"the death penalty in the United States is a moral and practical failure"

[boutons_deux]

Group Gives Up Death Penalty Work in Frustration

By ADAM LIPTAK Published: January 4, 2010
WASHINGTON

Last fall, the American Law Institute, which created the intellectual framework for the modern capital justice system almost 50 years ago, pronounced its project a failure and walked away from it.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/05/us/05bar.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=print

========

This sounds like it could be significant for stopping the death penalty yet-another fucked-up US system, the legal system.

[Ignignokt]

More innocent people have died of terrorism than the death penalty.

Why are we so concerned on stopping the death penalty?

[Blake]

the death penalty is an economic failure

[Ignignokt]

the death penalty is an economic failure

:lmao

LOL Blake

LoL The Death Penalty was formed to boost job growth.

[Blake]

:lmao

LOL Blake

LoL The Death Penalty was formed to boost job growth.

who says that the death penalty was formed to boost job growth? you?

or are you implying that's what I'm saying?

Is there a difference between LOL and LoL?

[Ignignokt]

who says that the death penalty was formed to boost job growth? you?

or are you implying that's what I'm saying?

Is there a difference between LOL and LoL?

Like you implying that the death penalty was instituted for economic reasons.

and yes.. LoL has a smaller o.

[Blake]

Like you implying that the death penalty was instituted for economic reasons.

I wasn't implying that.


and yes.. LoL has a smaller o.

ah.

LoL Ignignokt

[rjv]

i didn't get that he was implying that at all. seems to me more like what igni inferred.

[Ignignokt]

i didn't get that he was implying that at all. seems to me more like what igni inferred.

I'm surprised you're defending him.

[Ignignokt]

It's pretty stupid to argue the economic merits of the death penalty since it doesn't heighten or lower its value. Nobody gives a shit, about that, that's like arguing the economic value of rape.

Blake is a moron, that's all.

I'm open to hearing good moral reason's why the death penalty should be eliminated.

[Winehole23]

i didn't get that he was implying that at all. seems to me more like what igni inferred.gtown does that all the time. Whatever free association he has on your post, he thinks you posted.

[rjv]

I'm surprised you're defending him.

just saying what i got out of the statement. i read it as he was stating that for those who claim that it is too expensive for the state to keep such prisoners alive for a lifetime that the cost of the death penalty appeals have been just as if not more costly. i just assumed this was the only economic aspect of the death penalty he could have been referring to.

[rjv]

one of the best moral arguments against the death penalty i have ever read is by albert camus in his essay The Rebel. it is a fair argument in so much that it correctly assumes that there "once was a time where crime was put on trial. now it determines the law".

[Ignignokt]

gtown does that all the time. Whatever free association he has on your post, he thinks you posted.

TMZ is in the house.

[Oh, Gee!!]

More innocent people have died of terrorism than the death penalty.

Why are we so concerned on stopping the death penalty?

using that logic wouldn't we care only about stopping that which kills the most innocent people?

[Winehole23]

Sometimes you barely make sense, gtown.

[Ignignokt]

using that logic wouldn't we care only about stopping that which kills the most innocent people?

I was being facetious. Paying hommage to bouton's death by statistics style in the Christopher hitchen's thread.

nice going guy.

[Ignignokt]

Sometimes you barely make sense, gtown.

almost

[boutons_deux]

"economic merits of the death penalty"

Whoa, this is AMERICA. EVERYTHING in monetized.
If it can't be monetized, it has no value, so Americans don't care.

[boutons_deux]

I read where the average execution costs, end to end, about $1M.

At $25K/month per prisoner, $1M is only 40 months of incarceration.

So death penalty is "cost effective" and saves tax dollars (but reduces revenue to Prison Industrial Complex).

Let's Do It.

[EmptyMan]

Too many people look to the death penalty as a criminal deterrent.

It's not.

It's Justice.

[ChumpDumper]

Too many people look to the death penalty as a criminal deterrent.

It's not.

It's Justice.Is it justice when it turns out to be the wrong guy?

[Blake]

I read where the average execution costs, end to end, about $1M.

At $25K/month per prisoner, $1M is only 40 months of incarceration.

So death penalty is "cost effective" and saves tax dollars (but reduces revenue to Prison Industrial Complex).

Let's Do It.

I can't understand why people don't use google before posting. It makes failing that much harder.


Study: States can't afford death penalty

updated 4:04 a.m. EDT, Tue October 20, 2009

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- At 678, California has the nation's largest death row population, yet the state has not executed anyone in four years.

But it spends more than $130 million a year on its capital punishment system -- housing and prosecuting inmates and coping with an appellate system that has kept some convicted killers waiting for an execution date since the late 1970s.

This is according to a new report that concludes that states are wasting millions on an inefficient death penalty system, diverting scarce funds from other anti-crime and law enforcement programs.

"Thirty-five states still retain the death penalty, but fewer and fewer executions are taking place every year," said Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center. "But the overall death row population has remained relatively steady. At a time of budget shortfalls nationwide, the death penalty is turning into an expensive form of life without parole."

His group commissioned the study released Tuesday.

A privately conducted poll of 500 police chiefs released with the report found the death penalty ranked last among their priorities for reducing violent crime. Only 1 percent found it to the best way to achieve that goal. Adding police officers ranked first.

The death row population in 2007, the most-recent statistic available from the Justice Department, was 3,220. It was at 2,250 two decades ago, but the numbers have not grown significantly since 2000.

Forty executions have occurred so far in 2009 in 10 states, all by lethal injection. That total is up from 37 for all of last year, but less than half of the high of 98, from 10 years ago. The Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976.

