Question for DESMOND
John Rennie
executed. You can free him even though he has promised to murder the first
child he sees as soon as he is free and the prison psychologists assure you
that he will. Do you free him or do you allow him to be executed?
John Rennie
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message
news:slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net...
> Le Fri, 20 Sep 2002 08:37:51 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com>
a écrit :
>
> --
> Desmond Coughlan
You don't have that option. Sorry Desmond -
it's execution or freedom for Frank.
John Rennie
> Le Fri, 20 Sep 2002 09:24:48 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com>
a écrit :
>
> >> > Desmond, Theodore Frank is about to be
> >> > executed. You can free him even though he has promised to murder
the
> > first
> >> > child he sees as soon as he is free and the prison psychologists
assure
> > you
> >> > that he will. Do you free him or do you allow him to be executed?
>
> >> I commute his sentence to life imprisonment.
>
> > it's execution or freedom for Frank.
>
> or to free him, but not to commute him ?
>
> Ridiculous.
>
> --
> Desmond Coughlan
My question is full of meaning but I am not surprised
that you do not see it. I asked you sometime ago
whether, if you were given the power and you knew
Frank was to be executed, you would free him
or not. You said 'Yes' without qualification Now I am
making it just that little bit more difficult for you; would you
still say 'Yes' if you knew he would kill again?
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 08:13:52 +0000
>
>Le Fri, 20 Sep 2002 08:37:51 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a
>écrit :
>
>> Desmond, Theodore Frank is about to be
>> executed. You can free him even though he has promised to murder the
>first
>> child he sees as soon as he is free and the prison psychologists assure you
>> that he will. Do you free him or do you allow him to be executed?
>
>I commute his sentence to life imprisonment.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!washdc3-snh1.gtei.net!cam
bridge1-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!bos-service1.ext.raytheon.com!cyclone.
swbell.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!newsfeed.news2me.c
om!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfee
>d.fjserv.net!opentransit.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-
68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 08:13:52 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 14
>Message-ID: <slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032509727 5291116 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
>X-Orig-Path: lievre.voute.net!nobody
>X-No-Archive: true
>X-OS: BSD UNIX
>X-PGP: http://www.zeouane.org/pgp/pubring.pkr
>User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (FreeBSD)
>
The Dr. Dolly Coughlan archive exists because Desmond Coughlan lacks conviction
in his words. He won't allow his posts to be archived in Google. Please feel
free to use it to your advantage.
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 08:25:59 +0000
>
>Le Fri, 20 Sep 2002 09:24:48 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a
>écrit :
>
>>> > Desmond, Theodore Frank is about to be
>>> > executed. You can free him even though he has promised to murder the
>> first
>>> > child he sees as soon as he is free and the prison psychologists assure
>> you
>>> > that he will. Do you free him or do you allow him to be executed?
>
>>> I commute his sentence to life imprisonment.
>
>> You don't have that option. Sorry Desmond -
>> it's execution or freedom for Frank.
>
>Your question has no meaning, John. I have the 'power' to kill him,
>or to free him, but not to commute him ?
>
>Ridiculous.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-b
erlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 08:25:59 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 24
>Message-ID: <slrnaolmsn.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032510387 5396176 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 18:50:00 +0000
>
>Le Fri, 20 Sep 2002 12:58:05 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Your question has no meaning, John. I have the 'power' to kill him,
>>> or to free him, but not to commute him ?
>>>
>>> Ridiculous.
>
>> My question is full of meaning but I am not surprised
>> that you do not see it.
>
>John, the bad news is that LDB has just about 'sewn up' the job of
>'uneducated buffoon trying to appear erudite and patronising', so
>you're going to have to stick to Grammar Czar until something better
>comes along.
>
>> I asked you sometime ago
>> whether, if you were given the power and you knew
>> Frank was to be executed, you would free him
>> or not. You said 'Yes' without qualification Now I am
>> making it just that little bit more difficult for you; would you
>> still say 'Yes' if you knew he would kill again?
>
>My 'yes' was based on the proven fact that murderers are very
>unlikely to murder again. So yes, as you said, I was 'taking a risk'
>that you were not necessarily prepared to take. This did not, and
>does not constitute 'preferring' that he murder again.
>
>You can certainly criticise me for my willingness to take this risk (and
>I repeat now my willingness to take it), but what you cannot do is to
>add 'certitudes' that cannot ever exist, along the lines of 'you
>"know" [sic] that he's going to kill again', because as soon as you do,
>your 'question' becomes fatuous, and any tenuous link to reality that
>it might have had, evaporates.
>
>However, if these fanciful 'certitudes' that you seek to introduce into
>the equation, ever became fact, then I would certainly have the power
>to commute his sentence to life imprisonment. Or in the 'Mike Hammer'
>tradition that befits your rather silly question, I would have him
>released, only to follow him night and day, wait until he prepares to
>kill again, leap from a darkened doorway, and save his victim by
>'fillin' da mothafucka with lead!'
>
>I would thus be greeted as an all-American hero, be awarded the highest
>award for gallantry, and get to shag Jessica Alba.
>
>If you want a serious answer, then ask a serious question. Theodore
>Frank is about to be executed. You can free him. You know that if
>you do free him, there is a chance he will murder again. Take into
>account the phenomenally low rates of recidivism among murderers, and
>the fact that even bag snatchers are more likely to kill again.
>
>Am I willing to gamble on that infinitesimally small chance that he will
>kill again ?
>
>Yes.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!fr.clara.net!heighliner.f
r.clara.net!opentransit.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68
.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 18:50:00 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 63
>Message-ID: <slrnaomreo.79.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolmsn.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><b3Ei9.1411$DR.5...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032547908 5949147 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
A Planet Visitor
> Le Fri, 20 Sep 2002 12:58:05 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> Your question has no meaning, John. I have the 'power' to kill him,
> >> or to free him, but not to commute him ?
> >>
> >> Ridiculous.
>
> > that you do not see it.
>
> 'uneducated buffoon trying to appear erudite and patronising', so
> you're going to have to stick to Grammar Czar until something better
> comes along.
>
your 'library.'
> > I asked you sometime ago
> > whether, if you were given the power and you knew
> > Frank was to be executed, you would free him
> > or not. You said 'Yes' without qualification Now I am
> > making it just that little bit more difficult for you; would you
> > still say 'Yes' if you knew he would kill again?
>
> My 'yes' was based on the proven fact that murderers are very
> unlikely to murder again. So yes, as you said, I was 'taking a risk'
> that you were not necessarily prepared to take. This did not, and
> does not constitute 'preferring' that he murder again.
>
Literally the most stupid comment you've ever provided. Your
reply to the original question, with a simplistic 'yes' made no mention
of 'recidivism' or 'unlikely' or anything of the sort. It was an
ADMISSION that you would ACCEPT Frank murdering again,
RATHER than accept the State executing him. The question
did not address 'ratios' or percentages or anything even close to
that. The question was about Theodore Frank. No one else.
<wiggle...wiggle...wiggle clipped>
> Am I willing to gamble on that infinitesimally small chance that he will
> kill again ?
>
Didn't I say he'd put a caveat in it this time, before answering?
The old -- escape clause. To avoid 'actually' answering the
question, he will assume his answer will not result in a new
murder. Making it a non-answer, to a very reasonable question.
> Yes.
>
Theodore Frank???? Infinitesimally small chance that he will kill
again? Can you possibly hear yourself, bubble-brain? In any
case, the question was no longer posed in YOUR now presumed
terms of 'infinitesimally small chance.' We are now speaking of
a CERTAINTY. There is also an 'infinitesimally small chance' that
the execution will not 'take' and he will rise up as Lazarus, and the
State will forgive him.
In a question of your 'philosophy,' FDP... let's assume there is
NO chance he will not murder again. Just as we assume there is
NO chance he will rise from the dead.
I am now convinced THIS is a question you will not answer, without
some sort of wiggle attached. And I actually thought you MIGHT
stick to your guns, in respect to your 'philosophy' (sic).
Bring out the butt-balm again, FDP... spank...spank...spank.
PV
> --
> Desmond Coughlan |THE BITCH DROPPED THE BIKE ON MY TOE
|SO I DUMPED HER SORRY ASS
|AND MY 5 KIDS AS WELL
Steve Towne
> Le Fri, 20 Sep 2002 12:58:05 +0100, John Rennie
<j.re...@ntlworld.com> a écrit :
>
snip
>
> My 'yes' was based on the proven fact that murderers are
very
> unlikely to murder again. So yes, as you said, I was
'taking a risk'
> that you were not necessarily prepared to take. This did
not, and
> does not constitute 'preferring' that he murder again.
>
this risk (and
> I repeat now my willingness to take it), but what you
cannot do is to
> add 'certitudes' that cannot ever exist, along the lines of
'you
> "know" [sic] that he's going to kill again', because as
soon as you do,
> your 'question' becomes fatuous, and any tenuous link to
reality that
> it might have had, evaporates.
>
>
> Am I willing to gamble on that infinitesimally small chance
that he will
> kill again ?
>
To my mind "taking a risk" and "gambling" implies that the
risk taker is the one to suffer any adverse consequences that
may result from his actions. If the criminal you refer to
here has a 1 in 10,000 chance of killing YOU specifically is
that risk you would care to take? You don't lose any sleep
playing poker with someone else's money.
ST
A Planet Visitor
"John Rennie" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:b3Ei9.1411$DR.5...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net...
presume that POSSIBLY a new murder of an innocent will
not happen. Because... as I've said before... he views the
execution by the State of the worst murderer to be a
greater 'crime' than the murder of an innocent victim.
But he is too weak of character to now admit that is his
'philosophy' (sic). I just wish you'd make it difficult enough
to determine that 'philosophy.' (sic). You keep providing
that 'window' (you have closed it quite a bit, but it is still
slightly cracked open in philosophical terms), that he can
wiggle through, to assume his choice of 'yes' will NOT
result in another murder by Theodore Frank (or -- as he
said in another post -- the infinitesimally small chance that he
will kill again). You need to CLOSE that window, in my view,
and make it a TRUE theoretical question of which life holds
more VALUE for him. The life of a LIVING victim or the life
of a LIVING murderer. I am quite certain it is the life of the
LIVING murderer, because it would be the STATE that takes
that life, and not an individual as is the case in life of a
LIVING victim of murder.
I must say, that as much as Earl's views disturb me... I
believe he would be honest in answering this question, and
would answer it with the same 'philosophy' that I expected from
desi.
PV
incubus
That is not a fair question John, Desi's stance is clear. He doesn't support
the death penalty nor does he wan't murderers free. There is only one
possible answer for Desi and you taking that option away makes the question
unanswerable for him.
Another fact of the matter is that in the real world "life imprisonment" is
an option so he picks it.
A Planet Visitor
> Le Sat, 21 Sep 2002 08:45:37 +0100, incubus <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >>> I commute his sentence to life imprisonment.
>
> >> it's execution or freedom for Frank.
>
> > That is not a fair question John, Desi's stance is clear. He doesn't support
> > the death penalty nor does he wan't murderers free. There is only one
> > possible answer for Desi and you taking that option away makes the question
> > unanswerable for him.
> >
> > Another fact of the matter is that in the real world "life imprisonment" is
> > an option so he picks it.
>
> nonsensical. We do not know which murderers will kill again. We _cannot_
> know it.
>
> We know that some will kill again, but to execute every one of them, in
> order to stop a few of them killing again, is also nonsensical, and
> does not take into account the 'pool' of wrongly convicted that we find
> in any group of 'murderers'.
Ummm.. we execute less than 5% of them. Less executed than are
recidivist (8% of murderers on DR in the U.S. are recidivist for
homicide). In point of fact, post Furman we have had over 500,000
homicides (a staggering number). Yet have sentenced about 6,000
to the DP, and executed less than 800 proven murderers.
> This was the case with the death row
> convicts post-Furman. Four of them were innocent. One of them killed
> again. Executing them all would have prevented that one (Kenneth McDuff)
> from killing again, but would have resulted in the death of four
> innocents.
>
LOL... We also had 6 murders IN PRISON... committed by those commuted,
and we had Robert Lee Massie. See
http://www.clarkprosecutor.org/html/death/US/massie703.htm
Also sentenced to the DP, but overturned by Furman, which resulted in him
committing further new murders. In a robbery of a liquor store.
And we had Jerry Michael Ward -- Originally sentenced to die in the electric chair,
for committing murder with malice in the rape and murder of a Houston
school girl. His sentence was commuted to life in prison with the Furman
ruling. He was subsequently paroled in 1984 after serving 18 years in prison.
He was the number one suspect in two new cases, involving the
disappearance of Connie Sue Cooke, and the murder of Brenda Maureen
Hackett. But although police were on the verge of arresting him, Ward
committed suicide in a self-inflicted execution, as police were at his
door.
And we had another former death-row inmate commuted by
Furman murder a fellow drug dealer; he's currently serving a life sentence.
And yet another, a prison escapee, killed another man in a jealous rage
after the two had smoked crack cocaine at an all-night party.
And, of course, we have no POSITIVE way of assuring that ANY of the
others released did not commit another murder. According to JFA, Sharp
states "It appears that some 15 innocents have been murdered by
those Furman releasees, through 1987, in addition to other horrendous
crimes committed by that same group. We are unaware of any updated
review covering the next 15 years, through 2002." See
http://w1.155.telia.com/~u15509119/innocence.htm
Plus, I don't even think you can provide the NAMES of the four 'innocents' you
refer to. Why not give us the 'particulars' of the 'proof' of their innocence?
In addition to the fact, that having been commuted demonstrates only that
they were NOT executed.
A Planet Visitor
" Steve Towne" <cmp...@cox.net> wrote in message news:pnSi9.49693$S32.3...@news2.west.cox.net...
is of no concern to him... As long as he can appear as pious.
You see, the chance of Theodore Frank murdering, if he were
free, would be 'infinitesimally' small, according to desi. I mean
Frank only wrote in his diary in prison -- "Why do I want to
degrade and humiliate children? Sadism...I enjoy the humiliation.
Defile the innocent. Make them scared of sex. It's dirty." Hardly
a murderer worth worrying about, actually. Certainly not someone
who might be liable to murder again at greater than that
'infinitesimally' small chance. Let's give him a job at the local
kindergarten. Hell, life's a 'gamble' as it is. As long as desi is
in Paris, and Frank is in the U.S., why does desi need concern
himself?
PV
A Planet Visitor
"incubus" <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> wrote in message news:gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
> John Rennie wrote:
>
> >
> > "Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message
> > news:slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net...
> >> Le Fri, 20 Sep 2002 08:37:51 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com>
> > a écrit :
> >>
> >> > Desmond, Theodore Frank is about to be
> >> > executed. You can free him even though he has promised to murder the
> > first
> >> > child he sees as soon as he is free and the prison psychologists assure
> > you
> >> > that he will. Do you free him or do you allow him to be executed?
