Dally will probably never be released
The Dom Post reports:
The man who kidnapped, tortured and brutally murdered Lower Hutt schoolgirl Karla Cardno will remain in jail for at least three more years.
Paul Joseph Dally has already served 20 years of a life sentence but the Parole Board considers him too dangerous to be freed.
In its latest decision, issued yesterday, the board took the extra step of making a three-year postponement order, meaning Dally will not be eligible for parole again until 2013 except in exceptional circumstances. He had not even begun to rehabilitate, the board said.
Dally kidnapped 13-year-old Karla in May 1989 as she cycled to her Lower Hutt home. He then raped and tortured her in his nearby home, watching from the window as her frantic family searched outside.
Later he drove to the Pencarrow Coast, near Eastbourne, where he smashed her skull with a piece of driftwood and buried her face-down, naked and still alive, with her hands bound. Her body was found several weeks later.
The decision quoted a “chilling” psychological assessment given to the board, saying Dally showed “a high degree of relationship to serious and violent recidivism”.
If life without parole had been available as a sentence back then, Dally would be a perfect fit for it. The Parole Board has correctly judged that Dally shows absolutely no sign of rehabilitation, and is not letting him out.
It is a pity that they have to go through the farce of a hearing every three years, when life without parole would have meant the victim’s family don’t have to put up with the case hitting the media again, every time he has a parole hearing.
I don’t advocate life without parole for all murders, but it would have been appropriate for Dally’s killing of Cardno.
March 16th, 2010 at 9:32 am
He should have been exectuted back then and we shouldn’t be having this discussion or paying for his continued existance.
March 16th, 2010 at 9:33 am
I concur with Murray.
Lets have some retrospective legislation in honour of Helen Clarke!
March 16th, 2010 at 9:37 am
The state killing on my behalf? No thanks.
I like the thought of someone being locked up indefinitely though. Crushes their worthless souls, and they know it.
March 16th, 2010 at 9:38 am
Agree 100% with Murray.
March 16th, 2010 at 9:38 am
I’ve also blogged about this, and wondered whether society would be done a favour if he ever came into contact with Karla’s father, who is also behind bars
http://keepingstock.blogspot.com/2010/03/well-done-parole-board.html
I agree though that Dally should probably never be released; the risk is unacceptably high.
March 16th, 2010 at 9:39 am
Life without parole is simply the death sentence made long and for us poor bloody tax payers, very expensive.
I can only agree with the first two commenters.
March 16th, 2010 at 9:42 am
The horror and cruelty of which Karla Cardno was subjected to, affected some seasoned detectives to the point that they never ever recovered fully emotionally.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:06 am
I sometimes wonder just how evil someone needs to be before we as a society would consider the possibility of removing them PERMANENTLY from our midst?
Graeme Burton and William Dwane Bell are others that also come to mind.
Why are so many handwringers against the death penalty for such individuals? – it’s beyond me.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:08 am
What has changed if any in twenty years of his sentence? The report and comment do not show any substance to support the decision other than an emotional aspect.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:11 am
excuse thinks we should cuddle him more Kris.
I’m unconvinced thats a workable plan. I place greater worth on the safety of young girls than the so called rights of violent criminals.
Its not a nice choice, its a necessary one. We can chosse the lesser of two evils or we can cop out and look the other way. Hows the view out to sea there excuse? You can sleep well knowing you don’t condon the state killing on your behalf but every repeat offender is doing just that.
No balls for the hard calls, no responsibility.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:14 am
Kris
They don’t have to fork out of their pockets for it, the cost is shared.
They think that there is evil, everyone is a victim of society and their own personal circumstances.
They don’t believe in absolute values/truth everything is relative.
They don’t believe punishment helps victims get past it.
they are nice people unlike those who propose the death penalty for deliberate murder.
“No balls for the hard calls”
I like that thank you.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:22 am
Tassman – according to the Sensible Sentencing Trust, Dally and Taffy Hotene attended an anti-violence course together at some point
http://www.safe-nz.org.nz/sxdb/dallypaul.htm
Hotene is just as hopeless a case:
By 15 he was in court for theft, and again before he was 16.
