
        >
        >
        >
        > -----------------------
        > Senate to rush approval of death penalty abolition
        >
        > THE Senate will rush the approval of the bill seeking the abolition
        of
        > the death penalty in the Philippines, Senator Joker Arroyo said on
        > Thursday.
        >
        > Arroyo, who chairs the committee on justice and human rights, said
        he
        > would sponsor the bill for plenary debates in the afternoon. He said
        > he was optimistic it would be approved before Congress adjourns
        next week.
        >
        > http://news.inq7.net/breaking/index.php?index=1&story_id=77731
        >
      • tekton12
        Tony, The paradox here is that if we were to abolish the death penalty on the grounds that it is cruel and inhumane - and may not be foolproof - then we can
        Message 3 of 16 , Jun 4, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Tony,

          The paradox here is that if we were to abolish the death penalty on
          the grounds that it is cruel and inhumane - and may not be foolproof -
          then we can use the same argument to abolish life imprisonment. One
          can argue that spending the rest of one's life in jail is cruel and
          inhumane as well, so why don't we just make the sentence a year
          shorter? This will go on and on until we reach the point that any
          punishment - no matter how mild and short - can be considered
          inhumane. Does anyone deserve to stay one day in jail? I bet the
          offender will say he doesn't deserve any punishment at all, not even
          a slap on the wrist.

          I give qualified support for the death penalty. It is an important
          deterrent to crime. Human beings respond to incentives. If a would-be
          criminal sees that the death penalty has been abolished and the worst
          thing that can happen to him if caught is to obtain free board and
          lodging for life in the national penitentiary, then chances are that
          he will commit the crime as planned. Not only that, but abolishing
          the death penalty will also increase the incidence of vigilantism.
          Victims of heinous crimes will be tempted to take the law into their
          own hands in order to get even, since they can no longer rely on the
          authorities to do this for them. This will lead to an escalating
          cycle of violence that may be hard to stop.

          I oppose the death penalty in countries where the judicial system is
          notoriously corrupt and the political system is totalitarian. The
          accused simply doesn't stand a chance. But in countries where there
          is a reasonable chance that the accused can get a fair judgment - and
          where mechanisms of checks and balance are in place - then the death
          penalty should be available as an option. This presents a second
          paradox: dictatorships and corrupt governments should be barred from
          using capital punishment. The only governments that have earned the
          right to use it are those found in open humane societies, namely,
          liberal democracies.

          tekton12








          --- In pinoy_atheists@yahoogroups.com, "pinoy_infidel"
          <paetenian@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > This is a welome move, IMO, given the state of our justice system
          > where abuse and corruption is still considerably common. This will
          > also help in our cause each time our government try to get a
          > reprieve/stay/commutation for death row convicts in other
          countries.
          >
          > Tony
          >
          >
          >
          > -----------------------
          > Senate to rush approval of death penalty abolition
          >
          > THE Senate will rush the approval of the bill seeking the abolition
          of
          > the death penalty in the Philippines, Senator Joker Arroyo said on
          > Thursday.
          >
          > Arroyo, who chairs the committee on justice and human rights, said
          he
          > would sponsor the bill for plenary debates in the afternoon. He said
          > he was optimistic it would be approved before Congress adjourns
          next week.
          >
          > http://news.inq7.net/breaking/index.php?index=1&story_id=77731
          >
        • Jonathan Francisco
          From Catholic to Atheist.... :o) http://youtube.com/watch?v=qso1pRiRByI&search=julia%20sweeney http://www.juliasweeney.com/welcome.asp Good day! Jonathan ...
          Message 4 of 16 , Jun 4, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            From Catholic to Atheist.... :o)

            http://youtube.com/watch?v=qso1pRiRByI&search=julia%20sweeney

            http://www.juliasweeney.com/welcome.asp


            Good day!
            Jonathan



            ------------------------------------------------------------------
            The Riddle of Epicurus
            Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
            Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
            Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
            Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?



            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
            http://mail.yahoo.com
          • pinoy_infidel
            Hi Tekton, My objection to the death penalty is because it s irreversible. Once it s done, nothing can be done to reverse it if the person is in fact innocent.
            Message 5 of 16 , Jun 6, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Tekton,

              My objection to the death penalty is because it's irreversible. Once
              it's done, nothing can be done to reverse it if the person is in fact
              innocent. Our justice system is still in the Stone Age (I think DNA
              testing is still not very much in use) where might is right and where
              trial by publicity is very common. Petty thieves such as the Floras
              are left languishing in jail, while the plunderers can go scot-free
              because of "technicalities". The poor Echagarays will make a fine
              example that crime does not pay but the rich murderers can live it up
              and be fine examples that justice can be bought if the price is right.
              Until we perceive that our justice system has become blind to matters
              of social standing and the amount of money the suspects have in the
              bank or with whom important and powerful one is connected with, we are
              simply not ready for it. That is why I welcome it for now.