> >>
> >> I commute his sentence to life imprisonment.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Desmond Coughlan
> >
> >
> > You don't have that option. Sorry Desmond -
> > it's execution or freedom for Frank.
> That is not a fair question John, Desi's stance is clear. He doesn't support
> the death penalty nor does he wan't murderers free. There is only one
> possible answer for Desi and you taking that option away makes the question
> unanswerable for him.
>
are EXACTLY TWO possible answers. 'free' or 'execute.' The fact that
BOTH result in the death of a human (one an innocent - the other a
proven - murdering, scum-sucking, child-rapist-torturer-murderer), simply
does not permit a 'third' choice. That only means desi AVOIDS the
confrontation of his 'philosophy' (sic) regarding the DP. There is absolutely
NO WAY that desi can claim 'released murderers don't murder again.' All
we need do is assume that the murderer released WILL murder again.
And ask the 'philosophical' question under those conditions. You see..
FDP is not trying to examine Theodore Frank... he wishes us to look
at the question as if it were about Roger Coleman.
> Another fact of the matter is that in the real world "life imprisonment" is
> an option so he picks it.
>
Another fact of the matter is that released murderers murder again.
And now, instead of 'only one possible answer for FDP,' you would
offer him a 'third choice.' Understand that the question did not provide
for such a choice. It was 'free him' or 'execute him.' Which is the
HEART of the argument here. What FDP is saying... is that he is
willing to "gamble" the lives of innocent victims to feed his particular agenda.
How very noble of him. One wonders if his choice of 'gambling' on Theodore
Frank, also includes an offer for Frank to stay in FDP's home as he
enjoys that freedom. No... actually all he wishes to do is afford Frank
the possibility (in this example a 'theoretical' certainty), of murdering
again. So FDP might appear self-anointed in 'spiritual purity.' While
pathetically trying to justify that by saying it is a 'gamble' he is willing to
take with the lives of others, because he sees it as 'infinitesimally small.'
As I've said... how very noble and how very God-like of him to presume
he can 'gamble' with innocent lives.
PV
A Planet Visitor
> Le Sat, 21 Sep 2002 02:58:50 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip childish whine, and claims of victory }
>
We ALL know what that means. TRANSLATION -- 'I can't stand
it when someone challenges my perverse taste for murderers.'
> > Theodore Frank???? Infinitesimally small chance that he will kill
> > again? Can you possibly hear yourself, bubble-brain? In any
> > case, the question was no longer posed in YOUR now presumed
> > terms of 'infinitesimally small chance.' We are now speaking of
> > a CERTAINTY. There is also an 'infinitesimally small chance' that
> > the execution will not 'take' and he will rise up as Lazarus, and the
> > State will forgive him.
>
> It would appear that you 'practice' your posts first, in front of a
> mirror. 'Bubble-brain' ? LOL ... indeed you are. There is a chance
> that the execution will 'not take and he will rise up as Lazarus' ?
>
About the same chance that Theodore Frank would not murder if
'free.' But then, you've always been a 'gambling man.' As long
as it's somebody else's life. Because as I recall, if it was your life --
you would be crapping in your pants in fear. That WAS the
thrust of one of your comment, wasn't it???
> LOL ... what a moron. No, there is _no_ chance that his body will
> resist the poison being pumped into it. Just as there is _no_ chance
> that the body will be able to survive the several thousand volts used
> in the electric chair, where that is still permitted. These physical
> reactions are governed by the laws of physics, and as such, we can
> be 100% sure that once the chemicals have entered the convict's blood-
> stream, they will kill him.
>
Oh, please... First the 'Big Crunch'... now the 'laws of physics.'
It's a wonder you can spell it. But I love to tweak your pompous
little nose. tweak..tweak..tweak... Do they have a 'tweak-balm'
I wonder? Shit... nope... but they DO HAVE a 'nose-balm.' See -
http://www.medetail.co.uk/home-doc/prodfind.cgi?Nosor+Nose+Balm
Maybe that might help you.
> These are facts. Asking, 'He might kill again' is in the realm of
> supposition, and as such, can never be 'certain'. It is impossible
> to say whether or not Theodore Frank would have killed again, and
> no matter how much you whine, insult, rant, and thump your desk, that
> fact remains carved in stone.
>
Sure... take a 'gamble' desi. Save a scum-bag pedophile, torturing
child-murderer. Meanwhile, we all know the question is posed as
Frank WOULD murder again. Which is one of the most obvious
facts in this entire question. And only demonstrates that you
really HAVE NO 'philosophy' regarding the DP... except you like to
'gamble' with innocent lives.
> { snip more declarations of victory }
>
Actually, I'm still arguing... it's you who seems to be 'claiming victory.'
Although it doesn't have any substance. As I said... an argument about
as empty as a floating turd.
Ummm... tweak..tweak...tweak... I just LOVE this thread. It has
so clearly pinned you to the wall, and caused you to lose a great
deal of respect among abolitionists... because they all see you
CANNOT take a position in this argument. And you cannot hide
behind 'the dead cannot be honored.' Because we are speaking
of a 'live' victim. I think the question can be asked -- since you
are such a 'gambling' man. Would you TRADE the life of a
victim for the life of Theodore Frank. Save Frank -- lose a victim.
Lose Frank -- Save a victim. Simple. You choose. I certainly
have no qualms about choosing. Bye-bye Teddy.
incubus
> Le Sat, 21 Sep 2002 08:45:37 +0100, incubus <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> a
> écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
>>>> I commute his sentence to life imprisonment.
>
>>> You don't have that option. Sorry Desmond -
>>> it's execution or freedom for Frank.
>
>> That is not a fair question John, Desi's stance is clear. He doesn't
>> support the death penalty nor does he wan't murderers free. There is only
>> one possible answer for Desi and you taking that option away makes the
>> question unanswerable for him.
>>
>> Another fact of the matter is that in the real world "life imprisonment"
>> is an option so he picks it.
>
> Indeed, and in the real world, 'you _know_ he will kill again', is simply
> nonsensical. We do not know which murderers will kill again. We _cannot_
> know it.
whether he will kill again is irrelevent. People are executed for murders
they have already commited. Many executed murderers would probably have
never killed again but that is irrelevent. oh god i am repeating myself.
Anyway, execution is justice, not preventative. If it was then they
wouldn't execute the reformable
>
> We know that some will kill again, but to execute every one of them, in
> order to stop a few of them killing again, is also nonsensical, and
> does not take into account the 'pool' of wrongly convicted that we find
> in any group of 'murderers'. This was the case with the death row
> convicts post-Furman. Four of them were innocent. One of them killed
> again. Executing them all would have prevented that one (Kenneth McDuff)
> from killing again, but would have resulted in the death of four
> innocents.
if any of them were innocent then he/she deserves justice, just as the
victims of murderers deserve it.
>
incubus
Simple. Desi's one possible answer would be "life imprisonment" not capital
punishment or freedom.
>Clearly there
> are EXACTLY TWO possible answers. 'free' or 'execute.' The fact that
> BOTH result in the death of a human (one an innocent - the other a
> proven - murdering, scum-sucking, child-rapist-torturer-murderer), simply
> does not permit a 'third' choice.
but society does. Ok to you and me, life imprisonment isn't enough for these
evil monsters. but it is the only acceptable solution for abolishonists
> That only means desi AVOIDS the
> confrontation of his 'philosophy' (sic) regarding the DP. There is
> absolutely
> NO WAY that desi can claim 'released murderers don't murder again.' All
> we need do is assume that the murderer released WILL murder again.
> And ask the 'philosophical' question under those conditions. You see..
> FDP is not trying to examine Theodore Frank... he wishes us to look
> at the question as if it were about Roger Coleman.
You are taking this way too seriously ;-)
>
>> Another fact of the matter is that in the real world "life imprisonment"
>> is an option so he picks it.
>>
> Another fact of the matter is that released murderers murder again.
> And now, instead of 'only one possible answer for FDP,' you would
> offer him a 'third choice.' Understand that the question did not provide
> for such a choice. It was 'free him' or 'execute him.' Which is the
> HEART of the argument here.
1. Don't preach to the chior. I am a deathie like you
2. This situation won't happen because in real life life imprisonment does
exist. if anyone asked me a question that was that unfair, i would refuse
to answer as none of the options provided would be acceptable to me
>What FDP is saying... is that he is
> willing to "gamble" the lives of innocent victims to feed his particular
> agenda.
no he is not in this thread. He is saying that the question is stupid
> How very noble of him. One wonders if his choice of 'gambling' on
> Theodore Frank, also includes an offer for Frank to stay in FDP's home as
> he
> enjoys that freedom. No... actually all he wishes to do is afford Frank
> the possibility (in this example a 'theoretical' certainty), of murdering
> again. So FDP might appear self-anointed in 'spiritual purity.' While
> pathetically trying to justify that by saying it is a 'gamble' he is
> willing to take with the lives of others, because he sees it as
> 'infinitesimally small.' As I've said... how very noble and how very
> God-like of him to presume he can 'gamble' with innocent lives.
you definately need a holiday PV. :-) as far as you and i are concerned, we
would string the monster up. Justice done if you ask me but our beleifs are
ours and Aboloshonists see things the way they do for a reason just as we
do. We cannot even begin to contemplate why they think the way they do just
as they cannot contemplate us but we all have reasons for our beleifs
>
>
> PV
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 16:31:54 +0000
>
>Le Sun, 22 Sep 2002 16:31:05 +0100, incubus <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Indeed, and in the real world, 'you _know_ he will kill again', is simply
>>> nonsensical. We do not know which murderers will kill again. We _cannot_
>>> know it.
>
>> whether he will kill again is irrelevent. People are executed for murders
>> they have already commited. Many executed murderers would probably have
>> never killed again but that is irrelevent. oh god i am repeating myself.
>> Anyway, execution is justice, not preventative. If it was then they
>> wouldn't execute the reformable
>
>Well no, incubus, for quite a few capital jurisdictions in the United
>States consider 'future dangerousness' when considering whether a
>person convicted of criminal homicide should face life imprisonment,
>the death penalty.
>
>Thus the fear that criminals like Theodore Frank might reoffend if
>released, is a legitimate one, and you won't see any criticism of
>LDB or John, from me on that score. It's when they start to ask
>'never-never land' questions, like, 'You _know_ [sic] he will kill
>again ... do you release him ?', that they become ridiculous, and
>I have to slap them down.
>
>{ snip }
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news
feed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!news.tu-darmstadt.de!
fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 16:31:54 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 33
>Message-ID: <slrnaors3q.8sl.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaooeih.4ce.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><eolj9.128$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032712416 6897688 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
incubus
> Le Sun, 22 Sep 2002 16:31:05 +0100, incubus <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> a
> écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
>>> Indeed, and in the real world, 'you _know_ he will kill again', is
>>> simply
>>> nonsensical. We do not know which murderers will kill again. We
>>> _cannot_ know it.
>
>> whether he will kill again is irrelevent. People are executed for murders
>> they have already commited. Many executed murderers would probably have
>> never killed again but that is irrelevent. oh god i am repeating myself.
>> Anyway, execution is justice, not preventative. If it was then they
>> wouldn't execute the reformable
>
> Well no, incubus, for quite a few capital jurisdictions in the United
> States consider 'future dangerousness' when considering whether a
> person convicted of criminal homicide should face life imprisonment,
> the death penalty.
>
> Thus the fear that criminals like Theodore Frank might reoffend if
> released, is a legitimate one, and you won't see any criticism of
> LDB or John, from me on that score. It's when they start to ask
> 'never-never land' questions, like, 'You _know_ [sic] he will kill
> again ... do you release him ?', that they become ridiculous, and
> I have to slap them down.
no mate. The whole re-offending thing is onl an issue in the case of a draw
:-)
that is if they can't decide whether to imprison offender or execute him/her
then they resort to deciding whether a killer will re-offend. Though when
it comes to first degree then it doesn't usually come up.
A Planet Visitor
> >> nonsensical. We do not know which murderers will kill again. We _cannot_
> >> know it.
>
> > whether he will kill again is irrelevent. People are executed for murders
> > they have already commited. Many executed murderers would probably have
> > never killed again but that is irrelevent. oh god i am repeating myself.
> > Anyway, execution is justice, not preventative. If it was then they
> > wouldn't execute the reformable
>
> States consider 'future dangerousness' when considering whether a
> person convicted of criminal homicide should face life imprisonment,
> the death penalty.
>
> Thus the fear that criminals like Theodore Frank might reoffend if
> released, is a legitimate one, and you won't see any criticism of
> LDB or John, from me on that score. It's when they start to ask
> 'never-never land' questions, like, 'You _know_ [sic] he will kill
> again ... do you release him ?', that they become ridiculous, and
> I have to slap them down.
>
I do believe you should have taken your own advice, before you
answered 'yes' to the original question, and then offered to 'gamble'
on the life of the next victim. Seriously, desi... "You got to know
when to hold 'em; know when to fold 'em. Know when to walk
away; and know when to run."
PV
> { snip }
A Planet Visitor
"incubus" <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> wrote in message news:kolj9.129$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net...
'presuming' that Theodore Frank would be eligible to teach a
kindergarten class unsupervised if he were set 'free' by him.
It is an escape mechanism to avoid the implication of the
question. You see, when the question was ASKED -- Desi
SAID 'YES' to 'freeing' him. He now needs to justify THAT
choice. I could understand if he had at first, when the question
was originally asked, stated that he would not answer it because
it imposed those conditions. But he did NOT. He answered in
his typical 'smart-ass' method of 'YES.' As usual... he became
his own worst enemy... Why did he answer as he did? Because
he is that 'smart-ass' Further, let us never presume that 'life
imprisonment' means 'life imprisonment.' Remember my list.
> >Clearly there
> > are EXACTLY TWO possible answers. 'free' or 'execute.' The fact that
> > BOTH result in the death of a human (one an innocent - the other a
> > proven - murdering, scum-sucking, child-rapist-torturer-murderer), simply
> > does not permit a 'third' choice.
>
>
> but society does. Ok to you and me, life imprisonment isn't enough for these
> evil monsters. but it is the only acceptable solution for abolishonists
>
Agreed in respect to the abolitionist believing, no matter how
naive that belief is, that 'life imprisonment' means 'life imprisonment,'
and that it also means they will never murder again. That conclusion
is utterly flawed. Proven to be so, regardless of how small the
number of murders they believe would be committed with a sentence
of 'life imprisonment.' It is just as impossible to make such a statement,
as it is to say we could NEVER execute an innocent. Of course... again,
that wasn't the question. But don't put words in my mouth since I
believe that TRUE L wop is certainly immoral, impractical, and
more torturous than a humane execution after due process.