Ohio recently suspended lethal injections after corrections officials were forced to cancel the execution of Romell Broom last month, when a suitable vein could not be found after two hours of trying.

Virginia plans a Nov. 10 execution for John Allen Muhammad, the so-called Beltway Sniper, convicted of randomly killing 10 people in 2002 with a high-powered rifle.

The Death Penalty Information Center study found that death penalty costs can average $10 million more per year per state than life sentences. Increased costs include higher security needs and guaranteed access to an often lengthy pardon and appellate process. The group is an information resource on capital punishment, and opposes its application as unworkable, inefficient and prone to mistakes.

Florida, where two men have been put to death this year, spends an average of $24 million per execution. That average has remained consistent since 2005, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

Many death penalty proponents say part of the problem is that states have added unnecessary, time-consuming delays, and have been reluctant to carry out the death penalty that their own legislatures have enacted. They say states should carry out the wishes of judges and juries that weighed evidence and imposed death on the worst murderers.

Death penalty supporters acknowledge that states outside the South have been reluctant to impose the punishment, even in the face of rising big-city crime rates.

"I think we need to build support for the death penalty and need to impose it more regularly where it is warranted," Kent Scheidegger, legal director of the Sacramento, California-based Criminal Justice Legal Foundation told CNN earlier this year.

Having the death penalty can offer powerful incentives in plea bargaining, Scheidegger said, and could provide states with large savings in trial and incarceration costs.

His group conducted a study earlier this year comparing murder cases resolved by guilty plea with those that went to trial.

In states with the death penalty, the average county obtained sentences of at least 20 years in almost 51 percent of cases in which the defendant was charged with murder and convicted of murder or voluntary manslaughter. Those sentences were reached through a guilty plea in about 19 percent of the cases.

In states without the death penalty, sentences of at least 20 years were obtained in 40 percent of those cases, but only 5 percent were guilty pleas, about one-quarter of the number in the death penalty states.

That study relied on U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics data from 33 large urban counties.

One example cited by Scheidegger of the plea bargaining effect involved Shaun Earl Arender. He confessed this year to the sexual assault and murder of 6-year-old Hanna Mack in Texas, and was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole in return for avoiding the death penalty. Texas consistently leads the nation with the most executions.

Eleven state legislatures have considered repealing the death penalty this year. New Mexico has banned it, and Maryland has narrowed the criteria under which it can be used.

Kansas, New Hampshire and the U.S. military are the only jurisdictions that have death penalty laws but have not conducted any executions since 1976. Lethal injection is used in the vast majority of executions, but electrocution, the gas chamber, hanging and firing squad remain as alternative methods.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/20/death.penalty/index.html


I like how "hanging and firing squad remain as alternative methods." :lol

Note to CNN: no they don't.

[Blake]

It's pretty stupid to argue the economic merits of the death penalty since it doesn't heighten or lower its value. Nobody gives a shit, about that, that's like arguing the economic value of rape.

Blake is a moron, that's all.

I'm open to hearing good moral reason's why the death penalty should be eliminated.

If a murderer is behind bars for life, then why is killing him morally better?

The cost of the death penalty is obviously a strain on tax dollars and if the moral reasoning for the death penalty cannot be proven beyond all doubt to be that much more necessary than a life sentence, then the economics of it come in to play.

I'm open to hearing good moral reasons why the death penalty is worth an extra $10 million per year per state.

Since the consensus seems to be that you are a moron and most likely a worthless troll, I doubt you have enough to justify it.

[hope4dopes]

I don't know the death penalty seems like a pretty good deterent.

[Blake]

I don't know the death penalty seems like a pretty good deterent.

based on what?

[spursncowboys]

Is it justice when it turns out to be the wrong guy?
Is your only problem you have with the death penalty the accuracy. I think that one innocent person executed is too many. BTW- Do you have a legitimite statistic that shows a significant amount?

[Winehole23]

Texas pardoned an executed man posthumously last year. If one is a significant number for you, there's your statistic.

[spursncowboys]

Texas pardoned an executed man posthumously last year. If one is a significant number for you, there's your statistic.
Go away.

[Blake]

Go away.

Apparently you really don't think that one executed person is too many.

[spursncowboys]

Apparently, you can assume better than you can think. I do not think that taking out executions is the answer to the problem. I'm not against capital punishment. In fact, I think more crimes should be capital offenses. Certain rapes and molestations. We also need to bring back hanging and firing squads.

[Winehole23]

For as much as SnC complains about trolls and factually unsupported posts, you'd think he'd appreciate direct, topical replies a little more.

[Blake]

Apparently, you can assume better than you can think. I do not think that taking out executions is the answer to the problem. I'm not against capital punishment. In fact, I think more crimes should be capital offenses. Certain rapes and molestations. We also need to bring back hanging and firing squads.

Am I to assume you're joking?

Either way, I think you're an idiot that forgets what he wrote on the previous page.

[balli]

Either way, I think you're an idiot-

[spursncowboys]

For as much as SnC complains about trolls and factually unsupported posts, you'd think he'd appreciate direct, topical replies a little more.
You dungeon masters can never stay in a policy dialogue. Always personal.

[ducks]

I read where the average execution costs, end to end, about $1M.

At $25K/month per prisoner, $1M is only 40 months of incarceration.

So death penalty is "cost effective" and saves tax dollars (but reduces revenue to Prison Industrial Complex).

Let's Do It. a 25 cent bullet is all it should take

[Winehole23]

You dungeon masters can never stay in a policy dialogue. Always personal.You're the one who started it. My first post in this thread was on the policy and you told me to go away. It's like you think people can't even read.

