Archive through 08 December 2002

** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **

Archive through 08 December 2002

Casebook Message Boards: General Discussion: Miscellaneous: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT OR NOT FOR JACK?: Archive through 08 December 2002

Author: Howard Brown Wednesday, 04 December 2002 - 11:47 pm
Dear Posters: I've just read a story about Fred and Rose West,who have to be 2 of the most loathsome people ever. I also remembered that you British folks don't have Capital Punishment...I was wondering what YOU would be in favor for,dear British citizen( and,of course,us Yanks..),had they caught JtR back in 1888 or now in 2002. Should he have swung from Tyburn Gallows or been a ward of the Empire/state,recieving free cable t.v. and conjugal visits from Big Melvin?.....Yours truly is a big,big, fan of the Hot Seat. How about you? Warden Brown
Author: Stewart P Evans Thursday, 05 December 2002 - 02:24 am
He certainly wouldn't have 'swung from Tyburn gallows' as executions there ended in 1783. In 1888 executions were conducted out of the view of the public, inside prisons. Executions for the London area were conducted at Newgate.
Author: Howard Brown Thursday, 05 December 2002 - 06:53 am
Thanks,Mr. Evans....As you can see,I'm an English history buff ! I appreciate the correction...your friend,....How
Author: Esther Wilson Thursday, 05 December 2002 - 09:24 am
If Jack had been caught I would have been in favor of him getting the death penalty. Esther
Author: Richard P. Dewar Thursday, 05 December 2002 - 10:01 am
Hi Esther, Count me as a vote in the opposite direction. I don't have any sympathy for the Whitechapel murderer, I simply oppose the death penalty in all circumstances. Though no doubt, I agree that someone convicted of the Whitechapel murders would have been executed - whether he did the crime or not. Rich
Author: Richard P. Dewar Thursday, 05 December 2002 - 10:04 am
Hi Howard, If memory serves correctly, Britain gave up the death penalty shortly after a convicted killer in a celebrated case was put to death - only later to find out that actually some other person had done the crime. Rich
Author: John Hacker Thursday, 05 December 2002 - 10:11 am
I'm pretty much with Rich on this one. I got no pity for Jack, but I oppose the death penalty on general principle. Regards, John Hacker
Author: Garen Ewing Thursday, 05 December 2002 - 03:02 pm
I'm also against it. The real Jack the Ripper certainly deserves death (I don't want to be the judge, though!) but how certain would we be? If a 'fantasy' court convicted Walter Sickert (prosecutor: Patricial Cornwell), should he die? Same goes for all our other friendly neighbourhood suspects. How many times has the wrong man gone to the chair? For me, it's not worth it. Let them sit in their own diseased heads on their own! I'm just glad I don't have to judge (my two jury episodes for assault and stolen goods were difficult enough!) All the best fellows - Garen.
Author: Paula Wolff Thursday, 05 December 2002 - 10:05 pm
Hi all, I would vote to hang Jack IF the evidence is conclusive and beyond reasonable doubt. I am from TX and we do have the death penalty, big time. But then we also shoot presidents and burn Branch Davidians so.... I do believe in the death penalty. The victim had no choice, no hearing, no jury, no one to plead his or her case. My heart does not bleed too heavily for those that take human life by choice (except in war). Thanks and know this is not popular. Paula
Author: Garen Ewing Friday, 06 December 2002 - 03:50 am
Hello again, I can understand why people support the death penalty. I've always thought 'what if someone I loved was murdered' then how would I feel? But to me it is still wrong. Where does it all end? It's a worrying aspect of human nature that we want to kill, and something like the death penalty smacks of revenge alot more than it does of justice. The Washington snipers for instance... I didn't like the way certain states seemed to be clamouring to be the first to want to put them to death. In this case they surely do have the right culprits, but again, it all seems more like revenge, a rather frightening condition. As I say, I'm just glad I'm not in the position to make any decisions on this point! I'm in no way an expert on the complicated issues surrounding this subject. With Jack the Ripper behind bars for life, what would psychologists have been able to learn from him, rather than just disposing of him as quickly as possible? Maybe nothing... Respect to all - Garen.