>
> > That only means desi AVOIDS the
> > confrontation of his 'philosophy' (sic) regarding the DP. There is
> > absolutely
> > NO WAY that desi can claim 'released murderers don't murder again.' All
> > we need do is assume that the murderer released WILL murder again.
> > And ask the 'philosophical' question under those conditions. You see..
> > FDP is not trying to examine Theodore Frank... he wishes us to look
> > at the question as if it were about Roger Coleman.
>
> You are taking this way too seriously ;-)
>
I often do.
> >
> >> Another fact of the matter is that in the real world "life imprisonment"
> >> is an option so he picks it.
> >>
> > Another fact of the matter is that released murderers murder again.
> > And now, instead of 'only one possible answer for FDP,' you would
> > offer him a 'third choice.' Understand that the question did not provide
> > for such a choice. It was 'free him' or 'execute him.' Which is the
> > HEART of the argument here.
>
> 1. Don't preach to the chior. I am a deathie like you
> 2. This situation won't happen because in real life life imprisonment does
> exist. if anyone asked me a question that was that unfair, i would refuse
> to answer as none of the options provided would be acceptable to me
>
>
Of course.. but he did answer at first. And I believe we had every
right to try and pin him to the cross. He would do no different were
a retentionist to make a statement that rather boxed him in. I live
for those moments when desi boxes himself in... as he did with his
'simplistic' yes to the original question. He locked himself right out
of any claim of 'life imprisonment.' He AGREED to 'free' Theodore
Frank. It then only became a question of the RESULTS of his
doing so.
> >What FDP is saying... is that he is
> > willing to "gamble" the lives of innocent victims to feed his particular
> > agenda.
>
> no he is not in this thread. He is saying that the question is stupid
>
Well.. he used the WORD 'gamble.' In this thread -- His words were
"Am I willing to gamble on that infinitesimally small chance that he will
kill again ?"
And he answered his own question with that one word again --
"Yes."
> > How very noble of him. One wonders if his choice of 'gambling' on
> > Theodore Frank, also includes an offer for Frank to stay in FDP's home as
> > he
> > enjoys that freedom. No... actually all he wishes to do is afford Frank
> > the possibility (in this example a 'theoretical' certainty), of murdering
> > again. So FDP might appear self-anointed in 'spiritual purity.' While
> > pathetically trying to justify that by saying it is a 'gamble' he is
> > willing to take with the lives of others, because he sees it as
> > 'infinitesimally small.' As I've said... how very noble and how very
> > God-like of him to presume he can 'gamble' with innocent lives.
>
> you definately need a holiday PV. :-) as far as you and i are concerned, we
> would string the monster up. Justice done if you ask me but our beleifs are
> ours and Aboloshonists see things the way they do for a reason just as we
> do. We cannot even begin to contemplate why they think the way they do just
> as they cannot contemplate us but we all have reasons for our beleifs
>
Nah... I just like to zing desi... because he's
1) so easy
2) such a hypocrite
3) so filled with himself,
4) and all-in-all a rather despicable, hateful human being.
John and I argue... it will forever be so. But desi and dirt are rather
playthings that I toy with. Like a cat with a mouse. And I'm lucky
enough to have two mice who are more concerned with their grooming
habits than their argument. I toy with them simply BECAUSE they are so
filled with themselves.
PV
>
> >
> >
> > PV
>
>
incubus
>
> "Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message
> news:slrnaors3q.8sl.p...@lievre.voute.net...
>> Le Sun, 22 Sep 2002 16:31:05 +0100, incubus <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> a
>> écrit :
>>
>> { snip }
>>
>> >> Indeed, and in the real world, 'you _know_ he will kill again', is
>> >> simply
>> >> nonsensical. We do not know which murderers will kill again. We
>> >> _cannot_ know it.
>>
>> > whether he will kill again is irrelevent. People are executed for
>> > murders they have already commited. Many executed murderers would
>> > probably have never killed again but that is irrelevent. oh god i am
>> > repeating myself. Anyway, execution is justice, not preventative. If it
>> > was then they wouldn't execute the reformable
>>
>> Well no, incubus, for quite a few capital jurisdictions in the United
>> States consider 'future dangerousness' when considering whether a
>> person convicted of criminal homicide should face life imprisonment,
>> the death penalty.
>>
> Could you possibly parse that sentence again, in a different form, desi?
it is us that do the parsing mate :-)
>
>> Thus the fear that criminals like Theodore Frank might reoffend if
>> released, is a legitimate one, and you won't see any criticism of
>> LDB or John, from me on that score. It's when they start to ask
>> 'never-never land' questions, like, 'You _know_ [sic] he will kill
>> again ... do you release him ?', that they become ridiculous, and
>> I have to slap them down.
>>
> I do believe you should have taken your own advice, before you
> answered 'yes' to the original question, and then offered to 'gamble'
> on the life of the next victim. Seriously, desi... "You got to know
> when to hold 'em; know when to fold 'em. Know when to walk
> away; and know when to run."
oh god. He's breaking into song
incubus
Hmm. Definately more practical but as for more humane and less torturous, i
think that very much depends on the prisoner. some seem to adjust to prison
life well
>
>>
>> > That only means desi AVOIDS the
>> > confrontation of his 'philosophy' (sic) regarding the DP. There is
>> > absolutely
>> > NO WAY that desi can claim 'released murderers don't murder again.'
>> > All we need do is assume that the murderer released WILL murder again.
>> > And ask the 'philosophical' question under those conditions. You see..
>> > FDP is not trying to examine Theodore Frank... he wishes us to look
>> > at the question as if it were about Roger Coleman.
>>
>> You are taking this way too seriously ;-)
>>
> I often do.
don't we all
>
>> >
>> >> Another fact of the matter is that in the real world "life
>> >> imprisonment" is an option so he picks it.
>> >>
>> > Another fact of the matter is that released murderers murder again.
>> > And now, instead of 'only one possible answer for FDP,' you would
>> > offer him a 'third choice.' Understand that the question did not
>> > provide
>> > for such a choice. It was 'free him' or 'execute him.' Which is the
>> > HEART of the argument here.
>>
>> 1. Don't preach to the chior. I am a deathie like you
>> 2. This situation won't happen because in real life life imprisonment
>> does exist. if anyone asked me a question that was that unfair, i would
>> refuse to answer as none of the options provided would be acceptable to
>> me
>>
>>
> Of course.. but he did answer at first. And I believe we had every
> right to try and pin him to the cross. He would do no different were
> a retentionist to make a statement that rather boxed him in. I live
> for those moments when desi boxes himself in... as he did with his
> 'simplistic' yes to the original question. He locked himself right out
> of any claim of 'life imprisonment.' He AGREED to 'free' Theodore
> Frank. It then only became a question of the RESULTS of his
> doing so.
I don't doubt he did but i am sure he realises that he picked a stupid
choice
>
>> >What FDP is saying... is that he is
>> > willing to "gamble" the lives of innocent victims to feed his
>> > particular agenda.
>>
>> no he is not in this thread. He is saying that the question is stupid
>>
>
> Well.. he used the WORD 'gamble.' In this thread -- His words were
> "Am I willing to gamble on that infinitesimally small chance that he will
> kill again ?"
>
> And he answered his own question with that one word again --
> "Yes."
somebody put a similar question to me about how many innocents executed
would be acceptable. It's a hard question to answer but as no one knowingly
executes an innocent then i suppose "none" is an answer i am confortable
with
you definately need that holiday :-)
>
> PV
>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > PV
>>
>>
JIGSAW1695
Message-id: <slrnaotpjk.acr.p...@lievre.voute.net>
Le Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:13:08 +0100, incubus <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> a écrit
:
{ snip }
>> I do believe you should have taken your own advice, before you
>> answered 'yes' to the original question, and then offered to 'gamble'
>> on the life of the next victim. Seriously, desi... "You got to know
>> when to hold 'em; know when to fold 'em. Know when to walk
>> away; and know when to run."
> oh god. He's breaking into song
It's almost pitiful, the degree to which dirt and I have slapped him
down ... 'whump-squeal!' ...
--
Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1
==============================
Ah....dezi...... to be honest with you and dont see any real ...ah......."Slap
Down" as you put it.
All I hear is you saying how great you are, and how minor PV is. You are going
to have show us something a little better than childish insults repeated over
and over again, along with your "Expert" knowledge of the English languages
grammar rules.
Lets face it Dez, in the past six months you have decided to inundate us with
rantings on proper use of quotes, apostrophes and commas. Nothing on parasans
though.
Oh welll...... I guess a little knowledge of something is better than a lot of
knowledge about nothing*.
Jigsaw
* Yea...yea... I know...it's an oxymoron, but when we talk to Dezi, we enter
into another demension of space and time.
JIGSAW1695
Message-id: <slrnaott0j.c3m.p...@lievre.voute.net>
Le 23 Sep 2002 10:57:29 GMT, JIGSAW1695 <jigsa...@aol.com> a écrit :
{ snip }
>> It's almost pitiful, the degree to which dirt and I have slapped him
>> down ... 'whump-squeal!' ...
> Ah....dezi...... to be honest with you
'Honest' ? Isn't that a 'bad word', where you come from, Jig ? Tell
us about Escambia County ...
> and dont see any real ...ah......."Slap Down" as you put it.
Let me see ... Jigsaw is 'pro-LDB, anti-Des'. Anyone surprised ? Stick
to amusing us with your grammatical 'prowess', Jig ... you're best at
that.
--
Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1
==============================
Actually Sezi, I am pro DP. As for "grammatical prowess" please refer all
questions to our Spelling and Grammar Czar, John Rennie.
A Planet Visitor
> >> answered 'yes' to the original question, and then offered to 'gamble'
> >> on the life of the next victim. Seriously, desi... "You got to know
> >> when to hold 'em; know when to fold 'em. Know when to walk
> >> away; and know when to run."
>
> > oh god. He's breaking into song
>
> down ... 'whump-squeal!' ...
>
a hypocrite you are.
And seriously -- could you possibly explain exactly what you
were trying to mumble when you wrote --
"Well no, incubus, for quite a few capital jurisdictions in the United
States consider 'future dangerousness' when considering whether a
person convicted of criminal homicide should face life imprisonment,
the death penalty."
spank...spank...spank...
PV
A Planet Visitor
> >> down ... 'whump-squeal!' ...
>
>
> us about Escambia County ...
>
1) Firebombing
2) Baltimore County Police
3) 'execreta' (sic)
That would be nice, just for starters.
> > and dont see any real ...ah......."Slap Down" as you put it.
>
> Let me see ... Jigsaw is 'pro-LDB, anti-Des'. Anyone surprised ? Stick
> to amusing us with your grammatical 'prowess', Jig ... you're best at
> that.
While dirtbag is pro-FDP, anti-humanity. Go figure. And
actually we have pot... kettle .... black from desipoo. Since
'grammatical prowess' (sic) is the ONLY weapon in his rather
barren arsenal. Certainly logic, common sense, intellect,
morality, accountability, mental stability and trustworthiness
have no place in his arsenal of weapons.
incubus
> Le Sun, 22 Sep 2002 18:21:44 +0100, incubus <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> a
> écrit :
>
> incubus, I suggest that you study capital statutes a little more closely.
> This was one of the 'safeguards' put in place after Gregg v. Georgia in
> 1976, namely that capital trials must take place in two stages. The
> first is named the 'guilt phase', and as its name suggests, is concerned
> not with the punishment of the offender, but with whether or not he or
> she was responsible for the crime. The second phase is the 'punishment
> phase', and deals with mitigating circumstances (ask LDB about that one
> ... ho, ho, ho ...), aggravating circumstances, future 'dangerousness',
> and so on.
>
> Nothing to do with 'a draw'.
i know mate, That's why i put a smiley next to to ny renark, Tchoh, really
Dezi, pay attention child. As you said so correctly, it is a two phase
system, but no way can they bring whether the convicted will kill again in
study with his senrtence unless the convicted is already a repeat offender
of course but you cannot give somebody the death penalty for an act they
have not and may not commit yet. We can only anticipate but you can not
decide whether somebody will live or die based on what they may or may not
do
>
anthrax
wrote:
<snipped>
> Tchoh, really
Fucking _what_, really?
w00f
A Planet Visitor
> Le Mon, 23 Sep 2002 21:12:23 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> >> >> It's almost pitiful, the degree to which dirt and I have slapped him
> >> >> down ... 'whump-squeal!' ...
>
> >> > Ah....dezi...... to be honest with you
>
> >> 'Honest' ? Isn't that a 'bad word', where you come from, Jig ? Tell
> >> us about Escambia County ...
>
> > And you about --
> > 1) Firebombing
> > 2) Baltimore County Police
> > 3) 'execreta' (sic)
>
>
> ROT-F-FLMAO !!!!
>
> 'Jump, Littel [sic] Dansing [sic] Boi [sic] !! Jump !!'
>
> 'How heye [sic], Mastar [sic] ??!!'
These are actually the type of post from desi that require no other
notice except to remark he's apparently dropped off the radar screen
of reality.
But that last reply from you in another thread was every bit as
good as your 'yes' answer that would loose Theodore Frank
on an unsuspecting society. I asked in respect to any judge ---
"Would you presume he was a crook if he let a verdict stand which
sent Coleman to the DP, if he had the POWER to rule favorably on
a motion 'Finding for a Directed Verdict of Not Guilty'?"
And you replied --
"Of course not, you spastic. Those who save the lives of innocents,
are above reproach."
Of course NOT... you say?? You would NOT presume he was a
crook to sign an execution on someone he KNOWS is innocent.
ROTFLMAO. That's a definite keeper. Mark your reply for
archive..... pleasssssseeee.
spank...spank...spank...
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:59:31 +0000
>
>Le 23 Sep 2002 10:57:29 GMT, JIGSAW1695 <jigsa...@aol.com> a écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> It's almost pitiful, the degree to which dirt and I have slapped him
>>> down ... 'whump-squeal!' ...
>
>> Ah....dezi...... to be honest with you
>
>'Honest' ? Isn't that a 'bad word', where you come from, Jig ? Tell
>us about Escambia County ...
>
>> and dont see any real ...ah......."Slap Down" as you put it.
>
>Let me see ... Jigsaw is 'pro-LDB, anti-Des'. Anyone surprised ? Stick
>to amusing us with your grammatical 'prowess', Jig ... you're best at
>that.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!news
feed.news2me.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!
fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:59:31 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 23
>Message-ID: <slrnaott0j.c3m.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnaotpjk.acr.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><20020923065729...@mb-fu.aol.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032778864 7499726 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 22:03:37 +0000
>
>Le Mon, 23 Sep 2002 23:04:49 +0100, anthrax <ant...@shitmusic.cxm> a écrit
>:
>
>>> Tchoh, really
>
>> Fucking _what_, really?