[balli]

It's always personal because SnC is such a moron. Like I said yesterday and Blake said today, SnC, whether people agree or disagree with you is a moot point. Either way, you're a moron.

Your penchant for idiocy defies debate and usually after you post, people are left fairly dumbfounded, only able to question your mental aptitude (or lack thereof).

And that's a 'you' problem, not a 'them' problem. The sooner you get to work on it, if your feeble mind will allow for such self-improvement, the better.

[Blake]

You dungeon masters can never stay in a policy dialogue. Always personal.


Go away.

[spursncowboys]

You're the one who started it. My first post in this thread was on the policy and you told me to go away. It's like you think people can't even read.


Texas pardoned an executed man posthumously last year. If one is a significant number for you, there's your statistic.
It was a stupid little one liner. Come on. Own it and move on but don't act like I am doing something wrong by thinking it's stupid.

[spursncowboys]

a 25 cent bullet is all it should take
Being too expensive should not be a reason for not using the death penalty.

[Blake]

It was a stupid little one liner. Come on. Own it and move on but don't act like I am doing something wrong by thinking it's stupid.

how is it stupid?

You said "one innocent person executed is too many" and wh called you out on it.

Own it and move on instead of crying "go away".

[Blake]

Being too expensive should not be a reason for not using the death penalty.

Let California just borrow some money for the DP. As long as they are meeting your moral standards, who cares?

[spursncowboys]

how is it stupid?

You said "one innocent person executed is too many" and wh called you out on it.

Own it and move on instead of crying "go away".

How did he own me? He insinuated an outcome of my reasoning. Keep this forum in focus with real life.

[spursncowboys]

Let California just borrow some money for the DP. As long as they are meeting your moral standards, who cares?
Why does Cali have to borrow money? WTF are you talking about? What moral standards are you talking about?

[Winehole23]

SnC doesn't remember what he said and he can't understand your reply.

Ergo, SnC doesn't even take posts one by one. He can't recall what you're responding to, and nine times out of ten, he substitutes some strawman or totally off the wall inference for what you really said, proving that he doesn't understand your reply to him either.

It's not so much that he pretends the rest of us can't read. It's more like he forgets all the posts preceeding his own including his own and as a result, he habitually gets everything wrong.

SnC's bad memory and poor reading comprehension really aren't so unusual. What makes it so conspicuous is his overbearing and completely unearned arrogance.

[Winehole23]

The other poster is always the idiot.

In his own mind, SnC never misconstrues another poster, nor does he ever make a factual mistake. If he has, he has yet to admit it here.

It is this quality of assuming he is unerring and uncontradicted when he is so often, so obviously wrong, and so many times, so plainly refuted -- that grates and galls.

[Winehole23]

It was a stupid little one liner. Come on. Own it and move on but don't act like I am doing something wrong by thinking it's stupid.It was a direct reply to your request for information. It was also a direct response to something you said, as Blake pointed out, on the previous page: that one innocent person executed is one too many. Maybe you didn't really mean it, but it's uncontrovertible that you said it.

[Blake]

Why does Cali have to borrow money?

because they don't have much of it right now but they spend a lot on it according to the CNN article.


WTF are you talking about?

the extremely high cost of the death penalty process.


What moral standards are you talking about?

your standard that the death penalty is morally justified to the point that it should be implemented at literally all costs.

[Blake]

It is this quality of assuming he is unerring and uncontradicted when he is so often, so obviously wrong, and so many times, so plainly refuted -- that grates and galls.

and yet it's also become highly entertaining.

[Winehole23]

True.

[MiamiHeat]

What a garbage thread. You guys have polluted the thread with ridiculous juvenile fighting. I had to scroll past most of it, what a waste of time.

Anyway, the death penalty... I don't know if I am for it or against it.

[Winehole23]

Yeah, what a pity you should actually have to read the thread. Don't strain anything trying to think for yourself, MH.

[spursncowboys]

It was a direct reply to your request for information. It was also a direct response to something you said, as Blake pointed out, on the previous page: that one innocent person executed is one too many. Maybe you didn't really mean it, but it's uncontrovertible that you said it.
Wow, both of you are so full of yourselves. Instead of worrying about my reading comprehension, worry about your own. I said that one innocent person is one too many. You assumed I meant to not* allow executions to continue. It was not. It is too many for the system to stay broke. Not to stop executing. You spent over 5 posts describing and analyzing me and not one was actual questions towards me. The greatest psychologist in the world could not conclude the things you do, with such little information.

*-editted

[spursncowboys]

You're the one who started it. My first post in this thread was on the policy and you told me to go away. It's like you think people can't even read.
I told you to go away because you hijack threads. Your posts are usually moronic but very well structured as to look intelligent.:toast

[spursncowboys]

your standard that the death penalty is morally justified to the point that it should be implemented at literally all costs.
How do you know my moral stand on the death penalty?

[Blake]

How do you know my moral stand on the death penalty?


Being too expensive should not be a reason for not using the death penalty.


Apparently, you can assume better than you can think. I do not think that taking out executions is the answer to the problem. I'm not against capital punishment. In fact, I think more crimes should be capital offenses. Certain rapes and molestations. We also need to bring back hanging and firing squads.

if you are for the death penalty and expense should not be a reason against it, what other reason would you have for the DP other than it being the morally correct thing to do?

[EmptyMan]

Is it justice when it turns out to be the wrong guy?


Didn't see that one coming :rolleyes

[EmptyMan]

LOL @ expecting a Government Action to be cost effective.