Author: Guy Hatton Friday, 06 December 2002 - 04:57 am
Richard - The case you are referring to as that of the hanged man later being found to be innocent wouldn't be that of James Hanratty, would it? For some considerable time after Hanratty's execution in 1962 for the so-called 'A6 murder' of Michael Gregsten and the rape and shooting of Gregsten's mistress Valerie Storey, it was thought that the conviction was highly unsafe. A slew of circumstantial evidence pointed towards his innocence, questions were raised about the conduct of the trial, and more than a dozen witnesses came forward over a period of time to confirm his alibi that he was more than 200 miles away from the crime scene at the time of the murder. Hanratty's family, backed by journalists such as Paul Foot and high-profile sympathisers including John Lennon and Yoko Ono, conducted a lengthy campaign to overturn the conviction. It seemed as though success was within their reach until DNA testing based on samples from Hanratty's remains (which were exhumed for the purpose) and crime scene material including Valerie Storey's soiled underwear, suggested, apparently against all odds, that Hanratty was actually guilty after all. Nonetheless, I would still oppose the death penalty, on the grounds that the risk of executing an innocent person outweighs any perceived benefit. Of course, if the Whitechapel Murderer had been caught and convicted, the punishment at that time would certainly have been hanging. All the Best Guy
Author: Caroline Morris Friday, 06 December 2002 - 06:08 am
Hi Paula, You say your heart does not bleed too heavily for those that take human life by choice. But anyone in favour of the death penalty is also in favour of taking human life by choice. 'Thou shalt not kill' unless members of the government say it's ok has always sounded a bit dodgy to me. Is it the right thing to do, and a good thing to do, or if considerations like cost were no object, would it be preferable to keep convicted killers away from the public for the rest of their natural, but at least try to learn all we can from them (if anything)? Good weekend all. Love, Caz
Author: Paula Wolff Friday, 06 December 2002 - 08:11 am
Hi Caz, When you check out the commandment"Thou shalt not kill", it comes down to cold, premeditated murder, not manslaughter, etc. That is when I say that 12 good men(etc.) and true are given the responsibility of deciding whether society should suffer the person to live or die. Justice is blind if I remember correctly. When prisons get to the point of capacity as they have here, just build more?? Pretty soon the whole country is a prison. I do not like the "shows" that go on outside a prison when a killer is to die. He or she should have the dignity left them to die without a brouhaha going on outside either in favor of killing the guy or not doing so. There is a time and place for the death penalty if it is used right. God, if you look in the Bible where He is, required death for certain crimes. And yet He said Thou shalt not kill. Paradox? Nope, intent. Truly He can judge the heart better than we, but we as citizens of a country that is free are given these rights by a constitution. There are enough very strange people out there to analyse without having murderers in particular being picked to study. Many escape the death penalty even if there is a chance to use it in a case. I know I sound like a Texas redneck but I do believe in justice. Mercy is something else again and not for the courts to decide. Thanks for the message. I respect all the messages I have seen you post and know you to be an intelligent and caring person, so I appreciate your insight. See ya, Paula
Author: Richard P. Dewar Friday, 06 December 2002 - 09:15 am
Hi Guy, I am actually referring to the Evans/Christie murder case. Evans and Christie lived separately in the same cul de sac. Evans was convicted and sentenced to death for murdering his wife. Evans, an uneducated man unable to read who some believe was mildly retarded, claimed that Christie had offered to slip his wife an abortion medicine and it actually killed his wife. Frightened that he would be implicated in murder, he with Christie hid the body. The court ruled differently. Evans was convicted. Subsequently, Christie, a career criminal, sexual deviant with a violent temper, murdered his own wife and confessed to the crime. The case is still hotly contested - but some believe the chances of two different men murdering their wives in the same apartment complex is too remote. Many believe that it was actually Christie who murdered both women and that Evans may have been innocent. Christie was convicted for his wife's murder and sentenced to death. Rich
Author: stephen miller Friday, 06 December 2002 - 09:44 am