>
>I'd imagine that it's an onomatopoeic representation of 'tsk ...'.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!newsfeed1.bredband.com!br
edband!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!193.174.75.178!news-fra1.dfn.de!fu-
berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 22:03:37 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 13
>Message-ID: <slrnaov3tp.edj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaooeih.4ce.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><eolj9.128$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaors3q.8sl.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><B%mj9.7384$DR.4...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaotpv7.acr.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><9HLj9.1271$lg.102183@newsfep2-gui>
><kr3vouc4sm1evne09...@4ax.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032818789 7781631 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 21:45:43 +0000
>
>Le Mon, 23 Sep 2002 21:12:23 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>>> >> It's almost pitiful, the degree to which dirt and I have slapped him
>>> >> down ... 'whump-squeal!' ...
>
>>> > Ah....dezi...... to be honest with you
>
>>> 'Honest' ? Isn't that a 'bad word', where you come from, Jig ? Tell
>>> us about Escambia County ...
>
>> And you about --
>> 1) Firebombing
>> 2) Baltimore County Police
>> 3) 'execreta' (sic)
>
>Right on cue !!
>
>ROT-F-FLMAO !!!!
>
>'Jump, Littel [sic] Dansing [sic] Boi [sic] !! Jump !!'
>
>'How heye [sic], Mastar [sic] ??!!'
>
>
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.cis.ohio-state.edu!n
ews.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!
newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!news-feed1.de1.concert.net!fu-berl
in.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dh
>cp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 21:45:43 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 30
>Message-ID: <slrnaov2s6.dsi.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnaotpjk.acr.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><20020923065729...@mb-fu.aol.com>
><slrnaott0j.c3m.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><XsLj9.23660$R8.9...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032817889 7938761 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:01:24 +0000
>
>Le Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:13:08 +0100, incubus <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> I do believe you should have taken your own advice, before you
>>> answered 'yes' to the original question, and then offered to 'gamble'
>>> on the life of the next victim. Seriously, desi... "You got to know
>>> when to hold 'em; know when to fold 'em. Know when to walk
>>> away; and know when to run."
>
>> oh god. He's breaking into song
>
>It's almost pitiful, the degree to which dirt and I have slapped him
>down ... 'whump-squeal!' ...
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!news
feed.news2me.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!opentransit.net!fu-b
erlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:01:24 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 20
>Message-ID: <slrnaotpjk.acr.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaooeih.4ce.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><eolj9.128$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaors3q.8sl.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><cEyj9.20414$R8.8...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><wXAj9.304$lg.31880@newsfep2-gui>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032775592 7544390 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 22:16:06 +0000
>
>Le Mon, 23 Sep 2002 22:20:42 +0100, incubus <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> incubus, I suggest that you study capital statutes a little more closely.
>>> This was one of the 'safeguards' put in place after Gregg v. Georgia in
>>> 1976, namely that capital trials must take place in two stages. The
>>> first is named the 'guilt phase', and as its name suggests, is concerned
>>> not with the punishment of the offender, but with whether or not he or
>>> she was responsible for the crime. The second phase is the 'punishment
>>> phase', and deals with mitigating circumstances (ask LDB about that one
>>> ... ho, ho, ho ...), aggravating circumstances, future 'dangerousness',
>>> and so on.
>>>
>>> Nothing to do with 'a draw'.
>
>> i know mate, That's why i put a smiley next to to ny renark, Tchoh, really
>> Dezi, pay attention child. As you said so correctly, it is a two phase
>> system, but no way can they bring whether the convicted will kill again in
>> study with his senrtence unless the convicted is already a repeat offender
>> of course but you cannot give somebody the death penalty for an act they
>> have not and may not commit yet. We can only anticipate but you can not
>> decide whether somebody will live or die based on what they may or may not
>> do
>
>Wow. I'm impressed. How much did you have to drink to get so hard to
>understand ? :-)
>
>As to your point, 'unless the convicted is already a repeat offender', are
>you referring to those who have already killed, or those who have already
>committed some other (often non-lethal) offence ?
>
>A case in point is Roger Coleman, executed in 1992 for the rape and murder
>of Wanda McCoy on 10 March 1981. Leaving aside the overwhelming evidence
>of Mr Coleman's innocence {1}, the fact is that he had one previous
>conviction; that of indecent assault on a neighbour. That conviction was
>obtained in violation of Roger Coleman's constitutional rights (read _May
>God Have Mercy_ by John C. Tucker {2}), and was thus 'invalid'. So
>any 'aggravating circumstances' used to obtain a death sentence, were
>certainly also in violation of Mr Coleman's constitutional rights. In
>short, he didn't kill Mrs McCoy, and he never sexually assaulted a
>neighbour. An innocent man, killed by the state, post-Gregg v. Georgia.
>
>{1} Read
>url:http://www.quixote.org/ej/grip/reasonabledoubt/Roger%20Keith%20Colema
n.html
>among other sites ...
>{2}
>url:http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385332947/qid=10328192
96/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-9506965-1875346?v=glance&s=books
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-b
erlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 22:16:06 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 51
>Message-ID: <slrnaov4l4.edj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaooeih.4ce.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><eolj9.128$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaors3q.8sl.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><B%mj9.7384$DR.4...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaotpv7.acr.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><9HLj9.1271$lg.102183@newsfep2-gui>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032819535 7826453 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 21:54:08 +0000
>
>Le Mon, 23 Sep 2002 06:36:56 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Well no, incubus, for quite a few capital jurisdictions in the United
>>> States consider 'future dangerousness' when considering whether a
>>> person convicted of criminal homicide should face life imprisonment,
>>> the death penalty.
>
>> Could you possibly parse that sentence again, in a different form, desi?
>
>It's really quite simple for us native English speakers, FW. You know,
>a preposition missed out here, an object pronoun there ... but we join
>the dots. However, just for you, the word 'or' was missed out, just
>after the word 'imprisonment'. If it would make it easier for you to
>understand, here it is in 'LDB-speak' ...
>
>'Wel [sic] noh [sic], incubus, four [sic] kwite [sic] a fuw [sic]
>kapital [sic] joorisdikshons [sic] in the Yoonited [sic] States
>konssiderr [sic] footoor [sic] danjerrusness [sic] wen [sic] konssiderring
>[sic] weather [sic] a person konvickted [sic] of kriminal [sic]
>homeuseyede [sic] shood [sic] fais [sic] leyefe [sic] immprisonnmeant
>[sic] _or_ [this is the word that caused you so much difficulty] the
>def [sic] penalti [sic].'
>
>>> Thus the fear that criminals like Theodore Frank might reoffend if
>>> released, is a legitimate one, and you won't see any criticism of
>>> LDB or John, from me on that score. It's when they start to ask
>>> 'never-never land' questions, like, 'You _know_ [sic] he will kill
>>> again ... do you release him ?', that they become ridiculous, and
>>> I have to slap them down.
>
>> I do believe you should have taken your own advice, before you
>> answered 'yes' to the original question, and then offered to 'gamble'
>> on the life of the next victim. Seriously, desi... "You got to know
>> when to hold 'em; know when to fold 'em. Know when to walk
>> away; and know when to run."
>
>Oh dear ... is that a rosy red glow coming from LDB's buttocks, or is
>he just pleased to see us ..?
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.cis.ohio-state.edu!n
ews.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.
de!news-feed1.de1.concert.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-
68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 21:54:08 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 46
>Message-ID: <slrnaov3bv.ecn.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaooeih.4ce.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><eolj9.128$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaors3q.8sl.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><cEyj9.20414$R8.8...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032818189 8104121 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:07:36 +0000
>
>Le Sun, 22 Sep 2002 18:21:44 +0100, incubus <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> a
>écrit :
>
>>>>> Indeed, and in the real world, 'you _know_ he will kill again', is
>>>>> simply
>>>>> nonsensical. We do not know which murderers will kill again. We
>>>>> _cannot_ know it.
>
>>>> whether he will kill again is irrelevent. People are executed for murders
>>>> they have already commited. Many executed murderers would probably have
>>>> never killed again but that is irrelevent. oh god i am repeating myself.
>>>> Anyway, execution is justice, not preventative. If it was then they
>>>> wouldn't execute the reformable
>
>>> Well no, incubus, for quite a few capital jurisdictions in the United
>>> States consider 'future dangerousness' when considering whether a
>>> person convicted of criminal homicide should face life imprisonment,
>>> the death penalty.
>>>
>>> Thus the fear that criminals like Theodore Frank might reoffend if
>>> released, is a legitimate one, and you won't see any criticism of
>>> LDB or John, from me on that score. It's when they start to ask
>>> 'never-never land' questions, like, 'You _know_ [sic] he will kill
>>> again ... do you release him ?', that they become ridiculous, and
>>> I have to slap them down.
>
>> no mate. The whole re-offending thing is onl an issue in the case of a draw
>
>>:-)
>> that is if they can't decide whether to imprison offender or execute
>him/her
>> then they resort to deciding whether a killer will re-offend. Though when
>> it comes to first degree then it doesn't usually come up.
>
>incubus, I suggest that you study capital statutes a little more closely.
>This was one of the 'safeguards' put in place after Gregg v. Georgia in
>1976, namely that capital trials must take place in two stages. The
>first is named the 'guilt phase', and as its name suggests, is concerned
>not with the punishment of the offender, but with whether or not he or
>she was responsible for the crime. The second phase is the 'punishment
>phase', and deals with mitigating circumstances (ask LDB about that one ...
>ho, ho, ho ...), aggravating circumstances, future 'dangerousness', and
>so on.
>
>Nothing to do with 'a draw'.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!news
feed.news2me.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!
news.tu-darmstadt.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.F
R!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:07:36 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 48
>Message-ID: <slrnaotpv7.acr.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaooeih.4ce.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><eolj9.128$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaors3q.8sl.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><B%mj9.7384$DR.4...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032775894 7558952 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
A Planet Visitor
> Le Mon, 23 Sep 2002 06:36:56 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> States consider 'future dangerousness' when considering whether a
> >> person convicted of criminal homicide should face life imprisonment,
> >> the death penalty.
>
> > Could you possibly parse that sentence again, in a different form, desi?
>
> a preposition missed out here, an object pronoun there ... but we join
> the dots. However, just for you, the word 'or' was missed out, just
> after the word 'imprisonment'. If it would make it easier for you to
> understand, here it is in 'LDB-speak' ...
>
post. I expect a humble apology to the entire group from you.
I now understand the meaning of your very convoluted sentence.
Did you enter that 'worst fiction sentence of the year' contest yet?
<flimsy attempt to avoid the fact that he provided a sentence
that was indecipherable clipped>
> >> Thus the fear that criminals like Theodore Frank might reoffend if
> >> released, is a legitimate one, and you won't see any criticism of
> >> LDB or John, from me on that score. It's when they start to ask
> >> 'never-never land' questions, like, 'You _know_ [sic] he will kill
> >> again ... do you release him ?', that they become ridiculous, and
> >> I have to slap them down.
>
> > I do believe you should have taken your own advice, before you
> > answered 'yes' to the original question, and then offered to 'gamble'
> > on the life of the next victim. Seriously, desi... "You got to know
> > when to hold 'em; know when to fold 'em. Know when to walk
> > away; and know when to run."
>
> Oh dear ... is that a rosy red glow coming from LDB's buttocks, or is
> he just pleased to see us ..?
>
Another pathetic appeal for others to believe you haven't been
spanked thoroughly for these past many weeks. Are you STILL
intent on lying your way through "execreta" (sic)?
PV
A Planet Visitor
> Le Mon, 23 Sep 2002 23:04:49 +0100, anthrax <ant...@shitmusic.cxm> a écrit :
>
>
> > Fucking _what_, really?
>
>
A BIG 'P-I' is now stamped into the forehead of FDP. He's been working
the jumbo crossword puzzles, I see. And also... peeking at the answers.
incubus
> Le Mon, 23 Sep 2002 22:20:42 +0100, incubus <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> a
> écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
>>> incubus, I suggest that you study capital statutes a little more
>>> closely. This was one of the 'safeguards' put in place after Gregg v.
>>> Georgia in
>>> 1976, namely that capital trials must take place in two stages. The
>>> first is named the 'guilt phase', and as its name suggests, is concerned
>>> not with the punishment of the offender, but with whether or not he or
>>> she was responsible for the crime. The second phase is the 'punishment
>>> phase', and deals with mitigating circumstances (ask LDB about that one
>>> ... ho, ho, ho ...), aggravating circumstances, future 'dangerousness',
>>> and so on.
>>>
>>> Nothing to do with 'a draw'.
>
>> i know mate, That's why i put a smiley next to to ny renark, Tchoh,
>> really Dezi, pay attention child. As you said so correctly, it is a two
>> phase system, but no way can they bring whether the convicted will kill
>> again in study with his senrtence unless the convicted is already a
>> repeat offender of course but you cannot give somebody the death penalty
>> for an act they have not and may not commit yet. We can only anticipate
>> but you can not decide whether somebody will live or die based on what
>> they may or may not do
>
> Wow. I'm impressed. How much did you have to drink to get so hard to
> understand ? :-)
A couple of pints of Guinness usually does the trick :-)
>
> As to your point, 'unless the convicted is already a repeat offender', are
> you referring to those who have already killed, or those who have already
> committed some other (often non-lethal) offence ?
now you are playing with me dude. Clearly i meant if he killed before, but
you could have a point. We have all seen the way ex-cons are tarred. They
are thiefs rapist and murderers regardless of what crime they are banged up
for. according to society. Just imagine the dialog....
"so who's this visitor then?"
"his name is desmond and he has just come out of prison"
"quick hide the silver"
>
> A case in point is Roger Coleman, executed in 1992 for the rape and murder
> of Wanda McCoy on 10 March 1981. Leaving aside the overwhelming evidence
> of Mr Coleman's innocence {1}, the fact is that he had one previous
> conviction; that of indecent assault on a neighbour. That conviction was
> obtained in violation of Roger Coleman's constitutional rights (read _May
> God Have Mercy_ by John C. Tucker {2}), and was thus 'invalid'. So
> any 'aggravating circumstances' used to obtain a death sentence, were
> certainly also in violation of Mr Coleman's constitutional rights. In
> short, he didn't kill Mrs McCoy, and he never sexually assaulted a
> neighbour. An innocent man, killed by the state, post-Gregg v. Georgia.
A tragic miscarriage of justice. I hope those that were responsible paid
dearly
>
> {1} Read
>
{url:http://www.quixote.org/ej/grip/reasonabledoubt/Roger%20Keith%20Coleman.html
> {among other sites ... 2}
>
{url:http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385332947/qid=1032819296/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-9506965-1875346?v=glance&s=books
>
No Desi, the urling comes after 8 or nine pints of Guinness :-)
incubus
> Le Tue, 24 Sep 2002 08:48:09 +0100, incubus <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> a
> écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
>>> As to your point, 'unless the convicted is already a repeat offender',
>>> are you referring to those who have already killed, or those who have
>>> already committed some other (often non-lethal) offence ?