In b4: Yooo maaan, maybe we can like tax the legalization of marijuana you know. Not only would it free up the legal system to put more attention towards cases involving capital punishment, it could go towards paying for 10 years of imprisonment while the defendant goes through appeals before being injected. Don't know why they won't do it maaaaaan. It's The Man and big pharma trying to keep us down.

[Blake]

LOL @ expecting a Government Action to be cost effective.


who is expecting a government action to be cost effective?

[DarrinS]

Before weighing in on the moral justification for the death penalty, shouldn't we first know the carbon footprint of your average deathrow inmate?


The only other justification for the taking of a human life is obviously when an unborn human is an inconvenience to the mother.

[Blake]

Before weighing in on the moral justification for the death penalty, shouldn't we first know the carbon footprint of your average deathrow inmate?

How big of a carbon footprint do you think the average deathrow inmate has?

[DarrinS]

How big of a carbon footprint do you think the average deathrow inmate has?


I don't know. But the latest craze amongst climate change wackos is a one-child policy.

[spursncowboys]

if you are for the death penalty and expense should not be a reason against it, what other reason would you have for the DP other than it being the morally correct thing to do?
If expense is the problem with execution, we should find ways to make it cheaper

if executions costing too much is troubling, wouldn't it also be as troubling how much it cost to imprison people? Would you also want to not imprison criminals because it costs too much?
Another reason for the death penalty would be the efficiency. It is the only way that will 100% guaranteed way of stopping someone from committing another crime.

[Winehole23]

I said that one innocent person is one too many. You assumed I meant to not* allow executions to continue. It was not.I assumed no such thing. Can you point out the post where I said that? This goes directly to reading comprehension and your habit of putting words in the mouths of others.

[Winehole23]

I told you to go away because you hijack threads.You should look in the mirror every now and then. You resemble this.

[Winehole23]

Anyway, I doesn't take a psychologist of any description to conclude that you don't read or remember things too well, SnC. It's plain enough from what you post.

[Winehole23]

if executions costing too much is troubling, wouldn't it also be as troubling how much it cost to imprison people? Would you also want to not imprison criminals because it costs too much?Texas is cutting down for exactly this reason. Prisons are expensive, and they may not be the best bang for the buck. Being tuff on crime is easy. Getting smart on crime, well, that's a bit tougher.

[spursncowboys]

Texas is cutting down for exactly this reason. Prisons are expensive, and they may not be the best bang for the buck. Being tuff on crime is easy. Getting smart on crime, well, that's a bit tougher.
clichés from you seem to be free and plentiful. How does a community go about getting smarter on crime?

[DarkReign]

clichés from you seem to be free and plentiful. How does a community go about getting smarter on crime?

Easy answer. Prioritize.

Priorities for law enforcement of all colors starts and ends with drugs. Because drugs make their individual departments money (unlike other crimes that only cost the department).

Asset forfeiture has completely refocused law enforcement into a more business oriented approach of "cost vs reward" instead of "crime prevention vs prosecution".

As this pertains to the death penalty, the stats say it is costly. The results are...well, IMO, there arent any. At no point could I believe some homicidal maniac stopped and said "Boy, I better do this in a state that doesnt have the death penalty". Even the business minded police force is starting to see that this practice is self-defeating...that if the people on death row were taken off, more than a few jobs for cops probably wouldnt have been lost.

Its a selfish interest, but the good kind in this case.

I personally feel the death penalty is a good thing...in extreme cases. The slam dunk kind. Terrorists (KSM) and mass murderers (McVeigh, Gacey, etc). Beyond that, youre treading in gray territory because said person might be innocent, then what? Chalk it up to statistical error?

Not fucking good enough, IMO.

[DarrinS]

I never thought of the death penalty as a deterrent -- I don't think that was ever its intended purpose.

[Winehole23]

clichés from you seem to be free and plentiful. How does a community go about getting smarter on crime?Focus on solutions that mitigate incarceration: parole more nonviolent offenders, reform the rules that send so many back to prison for relatively trivial violations of release, revoke mandatory minimums and give judges the discretion they used to have in setting sentences, use drug courts and enhance drug diversion programs that are proven to work, stop using prisons to warehouse people who are insane, and explore alternatives to incarceration like restorative justice for young and first time offenders.

[Winehole23]

I recommend Sentencing Law and Policy (lib), gritsforbreakfast (libertarian) and TPPF (conservative) for analysis of criminal justice issues, with a focus on Texas.

Here's something from TPPF today:

http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2009-12-PB24-UnlockKids-ml.pdf

[Blake]

Another reason for the death penalty would be the efficiency. It is the only way that will 100% guaranteed way of stopping someone from committing another crime.

Unless the wrong person is killed.

[Spurminator]

If the death penalty is not a deterrent then that's even more of a reason to abolish it. If it does not help to discourage capital crimes, then its only purpose is revenge.

[DarrinS]

If the death penalty is not a deterrent then that's even more of a reason to abolish it. If it does not help to discourage capital crimes, then its only purpose is revenge.


Then what's the point of prison again?

[Spurminator]

It depends on who you ask.

But prison isn't death. You can rehabilitate yourself in prison, even if you're spending the rest of your life there.

[DarrinS]

It depends on who you ask.

But prison isn't death. You can rehabilitate yourself in prison, even if you're spending the rest of your life there.


Then prison is for rehabilitation?

[Winehole23]

It was. At least, that was the late 19th century model. Since then we've regressed to our Anglo-Saxon roots.

[doobs]

Oh, come on. Punishment has never been intended for ONE purpose only.

There are at least 4 legitimate purposes that simultaneously apply:

(1) Deterrence - deter potential criminals from committing crimes
(2) Prevention - prevent prisoners from committing further crimes during their incarceration
(3) Rehabilitation - make prisoners less likely to commit crimes after their release
(4) Justice - satisfy society's expectations of fairness with proportional punishment (he got what he deserved!)

