₦airaland Forum

MyJoe:
Movies sure are magical. I watch a good number of them nowadays. But I'm glad I stayed almost completely away from them till my 30's. I have not seen this one, but I read the book in 2001.

Michael Aondoakaa [Ah-on-DOH-kar], a recent Attorney-General of Nigeria, is well-known, not least for his crooked ways, which included openly advocating for people suspected of looting the public treasury and rendering millions of Nigerians poor and desperate. He was also the AG blackmailed by Pfizer in the pharmaceutical company’s efforts to avoid making payouts to victims of their drug trials in Kano. What many don’t know about Mr Aondoakaa is his huge contribution to Nigerian and, perhaps, Common Law, criminal jurisprudence; an achievement that singularly qualified him for the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria, a rank that made it possible for the cabal he served as their poodle to make him Attorney-General. There was this case involving a woman whose husband would not stop cheating on her. (I did not actually read this case from the law report or journal but had it narrated by a trusted narrator. So I am giving you a summary of a summary!) The man was so brazen he would actually bring a woman into their bedroom and order the wife out! The woman bore her cross like many Nigerian women of the traditional school would. But one day she snapped and ended up killing him.

At the high court the state argued that for a plea of PROVOCATION to be successful, the accused person must take action within a reasonable time frame after the action said to cause the provocation. That is, poster A cannot say something nasty to poster B in one thread today, and tomorrow, poster B says something nasty to poster A in another thread and claim he was under provocation. It is assumed that anger passes with the passing of time. Aondoakaa, the defence lawyer, argued that the passing of a certain amount of time does not on its own nullify a plea of provocation. The high court accepted the prosecution’s argument, convicted the woman for murder and sentenced her to die by hanging.

The Court of Appeal agreed with the prosecution. But the Supreme Court accepted Mr Aondoakaa’s argument and, bingo – the law on provocation has been re-written! Law students will study that case for decades to come.

Very interesting! I am curious, if you were the judge, what would you have ruled?

I think the case in Grisham’s book is similar. I agree when you said you would give weight to the fact someone is under drugs, is mentally ill, or emotionally unstable. Angry people are emotionally unstable. And that is the primary consideration behind the law on provocation, intoxication and insanity – the fact the accused person was not in full control of his senses at the time of commission of crime. Even when we move beyond strict legalism, it is the same question that arises: was the woman in the case above and Carl Lee Hailey in that book in control of their senses at the time they killed their victims? Hailey took his time to carefully plan his murders. It was an act of revenge. But, then, there is the immensely important fact that not too long before and not too far away the law had failed miserably in a similar case – four white boys who violated a little black girl had been acquitted. Now, that is enough to drive any father whose little girl’s life had been ruined crazy. It was Mississippi and many black people still feel put upon by the system in some of these Southern states. But couldn’t he have waited for the law to take its course? Shouldn’t he have? What I objectively think is that his action would, perhaps, have been more understandable (though not right) if he had waited for the trial and had acted only because the system failed to bring “justice” like in the other case. But it was not my daughter. If it was my daughter I doubt I would be objective. It is hard to say exactly what you would do in these kinds of situations unless it actually happens to you.

Gbam left right center top down inside out.

And honestly, I think this is part of why the use of jurys instead of just single judges is on point. A jury - of his peers - a collection of carefully selected people by both prosecution and defense, will not just consider whether or not a crime was committed, but take everything else into account, and most importantly [b]put themselves in his shoes [/b]and consider how they would have acted. So we see even guilty as hell people walk free and we applaud the jury's call.

Another movie - lol - you seen "Law Abiding Citizen" starring Jamie Foxx and Gerard Butler? It is exactly the scenario you painted. A man's wife and daughter are raped and killed during a home invasion. The forensic evidence gets screwed up and the perps could get off free, so the hot shot prosecutor in order to maintain his success rate strikes a plea deal with the defense - the main perp who committed the crime gets off with only 3 yrs while the accomplice gets the DP. The man loses his mind and disappears for years - all the while he plans an elaborate, impressive and deadly assault against the perp, the lawyers, the judge and the entire justice system.

As a viewer watching this unfold - you really can't help but cheer for the guy - even though he's 'wrong'. Its a good movie if you have the time

MyJoe! finally have some time to reply properly. Honestly, I think I gain percentage points in brain cells everytime I read from you . You're so smart and knowledgeable, exactly the type of elder I need to sit at their feet and learn

and btw *offtopic* you been seeing the wahala in Egypt? Am I joining the conspiracy ranks to think our friends in the MB are smiling at the instability?

MyJoe:
The idea is about bandits having more incentive to kill witnesses. I don’t think a strong argument can be made there, but it appears there have been cases of bandits killing another person, and another person, and another person, just to avoid the gallows since they already killed one.

Oh okay got it. That makes sense.

So it appears. I have not seen this movie, but I just checked it out at imdb.com and it’s the kind of movie I’d like to watch in a few days. This judge did it for real. If you like classical music then you definitely have stories to tell of people around you not being keen on this particular like of yours. Now, imagine a guy from some slum in LA who eats and sleeps Tupac or heavy metal being forced to listen to Bach and Tchaikovsky under circumstances where he can’t simply walk away!