>
>> now you are playing with me dude. Clearly i meant if he killed before,
>> but you could have a point. We have all seen the way ex-cons are tarred.
>> They are thiefs rapist and murderers regardless of what crime they are
>> banged up for. according to society. Just imagine the dialog....
>>
>> "so who's this visitor then?"
>> "his name is desmond and he has just come out of prison"
>> "quick hide the silver"
>
> Heh ... we was framed, guv' ! Honest !!
>
> Seriously, I made the point about recidivism, as it is a widely held
> belief that all of those put to death are 'career criminals', with one
> or more murders already on their 'rap sheet', and that the murders for
> which they have been sentenced to death were hideously cruel. This is
> not always the case. Many states (perhaps all ... Jigsaw ?) provide
> for the imposition of the death penalty for 'felony murders', i.e.
> the taking of life during the commission of a felony. This can result
> in someone being put to death for shooting a 'gas [sic] station'
> attendant whilst robbing that 'gas [sic] station'. Whilst such a
> murder is objectionable and reprehensible, it involves no torture,
> no sexual sadism, no prolonged suffering on the part of the victim. As
> my 'short story' (which apparently helped LDB 'get wood' for the first
> time in years without an execution) showed so well, death often comes
> quickly for the victim, and slowly for the killer.
you mean in the years of waiting perhaps. It is unavoidable as all the due
process red tape holds the whole thing up, but although i do not think the
murderers should be tortured then this is a sad but nessesary evil.
>
>>> A case in point is Roger Coleman, executed in 1992 for the rape and
>>> murder
>>> of Wanda McCoy on 10 March 1981. Leaving aside the overwhelming
>>> evidence of Mr Coleman's innocence {1}, the fact is that he had one
>>> previous
>>> conviction; that of indecent assault on a neighbour. That conviction
>>> was obtained in violation of Roger Coleman's constitutional rights (read
>>> _May
>>> God Have Mercy_ by John C. Tucker {2}), and was thus 'invalid'. So
>>> any 'aggravating circumstances' used to obtain a death sentence, were
>>> certainly also in violation of Mr Coleman's constitutional rights. In
>>> short, he didn't kill Mrs McCoy, and he never sexually assaulted a
>>> neighbour. An innocent man, killed by the state, post-Gregg v. Georgia.
>
>> A tragic miscarriage of justice. I hope those that were responsible paid
>> dearly
>
> No, they did not. They are still free, alive, and quite probably
> railroading other innocents to the death chamber.
Like those that convicted the guilford 4. They clearly grabbed the first
northern irish they could find abd locked them away despite tha fact that
any real evidence they found would clear the Guilford four. Strange how it
got mysteriously lost. Only years later when it was accidently recovered
were the guilford 4 cleared and strangely, none of those guilty were
prosecuted. How can we be expected to respect the law when the law won't
obey its own rules??
>
> { snip }
>
incubus
> Le Tue, 24 Sep 2002 13:43:40 +0000, Desmond Coughlan
> <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
>> Think Noreiga.
>
> Typo alert !! Typo alert !!
typos are not illegal
>
> :-)
>
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
pasdespa...@zeouane.org wrote:
> Life imprisonment is _always_ an option. Remove it from any hypothetical
> (damn, sorry ... I'm having difficulty using simple words, so that you
> will understand) question, and the question becomes 'never-never land'.
I actually want to read your straight answer to John's question and have
little interest in your on-going feud with PV.
If it helps you towards answering the question in a straightforward
fashion, I'll give my answer.
Yes, under the circumstances that John describes, I would support
execution. It is as simple as that. Being principled is all well and
good but you have to prioritise your principles and act pragmatically
upon how important each individual belief is to you.
Mr Q. Z. D.
--
Drinker, systems administrator, wannabe writer, musician and all-round bastard.
"...Base 8 is just like base 10 really... ((o))
If you're missing two fingers." - Tom Lehrer ((O))
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
pasdespa...@zeouane.org wrote:
> Le Tue, 24 Sep 2002 23:31:26 GMT, Mr Q. Z. Diablo
> <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> a écrit :
>
> >> Life imprisonment is _always_ an option. Remove it from any
> >> hypothetical
> >> (damn, sorry ... I'm having difficulty using simple words, so that you
> >> will understand) question, and the question becomes 'never-never
> >> land'.
>
> > I actually want to read your straight answer to John's question and
> > have
> > little interest in your on-going feud with PV.
> >
> > If it helps you towards answering the question in a straightforward
> > fashion, I'll give my answer.
> >
> > Yes, under the circumstances that John describes, I would support
> > execution. It is as simple as that. Being principled is all well and
> > good but you have to prioritise your principles and act pragmatically
> > upon how important each individual belief is to you.
>
> I believe that you already read it, at the time John asked it. FWIW,
> my answer is still 'yes', because there is very little chance that
> Theodore Frank would have reoffended.
John _did_ narrow the question down a little more substantially than
that. You labelled it as "meaningless", as such a set of circumstances
would never be applicable in the real world.
The question, however "unfair" (and, IMHO, it is) is designed to test
the limits of your principles (not just yours, everyone's) and where
they become broken by pragmatism.
As such, it is a very interesting and valid question.
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 13:52:42 +0000
>
>Le Tue, 24 Sep 2002 13:43:40 +0000, Desmond Coughlan
><pasdespa...@zeouane.org> a écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>> Think Noreiga.
>
>Typo alert !! Typo alert !!
>
>:-)
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!nntp1.roc.gblx.net!nntp.g
blx.net!nntp.gblx.net!newsxfer.visi.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.ma
xwell.syr.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-f
or-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 13:52:42 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 15
>Message-ID: <slrnap0rha.ha5.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaooeih.4ce.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><eolj9.128$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaors3q.8sl.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><B%mj9.7384$DR.4...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaotpv7.acr.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><9HLj9.1271$lg.102183@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaov4l4.edj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><PNUj9.927$hc1....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><slrnap0ce6.g56.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><nEZj9.1698$hc1....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><slrnap0r0b.ha5.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032875785 8239523 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 19:27:05 +0000
>
>Le Mon, 23 Sep 2002 06:36:56 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Simple. Desi's one possible answer would be "life imprisonment" not
>capital
>>> punishment or freedom.
>
>> Unfortunately, that wasn't a choice. It is the same as desi
>> 'presuming' that Theodore Frank would be eligible to teach a
>> kindergarten class unsupervised if he were set 'free' by him.
>
>Which part of 'it wasn't a serious question', are you having difficulty
>with, LDB ? 'Wood' (sic) you have preferred it if incubus had limited
>himself to monosyllables ?
>
>Life imprisonment is _always_ an option. Remove it from any hypothetical
>(damn, sorry ... I'm having difficulty using simple words, so that you
>will understand) question, and the question becomes 'never-never land'.
>
>You've been spanked, kicked up and down the newsgroup, had your face
>rubbed in your own lack of education, had your nipples tweaked, and your
>pigtails tugged.
>
>One 'wood' (sic) imagine that you'd know better to 'engage' 'you're' (sic)
>betters ... apparently not. Poor LDB ... the Pavlov's dog of AADP.
>
>{ snip }
>
>> John and I argue... it will forever be so. But desi and dirt are rather
>> playthings that I toy with. Like a cat with a mouse. And I'm lucky
>> enough to have two mice who are more concerned with their grooming
>> habits than their argument. I toy with them simply BECAUSE they are so
>> filled with themselves.
>
>Two 'playthings' who kick 'you're' (sic) 'ass' (sic), and _everyone_
>agrees about that ...
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!news
feed.news2me.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!lnewspeer00.lnd.ops.
eu.uu.net!emea.uu.net!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!
uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-
>198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 19:27:05 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 42
>Message-ID: <slrnap1f48.igc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><lI4j9.9587$yB5.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><kolj9.129$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><cEyj9.20415$R8.8...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032895754 8539412 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 23:35:24 +0000
>
>Le Tue, 24 Sep 2002 23:31:26 GMT, Mr Q. Z. Diablo
><jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> a écrit :
>
>>> Life imprisonment is _always_ an option. Remove it from any hypothetical
>>> (damn, sorry ... I'm having difficulty using simple words, so that you
>>> will understand) question, and the question becomes 'never-never land'.
>
>> I actually want to read your straight answer to John's question and have
>> little interest in your on-going feud with PV.
>>
>> If it helps you towards answering the question in a straightforward
>> fashion, I'll give my answer.
>>
>> Yes, under the circumstances that John describes, I would support
>> execution. It is as simple as that. Being principled is all well and
>> good but you have to prioritise your principles and act pragmatically
>> upon how important each individual belief is to you.
>
>I believe that you already read it, at the time John asked it. FWIW,
>my answer is still 'yes', because there is very little chance that
>Theodore Frank would have reoffended.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news
feed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news
feed.freenet.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not
-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 23:35:24 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 26
>Message-ID: <slrnap1tlr.jm7.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><lI4j9.9587$yB5.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><kolj9.129$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><cEyj9.20415$R8.8...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnap1f48.igc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><jonathan-A97503...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032910616 8301210 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 13:43:40 +0000
>
>Le Tue, 24 Sep 2002 14:19:26 +0100, incubus <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>>> A tragic miscarriage of justice. I hope those that were responsible paid
>>>> dearly
>
>>> No, they did not. They are still free, alive, and quite probably
>>> railroading other innocents to the death chamber.
>
>> Like those that convicted the guilford 4. They clearly grabbed the first
>> northern irish they could find abd locked them away despite tha fact that
>> any real evidence they found would clear the Guilford four. Strange how it
>> got mysteriously lost. Only years later when it was accidently recovered
>> were the guilford 4 cleared and strangely, none of those guilty were
>> prosecuted. How can we be expected to respect the law when the law won't
>> obey its own rules??
>
>Governments are not to be trusted. Apply this general rule, and you
>won't go far wrong. The naïveté of deathies who don't trust their
>governments to keep people locked up, but who _do_ trust them to kill
>people, is stunning. Think Westland. Think Noreiga. Think Belgrano
>Logbook. Think Iran-Contra. Think 'Chernobyl radiation can't cross
>the border from Germany'. Think Iraqi 'Supergun'.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!wn1f
eed!wn6feed!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!128.230.129.106!news.maxwell.syr.edu
!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news-lond.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.n
et!newspeer.clara.net!news.
>clara.net!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.
de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 13:43:40 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 30
>Message-ID: <slrnap0r0b.ha5.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaooeih.4ce.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><eolj9.128$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaors3q.8sl.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><B%mj9.7384$DR.4...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaotpv7.acr.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><9HLj9.1271$lg.102183@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaov4l4.edj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><PNUj9.927$hc1....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><slrnap0ce6.g56.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><nEZj9.1698$hc1....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032875185 8373322 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 19:37:10 +0000
>
>Le Sun, 22 Sep 2002 06:41:24 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>>> { snip childish whine, and claims of victory }
>
>> We ALL know what that means. TRANSLATION -- 'I can't stand
>> it when someone challenges my perverse taste for murderers.'
>
>No, LDB ... _I_ wrote the 'quote' (sic) ... get your 'attribution's'
>(sic) right ... what chance do you have to get away with the skin
>intact on your arse, if you can't even recognise what you did and
>didn't write ... remind us all of how all Palestinians are 'dishonest
>cunt's [sic]' whom you wouldn't trust as far as you can throw them ...
>
>>> > Theodore Frank???? Infinitesimally small chance that he will kill
>>> > again? Can you possibly hear yourself, bubble-brain? In any
>>> > case, the question was no longer posed in YOUR now presumed
>>> > terms of 'infinitesimally small chance.' We are now speaking of
>>> > a CERTAINTY. There is also an 'infinitesimally small chance' that
>>> > the execution will not 'take' and he will rise up as Lazarus, and the
>>> > State will forgive him.
>
>>> It would appear that you 'practice' your posts first, in front of a
>>> mirror. 'Bubble-brain' ? LOL ... indeed you are. There is a chance
>>> that the execution will 'not take and he will rise up as Lazarus' ?
>
>> About the same chance that Theodore Frank would not murder if
>> 'free.'
>
>Ho, ho, ho ... the 'engineer' 'engineers' his very own butt-rogering,
>by comparing probabilities (quick, to google, LDB !! Hurry !!), and
>instead having his foot 'eat some of dat lead, yo mothafucka !' (quick,
>get that one on the list !!!).
>
>{ snip }
>
>> Ummm... tweak..tweak...tweak... I just LOVE this thread. It has
>> so clearly pinned you to the wall,
>
>Let's see ... how many times does LDB claim to have 'spanked'
>me, or 'pinned me to the wall' (that one is rather creepy in a
>billytwatish, chocolate-stabbing way) ? Hmm ... in just about every
>single post that he 'sends' (sic and ho, ho, ho ...) to me. And in
>how many of those posts has he in fact done so ? Hint : it's less
>than 1 and more than -1.
>
>{ snip rote abuse, topped off by more declarations of victory }
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!news
feed.news2me.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!no
t-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 19:37:10 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 52
>Message-ID: <slrnap1fn5.igc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolmsn.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><b3Ei9.1411$DR.5...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaomreo.79.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><KfRi9.6191$yB5.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnaop84d.5os.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><oCdj9.14327$yB5.4...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032896365 8781746 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 09:35:02 +0000
>
>Le Tue, 24 Sep 2002 08:48:09 +0100, incubus <inc...@spawnofsatan.com> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> A case in point is Roger Coleman, executed in 1992 for the rape and murder
>>> of Wanda McCoy on 10 March 1981. Leaving aside the overwhelming evidence
>>> of Mr Coleman's innocence {1}, the fact is that he had one previous
>>> conviction; that of indecent assault on a neighbour. That conviction was
>>> obtained in violation of Roger Coleman's constitutional rights (read _May
>>> God Have Mercy_ by John C. Tucker {2}), and was thus 'invalid'. So
>>> any 'aggravating circumstances' used to obtain a death sentence, were
>>> certainly also in violation of Mr Coleman's constitutional rights. In
>>> short, he didn't kill Mrs McCoy, and he never sexually assaulted a
>>> neighbour. An innocent man, killed by the state, post-Gregg v. Georgia.
>
>> A tragic miscarriage of justice. I hope those that were responsible paid
>> dearly
>
>No, they did not. They are still free, alive, and quite probably railroading
>other innocents to the death chamber.
>
>{ snip }
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news
feed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!news-feed1.de1.concer
t.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 09:35:02 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 58
>Message-ID: <slrnap0ce6.g56.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaooeih.4ce.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><eolj9.128$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaors3q.8sl.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><B%mj9.7384$DR.4...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaotpv7.acr.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><9HLj9.1271$lg.102183@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaov4l4.edj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><PNUj9.927$hc1....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032860187 8247561 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
A Planet Visitor
> >> you referring to those who have already killed, or those who have already
> >> committed some other (often non-lethal) offence ?