He appeared for his first attempted rape of a woman at knifepoint at 17.
He was jailed for just 15 months.
As soon as he was out he walked into the home of a married woman with her two and a half year old daughter and ten month old baby, and attempted to rape her, holding a knife to the baby’s head.
he was imprisoned for four years.
As soon as he was released, he then attacked three women in Wanganui, in a four day reign of terror. One of them he succeeded in raping. All of them were women minding shops on their own. Each attack was reasonably well planned, and he took precautions such as discarding his clothes after each attack and taking measures to throw police dogs off his trail.
He was sentenced to 12 years in prison for these three attacks, paroled in 8, and within weeks raped and killed Kylie Jones.
http://www.safe-nz.org.nz/sxdb/hotenetaffy.htm
March 16th, 2010 at 10:26 am
“I don’t advocate life without parole for all murders, but it would have been appropriate for Dally’s killing of Cardno.”
Your position is absolute rubbish – if you don’t advocate life without parole for all murderers, then you are obviously of the belief (whether valid or not I am not commenting on), that a murderer can be ‘rehabilitated’. if such is the case, then there is a chance that Dally too could rehabilitate (finding God or whatever might spin his wheels). It would take some kind of supernatural prediction to separate those who might rehabilitate, and those that won’t. Do you, or the parole board have these abilities?
I could be reading you wrong, and perhaps you do not believe in prison as ‘correctional’ but rather as punishement, as some here are suggesting – that the punishment should fit the crime In that case I don’t see why any killer should be released – let alone continue living…
March 16th, 2010 at 10:32 am
Perhaps because you’re trying to lump them to together and ascribe to them a single reason for not wanting the death penalty. Most probably aren’t against it for those particular cases, but a death penalty law wouldn’t be written for named people but for particular crimes, and to ensure that no innocent people were executed we would need a much more rigorous and drawn-out appeals system etc. And then we’d end up with the US system, which is a farce to the point that a lot of states have gotten rid of it or are considering it’s demise (c.f. Illinois).
I’m against the death penalty for purely practical reasons. Not because I’m worried about Mr Dally.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:34 am
Sam
I can for Murder as that is the deliberate taking of life with malice aforethought.
I think we should punish/sanction to the level of how we value the crime.
So what value do we put on deliberately killing someone and ending their life with all the aftermath for their family, friends and society per se?
A life sentence is 10yrs, unless a non parole period is specified and then it can be longer, but if not they are eligible for parole at 10yrs.
Do you think 10yrs is a fair sanction for taking a life deliberately?
March 16th, 2010 at 10:35 am
Malcolm
what practical reasons apart from making a mistake?
March 16th, 2010 at 10:41 am
He can practically cop out of taking any responsibility for what is going on in our country.
Its how lefties maintain their air of smug self deluding sense of superiority while utterly fucking up our society.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:41 am
In his 1974 autobiography Albert Pierrepoint wrote;
“I have come to the conclusion that executions solve nothing, and are only an antiquated relic of a primitive desire for revenge which takes the easy way and hands over the responsibility for revenge to other people…The trouble with the death penalty has always been that nobody wanted it for everybody, but everybody differed about who should get off.”
March 16th, 2010 at 10:42 am
MikeNZ 10:14 am,
Indeed, Mike.
And it was “nice people” that allowed Hitler to rise to power and exterminate six million Jews (among others).
Spare me from the “nice people” – they are little more than enablers of evil, not that they recognise that fact.
And don’t get me started on the “everyone is a victim” line that is regularly trotted out – it makes me sick.