Hi Richard The Evans/ Christie case happened in late 40's and then went on into the early 50's when Christie was apprehended. Evans was given a posthumous pardon in the 60's I believe Someone here should know the exact dates for these events as I am not at home at the moment I can't check for you. The UK suspended the death penalty in 1965 finally abolishing it in 1970 The last two to hang in UK were Owen and Evans both for the same murder in 1965 someone please correct me if I am wrong. all the best steve
Author: Timsta Friday, 06 December 2002 - 10:38 am
Hi all. There's a great movie about this case, called '10 Rillington Place', with Richard Attenborough as Christie and John Hurt as Evans. It is available on VHS but scandalously isn't out on DVD yet. And yes, Evans was posthumously pardoned in the 60s, but I forget exactly when. Regards Timsta
Author: Richard P. Dewar Friday, 06 December 2002 - 10:50 am
Hi Stephen, You are correct about many of the dates you cite. Beryl Evans and her daughter were murdered in Nov 1949 - the husband/father was tried, convicted and executed for murder in 1950. The husband had maintained that Christie was actually the killer. In December of 1950, Christie's wife went missing. Subsequently, her body and that of 3 others were discovered. Christie was arrested for the crimes in 1953. He confessed to killing Beryl Evans. He was executed in 1953. After Christie's trial, an inquiry was conducted. The official inquiry ruled that Evans had rightfully been convicted of murder. Over the ensuing years, many writers researched the case and several implored for new inquiries - claiming the initial one had been corrupt or botched. Eventually, another inquiry was conducted in 1965. That inquiry posthumously cleared Evans of murdering his daughter. Interestingly, Evans though accused of murdering his wife was never charged. The final inquiry did not clear Evans of murdering his wife. Some believe that this controversy was one of the major factors that led to the suspension and eventual abolition of the death penalty in Britain. Regards, Richard
Author: Richard P. Dewar Friday, 06 December 2002 - 10:55 am
Hi all, I apologize for the clumsy wording of my post which stated that shortly after an allegedly innocent person was convicted of a crime, the death penalty was overturned. What I intended to write was that shortly after a ruling that an innocent man had been convicted and executed, the death penalty was abolished. That in itself is somewhat inaccurate. The inquiry into the Evans case commenced in 1965 - the same year the death penalty was suspended. The ruling of the inquiry was released in 1966. In any case, I think its fair to state that this case was a contributing factor in the abolition of the death penalty in Britain. Regards, Richard
Author: Caroline Morris Friday, 06 December 2002 - 11:09 am
Hi Paula, Thanks for the kind words. Well, yes, I believe we have to build more prisons as long as society goes on producing more and more criminals, whether they are killers or not. What's the alternative? Bring in the death penalty for lesser crimes because the prisons we have are full up? I do understand why people feel that cold premeditated, but lawful killing is a just way to deal with those who do it unlawfully. But if it was left to me to do it, I know I couldn't, so I'm not sure about expecting a fellow human being to do it on my behalf. Certainly if I were to be called for jury service again in a future that saw the return of the black cap in the UK, and if I thought that delivering a guilty verdict would definitely result in an execution, it would be the most difficult decision of my life so far. Love, Caz
Author: stephen miller Friday, 06 December 2002 - 11:43 am
Hi Richard thanks for the details on the dates I remember reading somewhere that Evans was not charged with murdering his wife because that could have led to a manslaughter verdict Timsta there is also a book by the same title by Ludovic Kennedy well worth reading from steve
Author: Richard P. Dewar Friday, 06 December 2002 - 11:48 am
Hi all, It's interesting to see the Paula and Caz discussion regarding the death penalty. My sense is that the position on both sides of the death penalty debate are more viceral than intellectual. I know it is in my case. I oppose the death penalty and doubt my position would change based on any information given to me. I get the sense that many death penalty supports feel the same way. Yet both sides attempt to use intellectual and statistical arguments to buttress their cases. I would be interested in see from anyone, whatever position they hold, what fact or statistic could sway you from your current position if it were true? Regards, Richard
Author: Caroline Morris Friday, 06 December 2002 - 02:11 pm