>
> > now you are playing with me dude. Clearly i meant if he killed before, but
> > you could have a point. We have all seen the way ex-cons are tarred. They
> > are thiefs rapist and murderers regardless of what crime they are banged up
> > for. according to society. Just imagine the dialog....
> >
> > "so who's this visitor then?"
> > "his name is desmond and he has just come out of prison"
> > "quick hide the silver"
>
>
> Seriously, I made the point about recidivism, as it is a widely held
> belief that all of those put to death are 'career criminals', with one
> or more murders already on their 'rap sheet', and that the murders for
> which they have been sentenced to death were hideously cruel. This is
> not always the case. Many states (perhaps all ... Jigsaw ?) provide
> for the imposition of the death penalty for 'felony murders', i.e.
> the taking of life during the commission of a felony. This can result
> in someone being put to death for shooting a 'gas [sic] station'
> attendant whilst robbing that 'gas [sic] station'. Whilst such a
> murder is objectionable and reprehensible, it involves no torture,
> no sexual sadism, no prolonged suffering on the part of the victim. As
> my 'short story' (which apparently helped LDB 'get wood' for the first
> time in years without an execution) showed so well, death often comes
> quickly for the victim, and slowly for the killer.
>
> >> of Wanda McCoy on 10 March 1981. Leaving aside the overwhelming evidence
> >> of Mr Coleman's innocence {1}, the fact is that he had one previous
> >> conviction; that of indecent assault on a neighbour. That conviction was
> >> obtained in violation of Roger Coleman's constitutional rights (read _May
> >> God Have Mercy_ by John C. Tucker {2}), and was thus 'invalid'. So
> >> any 'aggravating circumstances' used to obtain a death sentence, were
> >> certainly also in violation of Mr Coleman's constitutional rights. In
> >> short, he didn't kill Mrs McCoy, and he never sexually assaulted a
> >> neighbour. An innocent man, killed by the state, post-Gregg v. Georgia.
>
> > A tragic miscarriage of justice. I hope those that were responsible paid
> > dearly
Do not believe everything you read from our boy, FDP. He is a
certifiable liar. The case of Roger Coleman is indeed troubling, and
his execution should probably have been commuted by the governor
at that time. But to gain a perspective that comes from one of the
most biased opponents to the DP, one should look at
http://www.amnestyusa.org/rightsforall/dp/innocence/innocent-1.html
You will find that Coleman failed a lie-detector test on the day of
his execution which, had he passed would have resulted in commuting
his execution by the Governor. Even Amnesty, certainly the most
biased organization in the U.S. opposed to the DP, recognized that
"It will likely never be known with absolute certainty if Roger Coleman
was guilty or innocent of the crime for which he was put to death."
And the further point is that Coleman is ALWAYS brought to the
forefront by abolitionists, as the CLOSEST example of the execution
of an innocent. He might well have been. Mathematically, there
are a number that MIGHT have been. The Justice System operates
on such a principle since absolute certainty in not possible. I
would favor performing the newer DNA analysis of that retained as
evidence. I am unconvinced of his innocence, but realize this
particular case should never have resulted in an execution. In any
case, PERSONALLY (I don't know how others feel), if it became
more certain that Coleman was, in fact, innocent, it would not
alter my view on the DP, since I've always realized that all
penalties hold the risk of convicting an innocent. What we ARE
CERTAIN of.. is that a great number of TRUE murderers who were
not executed murdered again. Randy Greenawalt - Escaped from
Prison in 1978, while serving a life sentence for a 1974 murder. He then
murdered a family of 4 people, shotgunning them to death, including a toddler.
Donald Dillbeck. Killed policeman in 1979. Escaped from prison in 1990,
kidnapped and killed female motorist after escape. Edward
Kennedy. Killed motel clerk. Sentenced to Life. Escaped 1981. Killed
policeman and male civilian after prison break. Viva Nash, Serving
life for murder.. Escaped in 1982. Murdered again. Norman Parker.
Serving Life for murder.. Escaped 1978. Murdered again in 1979.
Martsay Bolder. Serving a sentence of life for first-degree murder.
Murdered prison cellmate 1979. Samuel D. Smith in prison for
murder during a burglary. While in prison he murdered another
inmate in a knife fight Jarmarr Arnold - while on DR, awaiting
execution.. murdered another DR inmate by stabbing him in the
forehead with a sharpen spike. Robert Lee Massie. Death
sentence commuted by Furman. Released, and murdered again.
Kenneth McDuff. Death sentence commuted by Furman. Released,
and murdered a great number of women again. William Coday.
Released by Germany for a murder committed in Germany.
Returned to U.S. and murdered again. Cuhuatemoc Hinricky Peraita.
murdered a fellow inmate. Bennie Demps, was condemned to the DP
for murder. Commuted by Furman. Murdered another prison inmate.
And the list goes on. But that's okay... desi is a 'ramblin' gambln'
man.' As long as it's not HIS life he's gamblin' with, he'll just keep
on ramblin'.
Execution of murderers runs the risk of excuting an innocent.
Non-execution of murderers runs the risk of them murdering again.
We must balance those two risks. By not executing ALL... but
also not executing NONE, if we find it necessary to do so. We
cannot LIMIT our options in the protection of our lives. Just as
we cannot limit an individual using self-defense if it is justified.
We must always try to IMPROVE our methods of identifying those
who are guilty, deserve to be executed, and represent a grave
future risk of recidivism. I feel that Coleman met neither the
second or third criteria. As to his guilt, I am certainly not convinced
that he was not guilty.
.
>
> No, they did not. They are still free, alive, and quite probably railroading
> other innocents to the death chamber.
While you are going about setting murderers 'free' to rape, torture,
humiliate and murder 2-year-old children. You should be ashamed
of yourself. Instead of pretending to be pathetically 'pious.' Now,
look carefully for a 'mistake' so you can pretend this post has no
meaning.
PV
> { snip }
John Rennie
"Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote in
message news:jonathan-A97503...@newsroom.utas.edu.au...
> In article <slrnap1f48.igc.p...@lievre.voute.net>,
> pasdespa...@zeouane.org wrote:
>
> > Life imprisonment is _always_ an option. Remove it from any
hypothetical
> > (damn, sorry ... I'm having difficulty using simple words, so that you
> > will understand) question, and the question becomes 'never-never land'.
>
> I actually want to read your straight answer to John's question and have
> little interest in your on-going feud with PV.
>
> If it helps you towards answering the question in a straightforward
> fashion, I'll give my answer.
>
> Yes, under the circumstances that John describes, I would support
> execution. It is as simple as that. Being principled is all well and
> good but you have to prioritise your principles and act pragmatically
> upon how important each individual belief is to you.
>
> Mr Q. Z. D.
I, surprise, surprise, would also execute Frank. Even if there was
only a 1 in 10,000 chance of Frank repeating his original offence,
I would not take that chance. It appears that Frank will spend the
rest of his days in prison, a most inhumane sentence according
to PV. I don't imagine that you and I will lose much sleep over
that.
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
pasdespa...@zeouane.org wrote:
> Le Wed, 25 Sep 2002 00:00:28 GMT, Mr Q. Z. Diablo
> <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> I believe that you already read it, at the time John asked it. FWIW,
> >> my answer is still 'yes', because there is very little chance that
> >> Theodore Frank would have reoffended.
>
> > John _did_ narrow the question down a little more substantially than
> > that. You labelled it as "meaningless", as such a set of circumstances
> > would never be applicable in the real world.
>
> Indeed. How can one possibly ask someone, 'We "know" that X is going
> to kill again, do we release him ?' It's a question that cannot 'exist'
> as we cannot 'know' whether someone will kill again, and if we did, it
> would be an impossible question to answer. Who but a madman would
> release someone, _knowing_ that he will kill again ?
So here is the crux of John's question. If you, for the sake of
argument, _know_ that a released person will kill again and have only
the option of having them executed at your disposal, do you do so?
I can think of several non-DP situations which are reasonably plausible
that allow a variation upon our question...
A terrorist who has undertaken several bombings in the past, costing
dozens of lives, is about to set off his latest bomb. You know that it
will only kill one or two people. You have a loaded gun at his head and
have told him to desist. You cannot remove the detonating device from
his hand without him setting the bomb off. He refuses to stop and the
only means by which he can be stopped is to pull the trigger. Do you do
so?
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 08:53:48 +0000
>
>Le Wed, 25 Sep 2002 00:00:28 GMT, Mr Q. Z. Diablo
><jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> a écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> I believe that you already read it, at the time John asked it. FWIW,
>>> my answer is still 'yes', because there is very little chance that
>>> Theodore Frank would have reoffended.
>
>> John _did_ narrow the question down a little more substantially than
>> that. You labelled it as "meaningless", as such a set of circumstances
>> would never be applicable in the real world.
>
>Indeed. How can one possibly ask someone, 'We "know" that X is going
>to kill again, do we release him ?' It's a question that cannot 'exist'
>as we cannot 'know' whether someone will kill again, and if we did, it
>would be an impossible question to answer. Who but a madman would
>release someone, _knowing_ that he will kill again ?
>
>> The question, however "unfair" (and, IMHO, it is) is designed to test
>> the limits of your principles (not just yours, everyone's) and where
>> they become broken by pragmatism.
>>
>> As such, it is a very interesting and valid question.
>
>In its original form, it was an interesting question, and I can well
>understand the 'ammunition' provided by my original response. In its
>'modified' form, however, it has as much validity as asking a question
>like, 'LDB shows some form of intelligence ... do you consider that someone
>forged his posts ?'
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!nntp1.roc.gblx.net!nntp.g
blx.net!nntp.gblx.net!triton.net!smallfeed.triton.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!
fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 08:53:48 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 35
>Message-ID: <slrnap2ucr.kur.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><lI4j9.9587$yB5.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><kolj9.129$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><cEyj9.20415$R8.8...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnap1f48.igc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><jonathan-A97503...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><slrnap1tlr.jm7.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><jonathan-A6821B...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032944162 8709008 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 09:25:05 +0000
>
>Le Wed, 25 Sep 2002 02:22:32 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> >> A case in point is Roger Coleman, executed in 1992 for the rape and
>murder
>>> >> of Wanda McCoy on 10 March 1981. Leaving aside the overwhelming
>evidence
>>> >> of Mr Coleman's innocence {1}, the fact is that he had one previous
>>> >> conviction; that of indecent assault on a neighbour. That conviction
>was
>>> >> obtained in violation of Roger Coleman's constitutional rights (read
>_May
>>> >> God Have Mercy_ by John C. Tucker {2}), and was thus 'invalid'. So
>>> >> any 'aggravating circumstances' used to obtain a death sentence, were
>>> >> certainly also in violation of Mr Coleman's constitutional rights. In
>>> >> short, he didn't kill Mrs McCoy, and he never sexually assaulted a
>>> >> neighbour. An innocent man, killed by the state, post-Gregg v.
>Georgia.
>>>
>>> > A tragic miscarriage of justice. I hope those that were responsible paid
>>> > dearly
>
>> Do not believe everything you read from our boy, FDP. He is a
>> certifiable liar.
>
>{ snip }
>
>Another appeal to 'The Gang' to leave you alone, I see. Devoid of
>any real content (like most of your posts), especially as I didn't
>even _mention_ the lie detector test.
>
>> The case of Roger Coleman is indeed troubling, and
>
>'Troubling' ? How noble of you. Perhaps the 'gentle reader' to
>whom you often appeal to save the last vestiges of 'unburnt' skin on
>your 'ass' (sic), would like to speculate as to what your response
>would have been, if an abolitionist had referred to Kenneth McDuff's
>post-release murders as 'troubling'. You'd have been spraying words
>like 'evil', 'twisted', and 'sadistic' around with as much force as you
>normally spay saliva over your screen.
>
>That Kenneth McDuff was released to kill again, is a tragedy, and a
>major fuck-up by the system. That Roger Coleman was executed for a
>crime he did not commit, is no less a tragedy, no less a fuck-up by
>the system, and his life was certainly of no less value than the
>innocents that Kenneth McDuff murdered after being allowed out of
>gaol.
>
>Those eight or nine words that you just posted, show your priorities
>better than anything that 'The Gang' could produce. An innocent man's
>life was torn from him by the state, and all you can say is, 'it's
>troubling' ? 'Gentle Reader', ask yourself _who_ is the truly evil
>one on this newsgroup ?
>
>I suppose that we should be grateful that Roger Coleman wasn't German
>or Palestinian. You'd have been calling his wrongful execution 'a
>minor slip-up', or perhaps even 'a cause for national celebration'.
>
>> his execution should probably have been commuted by the governor
>> at that time. But to gain a perspective that comes from one of the
>> most biased opponents to the DP, one should look at
>> http://www.amnestyusa.org/rightsforall/dp/innocence/innocent-1.html
>> You will find that Coleman failed a lie-detector test on the day of
>> his execution which, had he passed would have resulted in commuting
>> his execution by the Governor.
>
>Quite fitting that you should mention the lie detector today, as only
>a couple of days ago, it was mentioned in a 'science for laymen'
>programme here on French television. It's apparently rarely used
>in court cases, as it is notoriously unreliable, and in fact reports
>more on the _stress_ of the subject, rather than whether he or she is
>lying (the two being not necessarily mutually inclusive). Now ask
>yourself how _you_ would have fared, stresswise, had you been told that
>if you failed the test, you were going to be strapped into the electric
>chair and killed.
>
>I have never murdered anyone, but frankly, if I had to sit one of those
>tests, the stakes being life or death ... I'm not confident that I'd
>'pass' it.
>
>{ snip }
>
>> And the further point is that Coleman is ALWAYS brought to the
>> forefront by abolitionists, as the CLOSEST example of the execution
>> of an innocent.
>
>The Coleman case is the one I mention most frequently, as I'm familiar
>with the details of the case. I could mention O'Dell Barnes, but I
>know less of that case than the Coleman one. Or Edward Earl Johnson,
>executed for a crime committed whilst he was ten miles away, at a
>'fish fry' with around 30 friends. All of them black, all of them
>told by the police to 'go home, or you'll regret it', when they tried
>to get the investigators to take the statements that would have proved
>his innocence.
>
>> He might well have been. Mathematically, there
>> are a number that MIGHT have been. The Justice System operates
>> on such a principle since absolute certainty in not possible.
>
>Which is a strong argument in favour of abolishing the death penalty,
>and replacing it with long gaol terms. _You_ might consider that
>worse than the death penalty, but at least those so incarcerated would
>have the chance to prove their innocence. As the Anthony Porter case
>shows, new evidence _can_ come to light decades after the case, and the
>stock deathie response, 'If the evidence was there, it would have come
>out at the trial' would be laughable, if it did not show just how
>stupid the majority of deathies were. How stupid, and how reckless
>they are with other peoples' lives. As someone else said, easy to
>play poker when the money doesn't come out of your own pocket.