Lol. Gosh that is really funny and I salute the inventiveness of that judge. lol. I know I would pull my hair out and pierce my ear drums if I were forced to listen to hard/death metal gross lol.

The act of giving crime proceeds to the poor, by itself, does not make it less egregious in my opinion. Lawrence Anini and most of the big Nigerian 419ers do this. Left to me the poor should reject anything from these sort of people. I think genuine remorse involves a change of heart, a change of mindset. If someone engages in armed robbery, maiming and killing and gives his proceeds to the poor, is caught and keeps repeating that he did it all for the poor, the law ought to take its course. I believe anyone who knowingly does hurt to any human being is building his own hell.

so so agreed.

I fail to see any morality in depriving someone of a possession, even if they have in abundance, to give to those who don’t have it.

I see you're not a an american-flavored pop-tart liberal democrat .

But if someone engages in banditry and murder, realizes in his heart and confesses with his mouth that it is bad to steal or kill and he should never have stolen or hurt anyone, and demonstrates this by seeking out and apologizing to his victims or giving everything he owns to the needy, or working with social workers to help delinquent kids, there is a case for mercy. The Bible says the angels of God rejoice when a sinner repents (Luke 15:10).

Well said, and I would tend to agree with you. And I think this is one of the main reasons pardons can be granted after the sentence. And I would say even if the sentence wasn't commuted, in the eyes of the Law, his genuine change in the eyes of God is what truly matters both here and afterhere. The bible itself also shows us hardknock, brutal, immediate and swift judgement resulting in death - from God. And we also see the opposite in great mercy extended. We need both ends of a single-edged sword in our society - that's what I think.

Right, the “governator” was right legally speaking. Even beyond strict legalism, some of the reasons he gave for denying pardon were compelling. But he was within the law to grant a pardon. He acknowledged Tookie’s good work, but said he could not grant a pardon since remorse can only be demonstrated by an acknowledgement of guilt. To him, the evidence against Williams’ culpability in the murders was compelling – beyond reasonable doubt. Tookie insisted that while he did a ton of bad things he was not responsible for these four murders. He probably could have saved himself from the gallows by just admitting he did it. But the said he didn’t. To Mr Schwarzenegger that was the problem – he found it impossible to reconcile Williams’ claim of innocence with his claim of change of heart in the face of so much compelling evidence. Stalemate. I believe the governor acted without malice.

Interesting. We've seen that compelling evidence doesn't always equate guilt so I can't argue in the offense. At the same time felons have been known to play the system. Stalemate for real. That is why I could never be a judge. Not to mention my heart melts to see people cry/weep. Don't buy the hard talker you see here, I'm a sucker for repentance lol.

Yes, that is “legal justice” or "formal justice". But what is justice then – I mean “justice” without a qualifying adjective? I’m not sure I can do a good job of answering that. Maybe that is why the phrase in the legal community is “substantial justice”. I doubt absolute justice is achievable – we have to get used to that. And maybe someone will run a thread on “what is justice” around here one of these days.

I vote for you . Absolute justice would be just like you said - eye for an eye - but that is impossible in our society. What do we do with the likes of Bernie Madoff? take billions back from him that he doesn't have? lol.

But you already alluded to the impossibility of having laws that objectively captures just a category of people. No wiggle room – that’s how it mostly works. Imagine having a law that sentences to death only when there is a confession or video evidence, or, perhaps, only when there is a confession since video evidence can be manipulated!

True true I did. Video evidence can be manipulated, but it would be pretty darn hard and a lot of other variables would also have to line up perfectly with the video for a jury to convict - at least I would like to think so.

We may also talk of those who become famous, that is, “everyone” knows and talks about them while the state is in pursuit – we get these sort of people every now and then: Johnny Dillinger, Al Capone, Ishola Oyenusi (“when you talk to me like that I gun you down”), Lawrence Anini. But how does a law capture this objectively? That’s the point I was making. In The Day of the Jackal, “everyone” involved in the matter knew Charles Caltrop was the Jackal at some point, but at the end of the day they turned out to be wrong.

Not sure I understand you fully here but . . . that's why they have their day in court and usually armed with a team of the best lawyers and usually for free.

We just caught Whitey Bulger - a dude on the FBI's top 10 most wanted & who's been on the run for 16yrs, 16yrs, imagine. He's from down the street here in Boston and was a notorious crime boss. You need to see how heads are fighting to be on his defense team. In developed countries, I think its pretty darn hard to lynch the wrong guy that 'everyone' knows is guilty.

I'm a bit west of you so unfortunately don't know of any friends with apts for rent. BU huh? . . . off-campus accomodation will not be cheap/easy oh. Your best bet is to hound [b]craigslist.com [/b]daily for openings. You been to Boston before?

InesQor:
Dear sistah *hugs*

I'm okay, can't complain too much and all that _ _ _ thankfully

Can you please send me an IM contact (preferably Yahoo if u have it) via Nairaland messaging, we need to talk? Your phone number is unreachable.

lol. I know jare. Check ur inbox . . .