What happened to personal responsibility? – Oh that’s right, it disappeared along with OBJECTIVE morality – silly me.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:43 am
Cost mostly, Mike. We often hear about the $-per-prisoner-per-year cost and assume that would be saved if they were executed. This isn’t so because those costs are for the whole prison system divided by the number of prisioners. If one prisoner is removed then there will be a small reduction in cost, but much of the fixed costs will remain. Not to mention the fact that death row prisoners often spend 20-30 years in prison while all the expensive appeals take place.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:45 am
An hour and fifteen to Godwin the thread, congratulations.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:46 am
It would seem to me that a parole board should be able to specify a period before another hearing of up to 5 years as a matter of course. AFAIK it is annually unless there is otherwise strong reason meaning that the victim’s family needs to respond to a hearing each year. If a judge can impose a minimum period (limit appears to be 25 years but that period is exceptional), it seems strange that a parole board should need to re-visit the case each year when the minimum period is up.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:47 am
Just think – if we had the death penalty that nice chap Mr Bain probably wouldn’t have got the chance to prove his innocence. Oh, wait..
March 16th, 2010 at 10:50 am
Mike, there are other reasons which largely escape me now as it has been some years since I really looked into this. If you are interested I suggest you read about the reasons why various states and countries have done away with the death penalty. There are lots of interesting points for and against.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:55 am
Practical reasons against the death penalty include:
1- the risk of executing an innocent person
2- the risk that juries will be less likely to convict if they think the death penalty might be employed (more dangerous crims get freed)
3- the fact that the death penalty is not applied fairly and evenly to the same crimes (e.g. in the US blacks are more likely to get death sentences than whites)
4- the fact that the appeals process would necessarily be expensive and lengthy, such that a significant number of US crims on death row die of old age first.
5- the risk it elevates the level of violence in some crimes as the perp has nothing left to lose.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:56 am
Kris the only person I have seen wishing death upon those that disagree with their viewpoint is you, I would say that your views has more in common with that. Oh and Goodwins law btw.
Personally I am all for throwing them in a hole and throwing away the key, death is too easy.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:57 am
Mike, what Chthoniid said.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:58 am
I counter your cost with revenge, punishment, example and plain old blood lust
I personally would rather we had a two tier prison system one for those we can rehabilitate and one for the incorrigible.
Long term prison can dehumanise people and doesn’t rehabilitate necessarily so I favour a graded term, punishment, re-education and rehabilitation with longer post sentence bonding as well as worthwhile work to produce income for the system to defray costs.
Personal space should not include TV’s and there should be full surveillance of all areas of a prison for control and punishment.
Prisoners should lose some of the rights they consider self evident in society as when they get convicted they are no longer members of society until they are released in my opinion because they refuse to live by our rules.
IE: if we give someone a 1/3rd off for parole then they should be bonded from the end of the sentence for that period too.
I visited a sex offender in prison and he viewed his time as being till parole not the full sentence, he assured me all prisoners did the same!
I would prefer we charge fathers and mothers who rape their kids with that and not incest or unlawful connection, because they are parents or family they should be treated as harshly as the serial rapists.
All that said my position is that where it is proven beyond doubt that a person has murdered then the death penalty should be the sentence.
Similarly when convicted there should be no name suppression at all.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:59 am
“And it was “nice people” that allowed….”
That sort of angle can be attached to many bad events Kris. Sometimes (and in Germany often) “nice” people were Christians.
And I’m sure not all Christians want to kill people that have broken certain laws.
March 16th, 2010 at 11:00 am
“Dally will probably never be released”.
He never really went to a real prison.
I bet he loves the ideaI of being locked up in NZ with all its privileges.
Retirement homes in NZ for the elderly are much worse.
March 16th, 2010 at 11:00 am
Malcolm 10:32 am,
I guess you’re not thinking of the likes of Karla Cardno (“innocent people [who] were executed”), and other victims of these often repeat offenders/murderers?
Why should we continue to protect these scum when they will likely, upon release, commit more of these same crimes?
As Inventory2 highlighted at 10:22 am regarding the likes of Taffy Hotene – by not removing these scum we are condemning other victims to their future crimes. What of the future victims, Malcolm?