Revenge is, of course, an illegitimate purpose. The line between justice and revenge is a tough one to distinguish, but it's real.

Does the death penalty:

(1) Deter crime? Unclear. It's hard to try to prove one way or the other without stumbling into correlation/causation.
(2) Prevent crime? Yes, of those under sentence of death. They can't kill people on the streets if they're locked up or dead. No more effective than life without parole, though.
(3) Rehabilitate offenders? No, of course not.
(4) Do justice? In an eye-for-an-eye sense, yes. Many people really do believe that if you take a life, your life needs to be taken.

I'm against the death penalty for various reasons, but I'm not blind to the arguments in its favor.

[ChumpDumper]

Didn't see that one coming :rolleyesSo what if it is the wrong guy?

[Spurminator]

Then prison is for rehabilitation?

Among other things. I was pointing out that it's the main difference between a life sentence and a death sentence.

[Yonivore]

Practical failure?

Everyone who's ever been executed has not killed again... That's success by any measure.

[Blake]

Practical failure?

Everyone who's ever been executed has not killed again... That's success by any measure.

some who were executed did not kill in the first place... that's a fail by any measure.

[ChumpDumper]

Practical failure?

Everyone who's ever been executed has not killed again... That's success by any measure.So the ones who didn't actually kill in the first place were successes as well?

By what measure?

[Yonivore]

So the ones who didn't actually kill in the first place were successes as well?

By what measure?
A failure of the Criminal Justice System. Start holding prosecutors responsible for wrongful convictions and maybe they'll be a little more careful and a bit less political about their cases.

The Death Penalty has a 100% success rate against recidivism.

[ChumpDumper]

A failure of the Criminal Justice System. Start holding prosecutors responsible for wrongful convictions and maybe they'll be a little more careful and a bit less political about their cases.How would you hold them responsible for wrongful convictions prosecuted in good faith?

Would you kill them? That would mean there is a 100% chance they wouldn't do it again.

[Yonivore]

How would you hold them responsible for wrongful convictions prosecuted in good faith?
I think prosecutors have to ignore a lot of exculpatory evidence to relentlessly pursue a death penalty in a case where the defendant's guilt is in doubt.


Would you kill them? That would mean there is a 100% chance they wouldn't do it again.
If a prosecutor knowingly let an innocent person be executed? Yep. I'd make that a capital crime. It's murder. Worse, the prosecutor used the State to commit the crime.

[ChumpDumper]

I think prosecutors have to ignore a lot of exculpatory evidence to relentlessly pursue a death penalty in a case where the defendant's guilt is in doubt.How are you going to prove that?


If a prosecutor knowingly let an innocent person be executed? Yep. I'd make that a capital crime. It's murder. Worse, the prosecutor used the State to commit the crime.Prove it.

[Yonivore]

How are you going to prove that?
They're called trials.


Prove it.
Prove what?

[ChumpDumper]

They're called trials.What is the charge?



Prove what?You don't know?

Not surprising.

[Yonivore]

What is the charge?
Capital Murder. If you had bothered to read the entire post, I said -- in the very next sentence -- "I'd make that a capital crime."


You don't know?

Not surprising.
You asked me to prove that if I had the power I'd make it a capital crime for prosecutors to be charged with capital murder if they knowingly allowed an innocent person to be executed.

I guess that I wrote it is proof that I would.

I think you reflexively type "prove it," sometimes without thinking...but, on typing that, I realize you may do quite a bit without thinking.

[ChumpDumper]

Capital Murder. If you had bothered to read the entire post, I said -- in the very next sentence -- "I'd make that a capital crime."


You asked me to prove that if I had the power I'd make it a capital crime for prosecutors to be charged with capital murder if they knowingly allowed an innocent person to be executed.

I guess that I wrote it is proof that I would.

I think you reflexively type "prove it," sometimes without thinking...but, on typing that, I realize you may do quite a bit without thinking.No, how do you prove that a prosecutor didn't prosecute someone in good faith?

And whom do you get to indict the prosecutor?

[Yonivore]

No, how do you prove that a prosecutor didn't prosecute someone in good faith?
You don't have to prove that.

In my scenario, you prove they allowed an execution to go forward when they had exculpatory evidence in their possession or had sufficient reason to believe the defendant may be innocent.


And whom do you get to indict the prosecutor?
I suppose a Grand Jury could do it. I can't believe there's not a mechanism, already in place, for charging a prosecutor with a crime.

Are you suggesting prosecutors should be immune from criminal prosecution if they knowingly allow an innocent person to be executed?

[ChumpDumper]

You don't have to prove that.

In my scenario, you prove they allowed an execution to go forward when they had exculpatory evidence in their possession or had sufficient reason to believe the defendant may be innocent.And how do you know they have exculpatory evidence in their possession?



I suppose a Grand Jury could do it.Directed by the prosecutor's office?


Are you suggesting prosecutors should be immune from criminal prosecution if they knowingly allow an innocent person to be executed?I'm suggesting you don't know what you are talking about.

[Yonivore]

And how do you know they have exculpatory evidence in their possession?
That's what investigations are for. Are you unfamiliar with how criminal cases are developed?


Directed by the prosecutor's office?
Directed by whomever is needed to see the process through. The do use special prosecutors from other jurisdictions when a District Attorney runs afoul of the law, I think.

What I know, is they don't let them off because they're a prosecutor.

Your responses seem to suggest a prosecutor is somehow untouchable.


I'm suggesting you don't know what you are talking about.
I think prosecutors aren't above the law.

