If it is known unequivocably that he did it (photographs, multiple
witnesses, multiple DNA traces (in more than just flaked skin
quantities)), then not only is he a mad dog, but he is a mad dog without
integrity. With the level of fraud, dishonesty, rudeness, and
callousness in this society today, it would take making killing someone
for cutting in line homicide in the public interest a justified defense
before people start to treat each other with respect for space, privacy,
etc. Its all to do with the concept of mercy. If we now you did it, and
admit to it, accept what ever punishment is deemed necessary, then you
are worthy of redemption much more than the guy who continues to deny it
in the face of overwhelming evidence.
>
> (see also the parole hearing in _The Shawshank Redemption_)
>
I've seen it. As I recall, the guy who escaped was innocent. If you
remember his case, his tire tracks were found outside the house of the
scene of the crime, he had no alibi, and was drinking. There was no
enuequivocal evidence, only loose circumstantial evidence.
-- TANSTAAFL!!! Michael Lorrey ------------------------------------------------------------ mailto:retroman@tpk.net Inventor of the Lorrey Drive Agent Lorrey@ThePentagon.com Silo_1013@ThePentagon.com http://www.tpk.net/~retroman/Mikey's Animatronic Factory My Own Nuclear Espionage Agency (MONEA) MIKEYMAS(tm): The New Internet Holiday Transhumans of New Hampshire (>HNH) ------------------------------------------------------------ #!/usr/local/bin/perl-0777---export-a-crypto-system-sig-RC4-3-lines-PERL @k=unpack('C*',pack('H*',shift));for(@t=@s=0..255){$y=($k[$_%@k]+$s[$x=$_ ]+$y)%256;&S}$x=$y=0;for(unpack('C*',<>)){$x++;$y=($s[$x%=256]+$y)%256; &S;print pack(C,$_^=$s[($s[$x]+$s[$y])%256])}sub S{@s[$x,$y]=@s[$y,$x]}