I’m all for rehabilitation where POSSIBLE, but what about when it’s unlikely? I’m not talking about crimes of passion here, but cold blooded, calculated and planned acts of murder and rape, or where these scum simply place no value on the lives of others, and have no remorse for their actions.
March 16th, 2010 at 11:04 am
Maybe the victims of crime should decide on parole at trial or whether a hearing should go ahead.
If the victim was murdered then their immediate family could make the decision?
After the judge had set the term of course.
March 16th, 2010 at 11:11 am
Inventory @10.22
Ok, that’s one side of the circumstances…
Now what is the point of locking up anyone for that matter and for twenty years what is the expected outcome?
Will it make you happier…?
Or will it make society safer….? If so, has this been proven elsewhere?
It’s hasn’t worked in the US because it creates more murderers than it killed them.
It has worked in the ME and parts of Asia because the law is sanctioned by moral principles.
March 16th, 2010 at 11:13 am
Should have moral principles are sanctioned by law…
March 16th, 2010 at 11:13 am
Pete George 10:59 am,
Yes, Pete, I was aware that many of those “nice people” who enabled Hitler were German Christians (or at least church goers).
What’s that saying?
“Evil triumphs where good men do nothing.”
I guess we don’t need “nice people” so much, but rather “good men”.
And sometimes “good men” just ain’t ‘nice’ – but they have the fortitude to do what’s right and stand against evil.
March 16th, 2010 at 11:14 am
We can pontificate all we like here but our justice system is a lottery and actually brings the law into disrepute but nothing is done about this.
Just last week, a serial rapist gets home detention.
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/97583/sex-offender-met-girls-bebo
A sex offender with 40 yr history is allowed to work near schools on parole.
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/51195/questions-raised-over-sex-attacker039s-shift-near-two-schools
The judge couldn’t give home detention for possession of 18 images and a 4000 library here.
http://www.odt.co.nz/50713/jail-for-man-with-irreparably-damaging039-child-porn-pictures
Yet a PN professional got that and permanent name suppression for 25 images and 300,000 library
March 16th, 2010 at 11:14 am
Strangely, given that Christian groups were behind abolishing capital punishment, the only people who seem to be seriously campaign for its reinstatement are the Christian right with a return to capital punishment an election issue for the defunct Christian Heritage. I mean, seriously, whatever happened to You shall not murder.
March 16th, 2010 at 11:14 am
How innocent do you think the names bandied about as posssible candidates for the death penalty are?
Resolved by having two stage trials as in the USA – the conviction phase where guilt or innocence is determined followed by the penalty phase where it is determined whether or not to apply the ultimate sanction.
An old saw – the states with the death penalty also have a higher proportion of Black residents than states without it – tus skewing the statistics over the Nation as a whole
The appeals process is what you make it and in the US varies from state to state – in some retentionist states the appeals system effectively makes the Death Penalty inoperative Oregon would be an example where actually being executed is a form of suicide since the only way it happens is if an inmate forgoes his appeals.
Indeed imposing the death penalty in much of the USA can be seen as a message the offender will never be released since the vast majority of those currently on Death row will die before being executed
What has Graeme Burton got left to loose?
March 16th, 2010 at 11:16 am
“I mean, seriously, whatever happened to You shall not murder.”
State sanctioned execution is by definition not murder. I beleive the same rationalisation is used by military chaplains.
March 16th, 2010 at 11:18 am
cha
Islamics are not Christians…
March 16th, 2010 at 11:18 am
good points andrei.
sadly you’ll get the same old same old in reply.
Cha
your need to beat the god bothers with your take on things is a waste of time and brain as I know many non christians who favour the death penalty for murder and terrorism.
March 16th, 2010 at 11:20 am
Yeah, bloody nanny state can stay out of my life…except when I want someone dead.
March 16th, 2010 at 11:22 am
Jeff83 10:56 am,
I wish you long life, prosperity, and that you find TRUE purpose for your life, Jeff, despite you disagreeing with me
March 16th, 2010 at 11:25 am
Mr. McVictor and his Act front line would propable do the job themselves!