5solas:
@Jesoul

Thanks a lot for the information and Vote Of Confidence .

Lol. You're very welcome

^ and she's gone Well, its their first tourney back, we can't blame them for running out of steam.

Looks like Venus might also be on her way out the way this game is going

^Honestly, his kolo does not have start or finish. May God be with the poor guy . . . cos this one na correct crase

I caught flashes of the draft jare. Not too exciting this year as it doesn't seem there are any real movers and shakers in this class that can transform a team . . . we'll see sha. I could be wrong. Plus unlike previous years (and because of the impending lockout) there were no trades or blockbuster deals to spice things up. Everyone is sorta waiting for the labor deal to get sorted before making real moves. The NBA is in limbo right now.

InesQor:
JeSoul!

Wharritdo Mod?

Yo! I-to-tha-NesQuizzy. What's crackin' dude?

Which school are you going to in Boston?

5solas:
Hi Jesoul,

I got banned today while trying to reply to the topic, 'Is Perfection An Enemy To Success?', before then I had created two new threads where I pasted articles. I created another I.D ,d5solas, with the aim of reporting the incident but was promptly banned again. The experience was very painful. About an hour later both I.Ds were unbanned. I have rested the new I.D, did I flout the rules in any way? The new threads are, 'Election' and 'The Pelagian Captivity Of The Church'.

Hey SolasPower

My brother you're not even among the first 1000 people on this site to open a 2nd ID so no worries whatsoever. Unless you were deliberately trying to be mischeivious which you're not. The spambot is unpredictable. Whenever your ID is banned the best bet is to wait it out, usually in about an hour or so it unbans automatically. Any longer you can email the anti-spam address or alert us mods in here with your other ID and we'll take of it. No qualms - Happy posting sir (and sorry the reply is a bit late, I'm not usually online over the weekends).

Wow. Truly impressive pictures.

My people help me laugh . . .

Ron Artest is changing his name to "Metta World Peace" LOL . . . dude. Like. Seriously?

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_dont_lie/post/Ron-Artest-is-petitioning-to-change-his-name-to-?urn=nba-wp5466

It's not the coolest name change in sports history, World B. Free has him beat there, and it's not exactly a novel idea when Chad Ochocinco beats you to the punch a few years before, but Ron Artest's pending name change to -- get ready -- "Metta World Peace" is a real thing. An all-too real thing.

Apparently, Lakers radio reporter John Ireland broke the news on his show earlier Thursday, and TMZ picked it up from there. AP confirmed the madness is true. Metta World Peace, with "Metta" apparently a word derived from the Buddhist religion and the Sanskrit language meaning "friendliness," "benevolence" and all manner of other heartwarming descriptions.

It's the latest move from the kindler, gentler Ron -- er, Metta World Peace. In the 6 1/2 years since he charged into the stands in Detroit to confront someone who had thrown a drink at him, Peace has rebuilt his image through his play with three other teams, won a championship in Los Angeles, auctioned off his championship ring to raise money for mental health research and care, all while staying incident free. He tended to clang quite a few jumpers as the Lakers disappointed and fell in the second round of the playoffs last month, but how can you get angry at a guy with "Peace" on the back of his jersey?

The change is up to you, Los Angeles Superior Court. Give Peace a chance.

(Sorry, you know I had to.)

Funny boy .

Amakaone hasn't been a moderator for more than a year now (I think). Disagreement with the admin on something I heard. Her name is still up there probably because the admin forgot to remove it. Sad though, she's such a cool girl.

boy t:
I am planning a 2 weeks vacation this summer in Paris. i don't know much about the city, any useful guide, eg, apartment hotels, places to visit. your suggestions are highly welcomed.

Oh boy . . . you're going to enjoy your stay in Paris .

Contrary to a few comments I found the French people extremely nice and accomodating. I was greeted by smiles and constant 'bonjours' when when walking into cafes. Restaurant service was fine as well. Even the bus drivers we encountered were very helpful and patient. The hotel? great staff! From my own experience I really have nothing bad to say about the friendliness of the French people.

-Hotel. I stayed in a hotel that was very close to the Lourve, depending on how much you're willing to spend, yes hotels can be expensive. But the location was fantastic! close to all the major city attractions and shopping spots. I think its worth paying a little more as you'll avoid the hassle and cost of getting to the main action. I can't recall street names except Strasborg St. which was pretty much smack dab center city [s]which was where one of the hotel staff directed me to get my hair done[/s] suprise! a couple good african stores there and restaurants. 

-Attractions. The Lourve of course was packed full, I suggest not going during peak hours - and please leave any bags at home! there's an express line if you don't have any bags that need to be searched. Get a free map of the musuem so you're not walking around aimlessly. Tickets if I remember were okay at about 15euros. The Eiffel tower is about an hour stroll from the lourve (very nice stroll with plenty to see along the way) and if you want to get on the elevator to go to the top be sure to wake up at a ridiculously early time to get in line cos ehn  you will be shocked. The longest line I've ever seen in my life and a sea of people. Plenty of concession stands for street food and hustlers trying to sell you everything so be alert.
   The stroll to the eiffel  tower takes you past fantastic attractions such as the Palace of Versailles, Champs Elysees and many others I can't recall the names now. And oh, did I mention you'll be strolling right beside the beautiful river Siene that flows right thru paris on your way to the tower?

