Printable View
You would have heard of cases of people who get sentenced for "life" in jail but then get eligible for parole in say a couple of years after they have been in jail.
take this instance for example : http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006440667,00.html
should people like this ever be considered for parole ?
whats your view on cases such as these
My views.
If sentenced for life, it should be life, in fact if it is proven without doubt that a person murdered someone, personnally i think they should hang them.
If proven without doubt...oh dear how many people wrongly convicted of murder would be in the graves if we followed that route? No, the state should never ever kill people or we join other great nations like China, Korea, USA, you get the drift.Quote:
Originally Posted by NewsreadeR
Should life mean life? In some cases (e.g. Myra Hyndley) yes but in most cases murders are committed in the heat of the moment by someone known to the victim. Doesn't make it right but a bit different to the cold hearted child killer above don't you think???
Thats the snag, there is not really a way that you can prove without a doubt.
i would have to say that although he was banned it wasnt his responsibility to make sure that she was wearing a seat belt.
After all she got into the car knowing that he was either a) a banned driver or b) she got into the car.
After the age of 14 its not the drivers responsibility to make sure that any passengers are wearing a seat belt.
Although i do agree a life sentence should mean life but only when there is 100% evidence lots of people have been convicted that were innocent.