I think if a prosecutors actions lead to the death of someone they should be held accountable.

With which of those two statements do you disagree?

[ChumpDumper]

That's what investigations are for. Are you unfamiliar with how criminal cases are developed?Who would investigate that if there is no knowledge of the alleged missing exculpatory evidence?


Directed by whomever is needed to see the process through. The do use special prosecutors from other jurisdictions when a District Attorney runs afoul of the law, I think.

What I know, is they don't let them off because they're a prosecutor.

Your responses seem to suggest a prosecutor is somehow untouchable.No, you are making a rather stupid assumption.



I think prosecutors aren't above the law.Duh.


I think if a prosecutors actions lead to the death of someone they should be held accountable.The scenario you put forth seems pretty stupid. You would have to assume that every prosecutor must be investigated when he tries a capital case. It's yet another stupid assumption on your part.

[Yonivore]

Who would investigate that if there is no knowledge of the alleged missing exculpatory evidence?

No, you are making a rather stupid assumption.


Duh.

The scenario you put forth seems pretty stupid. You would have to assume that every prosecutor must be investigated when he tries a capital case. It's yet another stupid assumption on your part.
Your assumption is that in the years of appeals nothing will be discovered that might warrant such an investigation.

Of course, we're already talking about an innocent person being executed so, I'm thinking the first order of an investigation would be what did the prosecutor know and when did he know it?

[ChumpDumper]

Your assumption is that in the years of appeals nothing will be discovered that might warrant such an investigation.Why would it be discovered? Most appeals have nothing to do with evidence, and again -- if the prosecution purposely hid that evidence, why would it magically appear later?


Of course, we're already talking about an innocent person being executed so, I'm thinking the first order of an investigation would be what did the prosecutor know and when did he know it?So immediately launch a criminal investigation of any prosecutor who wins a conviction in a capital trial?

That's rich.

[Ignignokt]

Just one question.

For sure executing an innocent man is unjust.

But executing the guilty one, is that unjust?

That's what it boils down to.

[hope4dopes]

It was. At least, that was the late 19th century model. Since then we've regressed to our Anglo-Saxon roots.
Fuck you.

Personally I find the fact that whinehole and Chimp have lived this long and weren't lynched from the jungle jim by thier own underwear before they got out of grade school.As either a conformation of how generous Anglo-Saxon society is, or that the death penalty is a great deterent.

[MiamiHeat]

Your assumption is that in the years of appeals nothing will be discovered that might warrant such an investigation.

Of course, we're already talking about an innocent person being executed so, I'm thinking the first order of an investigation would be what did the prosecutor know and when did he know it?

Why did you accept Chumpdumpers'

"alleged missing exculpatory evidence"

Who said it was missing?

Maybe it was there all along, and perhaps the prosecutor made a personal judgement call and ignored it. Perhaps the prosecutor was overzealous and wanted a conviction no matter what.

[Yonivore]

Fuck you.

Personally I find the fact that whinehole and Chimp have lived this long and weren't lynched from the jungle jim by thier own underwear before they got out of grade school.As either a conformation of how generous Anglo-Saxon society is, or that the death penalty is a great deterent.
:lmao I don't care who you are, that's funny right there.

[ChumpDumper]

Just one question.

For sure executing an innocent man is unjust.

But executing the guilty one, is that unjust?

That's what it boils down to.Guilty by what standard?

The death penalty only serves a purpose of vengeance IMO, but that is a legitimate purpose. My main problem is that it's irreversible, and the standard of guilt in a criminal court isn't comfortably high enough for me to think there will never be mistakes made that should be reversed.

[ChumpDumper]

Why did you accept Chumpdumpers'

"alleged missing exculpatory evidence"

Who said it was missing?

Maybe it was there all along, and perhaps the prosecutor made a personal judgement call and ignored it. Perhaps the prosecutor was overzealous and wanted a conviction no matter what.This was the premise all along.

Try to keep up.

[Yonivore]

Why did you accept Chumpdumpers'

"alleged missing exculpatory evidence"

Who said it was missing?

Maybe it was there all along, and perhaps the prosecutor made a personal judgement call and ignored it. Perhaps the prosecutor was overzealous and wanted a conviction no matter what.
Bottom line, innocent people don't get put to death by mistake. At the very least, it's negligence -- at worst, it's deliberate.

If you discover someone innocent was executed, you find out what failed and you hold people accountable. If a deliberate act was involved, I think it should be a crime. If that deliberate act results in the execution, I think it should be a capital crime.

[ChumpDumper]

Fuck you.

Personally I find the fact that whinehole and Chimp have lived this long and weren't lynched from the jungle jim by thier own underwear before they got out of grade school.As either a conformation of how generous Anglo-Saxon society is, or that the death penalty is a great deterent.That doesn't make any sense.

[ChumpDumper]

Bottom line, innocent people don't get put to death by mistake.How can you make that assumption?

Have you reviewed all the death penalty cases ever prosecuted?

Yes or no.

[Ignignokt]

Guilty by what standard?

The death penalty only serves a purpose of vengeance IMO, but that is a legitimate purpose. My main problem is that it's irreversible, and the standard of guilt in a criminal court isn't comfortably high enough for me to think there will never be mistakes made that should be reversed.

Vengeance?

Is vengeance only limited to killing, couldn't the same thing be said about other incarcerations like ones for theft?

It's not vengeance if the state is executing, they weren't the party that was harmed. The victims family was.

You talked about punishment that is irreversible, so is incarcerating alleged Pedophiles who were truly innocent. No system of correction will ever be 100 percent. And making a man stay in jail and putting him under stress that would come with being accused of child rape is something that can't be undone. Not to mention that it can ruin a person's life.