March 16th, 2010 at 11:28 am
Well you probably don’t have the balls for it do you Tassman?
At least Garth Mcvicar is doing the hard yards with the families of victims.
March 16th, 2010 at 11:33 am
Some people tend to argue the state in this day and has absolutely no right to execute members of its society- I have to disagree when a convicted criminal has dozens of violent assaults, attempted murders, robberies and rapes attached to their name. That is where the death penalty can be applied, generally not by a trial court but as a total sum up of a person already in jail for life who is endangering seriously the lives of those who may and will rehabilitate. it will be cheaper than execution in the USA as people won’t be eligible until they have already been locked away for numerous violent offenses.
And A simple way to make a person committed to Death not lash out is through either permanent lockdown in a cell (which ideally we should do for all serial killers and rapists – why is Graeme Burton allowed amongst general prison society) or simply not tell them and appoint a couple of QCs to argue on their behalf – they wouldn’t deserve the honour of being heard in court
Well thats my little rant on my ideas on capital punishment – only for those already in jail and have dozens of repeat violent offences
March 16th, 2010 at 11:45 am
In reply to cha — I would say that support for the death penalty will be found in many many sectors of society and across various religious beliefs. Essentially the death penalty were scrapped by a labour government at a time of very low murder rates. During the 1950s any policeman on the street could count on the fingers of his hand the number of murders in New Zealand in any given year.
Since capital punishment was abolished the murder rate has got up to I think around 80 murders a year. So it is now far in excess of what it was when we did have capital punishment.
My understanding of the biblical view, since you asked, is that the commandment “do not kill” is generally interpreted as “do not murder”. Murder refers to the deliberate and unlawful taking of human life. However capital punishment, which God sanctions on a number of occasions in the Old Testament, can be justified as — a deterrence to murder, a just punishment (a life for a life) that fits the crime, punishment that recognises the true dignity of human life (as opposed to 17 years imprisonment for murder) and a cast-iron guarantee that this person will not murder again.
In the New Testament support for the death penalty can be seen in the passage in Romans where the governing authorities bear the sword, they are God’s servants, to bring punishment on the wrongdoer (Romans 13:4).
I would like to see capital punishment reintroduced. My prediction is that the murder rates would then fall and we would be a lot safer in our homes.
March 16th, 2010 at 11:47 am
Suggest a reading of:
Spohn, Cassia (1994) Crime and the Social Control of Blacks: Offender/Victim Race and the Senetencing of Violent Offenders. In Inequality, Crime, and Socila Control ed Bridges & Myers pp249-68
Tonry, M (1995) Malign Neglect: Race, Crime, and Punishment in America
Waldfogel J (1993) Sentencing Policy, Implied Demographic Welfare Weights, and the Theory of Senetencing Reform. Journal of Public Economics 59:177-93
Race and gender turn out to be regular factors contributing towards sentencing outcomes, even after controlling for other variables. It’s not a demographic artifact.
March 16th, 2010 at 12:04 pm
@ Tassman (11.13am) – if Dalley indeed regards the murder, rape and torture of Karla Cardno as “ancient history”, I would suggest that rehabiliation is the longest of long-shots.
March 16th, 2010 at 12:05 pm
The traditionalists themselves are not absolute about the loss of life. For example, it’s relatively ok to risk a life in order to prevent the loss of many lives, thus the death penalty is respectively relative for acts of terrorism.
But terrorism itself is caused by the awareness of loss of life from Western materialism influence that sabotaged a culture and its way of living, giving rise to poverty, crime, and murder.
So, accordingly, the prevention of the loss of lives for the many takes precedence over the probable loss of lives for the few. If many persons are dead in the ME because of US and Israel impositions, it justifies Arabs to defend themselves.
And so the madness continues.
It’s total loss of logic… It is because it is influenced by partisan politics and sentiments. None of it is universal, and besides no one listens to no one be it principle, law, morality, culture, or whatever. It is basically individualism and the survival of the fittest.