-Getting around the city. I didn't use the subways while there but I heard they are notorious for pickpockets so be careful. If you want to get the best feel for the city I suggest walking (my favorite) or taking the bus. Also there are bicycles at rent stops all over the city that you can rent to use to ride around. Simply return it at any rent stop conveniently all over the place.

-Restaurants. Smile smile smile! and you will be suprised at how nice they will treat you and accomodate you as you don't speak their language. I wasn't blown away but the cafes and pastry shops? delicious treats.

-Airport. Under no circumstances give your bags or take fare offers from those touts who attack you at the gate offering 'cheap rides'. They are crooks and will nab unsuspecting travellers. Go directly to the info desk or bus companies with stations either inside or outside the terminal. Even ask them there how much a taxi is meant to cost going to your destination so you don't get fleeced.

-Security. I never once felt scared or hesistant about walking around late night. The city (at least the center/tourist areas) felt very safe, I stayed out very late several times. Shockingly I found out at night not all that glitters is gold . . . there are a good number of homeless people who occupy some sidewalks and bank-fronts over night. Very sad sight. 

If you have any specific questions pls ask, and hopefully I can answer correctly. Or else maybe we can have someone who lives in france as an expert witness come in soon.

omega25red:
@ topic

so how much is the average electric bill in the u.k?

here in yankee in the summer months you pay from $120 and up due to the air condition etc in the winter it's like between $45-$80

You must be on the west coast lol. The costs are reverse here. Heating costs the most up here in Boston. Costs depend on the size/efficiency of your house and type of heating - gas, oil or electric.

@topic, lol. Is it really that bad? can more UK folks come and comment on this?

MyJoe:
Yeah. We like our women big in Africa. Got any problems with that?

LOL . . . no wonder I had to leave, I won't fit at all at all

panafrican:
Hypocrisy. Why is she coming to Africa right now  ? because elections are looming in the USA !!!  this is the truth !

Hmm . . . maybe I'm slow today but I'm failing to see how Michelle's trip to SA actually helps Obama in the 2012 elections? Infact I would think the opposite - another costly trip on the taxpayers dime.

Her  hypocrit  husband and herself  spent  all  their time going to France, and other parts  of Europe after  he was elected.
His trip to Africa was nothing but a insult ,Here is how: he went to  Ghana on a  week end at night fall, wearing a simple shirt as if it was  a  promenade on  a beach.
If South Africa wants  to take pride in this trip, so be it. The rest of  us do not want to naive anymore.  Enough  is enough.

Lol  kai! this boy, you vex oh. lol. What should Obama have worn to Ghana? 3-piece suit? in all that heat? so he can sweating like a goat? Abeg go siddon jor. He's America's president and will travel to countries that concern the interests of Obama. Anything else na jara 

---

@topic. I love Michelle Obama. Pure black woman, smart, strong, sophisticated & doesn't take no nonsense from noborri.

MyJoe:
Thanks for the above because it brings out my point very well. In fact, when I mentioned Stanley “Tookie” Williams, what you wrote above is exactly what I was thinking.

Now let’s look at the “degrees of murder” and why I believe a comprehensive abolition of the death penalty is the way to go.

First, there are people for whom we are not sure that they actually committed the crime. A guy commits murder and makes it look like someone else did it. In fact, there is a picture of “someone else” holding the gun. Or the prosecutor argues that since the victim died at three thirty and it has been clearly demonstrated that no one else entered the premises between 2.30 and 4pm, he did it. The jury agrees. Most capital offence cases fall into this category – no confession, no video. We believe they did it, but we don’t know. Stanley Williams’ case fell into the category. For you, we should not apply the death penalty in this case. I agree.

My knowledge on Tookie's case is pedestrian. And I agree with you - for someone who knows what they are doing - framing someone else for a crime can be done. This is a very good point. I do think that forensic science is getting more and more sophisticated . . . although like all things if you're a poor man and cannot afford a good lawyer and top of the line experts to refute supposed evidence 

Second, there are people who confess, plead extenuating or mitigating circumstances and demonstrate their remorse. For these people, you are torn, but feel the law should be applied, anyway. I see it differently. If you re-read what you wrote, you will observe that you used the word “unfortunately” in describing the act of showing remorse on the part of a willful killer. Maybe it was an error or you meant unfortunately in the sense that it is only coming after the crime, but I think it demonstrates the revenge feelings behind the death penalty. A life for a life, full stop. He killed someone, so he should be killed, full stop. Tookie, for instance, devoted his life to turning kids off crime and serving humanity and only God knows by how many the lives he saved outnumber those he allegedly killed (he never confessed). And how many more he would have saved had he been allowed to continue the good work. Can you see why I think what is at work here is revenge, and not justice?

