The death penalty is not the problem, it's the idiots who decide to execute the wrong ones. We just had a case here in Ontario, where a high ranking military man (real sicko) murdered two women, broke into women's houses stole underwear and modelled them, while taking pictures of himself and then prompty confessed to over 80 separate charges. So they have his pictures, D.N.A. and confession. You tell me why we should foot the bill for this S.O.B. to live in relative luxury for the rest of his life, when we could just snuff the bastard and bring real closure for his victims and families.
Oh yes, and the confession is on tape, devoid of any coercion (the interrogator was always honest, friendly and respectful throughout), a detailed confession including where the body was (the police didn't know until he told them), and one murder on tape, matching in detail what he said he'd done in his long, detailed confession.
Now the likelihood that he was just delusional during the confession, that all the tapes and pictures are fabricated, that his DNA was placed on each victim by another who happened to own the same kind of vehicle and boots, and that he just happened to have the rope, and knew where the body was to be found as he'd described it is highly unlikely to say the least.
All too often, there is an iron clad case that is not iron clad. Science is flawed the
investigation is botched and still the jury listens because they want to believe the
system is doing its job. We are starting to see the problem is not one of the last
few year, these things have been happening for decades and people didn't know.
How many people have been executed for crimes they did not commit. The
answer is, we may never know, so justice was done, how can we say that about
a lot of cases and how do we go about clearing the names of those who might
be innocent.
We will never have a perfect system. There will always be innocents in prison and criminals roaming the streets. The issue to to come a close to a perfect system as possible based on the technology and methods curently available.
The police and prosecutors NEED to look at and honestly think that their "suspect" is guilty, Whereas the judge and/or Jury NEED to think of the accused as being innocent and they are to be convinced otherwise beyond a doubt.
Have you seen an excerpt from the Williams interview? I don't know if all interrogators are the same, but it was clear from the interview that Smyth was not trying to prove Williams guilty. In fact if anything, he was trying to help Williams by providing DNA and a boot print to help direct suspicion away from him. It's not Smyth's fault that it had the opposite effect. He even asked Williams to please explain these things away, hoping that Williams could put some doubts in his mind. Instead, Wiliams could only sit there and say that he didn't know what to say. Well, again, not Smyth's fault.
I can't imagine anyone wanting to put an innocent man behind bars. No matter how much Smyth was sure Williams was the culprit, it's clear from the video that he was still trying to make sure of this, and I'd imagine precisely to satisfy his conscience that he's not going to arrest an innocent man.
So while I can't speak for other police interrogators, it's clear that Smyth was just trying to get at the truth, not to find Williams guilty. And that just shows his humanity, that he does not get enjoyment from arresting someone and potentially ruining his life, but rather from solving a case, arresting someone being merely a necessary consequence of solving the case.