Hi Rich, I tend to agree with you. I can't imagine any fact or statistic ever swaying me from my current position on this one. Funny thing is, when I was much younger I held the opposite view and thought hanging was too good for some killers! I have absolutely no recollection of when exactly my views changed, whether it was overnight or gradually, or why. I'm pretty sure it wasn't as a result of reading about any one particular case of likely injustice though. Love, Caz
Author: Howard Brown Friday, 06 December 2002 - 06:45 pm
Dear Friends: Prior to starting this thread,I had a preconcieved notion about how the majority of folks would "vote"...and I was right. I also had a preconcieved assumption that despite the interest we all obviously have in solving the Ripper case,the overwhelming majority of people would not want capital punishment for him.....In my opinion,these feelings are reflections of how basically decent you,dear reader,are....What my opinion says about me,well,thats another story. I am in full favor of capital punishment,if it can be proven conclusively that the perpetrator did commit murder,in the first degree. Yes,if my brother killed someone,I'd be the first guy to say hold your horses to cap.punishment......Yes,cap.punishment does not prevent crime...No,we don't need to "study" these people. Life is precious,of course. If a man or woman takes it upon themself that YOUR life or your child's life is not so special,well,then their life isn't either. We live or ostensibly live in a reward-based civilization. Thats why I am for it.....Paula,you aren't being a redneck for believing in it,in my opinion...HB
Author: Paula Wolff Friday, 06 December 2002 - 09:36 pm
Well, my ideas would probably not be changed on capital punishment. I've held them all my life, formed by reading and trying to understand why someone would do something so final as deliberately kill someone, friend, family or other. Caz, Howard, I can understand completely where you are coming from. What if it is the wrong person? What if this, what if that? Could and will be debated for the eons to come. You two seem two I think can cheerfully ( on a really morbid subject) agree to disagree with me. I don't want to change anyone's opinion, just expressing mine. I think ya'll caught that. Thanks so much for the messages. I like to be talked to. Ta, Paula
Author: Paula Wolff Friday, 06 December 2002 - 09:39 pm
Timsta, I ordered that film today. Hope it's as good as you say. Can't wait to recieve it. Know anymore? Always interested!!! Thanks, Paula
Author: Timsta Friday, 06 December 2002 - 10:33 pm
Paula: It's a great movie. John Hurt in the dock shouting "But it wasn't me! It was 'im! It was Christie!" and Attenborough just looking at him. Or so I remember it, anyway. Regards Timsta
Author: Ivor Edwards Saturday, 07 December 2002 - 12:51 am
Howard,Sometimes the Victorians would execute the murderer then dissect him for medical research at the scene of his crime.This would be a most fitting end for JTR.For those against hanging we could skip that part of it out and just dissect him alive in Kelly's room. That should make everyone happy right ?
Author: stephen miller Saturday, 07 December 2002 - 06:46 am
Hi All as a dyed in the wool deep red socialist I shouldn't have these views but I do believe that all murderers should be executed however I oppose the death penalty because of innocent people being executed from steve
Author: judith stock Saturday, 07 December 2002 - 11:32 am
Dear Paula, et.al., I was born in Texas and lived there for the first 31 years of my life, however, I escaped safely and no longer have to contemplate a return to that ______(fill in the blank!) place. I can say, with conviction, that Texas and the death penalty go hand in glove, and for that, Texas should be eternally ashamed. The very thought that ONE person could have been put to death by mistake is abhorrent; it places the executioners beyond the pale. I guess you can't tell where I stand on the death penalty, can you? THAT said, I opt for a loooooooong life spent in prison, with no amenities, no TV, no computers, and nightly visits from Billy Joe Bob Bubba and his Band of Merry Men. YES, we should build more prisons, if they are necessary; your post implied that soon everyone would be in a prison...does that include you? I, for one, have never committed any offense that would entail even 30 seconds of jail time, never mind prison! I would hope that would hold true for most of us. But that's not the point...my point is that death is an easy out for these guys....long term misery, discomfort, and unhappiness works for me. Why not make the offenders spend long and miserable lives with no chance of parole? How about suffering? GO FOR IT! NOTHING done to these guys in prison can undo the suffering of their victims, and nothing can bring them back. Make 'em pay EVERY DAY for what they did; do NOT let 'em off the hook with death. Besides, if the death penalty is the best option, why do we spend so damned much time trying to make death as easy and painless as possible? I thought an "eye for an eye" meant the doer of a rape/torture/murder got the same back...right? NO? Oh, just a needle slipped into a vein....now THAT makes perfect sense. J
