There are certainly some cases where there is no doubt as to who did it, but in any case where something other than emperical evidence is used, I beleive that the benefit of the doubt must be given.
This was a moving tale about a man out of his time.
No matter where you go, there you are!
Unfortunately, today a true life sentence is the exception, rather than the rule. The majority of killers have some avenue of legal release in their future. Even if they have been given a life sentence "without parole", it's just legal jargon and can be circumvented in most cases. If real, literal, non-reversible life sentences (meaning until the criminal dies in incarceration) were the rule, rather than the exception, I would go along with that instead of execution. Until that happens (and it never will because criminal justice keeps getting more and more lenient, especially in leftist-run places like California), the only certain way to deter a murderer from doing further harm is to execute him.
share