>
>Frankly, that you acknowledge that absolute certainty is not possible,
>but that you are still in favour of the death penalty, speaks more about
>the 'evil' that I see in you, than anything I could possibly write. That
>you are white, middle-class, and probably mix with very few blacks, is
>(I am sure) not unrelated to the above views.
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> No, they did not. They are still free, alive, and quite probably
>railroading
>>> other innocents to the death chamber.
>
>> While you are going about setting murderers 'free' to rape, torture,
>> humiliate and murder 2-year-old children. You should be ashamed
>> of yourself. Instead of pretending to be pathetically 'pious.' Now,
>> look carefully for a 'mistake' so you can pretend this post has no
>> meaning.
>
>No need. Your own words 'damn' you. You're your own worst enemy, and
>a great friend to the abolitionist movement. I only wish that your
>views could be publicised outside of this newsgroup.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!fr.clara.net!heighliner.f
r.clara.net!151.189.0.75.MISMATCH!newsfeed.arcor-online.net!fu-berlin.de!u
ni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 09:25:05 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 132
>Message-ID: <slrnap307f.l1u.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaooeih.4ce.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><eolj9.128$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaors3q.8sl.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><B%mj9.7384$DR.4...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaotpv7.acr.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><9HLj9.1271$lg.102183@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaov4l4.edj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><PNUj9.927$hc1....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><slrnap0ce6.g56.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><I59k9.30208$R8.11...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032946053 9063459 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
JIGSAW1695
Date: 9/25/2002 7:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: <jonathan-C0E094...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
===============================
Yup... a shot to the brain will halt all functions of the body. How else would
you stop him.
A Planet Visitor
"Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote in message
news:jonathan-A6821B...@newsroom.utas.edu.au...
should be qualified as such in the answer. But as you say.. it
does speak to a 'philosophy' in the DP to me. Whether it is
'worse' in an individual's view for a murderer to murder or for
society to execute that murderer to prevent his murdering.
Given the condition that we are speaking of a TRUE murderer,
and the hypothetical condition that the two choices are the only
ones available. I believe you were forthright in your answer, and
it actually told me more about you. While desi would rather not
commit himself. I was not sure you would go the way you did,
because you often seem to express that society should hold
ITSELF to a higher standard than any one individual, in respect
to taking a life, even if the individual IS a murderer. This is the
view I believe desi holds, but he refuses to state it. Yet it is not
a view that presumes one supports murder, if one chooses 'yes,'
even if it is certain to result in the death of an innocent. It would
mean a belief that society should never take a life REGARDLESS.
ABSOLUTELY REGARDLESS. (I believe I make a better case
for desi's choice than he does). It only puts it in a different context.
That does not mean I was shocked or even surprised by your answer.
Simply that before you answered I didn't know what your answer
would be.
To be perfectly frank, I believe it is a question we should ALL,
abolitionist and retentionist, ask ourselves. At least privately TO
OURSELVES. Since it can tell us much about ourselves. Of
course, it's obvious that I would make the same choice as you
did.
PV
A Planet Visitor
> Le Sun, 22 Sep 2002 06:41:24 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> >> { snip childish whine, and claims of victory }
>
> > We ALL know what that means. TRANSLATION -- 'I can't stand
> > it when someone challenges my perverse taste for murderers.'
>
> No, LDB ... _I_ wrote the 'quote' (sic) ... get your 'attribution's'
> (sic) right ... what chance do you have to get away with the skin
> intact on your arse, if you can't even recognise what you did and
> didn't write ... remind us all of how all Palestinians are 'dishonest
> cunt's [sic]' whom you wouldn't trust as far as you can throw them ...
>
pressure? Today hasn't been a good day for you. Tomorrow doesn't
look much better either. I have the whole day. If my daughter-in-law
doesn't deliver by new grand-child...(any day now).
> >> > Theodore Frank???? Infinitesimally small chance that he will kill
> >> > again? Can you possibly hear yourself, bubble-brain? In any
> >> > case, the question was no longer posed in YOUR now presumed
> >> > terms of 'infinitesimally small chance.' We are now speaking of
> >> > a CERTAINTY. There is also an 'infinitesimally small chance' that
> >> > the execution will not 'take' and he will rise up as Lazarus, and the
> >> > State will forgive him.
>
> >> It would appear that you 'practice' your posts first, in front of a
> >> mirror. 'Bubble-brain' ? LOL ... indeed you are. There is a chance
> >> that the execution will 'not take and he will rise up as Lazarus' ?
>
> > About the same chance that Theodore Frank would not murder if
> > 'free.'
>
> Ho, ho, ho ... the 'engineer' 'engineers' his very own butt-rogering,
> by comparing probabilities (quick, to google, LDB !! Hurry !!), and
> instead having his foot 'eat some of dat lead, yo mothafucka !' (quick,
> get that one on the list !!!).
>
I do believe that's not even the English language. Have you been
studying Ebonics?
> { snip }
>
> > Ummm... tweak..tweak...tweak... I just LOVE this thread. It has
> > so clearly pinned you to the wall,
>
> Let's see ... how many times does LDB claim to have 'spanked'
> me,
I'd say about 50% of the times I've actually done so... Half the time I let
you skate. I believe your victory percentage is about 0.003. That would
probably be 'advise' instead of 'advice.'
> or 'pinned me to the wall' (that one is rather creepy in a
> billytwatish, chocolate-stabbing way) ?
Actually, it is a common American idiom for having pinned your ears
back. But in that backwater land you live in, I can see how you
might have missed it.
> Hmm ... in just about every
> single post that he 'sends' (sic and ho, ho, ho ...) to me. And in
> how many of those posts has he in fact done so ? Hint : it's less
> than 1 and more than -1.
>
> { snip rote abuse, topped off by more declarations of victory }
>
It would, of course, appear that you are actually the one doing the
snipping and claiming victory. I'm just making my remarks.
PV
A Planet Visitor
> Le Tue, 24 Sep 2002 23:31:26 GMT, Mr Q. Z. Diablo <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> a écrit :
>
> >> (damn, sorry ... I'm having difficulty using simple words, so that you
> >> will understand) question, and the question becomes 'never-never land'.
>
> > I actually want to read your straight answer to John's question and have
> > little interest in your on-going feud with PV.
> >
> > If it helps you towards answering the question in a straightforward
> > fashion, I'll give my answer.
> >
> > Yes, under the circumstances that John describes, I would support
> > execution. It is as simple as that. Being principled is all well and
> > good but you have to prioritise your principles and act pragmatically
> > upon how important each individual belief is to you.
>
> Theodore Frank would have reoffended.
>
Sure there is... That's why 8% of those already on DR, are recidivist
murderers. I'd say that Theodore Frank was more than your 'average'
redivist murderer. See
http://www.cybersleuths.com/billkelly/bkchap1.htm
It's one thing to change your argument.. but it is quite another to presume
that Theodore Frank was not a homicidal maniac... a pedophile murderer
of the greatest degree of danger to recidivism. There is an almost certain
chance that he would be recidivist. And hiding behind 'recidivist' numbers
cannot hide that fact.
A Planet Visitor
> Le Mon, 23 Sep 2002 06:36:56 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> punishment or freedom.
>
> > Unfortunately, that wasn't a choice. It is the same as desi
> > 'presuming' that Theodore Frank would be eligible to teach a
> > kindergarten class unsupervised if he were set 'free' by him.
>
> Which part of 'it wasn't a serious question', are you having difficulty
> with, LDB ? 'Wood' (sic) you have preferred it if incubus had limited
> himself to monosyllables ?
>
> (damn, sorry ... I'm having difficulty using simple words, so that you
> will understand) question, and the question becomes 'never-never land'.
>
there it will stay. Simply because that's what you SAID. Now you've
backtracked to 'Life imprisonment is always an option.' So what???
That wasn't your answer. You answered that you would let him go
'free.' Are you so forgetful that your words need to be brought back
again? No, that was word.. nor words. The one word 'Yes.' It's
similar to 'excreta.' You say them.. you eat them (my God -- there's
a double entendre). Just as you've pathetically done with 'advise' and
'advice,' 'insure,' and 'assure.' and now your pathetic little 'woody.'
> You've been spanked, kicked up and down the newsgroup, had your face
> rubbed in your own lack of education, had your nipples tweaked, and your
> pigtails tugged.
>
I don't think so, sport. Since _I_ (shit, you got me doing it) didn't say
'yes' to the question of 'let him go free.' I believe that was you. And
rather than fess up, and say 'hey, that's not a fair question, why not
life in prison?' Instead, you tried to bluff your way through, in your
typical manner of a desi SODS (step on dick special). You continued
to try and justify it with 'recidivism,' knowing full-well that it was absurd
in the particular case of Theodore Frank(hilariously calling it
infinitesimally small for the example of Frank). Which is why John
posed that particular name, and not Karla Faye Tucker.
> One 'wood' (sic) imagine that you'd know better to 'engage' 'you're' (sic)
> betters ... apparently not. Poor LDB ... the Pavlov's dog of AADP.
>
See my comment above... you've sucked all you can get out of it, FDP.
You must realize that I simply don't care how silly you look, repeating
your 'buddhist (sic) chant' of 'wood wouldy wood.' I'm only telling you
this to fill up paper, because I'm certain it is not penetrating. After all,
when contrails of smoke come from your ears when you start thinking,
I can hardly expect to achieve any progress in your learning process.
> { snip }
>
> > John and I argue... it will forever be so. But desi and dirt are rather
> > playthings that I toy with. Like a cat with a mouse. And I'm lucky
> > enough to have two mice who are more concerned with their grooming
> > habits than their argument. I toy with them simply BECAUSE they are so
> > filled with themselves.
>
> Two 'playthings' who kick 'you're' (sic) 'ass' (sic), and _everyone_
> agrees about that ...
Yeah... yeah... let me see.. gee.. that looks like SG Seminal axiom 6)
you're trying again. But maybe it's just some 'Cajun Voodoo and
mysterious swamp fever dissolved in the sugars of Boozoo Bajou'
that's causing your delusions. More of your cultural openmindedness'
intellectual overload.
PV
A Planet Visitor
> Le Wed, 25 Sep 2002 02:22:32 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> >> of Wanda McCoy on 10 March 1981. Leaving aside the overwhelming evidence
> >> >> of Mr Coleman's innocence {1}, the fact is that he had one previous
> >> >> conviction; that of indecent assault on a neighbour. That conviction was
> >> >> obtained in violation of Roger Coleman's constitutional rights (read _May
> >> >> God Have Mercy_ by John C. Tucker {2}), and was thus 'invalid'. So
> >> >> any 'aggravating circumstances' used to obtain a death sentence, were
> >> >> certainly also in violation of Mr Coleman's constitutional rights. In
> >> >> short, he didn't kill Mrs McCoy, and he never sexually assaulted a
> >> >> neighbour. An innocent man, killed by the state, post-Gregg v. Georgia.
> >>
> >> > A tragic miscarriage of justice. I hope those that were responsible paid
> >> > dearly
>
> > Do not believe everything you read from our boy, FDP. He is a
> > certifiable liar.
>
>
> Another appeal to 'The Gang' to leave you alone, I see. Devoid of
> any real content (like most of your posts), especially as I didn't
> even _mention_ the lie detector test.
>
that is, shall I say -- Rabidly anti-DP. If you believe it was
'devoid of any real content,' then what do you believe holds
content -- JFA??
<rant of comparing Coleman to McDuff clipped >
Poor desi - he still believes that those who support the execution of
one murderer must necessarily support them all. He confuses
abolitionists (who MUST oppose EVERY execution) with
retentionists, who can support whatever execution they feel was
necessary. Someday... maybe someday... his brain cells will
awaken sufficiently to recognize the difference.
> > his execution should probably have been commuted by the governor
> > at that time. But to gain a perspective that comes from one of the
> > most biased opponents to the DP, one should look at
> > http://www.amnestyusa.org/rightsforall/dp/innocence/innocent-1.html
> > You will find that Coleman failed a lie-detector test on the day of
> > his execution which, had he passed would have resulted in commuting
> > his execution by the Governor.
>
> Quite fitting that you should mention the lie detector today, as only
> a couple of days ago, it was mentioned in a 'science for laymen'
> programme here on French television.
Actually, it right there in the URL I provided. The URL is an ANTI-DP
web site -- Amnesty USA. I thought you were a member of Amnesty?
<more pathetic innuendo clipped>
> { snip }
>
> > And the further point is that Coleman is ALWAYS brought to the
> > forefront by abolitionists, as the CLOSEST example of the execution
> > of an innocent.
>
> The Coleman case is the one I mention most frequently, as I'm familiar
> with the details of the case. I could mention O'Dell Barnes, but I
> know less of that case than the Coleman one. Or Edward Earl Johnson,
> executed for a crime committed whilst he was ten miles away, at a
> 'fish fry' with around 30 friends. All of them black, all of them
> told by the police to 'go home, or you'll regret it', when they tried
> to get the investigators to take the statements that would have proved
> his innocence.
You could 'mention' whoever you wish.. you certainly do so. But
the point is Coleman is more frequently mentioned than any other
executed murderer post-Furman. You seem to have trouble
understanding English, since that's what I said. I certainly didn't
say he was the ONLY name mentioned. In fact, you CONFIRM
that your personal usage most frequently is Coleman... which is
what I said.
>
> > He might well have been. Mathematically, there
> > are a number that MIGHT have been. The Justice System operates
> > on such a principle since absolute certainty in not possible.
>
> Which is a strong argument in favour of abolishing the death penalty,
> and replacing it with long gaol terms.
You are familiar with my 'list,' are you not? Don't even TRY to tell
me about recidivism when fully 8% of ALL those on DR on this
day are RECIDIVIST murderers. I have put that government URL
information up here before, from the U.S. Statistical Abstract I
believe. If you do not believe what I am saying, ask and I'll find
it and put it up again.
<soapbox oration clipped. Frankly anyone interested can see
desi's post. I'll not spread his propaganda for him in my post>
> { snip }
>
> >> No, they did not. They are still free, alive, and quite probably railroading
> >> other innocents to the death chamber.
>
> > While you are going about setting murderers 'free' to rape, torture,
> > humiliate and murder 2-year-old children. You should be ashamed
> > of yourself. Instead of pretending to be pathetically 'pious.' Now,
> > look carefully for a 'mistake' so you can pretend this post has no
> > meaning.
>
> No need. Your own words 'damn' you. You're your own worst enemy, and
> a great friend to the abolitionist movement. I only wish that your
> views could be publicised outside of this newsgroup.
