I very strongly support the amendment. I rise to speak only so that there should be more than one non-legal voice speaking in this debate. In this case, philosophy undoubtedly supports the voice of the law, as it so often does—and perhaps we should say it the other way round, that jurisprudence is a version of philosophy. It is absolute nonsense on the practical point, as my noble friend has just pointed out, to suppose that a life sentence when passed should immediately be revoked and turned into something else. Far beyond that, I think that everybody who has ever been interested in questions of responsibility, blame or conflicting senses of duty realises that there are a large number of extenuating circumstances, particularly in the case of mercy killings, which were mentioned at the beginning of the debate. This is a very good amendment and I strongly support it.
Coroners and Justice Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Warnock
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 30 June 2009.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Coroners and Justice Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
712 c158 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:20:44 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_572042
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_572042
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_572042