Theft, fraud, many cases have had innocent people go to jail. By the same standard some use towards the DP, does that mean we should do away with all forms?


Again i ask, is it wrong to execute a man like Charles Manson?

[MiamiHeat]

I completely agree

Prosecutors should be held accountable for sending innocent people to jail.

[ChumpDumper]

Vengeance?

Is vengeance only limited to killing, couldn't the same thing be said about other incarcerations like ones for theft?

It's not vengeance if the state is executing, they weren't the party that was harmed. The victims family was.No it's the vengeance of the people. You can't tell me you never wanted some criminal dead -- that's precisely what we are talking about here. You had no personal stake in the Manson killings, but you seem ready to make a judgment on his life.


You talked about punishment that is irreversible, so is incarcerating alleged Pedophiles who were truly innocent.They can be released.


No system of correction will ever be 100 percent. And making a man stay in jail and putting him under stress that would come with being accused of child rape is something that can't be undone. Not to mention that it can ruin a person's life.That person still has a life.


Theft, fraud, many cases have had innocent people go to jail. By the same standard some use towards the DP, does that mean we should do away with all forms?Those people are still alive. The reversal of those convictions (release and compensation) are far from perfect, but they can actually take place.


Again i ask, is it wrong to execute a man like Charles Manson?If he's truly guilty, sure. I just have a higher personal standard of guilt in such cases. If you don't, that's fine.

[hope4dopes]

Which fucking Mr. Rodgers nieghborhood do you dwell in.

[ChumpDumper]

Which fucking Mr. Rodgers nieghborhood do you dwell in.With what specifically are you taking issue, internets tough guy?

[Ignignokt]

No it's the vengeance of the people. You can't tell me you never wanted some criminal dead -- that's precisely what we are talking about here. You had no personal stake in the Manson killings, but you seem ready to make a judgment on his life.

There will probably a day where i won't want a certain criminal put to death, be silly to make such claim.

It's not vengeance of the people since they don't decide on the individual executions. It's a stated law that is executed upon the right circumstance. It is a consequence, and in america it is a lenghty process so that the criminal has enough time to clear his name.


They can be released.

Cool story brosef!


That person still has a life.


In all seriousness though, that person yes does have a life, but it has been ruined. Every case is different, a man could have been incarcerated at age 40 and released at age 70, what good is the remainding part of his life. How can the state pay him back in just?


Those people are still alive. The reversal of those convictions (release and compensation) are far from perfect, but they can actually take place.

That's assuming they weren't raped, or beaten in prison. That's assuming many things, which i'm guilty of doing right now to. To say that we can totally reverse the penalty , or to guarantee it is foolish.



If he's truly guilty, sure. I just have a higher personal standard of guilt in such cases. If you don't, that's fine.


What is that standard?

[ChumpDumper]

There will probably a day where i won't want a certain criminal put to death, be silly to make such claim.I said some criminal, not all.


It's not vengeance of the people since they don't decide on the individual executions.Sure it is of the people since the state represents the people.


It's a stated law that is executed upon the right circumstance. It is a consequence, and in america it is a lenghty process so that the criminal has enough time to clear his name.Except there have been cases where it hasn't. And after the name is cleared in those cases there is no way to reverse it. That was my point.


In all seriousness though, that person yes does have a life, but it has been ruined. Every case is different, a man could have been incarcerated at age 40 and released at age 70, what good is the remainding part of his life. How can the state pay him back in just?I said it was imperfect, but it's more perfect than if he had been killed by the state.


That's assuming they weren't raped, or beaten in prison. That's assuming many things, which i'm guilty of doing right now to. To say that we can totally reverse the penalty , or to guarantee it is foolish.Again, I said it was imperfect, but at least there is the opportunity to make the attempt. I'm sure those who have been freed prefer it to nothing.


What is that standard?I couldn't make a blanket one that covers everything on a message board. DNA has certainly been helpful in clearing the innocent in recent years, including many that were on death row. Something like that wouldn't apply to Manson though, so there is much to consider.

[Winehole23]

Fuck you. Dream on, Captain Persuasion.


Personally I find the fact that whinehole and Chimp have lived this long and weren't lynched from the jungle jim by thier own underwear before they got out of grade school.As either a conformation of how generous Anglo-Saxon society is, or that the death penalty is a great deterentLynched for what? Pissing you off? That's not a capital offense. If it were, there'd hardly be anyone left to post here.

En serio, h4d, what I was referring to was the Anglo-Saxon justice as a substitute for the blood feud. The system we have now more and more approximates it. People now expect and demand the bloody vengeance it was supposed to replace. American justice is descending into barbarity. You are one of the the cheerleaders. You and the fear addled masses are leading us back into the dark ages. Your response to barbarism is to outdo it. I feel sure you will take that as a compliment, but it isn't.

You're no better than the terrorists. In your zeal to one up them, you show your true colors. Not only that, but you desire to shitcan the system of justice that once set us apart from them.

Fuck you.

[Winehole23]

I completely agree

Prosecutors should be held accountable for sending innocent people to jail.

Just 12 chief federal judges wield almost exclusive power over secret misconduct investigations of more than 2,000 fellow jurists — though some have themselves been accused of botching reviews or committing ethical blunders, according to a Houston Chronicle review.


At least four current or former chief circuit judges have been the subject of recent high-profile complaints about their behavior; one posted photos of naked women painted to look like cows and other graphic images on his publicly accessible Web site; another manipulated the outcome of a vote in a death penalty case.


Not one faced formal discipline.