Author: Paula Wolff Saturday, 07 December 2002 - 06:39 pm
Hey Judith, Where in Texas were you born? Big D here. Live southeast of Waco now. As to your message, it all makes complete sense and I respect your opinion and it's yours to keep. Now as regarding your attack on my country, that's another thing. Get you gun and meet me behing the saloon and we'll see if you can talk about Texas that way. :D It's a shame that the prisoner's do have all the amenities of home. My daughter was a guard in a woman's prison for a while so she knows of what she speaks. Now if those could be done away with.... Compared to the number of people in prison, a very, very few are ever put to death. And no, I was not referring to you or I ever being in prison or "everyone" for that matter. Prison nor death seem to be much of a deterrent for some people and I hope you have noticed the crime rate never drops by much and, instead, escalates.So there we are all wishing someone could fix the system. Thanks, J, Paula
Author: judith stock Saturday, 07 December 2002 - 07:06 pm
Dear Paula...born Dallas, moved to Lubbock 1949, lived there until 1977 when I escaped to Connecticut! No, thanks, dear, I don't do guns, either, so you can tell how well I fit in Texas!!! Actually, I DIDN'T attack Texas, per se..I just said I escaped safely! No attacks, please; you are welcome to Texas, if it pleases; it just didn't please me. And, the death penalty doesn't deter, it just exacts revenge. Nice to meet you, Paula....we must agree to disagree, OK? How are you enjoying the boards so far? Quite a loony bunch, no? J
Author: Ivor Edwards Saturday, 07 December 2002 - 08:15 pm
After meeting with many murderers including serial killers I made the effort to ascertain their thoughts on the subject of capital punishment.Many various types of killers exist and the motives for murder are many thus I learnt that each case should be taken on its own merits.When I asked one killer if he thought what he had done was worth the effort he replied,"When I get up every morning and eat my cornflakes I have the satisfaction to know that the guy I killed will not be doing the same".In this particular case the offender killed someone who had tried to rape him.While some killers would welcome execution many would not.It is surely a subject which is not as straightfoward as one might imagine.If Hitler had been captured alive I wonder how many people would have said, "Dont execute him just lock him up"Some people deserve to die whether we like it or not. The system in the UK fouled up very badly with capital punishment and it is no great secret why.If one made a visit to various prisons in the UK one would find child molesters and the like given far more privileges than the average con.In Wandsworth they have their own camera club and have access to photoghaphic equipment!!!!! they also have their own brass band. They are despised by other prisoners who attack them at any given opportunity and if nothing else it keeps them on their toes.Sometimes there can be a great void between the law and justice and it is not uncommon for the law to be broken so that justice can be done. My interest is with those who deserve to be protected especially children and anyone who interferes with their welfare should be dealt with in no uncertain terms. The allies did not win the last war by turning the other cheek or pusy footing around with a bunch of evil bastards who at the end of the day had to be killed. It is about time we declared war on child molesters and any other piece of sht ( terrorists )who believe they can run amok living out their twisted fantasy at the expense of the innocent including children. The latter have a right to be protected and when they are not someone is failing in their duty.The best idea Maggie Thatcher had in dealing with terrorists for example was to send the SAS to track them down and shoot them without further ado whether it be in the street or elsewhere.Show them the same degree of mercy they show others,none.When one fights the devil one does so on his terms otherwise do not bother. We seem to put property and the like before life itself I have just read of a killer who got two years for murder while a shoplifter was sentenced to 3 years.It is about time our society showed its priority in this respect along with some others.Judith was correct in stating that execution is a form of revenge rather that justice, if I had a daughter who was murdered I would seek revenge and justice would come a very poor second.