Look, for JK to survive a little bit longer, he needs to spend a little to fund his future voters in the likes of the soccer and cricket team. That’s individualism ambitions at the expense of the majority. Shall we put him under the axe?
March 16th, 2010 at 12:11 pm
If you give me a choice between an innocent man being exectuted and half a dozen little girls being raped and murdered I’m going to do some maths you wont like.
I’m not going to waffle a lot of shit or quote other people because I’m unable to construct my own argument. I’m just going to flat out tell you that is better that we loose one innocent person than letting 100 guilty people go free.
Thats an option that works. The current feel good system doesn’t. Thats the reality.
March 16th, 2010 at 12:15 pm
Then you should be in Afghanistan practising what you preach, and not from the safety behind the monitor…
March 16th, 2010 at 12:21 pm
safety behind the microphone..
March 16th, 2010 at 12:45 pm
[Murray]: “I’m just going to flat out tell you that is better that we loose one innocent person than letting 100 guilty people go free. Thats an option that works. The current feel good system doesn’t. Thats the reality.”
Oh, I see – you’re a psychopath! That explains a few things.
The occasional innocent Murray or son of a Murray getting executed – who cares, in the broader scheme of things? You’re a lot more socialist than me, chap…
March 16th, 2010 at 2:38 pm
@Kris K: “I sometimes wonder just how evil someone needs to be before we as a society would consider the possibility of removing them PERMANENTLY from our midst?
Graeme Burton and William Dwane Bell are others that also come to mind.
Why are so many handwringers against the death penalty for such individuals? – it’s beyond me.”
While I am not opposed to the death penalty, per se, the actual execution is something I would not wish to offer a person as a job. If one were to take a mainstream religious perspective, to kill someone in cold blood could stain the soul. Taking a non-religious perspective, I wonder as to the kind of individual who would do that job and if prior to doing the job an individual did not realise the psychological stress potentially involved what kind of effects that would have. Furthermore, the potential for abuse is worrying as is the potential for an innocent to be executed. Rules would have to be stringent. I also expect legal costs would be greatly raised, not only directly through appeals, but also perhaps through fewer admittals of guilt and thus more time needed to be spent on cases. And if incentivising guilty pleas through not applying the death penalty, this could mean the law is applied fairly unevenly and also may even incentivise some guilty pleas where not guilty. Whether the increased legal costs would be outweighed by the lessened jailtime costs, I don’t know. As such, I am ambivalent and I can understand why one would be opposed, but I can also understand the concept that some people won’t function as society desires them to on a return and that their crime/s are so heinous that to suffer them to live is not ideal.
March 16th, 2010 at 2:47 pm
MikeNZ – a life sentence is just that – a sentence for life. It is a common mistake for people to think it ends after 10 years – but that is the minimum non-parole period for the sentence not the end of their sentence. Judges now have the power to set much higher non-parole periods (as seen in the cases of Bell, Burton and Liam Reid to name a few) but if they don’t set one, the default is 10 years before a prisoner will be considered for parole (considered – not released).
Very few prisoners on life sentences get released as soon as they reach parole eligibility. An offender on a life sentence could be kept in until they die – and some such as Dally will be I think. But even if they do get parole later on, they are subject to parole conditions that they have to stick by until the day they die. An offender on life parole could technically be recalled to prison for missing an appointment with a probation officer 15 years after being released. So it is a life sentence even if it’s not all served behind bars.
Media constantly state that a prisoner will be released when they come up for parole – it’s just misleading and upsetting to victims and the community at large that want to see thesee men and women locked away for a long time.
March 16th, 2010 at 3:15 pm
I’m fine with the death penalty when the evidence is 100% conclusive.
Firstly, the guilty/non-guilty decision is based on ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. Then, the judge (or jury) would give a second verdict as to whether the conviction is ‘beyond all reasonable doubt’ or ‘beyond doubt’.
The death penalty should be considered where the murder evidence is ‘beyond doubt’.
People who would qualify for the death penalty under my criteria are Graeme Burton,Clayton Weatherston (SIC??), probably Paul Dally since he confessed and knew the location of the body.