Those words self . . . half the time they are like jelly, they can be interpreted so many ways. For me the demonstation of genuine remorse is extremely important and I know personally, I would forgive. In the eyes of the Law, I am honestly not sure that it is sufficient - heck, I know nothing he can do will be sufficient to address his crime.

Can we reward good behavior after the fact? If I steal a million dollars and then dedicate the money to the poor, does it partially soften my crime? make it more palatable? less egregious? I don't have a definite opinion on this - in the eyes of the Law I still committed the crime. In Tookie's case, the governor could've issued a pardon . . . but honestly and from a strictly legal (or it is judicial? abi criminal?) standpoint, I equally don't see his decision not to as wrong as he is bound by the Law.

^This is another good point against the DP, and honestly, I can't give you a better answer than the above.

But if justice means giving people a punishment commensurate with their crime then the death penalty, as practised in Nigeria and the US, still does not quite measure up. I mean, what is someone enters a house, massacre the men and violation the women before strangling them? Or if someone kills someone by pouring raw acid on them, does the court order a corresponding punishment? No. He gets hanged, injected or sent to an electric chair. Now, the Iranians who will pour acid on the fellow believe that is justice – before Allah and man! Tribal men in Pakistan will wipe out the entire family of the first scenario I have – to them that is justice before Allah and man! But I guess the Americans will claim these are “barbaric” and insist that their own method which gives a punishment that is far less than the crime in this case is “justice”.

Haba MyJoe lol. Justice doesn't necessarily mean "do me, I do you" now  . As I understand it, it is merely punishment (however the Law has chosen to define it - and the Jury of their peers chooses to sentence them) for a crime.

Third, there are those who confess, make a victory sign and spit on the legal system the way someone around here spits on any post she doesn’t quite like – many here will remember Monday Osunbor of the Anini gang. You believe these ones should be sent straight to the gallows, in fact, the only problem you have with the death penalty in cases of this nature is that it is not swift enough. In my opinion, do these people deserve to die? Yes. Should we kill them? No.

That is the heart of the matter ain't it. Maybe when I'm wiser and more seasoned like you I will believe otherwise

1. We run the risk of killing innocents by having laws that allow us to kill these kinds of people.
2. He should live and suffer the consequences of his crime in a prison, get a chance to reflect on his life and choose to make amends.
3. By killing him the state desensitizes itself, loses its capacity for compassion and becomes blood-guilty. They shoot suspected armed robbers at Nigerian police stations – this has created a whole lot of problems, policemen who go around rounding up people and shooting them.

I agree with #1 (except where guilt is beyond that shadow). #2? for me depends on the crime and response of the perp. #3 - you're talking about Naija again lol. Wipe that one off oh! Jungle justice is never right - except you're Jack Bauer on 24.

When the state of New Mexico, I think it was New Mexico, came up with a modified form of the death penalty, applying it only to those who killed law enforcement officers or witnesses to a crime, I applauded it. But when I thought long and hard about it, I realised that the problems associated with the death penalty have not gone away with all this modification. NM has since abolished it altogether, I believe.

Even me self, I don't get the hoopla over 'killing law enforcement officials' and why it is more heinous than the average joe.

It would be impossible to apply the death penalty exclusively to the third group because “laws are not created with wiggle room - or else they won't be laws”. No matter how much we try, there is simply no method of ensuring that only the guilty get executed. Once the law says “murderers”, all convicted murderers will get the gallows. The only path of compassion that safeguards those innocently accused and convicted is to put them all in jail. A jail is bad enough, but it does not have the quality of finality that the death penalty has. In my opinion, there is something amiss when humans who can’t bring someone to life executes someone.

But yes there is! There is no dispute on the DC sniper is there? that teenager in Mont Vernon as well, there's no dispute there either. Thankfully the law doesn't go 'life for life'. Its the jury and judge that have a say in the sentence - so the power does not rest with one man.

I think the real problem with the West is that they have gone too soft on criminals –this applies in the US where they have the death penalty and Western Europe where they don’t. An enforcer for a drug cartel gets caught in the act. Rather than lock him up and throw the keys away, some judge grants bail and he goes off to kill some witness as soon as he is released. Lock them up for life – no parole. But what you find is the parole boards puting hardened criminals back into the streets and everyone is at risk. In places you can simply buy your way out at the police station. These are the areas that need to be tightened up.

10000000% on point! Abeg please repeat this on the steps on Capitol Hill. They're busy playing golf instead of plugging our streets.

That scenario actually raises an entirely different issue – the extent to which we will go to prevent a crime. The answer is not hard. I, for one, am not in support of the Nigerian government negotiating with Boko Haram. These guys have killed law enforcement officers and clearly intend to kill more. Should we start negotiating they are likely to kill more policemen while negotiations are going on – not even the Pakistanis have seen the ferocity and frequency with which these guys now carry out their attacks. The only way to stop them is to fight them in the war they themselves have declared. Killing someone in a fight of this nature is one thing. But it is a different thing when someone is arrested and handcuffs are placed on his hands and feet and he is then shot. The purpose then, is no longer to prevent a bandit from killing your daughter, but to avenge your daughter’s death

Question sir. Have you seen the movie "A Time To Kill"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Time_to_Kill_(film)
If yes, what are your thoughts? (see me, na movies me I dey recommend  )

MyJoe:
I understand. I was merely re-stating how the legal system actually does it.