              On deterrence, despite the number of executions we already had, crime
              is still rampant. In short, it has not been proven to be a deterrent
              to crime. What will be a deterrent for crime is when the would-be
              violators know that the probability of getting caught and brought to
              justice far outweighs the probability of not getting caught and
              suffering the consequences of his/her actions. That is a better
              deterrent to crime, I suppose.

              cheers!
              Tony


              tekton12 wrote:
              >
              > Tony,
              >
              > The paradox here is that if we were to abolish the death penalty on
              > the grounds that it is cruel and inhumane - and may not be foolproof -
              > then we can use the same argument to abolish life imprisonment. One
              > can argue that spending the rest of one's life in jail is cruel and
              > inhumane as well, so why don't we just make the sentence a year
              > shorter? This will go on and on until we reach the point that any
              > punishment - no matter how mild and short - can be considered
              > inhumane. Does anyone deserve to stay one day in jail? I bet the
              > offender will say he doesn't deserve any punishment at all, not even
              > a slap on the wrist.
              >
              > I give qualified support for the death penalty. It is an important
              > deterrent to crime. Human beings respond to incentives. If a would-be
              > criminal sees that the death penalty has been abolished and the worst
              > thing that can happen to him if caught is to obtain free board and
              > lodging for life in the national penitentiary, then chances are that
              > he will commit the crime as planned. Not only that, but abolishing
              > the death penalty will also increase the incidence of vigilantism.
              > Victims of heinous crimes will be tempted to take the law into their
              > own hands in order to get even, since they can no longer rely on the
              > authorities to do this for them. This will lead to an escalating
              > cycle of violence that may be hard to stop.
              >
              > I oppose the death penalty in countries where the judicial system is
              > notoriously corrupt and the political system is totalitarian. The
              > accused simply doesn't stand a chance. But in countries where there
              > is a reasonable chance that the accused can get a fair judgment - and
              > where mechanisms of checks and balance are in place - then the death
              > penalty should be available as an option. This presents a second
              > paradox: dictatorships and corrupt governments should be barred from
              > using capital punishment. The only governments that have earned the
              > right to use it are those found in open humane societies, namely,
              > liberal democracies.
              >
              > tekton12
            • pinoy_infidel
              Congress passed bills (SB 2254, HB 4826) abolishing capital punishment: From the INQ7.net article: Under the bill, capital punishment for all crimes will be
              Message 6 of 16 , Jun 6, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Congress passed bills (SB 2254, HB 4826) abolishing capital punishment:

                From the INQ7.net article:

                "Under the bill, capital punishment for all crimes will be
                automatically downgraded to life imprisonment."

                "Senators Panfilo Lacson and Alfredo Lim, pro-death penalty advocates,
                made a complete turnaround and voted to abolish the death penalty.

                "Senator Jose gJinggoyh Estrada who has been charged with plunder, an
                offense that carries the death penalty, abstained."

                http://news.inq7.net/breaking/index.php?index=1&story_id=78273

                Tony
              • tekton12
                Tony, Points well taken. Like I said, corrupt and/or despotic governments should not be in the business of imposing capital punishment. They need to clean up
                Message 7 of 16 , Jun 6, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  Tony,

                  Points well taken. Like I said, corrupt and/or despotic governments
                  should not be in the business of imposing capital punishment. They
                  need to clean up their act first. Judicial judgments that emerge
                  from such governments are invalid, or at least highly suspect, in my
                  opinion. Only politically and economically stable governments of
                  societies that are firmly grounded in libertarian principles (where
                  everyone has equal standing in the law) should be meting out the
                  death penalty.

