This case has been to the Supreme Court, what, twice before.
The crime took place a lifetime ago. The cost to society of trying to enforce a punishment that does nothing to deter crime is enormous.
And here the determination to proceed, in light of credible evidence suggesting the conviction was wrongful, is based on politics.
Take a man's life not because of justice but because it would be seen as weak to walk away from an execution.
Canada was wise to end the death penalty almost 50 years ago.
4 comments:
22 years is a lifetime ago? For what, a chihuahua?
Keeping Olson alive and giving him his priviliges isn't (wasn't) exactly cheap either.
A main difference was one of proof -- no one thought Olson was innocent. Regardless, Davis is dead now so it's all moot
Olson was able to taunt his victims from jail and autograph books for sale. THAT is Canada's "justice" system at its best.
I see that as a reason to reduce the number of appeals and to speed up the execution. I don't think there was any serious suggestion this guy was not guilty.
When proof is certain and the crime is sufficient, like Olson, we should use the death penalty. I'd like to see a referendom on that.
Post a Comment