Yeah I got it too, was just trying to state my own 

You mean where we actually know, like Lawrence Anini or John Alan Mohammed.

Yup. The DC sniper guy I know. I had to google the Anini guy you mentioned (don't laugh at me oh ).   

I see the point. I share these sentiments. Never doubted them their validity. It’s hard to ague against them.

Ah but you're presenting such a good case for the other side. It's good for me to hear and consider these things and perhaps not be so gung-ho all the time 

The death penalty does not deter crime, it has been known to fuel it – there’s a lot of Pro and Con text on that about and I have found one side far more compelling than the other over the years.

Fuel it? Hmm . . . I'm not so sure. I think like you said there's lots of pro and con arguments that have been put forth, and I would argue that it is pretty darn hard to determine either way.

And most cells certainly aren’t comfortable. An American judge a couple of years back came up with the clever idea of constantly playing. . . wait for it, classical music for inmates! He realized that most inmates hated the cool sounding stuff and hated jail as a result! On a more serious note, I understand some US federal jails are not that bad, but with the rate at which aggressive commercial interests are using prisoners for hard labour in America nowadays I won’t pray for a US jail. Besides you have got to see places like Parchman in Mississippi to believe that “hell is real” is no idle talk. I won’t bore you with details of what I saw when I had an opportunity to meet robbery suspects, many of whom have since been killed, years back at someplace I was quite reliably informed was a hotel compared to a standard Nigerian jail. I do understand that the prison system is flawed, what with AK-47 and M-16-wielding inmates defying soldiers in their fortified cells in Venezuela as we speak here. But the problems with the prison system border largely on sabotage and corruption and are much easier to deal with than that of killing innocents.

Wait a second . . .  so that means that scene in the Shawshank Redemption (I hope you've seen this movie) did just the opposite?

Wow, first hand info. You've been to a US prison. I get my info from watching marathon prison reality shows on SpikeTV & TruTV . . . and sir I do not doubt the deplorable conditions in many prisons. AK-47 armed inmates in Venezuela? Then why are they still inmates? lol. Oh, there's this PBS documentary titled "Frontline: Battle for Haiti" . . . if any prison qualifies as hell, it will be the ones in Haiti. I came close to tears. Especially when many of the inmates were simply plucked off the street and thrown in for yrs without ever going to court, so bad there's no space to even lie down, they sleep standing I cannot even talk.

But sir, I see where you're coming from. It puts a whole nother spin on things when you actually get to meet people on the row . . . it becomes real. I have only mixed company with Juvenile inmates at the transition jail not far from where I live. One time I'm sitting at the back and someone yells out my name from the crowd of orange overalls . . . it was a kid I had been good friends with but lost touch how the heck did he end up there? suddenly it became just a little more personal and they seemed a little more human.

One of these days, the Motley Gang of Nairaland Mugabists is going to come for you at the FA section!

at the risk of being called 'white man ____' 'sellout' etc etc? absolutely!

^Lol. The way you guys have all been dissertating on the ins and out of wine and fermentation and alcoholic drinks - complete with Enigma's anecdotal droplet up there . . . hmm  I comment my reserve .

oscartawn1:
WARNING:

For all those speaking ill about men of God! See what's written:

"1Ch 16:22 Saying, Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm.
Ps 105:15 Saying, Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm."

Saul was after the life of David and he forced David to run into caves, (cos he'd kill David at the slightest opportunity) and live in exile but this was what David said when he had a "golden" opportunity to take the life of Saul:
I Sam 24: 4-6 "And the men of David said unto him, Behold the day of which the LORD said unto thee, Behold, I will deliver thine enemy into thine hand, that thou mayest do to him as it shall seem good unto thee. Then David arose, and cut off the skirt of Saul's robe privily.

And it came to pass afterward, that David's heart smote him, because he had cut off Saul's skirt.

And he said unto his men, The LORD forbid that I should do this thing unto my master, the LORD'S anointed, to stretch forth mine hand against him, seeing he is the anointed of the LORD."


Mariam and Aaron weren't very fortunate when they spoke against Moses because of his "choice of wife".
He that has an ear let him hear!

[size=23pt] WARNING: DO NOT TWIST SCRIPTURE TO MAKE IT SAY WHAT IT DOESN'T SAY! [/size]

2 Pet 3:16 "Speaking of these things in all of his letters. Some of his comments are hard to understand, and those who are ignorant and unstable have twisted his letters to mean something quite different, just as they do with other parts of Scripture. And this will result in their destruction

You're not the only one who knows how to make big fonts.