                  But maybe we should step back a bit and talk about the concept of
                  punishment itself. Forget the death penalty for a moment. Forget
                  about its association with religion. Let's look at the issue through
                  secular eyes. What do you think about the concept of punishing
                  another person for crimes committed against other humans? Is there a
                  legitimate place, in your view, for punitive actions against
                  behavior that threatens the lives of others? If you think there is,
                  then how should this punitive action be carried out, who should
                  carry it out, and to what extent should it be carried out?

                  tekton12



                  --- In pinoy_atheists@yahoogroups.com, "pinoy_infidel"
                  <paetenian@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > Hi Tekton,
                  >
                  > My objection to the death penalty is because it's irreversible.
                  Once
                  > it's done, nothing can be done to reverse it if the person is in
                  fact
                  > innocent. Our justice system is still in the Stone Age (I think DNA
                  > testing is still not very much in use) where might is right and
                  where
                  > trial by publicity is very common. Petty thieves such as the Floras
                  > are left languishing in jail, while the plunderers can go scot-free
                  > because of "technicalities". The poor Echagarays will make a fine
                  > example that crime does not pay but the rich murderers can live it
                  up
                  > and be fine examples that justice can be bought if the price is
                  right.
                  > Until we perceive that our justice system has become blind to
                  matters
                  > of social standing and the amount of money the suspects have in the
                  > bank or with whom important and powerful one is connected with, we
                  are
                  > simply not ready for it. That is why I welcome it for now.
                  >
                  > On deterrence, despite the number of executions we already had,
                  crime
                  > is still rampant. In short, it has not been proven to be a
                  deterrent
                  > to crime. What will be a deterrent for crime is when the would-be
                  > violators know that the probability of getting caught and brought
                  to
                  > justice far outweighs the probability of not getting caught and
                  > suffering the consequences of his/her actions. That is a better
                  > deterrent to crime, I suppose.
                  >
                  > cheers!
                  > Tony
                  >
                  >
                  >
                • badboylamok
                  Tekton12, There is a very interesting website on this issue: http://www.csbmb.princeton.edu/~jdgreene/ There are numerous links here that deal with
                  Message 8 of 16 , Jun 7, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Tekton12,

                    There is a very interesting website on this issue:
                    http://www.csbmb.princeton.edu/~jdgreene/

                    There are numerous links here that deal with retributivist vs.
                    consequentialist form of justice or whatever its called.

                    badboylamok

                    On 6/7/06, tekton12 <tekton12@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > But maybe we should step back a bit and talk about the concept of
                    > punishment itself. Forget the death penalty for a moment. Forget
                    > about its association with religion. Let's look at the issue through
                    > secular eyes. What do you think about the concept of punishing
                    > another person for crimes committed against other humans? Is there a
                    > legitimate place, in your view, for punitive actions against
                    > behavior that threatens the lives of others? If you think there is,
                    > then how should this punitive action be carried out, who should
                    > carry it out, and to what extent should it be carried out?
                    >


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • tekton12
                    Badboylamok, Thanks for the reference. I liked Greene s article on free will and legal responsibility. I agree with his contention that free will is an
                    Message 9 of 16 , Jun 7, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Badboylamok,

                      Thanks for the reference. I liked Greene's article on free will and
                      legal responsibility. I agree with his contention that free will is
                      an illusion. Retributivist justice is based on this illusion, ie,
                      that a criminal should be punished because he deserves it. Strictly
                      speaking, no one really "deserves it" since all our actions are
                      caused by our genes and our environment. There's no disembodied "I"
                      that controls our brains that can be held responsible for our
                      behaviors. We are our brains.

                      But Greene also does not think that we should no longer punish
                      criminals. He admits to being a consequentialist; he believes that
                      punishment is justified because it removes the offender from
                      circulation and spares society from future harm - that is, the
                      consequences of punishment have a net socially redeeming value.
                      Punishment sends a message to all would-be offenders that their
                      behavior will be dealt with harshly. You don't have to believe in
                      free will in order to be a consequentialist. Nazi war criminals may
                      have been "determined" by their genes and environment to launch the
                      genocidal second World War, but they can not use this "lack of free
                      will" as an excuse for their behavior. We are still justified in
                      punishing them because doing so eliminates them as a threat and
                      spares society from future harm.


                      tekton12




















                      --- In pinoy_atheists@yahoogroups.com, badboylamok <badboylamok@...>
                      wrote:
                      >
                      > Tekton12,
                      >
                      > There is a very interesting website on this issue:
                      > http://www.csbmb.princeton.edu/~jdgreene/
                      >
                      > There are numerous links here that deal with retributivist vs.
                      > consequentialist form of justice or whatever its called.
                      >
                      > badboylamok
                      >
                      >
                    • pinoy_infidel
                      Govft urged to pay Echegarayfs kin SC eerrorf sparks call for compensation FOR playing God, the government must pay. In what could be the most
                      Message 10 of 16 , Jun 10, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Govft urged to pay Echegarayfs kin
                        SC eerrorf sparks call for compensation

                        FOR playing God, the government must pay.