A few controversial cases include Dave Bain, where evidence was circumstantial, so the evidence was not beyond doubt.. Scott Watson (guilty of murdering Ben/Olivia ) would not qualify either, nor David Tamihere, or John Barlow.
March 16th, 2010 at 3:16 pm
Tassman I’ve already been a lot of places where there was no such safety thanks. thats the essential difference between us. I’m not a crapweasle expounding theory.
I love the new definition of pyscopath. Someone who understand the concepts of sacrifice for the protection of the innocent.
the morally superior socialist would let as many guilty people go free to rape and murder again just so they can feel good about themselves at their next morning tea latte.
You all are quite happy to not just risk but knowingly sacrifice thousands of innocent lives in numerous wars to protect our external security but you shit yourselves at the thought of taking the slightest risk to protect our selves from the exceedingly more real internal threats. When I see the country you have given us I wonder if we wouldn’t have been better to let one of those exteranls just take us out.
March 16th, 2010 at 4:26 pm
Ok, I’ve read all your crap and bleeding hearts rubbish.
some people are evil and we are stupid as a society to treat them as we treat ordinary people.
thankfully they are few and far between.
Kill them and be done with it.
providing we are 100% sure they did the deed of course.
if 50% of them are Maori then so be it.
March 16th, 2010 at 4:59 pm
couldn’t agree more Mike
http://news.msn.co.nz/article/1027921/mother-accused-of-strangling-her-six-babies
the death penalty is an extreme sentence for extreme crimes & should not be dependent on race, sex or religion
March 16th, 2010 at 5:17 pm
Malcolm: re “That nice chap Mr Bain probably wouldn’t have got the chance to prove his innocence.”
A slight aside, but as a point of correction: the nice Mr Bain did not prove his innocence. He was found not guilty, which is not the same thing. If he ever gets round to seeking compensation, it will be interesting to see where the balance of probability is determined to sit.
March 16th, 2010 at 8:09 pm
IV2 – Taffy Hotene killed himself back in November last year:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10612072
Watch the Beyond the Darklands show on him and it will make you realise why he became what he did. It is no excuse I know but when you really see what his homelife was like, he really did not know any better.
I went to school with him and he was a sexual deviant at a very young age. I just wish someone had done something to remove him from the environment he was in then maybe things could have turned out better. Plenty of teachers must have know that the behaviours he displayed were outside of the norm of a 7 year old yet no one did anything.
March 16th, 2010 at 8:40 pm
Quite right Projectman – it was a failed attempt at sarcasm on my part. I assume you’ve seen this excellent website: http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz/
Of course I wouldn’t say that David Bain murdered his family, however I did believe he did at the time of his first conviction and I am positive that his father did not.
March 16th, 2010 at 9:14 pm
the nice david bain was not absolutely 100% proven, like the nice mr burton (both times) so he wouldn’t be a candidate for execution.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:15 pm
I’m rather a- and be-mused by some of the people here who hate Helen Clark so much that they think she should be given the authority to decide who lives and who dies.
Honestly, there is not a single human being on the face of the planet who I could point to and say, “I trust you with the power to kill people without repercussion.”
March 16th, 2010 at 10:35 pm
Life without parole, v’s death.
1. Same impact on likelihood to commit any more crimes. So all the comments above along the lines of Murray’s “If you give me a choice between an innocent man being exectuted and half a dozen little girls being raped and murdered I’m going to do some maths you wont like.” – false argument. That isn’t the choice we have.
2. Cost benefit. I think it’s more expensive to execute people than to lock them up for life. At worst it’s a similar cost. So no real cost saving to society there.
3. Deterrent. I don’t think someone who didn’t care about 20 years in jail really thought they were going to get caught, in fact more likely they just didn’t think at all. No deterrent effect either way.
4. Potential that something goes wrong and we execute an innocent person. Small chance, but non-zero.
So, on all the points, my take is there is no advantage, except the last one. And that last one favours life-no-parole.
QED.