@InesQor's long response . . .

  www.nairaland.com/attachments/180447_ROTFLMAO_gif3d0c775232c7f27cf80592785b9635b6 www.nairaland.com/attachments/180447_ROTFLMAO_gif3d0c775232c7f27cf80592785b9635b6 www.nairaland.com/attachments/180447_ROTFLMAO_gif3d0c775232c7f27cf80592785b9635b6 www.nairaland.com/attachments/180447_ROTFLMAO_gif3d0c775232c7f27cf80592785b9635b6 www.nairaland.com/attachments/180447_ROTFLMAO_gif3d0c775232c7f27cf80592785b9635b6 www.nairaland.com/attachments/180447_ROTFLMAO_gif3d0c775232c7f27cf80592785b9635b6 www.nairaland.com/attachments/180447_ROTFLMAO_gif3d0c775232c7f27cf80592785b9635b6 www.nairaland.com/attachments/180447_ROTFLMAO_gif3d0c775232c7f27cf80592785b9635b6 www.nairaland.com/attachments/180447_ROTFLMAO_gif3d0c775232c7f27cf80592785b9635b6
gosh, I don laff well today 

Enigma:
Nne, you know I was going to make a post asking abi whether you mixed my posts up with that of someone else (and "heaven forfend" ---- then I thought better of it and deleted it before hitting the click button.

thank God oh. I wouldn't want anything ruining my chances with Enigmalet  

PS my post about Billy Graham that I referred to was actually made in late 2005 (I just checked)

Re Steve Chalke, he used to be more frequent on regular UK TV (including popular/populist programmes like Songs of Praise) years ago and is well known in UK Evangelical Circles.

I know nothing about this guy as well . . . infact this whole emerging thing . . . dat's why I just dey read and learn.

Pastor AIO:
Exactly!  This is something that is just happening and there is no one that is 'leading' us here on NL to ask those questions.  I was not even aware that there was such a thing as the 'emerging conversation' until about a couple of weeks ago.  I thought that I was all alone.  Well . . . not all alone but you get what I mean.  I didn't realise that it was prominent enough for people to give it a name.  But I was aware that there was something brewing.  I just didn't know to what extent.

Ha! So does Baba Junior Tonye realize that he too is unknowingly part of this 'emerging church' - especially since he opened a thread like this not long ago  :
My Fear For Pentecostalism. . .will She Last?
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-564033.0.html

^In-law, got it. Sorry just put ur name there first in front of 'and others' randomly.

Oyaa . . . Tonye and others

^my brother sorry jor. Yes, its sarcasm. See here: https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-695106.32.html#msg8562249

^Phew! okay I'm not crazy. lol.

Pastor AIO:
Thank you for that observation, JeSoul. The establishment that they are all mostly attacking, I believe, is the Emergent Village. I think watching the Mark Driscoll link on my 3rd post will make the situation a lot clearer. This is not a single monolithic movement, though I suspect that many of it's critics wish it were so.

Gbam! that is what I thought you were saying. And from what I have been thinking you're saying - it would even appear that we (with all these online discussions and questioning of the established 'church' denominations/practices) are all part of this emerging church? (pls tell me if I'm going off).

kokoye:
So my question is: why do the same people who live in and out of the bible try to pile up wealth and riches here on earth?

Kokoye of a guy, what kind of question is this ehn?

Have you not read in your bible that christians own the world? You're not piling up riches but merely reclaiming your inheritance in Christ. You better go quick to Aso rock and remind Goodluck that he is sitting in your mansion. Go to the French embassy and remind them the coast of southern france is yours and you're there to collect your land title. Central bank? na you get am. They're just holding it and piling it up until you come and claim it. Don't go to NASA sha and ask for certificate there - it is only the world that is ours - I don't think it extends to space and other planets.

Some appropriate bible verses:

Mark 13:14 "But when you see the abomination of desolation standing where it ought not to be (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains."


Proverbs 23:4-5 "Do not wear yourself out to get rich; have the wisdom to show restraint. Cast but a glance at riches, and they are gone, for they will surely sprout wings and fly off to the sky like an eagle".


Matthew 6:19-21 "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.


1 Timothy 6:17-19 "Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life".


Matthew 6:24, 33 "No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.

I've been following the thread and will continue. But quick comment . . .
Am I missing something, or does it appear the:

"Emerging Church" as a concept, new approach gaining traction around the globe in independent minds [/i]Pastor_LIO (I think) is talking about
is different from the

[i]"Emerging Church" as an already existing establishment/group complete with leaders that Enigma and others are talking about?

Nuclearboy your scenario is . . . lol.

I would actually treat very differently people who were impaired at the time of their crimes. Drug addicts, mentally ill, emtionally unstable people etc I think should be judged and sentenced differently from people who merely took a stroll out and decided to kill someone for the heck of it.

MyJoe:
It is taken for granted in modern criminal jurisprudence in many places, including Nigeria and the US, that guilt is to be “proved beyond reasonable doubt”. (By the way, it is "beyond reasonable doubt", not "beyond a shadow of doubt" - they mean different things.) So what I was referring to is the well-known fact that in spite of safeguards written into legislations, a few innocent people still get executed. Right now, I don’t have the time to dig up US cases where people spent years on death row only to be found innocent. In some cases it is the same police officer who investigated the offence and advised the state to seek the death penalty that goes through the process of the getting the “felon” released. A rise in such cases forced some US states to put a "moratorium" on the application of the death penalty.

I only support the application of the death penalty where it is indeed beyond [b]a shadow [/b]of doubt - not just reasonable.