Author: Paula Wolff Saturday, 07 December 2002 - 08:36 pm
Hi, Judith, Of course we can cheerfully agree to disagree.And I am sorry you didn't like TX but I would might not like Arizona(pleae! no one from Arizona; I just said 'might'). So I can see that. Kidding about the gunfight. I am a card-carrying, grade A, Number 1 coward. However, if someone was threatening, say, my child, I could use it (or for self-defense) without thinking over the ethics of the situation. I can't help but agree with much of what Ivor says but I'm too easy going, I hope, to be upset because of your ideas. They are real and logical. Well, the boards are very, very interesting. Some sweethearts on there and some not so sweet, but what would we be without some disagreements? Thanks so much, J, and it's always a joy to read you and now talk to you. You have a terrific sense of humor!! See ya, Paula
Author: judith stock Saturday, 07 December 2002 - 08:57 pm
Thanx, Paula.....after 32 years with the same man, and having two grandchildren (one of whom is a 45 year old midget!), you either develop a sense of humour or croak!! Hope you have a great weekeknd, or what's left of it. And, you might try Virginia.....better yet, plan on visiting Baltimore in April 2004 for the next US Ripper conference.Don Rumbelow will be back and Colin Wilson will be joining us as Guest of Honour. Come on down, or up, or over.... whatever! J
Author: Scott E. Medine Saturday, 07 December 2002 - 10:03 pm
I agree with Caz. Thou shalt not kill does not come with sub sections, but that is how I, a devout Catholic, feel. In the Army I was never put in the position to kill. However, as a police officer I have been forced to clear leather on many occasions such as felony traffic stops and high risk arrest warrants. But in 1997, I had to make a decision, that I will have to live with for the rest of my life. I only hope God seems fit to hand out pardons. I pray nobody else EVER has to make that decision. Peace, Scott
Author: Diana Saturday, 07 December 2002 - 10:39 pm
The Bible says "Thou shalt not kill" but I believe the reference is to murder. It also says "whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed" and of the magistrate "he beareth not the sword in vain". God established human governments to restrain the baser part of human nature. Scott, if you had to kill someone in the line of duty I realize that was probably very traumatic for you and it says something about your character that it bothers you to this day. I'm sure you did not undertake this lightly and probably other live(s) would have been lost if you had not done what you did. I have studied the Bible for years and I really believe that you were probably justified. Human government was given the authority to take life in certain circumstances and in your function as a Police Officer you would fit that. See Genesis 9:6, Romans 13:1-4. God does hand out pardons. They were purchased with the blood of Christ on the Cross. Romans 5:8,9 But God commendeth His love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
Author: Warwick Parminter Sunday, 08 December 2002 - 05:51 am
Well said, Ivor, if serial killers, child killers and terrorists MUST not be executed,-- then, bring back the ball and chain, the sledge hammer and granite,--- and the kind company of all the other prisoners,--7/24 Rick
Author: Paula Wolff Sunday, 08 December 2002 - 08:24 am
Oh, Judith, I know of what you speak. My first husband and I were married four and a half years before he died and then, later, I married a wonderful man and we've been at it a little over 30 now. So I hear ya!!! We have 10 grandchildren; in fact, one of them lives with us til he gets through this year of school and then he will move back with his family near Ft. Worth. So humor and sedatives are required here. I think, no, I know I would love Virginia. Up there about 3 years ago on vacation (actually DC) but we were with my step-son and family and I managed to fracture my ankle so sightseeing was done democratically-- all in favor of going here say aye type thing. So thank goodnes I had been there before and could remember and enjoy the Old Dominion. Beautiful state!! And your granddaughter is beautiful, just beautiful. She got those genes from somewhere, so put your picture up; I bet she got them from you! Ta, Paula
Author: Ally Sunday, 08 December 2002 - 09:20 am
One can find in the bible a passage to condemn anything you wish and another to sanctify the same thing. There are many scholars who believe that the correct translation of the commandment is Thou Shall not Murder not thou shall not Kill because obviously there are also instances where the god in the bible says the exact opposite such as the quote above and of course in Exodus, in black and white: "you shall appoint as penalty life for life". So while I count myself fortunate that I don't use a book to make up my belief system, if I needed to, both the Christian God and the Bible okay capital punishment. Ally
Author: judith stock Sunday, 08 December 2002 - 10:42 am
Dear Paula, I really am NOT responsible for the granddaughter's looks.....only her brains!! And before anyone jumps, I AM ONLY KIDDING...well, a bit. SO, no photo goes up on my page. Just ask Stephen and Ally.....my picture would crash the Casebook! And, Ally, thanks for the above post; I really had no idea how to respond to it. You did it very well. I am bothered by quotes from any translated book, as the bible is. In fact, the King James version is not a very accurate translation at all, EVEN THOUGH some of the language is beautiful. The accuracy of translation is a problem for any scholar, as the familiar is not necessarily the correct. And I find it interesting that this particular book is the MOST interpreted, edited, and mis-quoted of almost any book ever written. It has been used as a hammer, and a velvet glove, as an executioner's needle, and as a protest against the death penalty. I could quote the commandment that requires you NOT to take life...others quote the exact opposite in another verse. This very simple fact only reflects that the bible, as well as most other books, was written by people who are flawed (as all of us are), and who make mistakes. I, of course, THOUGHT I had made a mistake ONCE, but I was wrong...... Cheers to all, J