                        In what could be the most expensive gI am sorryh gesture the
                        government could make, Senate Minority Leader and anti-death penalty
                        advocate Aquilino Pimentel Jr. yesterday suggested an amount of
                        between P5 million and P10 million as compensation to the family of
                        Leo Echegaray for his gwrongful death.h


                        --- In pinoy_atheists@yahoogroups.com, "tekton12" <tekton12@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Badboylamok,
                        >
                        > Thanks for the reference. I liked Greene's article on free will and
                        > legal responsibility. I agree with his contention that free will is
                        > an illusion. Retributivist justice is based on this illusion, ie,
                        > that a criminal should be punished because he deserves it. Strictly
                        > speaking, no one really "deserves it" since all our actions are
                        > caused by our genes and our environment. There's no disembodied "I"
                        > that controls our brains that can be held responsible for our
                        > behaviors. We are our brains.
                        >
                        > But Greene also does not think that we should no longer punish
                        > criminals. He admits to being a consequentialist; he believes that
                        > punishment is justified because it removes the offender from
                        > circulation and spares society from future harm - that is, the
                        > consequences of punishment have a net socially redeeming value.
                        > Punishment sends a message to all would-be offenders that their
                        > behavior will be dealt with harshly. You don't have to believe in
                        > free will in order to be a consequentialist. Nazi war criminals may
                        > have been "determined" by their genes and environment to launch the
                        > genocidal second World War, but they can not use this "lack of free
                        > will" as an excuse for their behavior. We are still justified in
                        > punishing them because doing so eliminates them as a threat and
                        > spares society from future harm.
                        >
                        >
                        > tekton12
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > --- In pinoy_atheists@yahoogroups.com, badboylamok <badboylamok@>
                        > wrote:
                        > >
                        > > Tekton12,
                        > >
                        > > There is a very interesting website on this issue:
                        > > http://www.csbmb.princeton.edu/~jdgreene/
                        > >
                        > > There are numerous links here that deal with retributivist vs.
                        > > consequentialist form of justice or whatever its called.
                        > >
                        > > badboylamok
                        > >
                        > >
                        >
                      • Romeo Macapobre
                        i didnt know echegaray was eventually found innocent. what overturned the case. i have not been following the news .. why are we (the public) paying for their
                        Message 11 of 16 , Jun 10, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          i didnt know echegaray was eventually found innocent.
                          what overturned the case. i have not been following the news ..
                          why are we (the public) paying for their mistakes.

                          max

                          2006/6/11, pinoy_infidel <paetenian@...>:
                          > Govft urged to pay Echegarayfs kin
                          > SC eerrorf sparks call for compensation
                          > FOR playing God, the government must pay.
                          > In what could be the most expensive gI am sorryh gesture the
                          > government could make, Senate Minority Leader and anti-death penalty
                          > advocate Aquilino Pimentel Jr. yesterday suggested an amount of
                          > between P5 million and P10 million as compensation to the family of
                          > Leo Echegaray for his gwrongful death.h

                          --
                          apprenons francais [rmacapobre-french.blogspot.com].
                          apprenons max [rmacapobre.blogspot.com].
                        • pinoy_infidel
                          He was convicted. But it seems that capital punishment was not supposed to be meted to him because of the fact that the girl that he raped was not his
                          Message 12 of 16 , Jun 11, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            He was convicted. But it seems that capital punishment was not
                            supposed to be meted to him because of the "fact" that the girl that
                            he raped was not his daughter or something like that. A crucial fact
                            that the court failed to established. Silly enough, if the girl is not
                            his own, then the crime is not considered "heinous". I forgot to
                            inlcude the link to the story but I found this one instead:

                            http://news.inq7.net/nation/index.php?index=1&story_id=78660

                            Tony


                            --- In pinoy_atheists@yahoogroups.com, "Romeo Macapobre"
                            <romeo.macapobre@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > i didnt know echegaray was eventually found innocent.
                            > what overturned the case. i have not been following the news ..
                            > why are we (the public) paying for their mistakes.
                            >
                            > max
                            >
                            > 2006/6/11, pinoy_infidel <paetenian@...>:
                            > > Govft urged to pay Echegarayfs kin
                            > > SC eerrorf sparks call for compensation
                            > > FOR playing God, the government must pay.
                            > > In what could be the most expensive gI am sorryh gesture the
                            > > government could make, Senate Minority Leader and anti-death penalty
                            > > advocate Aquilino Pimentel Jr. yesterday suggested an amount of
                            > > between P5 million and P10 million as compensation to the family of
                            > > Leo Echegaray for his gwrongful death.h
                            >
                            > --
                            > apprenons francais [rmacapobre-french.blogspot.com].
                            > apprenons max [rmacapobre.blogspot.com].
                            >
                          • tekton12
                            One way to improve the present judicial system (to make sure that the person accused is really the culprit) is to require all Filipinos to submit biological
                            Message 13 of 16 , Jun 12, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              One way to improve the present judicial system (to make sure that
                              the person accused is really the culprit) is to require all
                              Filipinos to submit biological samples of themselves so that a DNA
                              database can be established. Newborns should be "genetically
                              fingerprinted" at birth. The police can then use this database to
                              compare it with specimens obtained from crime scenes and thereby
                              establish the identity of criminals. Come to think of it, this is
                              even better than the national ID system. ID photos can be faked.
                              Genetic material is iron clad. Of course, the idea of a DNA database
                              is Orwellian, and many people oppose it.

                              But we have choices to make here. If we want to ensure that only the
                              truly guilty are caught and the innocent are freed, then this
                              database is a step in the right direction and we should support its
                              creation. Are we willing to take this step? If this makes us uneasy
                              and we oppose this database, then we are left with a flawed judicial
                              system wherein misidentification is rampant and miscarriage of
                              justice is the inevitable result. We will never know for sure that
                              the person on death row deserves to be there. And even if the death
                              penalty is abolished, we will still not know for certain if the
                              person rotting in jail deserves to be there in the first place.
                              Changing the form of punishment will not solve the problem of
                              miscarriage of justice. You are simply rearranging chairs on the
                              Titanic.

                              tekton12








                              --- In pinoy_atheists@yahoogroups.com, "pinoy_infidel"
                              <paetenian@...> wrote:
                              >
                              >
                              > He was convicted. But it seems that capital punishment was not
                              > supposed to be meted to him because of the "fact" that the girl
                              that
                              > he raped was not his daughter or something like that. A crucial
                              fact
                              > that the court failed to established. Silly enough, if the girl is
                              not
                              > his own, then the crime is not considered "heinous". I forgot to
                              > inlcude the link to the story but I found this one instead:
                              >
                              > http://news.inq7.net/nation/index.php?index=1&story_id=78660
                              >
                              > Tony
                              >
                              >
                              > --- In pinoy_atheists@yahoogroups.com, "Romeo Macapobre"
                              > <romeo.macapobre@> wrote:
                              > >
                              > > i didnt know echegaray was eventually found innocent.
                              > > what overturned the case. i have not been following the news ..
                              > > why are we (the public) paying for their mistakes.
                              > >
                              > > max
                              > >
                              > > 2006/6/11, pinoy_infidel <paetenian@>:
                              > > > Govft urged to pay Echegarayfs kin
                              > > > SC eerrorf sparks call for compensation
                              > > > FOR playing God, the government must pay.
                              > > > In what could be the most expensive gI am sorryh gesture the
                              > > > government could make, Senate Minority Leader and anti-death
                              penalty
                              > > > advocate Aquilino Pimentel Jr. yesterday suggested an amount of
                              > > > between P5 million and P10 million as compensation to the
                              family of
                              > > > Leo Echegaray for his gwrongful death.h
                              > >
                              > > --
                              > > apprenons francais [rmacapobre-french.blogspot.com].
                              > > apprenons max [rmacapobre.blogspot.com].
                              > >
                              >
                            • tekton12
                              One way to improve the present judicial system (to make sure that the person accused is really the culprit) is to require all Filipinos to submit biological
                              Message 14 of 16 , Jun 12, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                One way to improve the present judicial system (to make sure that
                                the person accused is really the culprit) is to require all
                                Filipinos to submit biological samples of themselves so that a DNA
                                database can be established. Newborns should be "genetically
                                fingerprinted" at birth. The police can then use this database to
                                compare it with specimens obtained from crime scenes and thereby
                                establish the identity of criminals. Come to think of it, this is
                                even better than the national ID system. ID photos can be faked.
                                Genetic material is iron clad. Of course, the idea of a DNA database
                                is Orwellian, and many people oppose it.