 Your argument is strong and compelling and I do agree 1000% in the famous saying "it is better for a guilty man to go free, than an innocent man spend a day behind bars". I strongly agree that there are few things worse than innocent men imprisoned. So circle the wagon back to my first quote above - I only support it when the case is irrefutable - and usually when there is a confession involved, video evidence, independently confirmed DNA evidence from pro and anti parties etc. Eye witness testimonies are notoriously unreliable and subjective so I place little value on those in capital offense cases.

  Let me present to you this case that happened in my backyard few yrs ago . . .

- A quiet evening in Mont Vernon, NH. 4 teenagers randomly pick a house. Armed with a machete & knife, they break in and brutally stab and slash and gash a mother to death as she lay sleeping in bed. Then turn and apply the same treatment to her 11-yr old daughter - stab, slash and gash her with a machete and knife (dad was away on a business trip). They leave them to their death. They take/steal absolutely nothing. Their only goal was to kill whoever was in the house. Miraculously the little girl survived, but will live a life terribly scarred. They're caught and brought to court. During the trial, none of them denies anything, they confess their only aim was to simply kill. 3 of them expressed regret and remorse - but the leader of the gang laughed out loud in court several times, relishing the attention. He even gleamed and smiled in pride as gory details were recounted and presented. 

I honestly want to know why such a bastard (pls forgive my choice of words) should be allowed to live? People who have shown wanton, lascivious, devilish, reckless, remorseless care for human life - do not deserve to have that same courtesy shown to them. By committing such grave, incomprehensible crimes, they give up the right to be treated as valuable human beings.

Maybe I'm merciless. But my mother returning home one evening with her car riddled with bullet holes from a robbery attempt was enough to impact my young mind more than any philosophical or hypothetical musings. I can still remember putting my small fingers into the holes, trying to comprehend what have happened. Evil must be made to face the music for their crimes. Future murderers must be shown that there are grave and severe consequences for taking another human life. Why should they sit in a comfortable jail cell (paid for by me btw) to live out their days while their victims lie 6 feet under?

I do understand that there are 'degrees of murder' - we should not be rounding them all up and lining em up for the firing squad  - but killers like in my example above, I fully support the DP.

I don’t even want to talk about China where they simply pick you up, torture you into confessing to the crime and on that confession sentence you to death, or Iran where, finding nothing in the law books to accuse an undesirable of, they will say “he has offended God” and give him the death penalty. The US and other first world countries have cases of innocent people who got whacked because the justice system is imperfect, as it is run by mortals who only got five senses. This has not been addressed. I doubt it can. And for me, this is a major problem with the death penalty and the only way to solve it is to abolish the death penalty completely. But my complete rejection of the death penalty goes beyond that. Which is why I think states like New Mexico have tried, but not enough.

Ah! surely you must know how I feel about China and co . . . those people execute people for looking at them the wrong way, or using the president's toilet. When I say DP, I'm refering to how its practiced in developed and generally 'moral/reasonable' societies - not jungles like many countries in Africa and North Korea and co.

You see how heartless the death penalty is when you observe cases like Tookie Williams. He had obviously turned a new leaf. He served the community. He insisted he did not do that particular crime. He had become a model citizen. But, no. The society's crave for revenge had to be satisfied.

Revenge is not the right word sir, more like justice.

For a person who exhibits genuine remorse - I am a bit torn. Only because I still believe in forgiveness and moving on. But at the same time Laws are not created with wiggle room - or else they won't be laws. They cannot be applied dynamically and subjectively on a case-by-case basis or should I say reversed/not reversed depending on the future remorse of the perpetrator. If the law says you commit murder, and you will be subject to death - it is your own choice to ¹ leave the society ² obey the law or suffer the consequences - people who chose the latter and unfortunately turned over a new leaf after the crime, must still suffer the consequences.

MyJoe:
Just BTW, did you read Dostoevsky novel of that title? I think it gives a lot of insight into crime and its repercussions and how society may approach the matter of punishment.

Nah I haven't read it . . . and with the amount of books piling up for me that you mentioned . . . You must've consumed about a billion books sir.

[quote author=m_nwankwo link=topic=692895.msg8561180#msg8561180 date=1308660322]Thanks for your kind words. It is essential that we believe that which our souls sense to be the Truth. Based on your present experience and insight, you cannot see why death penalty is wrong especially when the criminal himself have no regard or respect for the life of others. It will be wrong for me or anybody else to persuade you otherwise. Thus, your present position on death penalty is in sync with that which is alive within you and you should keep it that way. I am always very happy when fellow human beings give expression to that which they genuinely believe and even when I disagree with the belief, I know the person is on the right path. As always stay blessed my sister.[/quote]Mehn . . . your method of interaction is most unique - and refreshing . . . and on point. Not only does eliminate the 'need' to be 'right' and the constant tussling of egos, it also (at least for me) subtly nugdes one to [i]continue thinking [/i]and pondering these things. It leaves plenty of room for the evolution of beliefs . . . which is something we should all be constantly doing.

May God continue to richly bless you sir!