Aussie wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 5:30pm:


Yup bugger off and call and Uber. 

freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 5:58pm:


So.....having been found 'guilty' by a Court, how does the innocent man produce a body he knows nothing of.

Nah.

This crap presumes we have a perfect system and we all know that we do not.

freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 6:04pm:


Are you really that thick? 

How many links would you like me to put up establishing that our non-perfect system has convicted innocents of murder/manslaughter?  How can such an innocent make parole if they had nothing to do with the death?

By having their conviction overturned. Not by saying you should let me out anyway, because I am innocent, just like everyone else in here.

People found guilty still have to be treated as guilty, despite the flaws in the system.

freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 6:09pm:


Dream on...... do you have any idea how near impossible that is?

freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 6:09pm:


Sure.....but this new 'no body ~ no parole' takes it a great deal further.  The person is convicted...okay....schit happens...but until today, like every other convictee, he was entitled to parole.  This takes that away and asks for an impossibility in the case of an innocent.

How can an innocent man produce a body he knows nothing about?

freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 6:18pm:


Yeas....but this new crap (an added punishment way beyond what was until today) has been brought in despite the fact that these populist politicians know full well our system is flawed.

freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 6:18pm:


In your case, I doubt it.

freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 6:38pm:


There is nothing 'old' about todays legislation in Qld.  This is a new impost on punishment.  You do understand it, don't you?

freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 6:46pm:


I have not referred to any principle.  My point is simple.....how can an innocent man produce a body?

Maybe you can assist with an answer?

freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 6:51pm:


Do whatever you like.  Revert back to personal abuse as well if you think that advances your credibility.

How can an innocent man produce a body?

Its all about Braddy Poos

Neferti wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 6:07pm:


.... He found it at the bottom of the Corn Flakes packet.

freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 6:15pm:


There's no such thing as a free lunch either.

Aussie do you also think it is unfair that an innocent person goes to jail if found guilty, even though they are actually innocent?

What other brilliant insights do you have for us?

If someone is found guilty of a theft they did not actually commit, and they had to return the money in order to get parole, would you only complain about the parole conditions and ignore the fact that an innocent man was found guilty? What do you think the real problem is - the incorrect verdict, or the parole condition that fails to take into account an incorrect verdict? Should the entire criminal justice system be geared towards treating convicted criminals as if they are actually innocent?

freediver wrote on Aug 11^th, 2017 at 1:09pm:


You can bullshit on with your esoteric crap as long as you like Effendi....and you'll remain irrelevant yet again.

How does anyone return a body/stolen money when they know nothing about it in the first place.

LearJet wrote on Aug 11^th, 2017 at 5:29pm:



precisely... we bargain with the worst of the worst...

their poor bloody victim didnt get a chance to bargain did they?....its about time that was taken into account..

Its getting harder and harder to get away with crime now.

With more and more scientific methods to prove guilt it will eventually become impossible.

Think of DNA, Fingerprints, CCTV etc

When that day comes and you are caught red handed.

There should be no parole, and hard labor for the rest of their lives.

That or the death sentence.

These are not trick questions Aussie. Do you really think it is esoteric for an innocent man to be found guilty?

Aussie do you also think it is unfair that an innocent person goes to jail if found guilty, even though they are actually innocent?

What other brilliant insights do you have for us?

If someone is found guilty of a theft they did not actually commit, and they had to return the money in order to get parole, would you only complain about the parole conditions and ignore the fact that an innocent man was found guilty? What do you think the real problem is - the incorrect verdict, or the parole condition that fails to take into account an incorrect verdict? Should the entire criminal justice system be geared towards treating convicted criminals as if they are actually innocent?

So a wrongful conviction is now reduced to "esoteric crap" in order for Aussie to maintain his rage about parole conditions being unfair to the wrongfully convicted.

Aussie wrote on Aug 11^th, 2017 at 7:21pm:


Into our lives some rain must fall.

Errors, mistakes, wrongful convictions are all human faults that are bound to happen from time to time. In reality the only statistic against successful prosecutions are those that have been subsequently found innocent of the guilt they were convicted of. An infinitesimally small amount, as opposed to the imaginations of the bleeding hearts & defense attorneys who think most everyone is as innocent as the white driven snow.

thecuriousmail wrote on Aug 12^th, 2017 at 7:48am:


I would only have to guess that that number was based on the number of those who had their convictions subsequently overturned by another trial, because there would be no other way to determine an error rate of wrongful convictions. He's probably more right than wrong, for we know nobody is absolutely perfect.

freediver wrote on Aug 12^th, 2017 at 6:15pm:


The problem is that an innocent person is totally unable to produce a body to get the parole he otherwise would have, except for this new populist policy.

freediver wrote on Aug 12^th, 2017 at 6:15pm:



maybe aussie would prefer  a law that any jury who found an innocent person guilty should face trial...

I mean I think they get so much wrong up in Qld  I am sure there are many innocent people in their jails for murders they didnt do

Did free speech make you decide that the wrongful conviction is not the real issue?

Do you also object to criminals being given a lighter sentence for pleading guilty and cooperating with police?

Jayzuz, Politicians are absolute grubs!  Government introduced this bullshit policy and at the time, paraded the parents of a manslaughter victim whose body had not been recovered.

The convicted had been granted parole (but were still in Prison) PRIOR to the new announcement and the relevant Ministers (AG and Corrective Services) KNEW it when they stood to be photographed with the parents they had been trotting out in support of the new no body no parole regime.

Link.

Bastards!

Quote:


One ~ will be a good start.

freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 6:09pm:


Would you say the same thing if the boot was on your foot or perhaps a son or daughter.

crocodile wrote on Aug 16^th, 2017 at 6:43pm:


If my child was murdered, I would want the person who actually did it to go to jail, and stay there until they revealed the location of the body.

If my child was wrongfully convicted, I would want the conviction overturned. I would not pretend the only problem is the parole board failing to take into account that the original conviction was incorrect. I would focus on the actual problem in the hoe of finding an actual solution.

What's that point again Aussie? That a wrongful conviction is "esoteric crap" that must be ignored in order for you to attempt to make a point?

That's a question Aussie. Do you have a point, or are you accusing me of missing the point because there is none?

Is it that a wrongful conviction is "esoteric crap" that must be ignored in order for you to attempt to make a point?

Your point is obvious, but you either do not know how, or are afraid to put it into words.

It is that a wrongful conviction is "esoteric crap" that must be ignored in order for you to attempt to make a point.

I can see why the policy is most unjust.

Are you serious?  Perhaps deluded, dunno.  I have never wavered from my point.  How can an innocent, yet convicted person, produce a body to meet lawful parole otherwise due except for this stupid new populist policy?

You have never said.  Is the question too hard?

I think the point is eluding FD.

Quote:


Duh. People who are convicted of crimes are supposed to be adversely affected. Don't you agree Aussie?

Are you having trouble figuring out what your point is Aussie?

Can I suggest that your point is that a wrongful conviction must be discarded as "esoteric crap" to be ignored in order for you to maintain your simplistic rage over a moot point?

Do you agree that people convicted of crimes are supposed to be 'adversely affected'?

You just stated that your point was that people convicted of a crime are adversely affected. Are we now not allowed to discuss your point? Have you forgotten what your point is? Perhaps you'd like to ask a really stupid question instead?