                                But we have choices to make here. If we want to ensure that only the
                                truly guilty are caught and the innocent are freed, then this
                                database is a step in the right direction and we should support its
                                creation. Are we willing to take this step? If this makes us uneasy
                                and we oppose this database, then we are left with a flawed judicial
                                system wherein misidentification is rampant and miscarriage of
                                justice is the inevitable result. We will never know for sure that
                                the person on death row deserves to be there. And even if the death
                                penalty is abolished, we will still not know for certain if the
                                person rotting in jail deserves to be there in the first place.
                                Changing the form of punishment will not solve the problem of
                                miscarriage of justice. You are simply rearranging chairs on the
                                Titanic.

                                tekton12








                                --- In pinoy_atheists@yahoogroups.com, "pinoy_infidel"
                                <paetenian@...> wrote:
                                >
                                >
                                > He was convicted. But it seems that capital punishment was not
                                > supposed to be meted to him because of the "fact" that the girl
                                that
                                > he raped was not his daughter or something like that. A crucial
                                fact
                                > that the court failed to established. Silly enough, if the girl is
                                not
                                > his own, then the crime is not considered "heinous". I forgot to
                                > inlcude the link to the story but I found this one instead:
                                >
                                > http://news.inq7.net/nation/index.php?index=1&story_id=78660
                                >
                                > Tony
                                >
                                >
                                > --- In pinoy_atheists@yahoogroups.com, "Romeo Macapobre"
                                > <romeo.macapobre@> wrote:
                                > >
                                > > i didnt know echegaray was eventually found innocent.
                                > > what overturned the case. i have not been following the news ..
                                > > why are we (the public) paying for their mistakes.
                                > >
                                > > max
                                > >
                                > > 2006/6/11, pinoy_infidel <paetenian@>:
                                > > > Govft urged to pay Echegarayfs kin
                                > > > SC eerrorf sparks call for compensation
                                > > > FOR playing God, the government must pay.
                                > > > In what could be the most expensive gI am sorryh gesture the
                                > > > government could make, Senate Minority Leader and anti-death
                                penalty
                                > > > advocate Aquilino Pimentel Jr. yesterday suggested an amount of
                                > > > between P5 million and P10 million as compensation to the
                                family of
                                > > > Leo Echegaray for his gwrongful death.h
                                > >
                                > > --
                                > > apprenons francais [rmacapobre-french.blogspot.com].
                                > > apprenons max [rmacapobre.blogspot.com].
                                > >
                                >
                              • Romeo Macapobre
                                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orwellian Orwellian - describes a situation, idea, or condition that George Orwell identified as being inimical to the welfare of
                                Message 15 of 16 , Jun 12, 2006
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orwellian

                                  Orwellian - describes a situation, idea, or condition that George Orwell
                                  identified as being inimical to the welfare of a free-society.

                                  inimical - being adverse often by reason of hostility or malevolence

                                  2006/6/13, tekton12 <tekton12@...>:
                                  >
                                  > Of course, the idea of a DNA database
                                  > is Orwellian, and many people oppose it.
                                  >

                                  --
                                  apprenons francais [rmacapobre-french.blogspot.com].
                                  apprenons max [rmacapobre.blogspot.com].


                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • tekton12
                                  Since no less than Chief Justice Panganiban has admitted that the Supreme Court erred in affirming the execution of Echegaray, and since this is an indication
                                  Message 16 of 16 , Jun 13, 2006
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Since no less than Chief Justice Panganiban has admitted that the
                                    Supreme Court erred in affirming the execution of Echegaray, and
                                    since this is an indication of the deeply flawed judicial system we
                                    have there in the Philippines, then I propose that all prisoners
                                    currently languishing in jails all over the country - whether they
                                    are on death row, life imprisonment, or merely jailed for limited
                                    time periods - be released from incarceration as soon as possible.
                                    If even the exalted Supreme Court (in the case of Echegaray) can
                                    make such a stupid mistake, how then can we trust the decisions
                                    issued by lesser courts where the standards are presumably much
                                    lower? This makes all decisions issued by all courts in the
                                    Philippines highly suspect. It would be a grave injustice to all
                                    convicts to be serving sentences that were obtained under a system
                                    that is rife with corruption and can not be trusted. Releasing them
                                    is the most logical and humane thing to do. After that, the
                                    government should compensate them for time spent behind bars. Where
                                    would the government get the money? The government can raise taxes
                                    to generate the money.

                                    tekton12
                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.