>
Ummm... that's hardly original, my little 'plagerisming.' (sic). In fact, there is
little doubt that you are to the abolitionist movement what Genghis
Khan was to 'safe sex.'
PV
A Planet Visitor
"JIGSAW1695" <jigsa...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020926023327...@mb-fw.aol.com...
looked at it... knowing full well what was coming. Just looking
at the post of Mr D., and seeing that there even was a reply from
you, was enough to make me chuckle.
PV
A Planet Visitor
"John Rennie" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:E3qk9.2591$q15.1...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net...
perhaps 6 months ago.. In prison... awaiting execution after
completion of due process... with a smile on his face... and
some drool running down him lips. I cannot say I am neither
saddened nor glad that he was not executed. He is gone... good
riddance. He can never harm another child.
PV
JIGSAW1695
Date: 9/26/2002 3:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: <N5zk9.4202$O8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
==============================
Well, It has been said before that I have good entertainment value.
John Rennie
> Le Wed, 25 Sep 2002 23:58:11 GMT, Mr Q. Z. Diablo
<jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> Indeed. How can one possibly ask someone, 'We "know" that X is going
> >> to kill again, do we release him ?' It's a question that cannot
'exist'
> >> as we cannot 'know' whether someone will kill again, and if we did, it
> >> would be an impossible question to answer. Who but a madman would
> >> release someone, _knowing_ that he will kill again ?
>
> > So here is the crux of John's question. If you, for the sake of
> > argument, _know_ that a released person will kill again and have only
> > the option of having them executed at your disposal, do you do so?
>
> meaningless.
All questions that Desmond finds difficult are 'meaningless'.
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
It's a _very_ easy question for _you_ to answer, though, given that your
stance is based on pragmatism. Given that mine is based on principle,
it presents a tougher challenge.
> Whether it is
> 'worse' in an individual's view for a murderer to murder or for
> society to execute that murderer to prevent his murdering.
> Given the condition that we are speaking of a TRUE murderer,
> and the hypothetical condition that the two choices are the only
> ones available. I believe you were forthright in your answer, and
> it actually told me more about you.
[minor snippage of blood-feud]
> I was not sure you would go the way you did,
> because you often seem to express that society should hold
> ITSELF to a higher standard than any one individual, in respect
> to taking a life, even if the individual IS a murderer.
I will always hold this to be the case. I think that I can wriggle out
of it on the basis that society would be just as much a murderer if it
was to _let_ an individual kill an innocent. Thus, given that permanent
incarceration is not an option, execution is the only way out.
> That does not mean I was shocked or even surprised by your answer.
> Simply that before you answered I didn't know what your answer
> would be.
Nor did I. I know that it wasn't mine to answer but John had a point to
make.
> To be perfectly frank, I believe it is a question we should ALL,
> abolitionist and retentionist, ask ourselves. At least privately TO
> OURSELVES. Since it can tell us much about ourselves. Of
> course, it's obvious that I would make the same choice as you
> did.
I believe that the question is only difficult for principled
abolitionists. Pragmatists, IMHO, should have no doubts whatsoever.
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
pasdespa...@zeouane.org wrote:
> Le Wed, 25 Sep 2002 23:58:11 GMT, Mr Q. Z. Diablo
> <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> Indeed. How can one possibly ask someone, 'We "know" that X is going
> >> to kill again, do we release him ?' It's a question that cannot
> >> 'exist'
> >> as we cannot 'know' whether someone will kill again, and if we did, it
> >> would be an impossible question to answer. Who but a madman would
> >> release someone, _knowing_ that he will kill again ?
>
> > So here is the crux of John's question. If you, for the sake of
> > argument, _know_ that a released person will kill again and have only
> > the option of having them executed at your disposal, do you do so?
>
> Again, one cannot 'know' such a thing. The question is thus
> meaningless.
But, in the spirit of a thought experiment, let us assume that we _can_
know such a thing.
> > I can think of several non-DP situations which are reasonably plausible
> > that allow a variation upon our question...
> >
> > A terrorist who has undertaken several bombings in the past, costing
> > dozens of lives, is about to set off his latest bomb. You know that it
> > will only kill one or two people. You have a loaded gun at his head
> > and
> > have told him to desist. You cannot remove the detonating device from
> > his hand without him setting the bomb off. He refuses to stop and the
> > only means by which he can be stopped is to pull the trigger. Do you
> > do
> > so?
>
> Yes.
>
> I hope, however, that you can see that the two situations are in no
> way comparable.
>
> In your hypothetical question, the terrorist is _about to act_ to
> take life. If Theodore Frank were standing in front of a child with
> his dick out and a gun in his hand, then I'd pull the trigger in that
> situation, too.
>
> However, being in gaol and saying, 'I _will_ reoffend if I get out', is
> not the same, and killing him in such a context is not self defence.
As I say, treat the whole thing as a thought experiment and assume that
you can predict the future with 100% accuracy. I think that the
question is interesting, even if you don't.
> By the same token, if your terrorist was in gaol, and said, 'I'm going
> to set off a bomb when I get out', then no, I would not have him
> executed,
> but would ensure that he did not obtain release.
The question has no meaning in the real world because, as we both know,
permanent incarceration is a possibility under all circumstances. I'm
as interested as John is to know at which point your principles are
overcome by pragmatism, if at all.
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
pasdespa...@zeouane.org wrote:
> Le 26 Sep 2002 06:33:27 GMT, JIGSAW1695 <jigsa...@aol.com> a écrit :
>
> { snip QZD's question on terrorists }
>
> > Yup... a shot to the brain will halt all functions of the body. How
> > else would
> > you stop him.
>
> In your case, Jigsaw, we would probably have to aim three feet further
> down ...
Ouch!
Very funny, though.
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:13:41 +0000
>
>Le 26 Sep 2002 06:33:27 GMT, JIGSAW1695 <jigsa...@aol.com> a écrit :
>
>{ snip QZD's question on terrorists }
>
>> Yup... a shot to the brain will halt all functions of the body. How else
>would
>> you stop him.
>
>In your case, Jigsaw, we would probably have to aim three feet further down
>...
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news
feed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!news.rwth-aachen.de!f
u-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:13:41 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 14
>Message-ID: <slrnap6205.pb7.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <jonathan-C0E094...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><20020926023327...@mb-fw.aol.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033046163 9788955 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:16:39 +0000
>
>Le Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:12:57 +0000, Desmond Coughlan
><pasdespa...@zeouane.org> a écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>> By the same token, if your terrorist was in gaol, and said, 'I'm going
> ^^^
>
>Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa ..
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news
feed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!skynet.be!skynet.be!fu-berlin.de!uni-berl
in.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:16:39 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 14
>Message-ID: <slrnap625n.pb7.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><lI4j9.9587$yB5.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><kolj9.129$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><cEyj9.20415$R8.8...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnap1f48.igc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><jonathan-A97503...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><slrnap1tlr.jm7.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><jonathan-A6821B...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><slrnap2ucr.kur.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><jonathan-C0E094...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><slrnap61uo.pb7.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033046299 9795281 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 17:07:52 +0000
>
>Le Thu, 26 Sep 2002 18:04:47 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Again, one cannot 'know' such a thing. The question is thus
>>> meaningless.
>
>> All questions that Desmond finds difficult are 'meaningless'.
>
>Oh fuck off, you sanctimonious old twat. The original question was
>'difficult', but perfectly feasible. Asking, 'we [know the unknowable],
>what do you do ?' is beneath even you, and I can only imagine that
>sucking up to your idol is making you lose all reason when it comes to
>asking questions which _can_ exist in the real world.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news
feed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berl
in.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 17:07:52 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 20
>Message-ID: <slrnap6fn7.q0i.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><lI4j9.9587$yB5.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><kolj9.129$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><cEyj9.20415$R8.8...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnap1f48.igc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><jonathan-A97503...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><slrnap1tlr.jm7.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><jonathan-A6821B...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><slrnap2ucr.kur.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><jonathan-C0E094...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><slrnap61uo.pb7.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><17Hk9.2081$vN6....@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033060149 10203714 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:12:57 +0000
>
>Le Wed, 25 Sep 2002 23:58:11 GMT, Mr Q. Z. Diablo
><jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> a écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Indeed. How can one possibly ask someone, 'We "know" that X is going
>>> to kill again, do we release him ?' It's a question that cannot 'exist'
>>> as we cannot 'know' whether someone will kill again, and if we did, it
>>> would be an impossible question to answer. Who but a madman would
>>> release someone, _knowing_ that he will kill again ?
>
>> So here is the crux of John's question. If you, for the sake of
>> argument, _know_ that a released person will kill again and have only
>> the option of having them executed at your disposal, do you do so?
>
>Again, one cannot 'know' such a thing. The question is thus
>meaningless.
>
>> I can think of several non-DP situations which are reasonably plausible
>> that allow a variation upon our question...
>>
>> A terrorist who has undertaken several bombings in the past, costing
>> dozens of lives, is about to set off his latest bomb. You know that it
>> will only kill one or two people. You have a loaded gun at his head and
>> have told him to desist. You cannot remove the detonating device from
>> his hand without him setting the bomb off. He refuses to stop and the
>> only means by which he can be stopped is to pull the trigger. Do you do
>> so?
>
>Yes.
>
>I hope, however, that you can see that the two situations are in no
>way comparable.
>
>In your hypothetical question, the terrorist is _about to act_ to
>take life. If Theodore Frank were standing in front of a child with
>his dick out and a gun in his hand, then I'd pull the trigger in that
>situation, too.
>
>However, being in gaol and saying, 'I _will_ reoffend if I get out', is
>not the same, and killing him in such a context is not self defence.
>
>By the same token, if your terrorist was in gaol, and said, 'I'm going
>to set off a bomb when I get out', then no, I would not have him executed,
>but would ensure that he did not obtain release.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news
feed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-onl
ine.de!newsfeed.freenet.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.
noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:12:57 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 50
>Message-ID: <slrnap61uo.pb7.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><lI4j9.9587$yB5.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><kolj9.129$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><cEyj9.20415$R8.8...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnap1f48.igc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><jonathan-A97503...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><slrnap1tlr.jm7.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><jonathan-A6821B...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><slrnap2ucr.kur.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><jonathan-C0E094...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033046161 9788955 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 18:52:35 +0000
>
>Le Thu, 26 Sep 2002 06:34:49 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Life imprisonment is _always_ an option. Remove it from any hypothetical
>>> (damn, sorry ... I'm having difficulty using simple words, so that you
>>> will understand) question, and the question becomes 'never-never land'.
>
>> Obviously that's what you should have said then. It is in my list. And
>> there it will stay.
>
>I fear that you are mistaking me for someone who cares about your list.
>
>However, you are once more confirming for me that your native language
>is not English. No English native speaker, would need the 'tautology'
>of saying, 'If I could select life imprisonment ...', for that would
>be, to coin a quaint American (i.e. incorrect) word, 'a given'.
>
>{ snip }
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news
feed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berl
in.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 18:52:35 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 25
>Message-ID: <slrnap9a7i.tiu.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><lI4j9.9587$yB5.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><kolj9.129$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><cEyj9.20415$R8.8...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnap1f48.igc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><dUxk9.4182$O8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033152823 11216485 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 18:45:41 +0000
>
>Le Thu, 26 Sep 2002 07:22:01 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Another appeal to 'The Gang' to leave you alone, I see. Devoid of
>>> any real content (like most of your posts), especially as I didn't
>>> even _mention_ the lie detector test.
>
>> Actually it was filled with the content of a site, Amnesty USA,
>> that is, shall I say -- Rabidly anti-DP. If you believe it was
>> 'devoid of any real content,' then what do you believe holds
>> content -- JFA??
>
>As you may know, I very rarely (once this year, IIRC) consult the sites
>that you provide. There's no point in reading them, as you haven't
>bothered to do so, so arguing about their content would be fruitless.
>However, in this particular case, I was calling your post 'content-free'.
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> a couple of days ago, it was mentioned in a 'science for laymen'
>>> programme here on French television.
>
>> Actually, it right there in the URL I provided. The URL is an ANTI-DP
>> web site -- Amnesty USA. I thought you were a member of Amnesty?
>
>See above.
>
>{ snip }
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!fr.clara.net!heighliner.f
r.clara.net!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!193.174.75.178!news-fra1.dfn.d
e!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Question for DESMOND
>Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 18:45:41 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 35
>Message-ID: <slrnap99qk.tiu.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <efAi9.390$VS3.17713@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaolm5v.1h7i....@lievre.voute.net>
><fXAi9.482$VS3.25086@newsfep2-gui>
><gtVi9.1405$61.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaooeih.4ce.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><eolj9.128$l_1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaors3q.8sl.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><B%mj9.7384$DR.4...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnaotpv7.acr.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><9HLj9.1271$lg.102183@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnaov4l4.edj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><PNUj9.927$hc1....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><slrnap0ce6.g56.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><I59k9.30208$R8.11...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnap307f.l1u.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><tAyk9.4196$O8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033152670 11114727 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
A Planet Visitor
> Le Thu, 26 Sep 2002 06:34:49 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> (damn, sorry ... I'm having difficulty using simple words, so that you
> >> will understand) question, and the question becomes 'never-never land'.
>
> > Obviously that's what you should have said then. It is in my list. And
> > there it will stay.
>
>
you care about. Clearly I need to again explain the groundrules to
you. You forget so readily. You don't care what I say... and I most
certainly don't care what you say. Klar???
> However, you are once more confirming for me that your native language
> is not English. No English native speaker, would need the 'tautology'
> of saying, 'If I could select life imprisonment ...', for that would
> be, to coin a quaint American (i.e. incorrect) word, 'a given'.
>
yada, yada, yada... now you know why everyone 'picks on you,'
desi... you're a no-talent bum... who is not modest about showing
it. ho ho ho. I just love that one.
PV
> { snip }
A Planet Visitor
> Le Thu, 26 Sep 2002 07:22:01 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> any real content (like most of your posts), especially as I didn't
> >> even _mention_ the lie detector test.
>
> > Actually it was filled with the content of a site, Amnesty USA,
> > that is, shall I say -- Rabidly anti-DP. If you believe it was
> > 'devoid of any real content,' then what do you believe holds
> > content -- JFA??
>
> that you provide. There's no point in reading them, as you haven't
> bothered to do so, so arguing about their content would be fruitless.
> However, in this particular case, I was calling your post 'content-free'.
>
you wish... God knows that's all YOU produce. Nonetheless, I
felt that you did not believe Amnesty was 'content-free.' We
learn something more about you every day.
> { snip }
>
> >> a couple of days ago, it was mentioned in a 'science for laymen'
> >> programme here on French television.
>
> > Actually, it right there in the URL I provided. The URL is an ANTI-DP
> > web site -- Amnesty USA. I thought you were a member of Amnesty?
>
> See above.
>
Yes... do.
> { snip }