Nationwide, the integrity of the federal judicial misconduct system relies heavily on chief judges. Each oversees complaints — more than 6,000 in the last 10 years — against all circuit, district, senior, bankruptcy and magistrate judges in multi-state regions called circuits.



Third Circuit Chief Judge Anthony Scirica, who is also chairman of the executive committee of the Judicial Conference of the United States, told the Chronicle, “The federal judiciary takes its ethical responsibilities with the utmost seriousness. Every misconduct complaint is carefully reviewed.”
He was the only chief circuit judge who directly responded to Chronicle requests for comment, though other circuits' staff replied.


In seven circuits, according to the Chronicle analysis, supervising judges took no public disciplinary action at all in the last decade, meaning not a single federal judge faced any sanctions in 29 states with more than 875 full-time federal judges, despite thousands of complaints.


Defenders of the system, like Scott Gant, a Washington, D.C.-based attorney, argue that under-enforcement is a small price to pay for strong federal judges.


“That's the nature of the system — anytime you have a group investigate itself. But if we want to have an independent judiciary, I think we have to accept that,” he said.
Error rate ‘far too high'

Most experts argue that the secretive self-policing helps protect judges who uphold the nation's laws from unfounded slurs and allegations slung by convicts and disgruntled citizens.


But a recent spate of well-publicized illegal behavior by judges — including frequenting prostitutes, falsifying federal court records, molesting court employees and committing motor vehicle homicide — has prompted experts and members of Congress alike to call for reforms and more disclosure of federal disciplinary decisions.



One of those cases involved former U.S. District Judge Samuel Kent of Galveston, now imprisoned for obstruction of justice involving the sexual assault of two female employees.


In 2006, a Supreme Court committee, led by Justice Stephen Breyer, reported the system handled routine matters well, but botched five of 17 high-profile cases, an error rate “far too high.”



The report named no names but described matters bungled by four of 12 regional circuits: the Chicago-based 7th Circuit, the Cincinnati-based 6th Circuit, the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit and the St. Louis-based 8th Circuit, the Chronicle found.


James B. Loken, who oversees the vast seven-state Midwest territory of the 8th Circuit, was among the supervising judges criticized for failing to properly investigate. Federal rules say chief judges should form a committee to probe matters “reasonably in dispute.”


But Loken has never formally investigated a complaint since becoming chief judge in 2003, according to Michael Gans, the 8th Circuit Clerk who works with Loken.


Early in his tenure, he dismissed allegations from an attorney as “signed by a person whose signature is illegible” and questioned whether he was even “a person … entitled to file” it, records show. The system allows anyone to file a judicial misconduct complaint.


Later, Loken rejected published allegations that a U.S. district judge in St. Louis improperly urged 314 newly minted citizens at a public ceremony to register and vote for his congressman friend “so he can continue his good work.” Loken accepted the jurist's denials without formal review.
When asked about Loken's decisions, Gans said: “The court does not comment on its orders or opinions.”
Behind the scenes

Critics such as California-based attorney Lara Bazelon said the system leaves “the mice in charge of the cheese” and the emphasis on secrecy permits supervising judges to ignore, conceal or explain away embarrassing errors or even crimes by colleagues.


“Judges are human beings just like the rest of us, and putting on a black robe should not immunize them from legitimate punishment,” she wrote in a recent Kentucky Law Journal article.


Some chief judges pursued no disciplinary action even after confirming that colleagues improperly dished out insider information, slept during trials, hurled obscenities in court, or broke laws themselves, the Chronicle's review of more than 3,000 records stored in a little-known judicial archive shows.
Yet many complaints, on topics ranging from alcoholism to personality disorders, are successfully managed behind the scenes through counseling, and, when necessary, quiet resignations, circuit court officials say.


“There's a lot more being done that doesn't appear (in public records),” said Collins Fitzpatrick, a longtime 7th Circuit executive who has worked on complaints for years and studied the system.


A dramatic and unusually public example of proactive action came in July when Chief Circuit Judge Karen Williams of the Richmond-based 4th Circuit resigned at 57 and disclosed her own diagnosis of early Alzheimer's disease.
“Judge Williams' decision to retire while able to perform her judicial duties in order to avoid any questions about future decisions is an admirable example of action preempting any future conduct issue,” Patricia S. Connor, circuit clerk, told the Chronicle.



Taxpayers have no way to know about most behind-the-scenes fixes. Both Fitzpatrick's and Williams' circuits are among seven that took no public disciplinary action in a decade.



Most federal judicial misconduct complaints deserve dismissal. One, for example, blamed a judge for “loss of vision and loss of teeth,” the Chronicle's review showed.


David Pimentel, an assistant professor at the Florida Coastal School of Law, said frivolous complaints tend to “siphon off the energy from legitimate complaints that I'm convinced are out there — and when they do get voiced, they don't get treated properly.”


Nationwide, about 50 out of 3,000 complaints in the last five years were resolved quietly after judges took some kind of private and anonymous action, statistics and the Chronicle's public orders show.
Disclosures vary

Only a handful of federal judges apologized publicly or privately even after admitting they made mistakes or broke laws, records show.



In 2007, a potential juror in the Northeast admitted in a questionnaire that she'd recently been sexually assaulted, a disclosure she assumed confidential. Instead, a federal judge grilled her about it in open court.



“The people in that room did not have a right to know about a very personal and private crime that had been committed against me,” she wrote in a formal complaint, according to a 2008 order from the New York City-based 2nd Circuit.


The matter was dismissed after the judge privately apologized.
Generally, chief judges alone decide how much to reveal about reviews in public summaries. Only four of 12 circuits post them on Web sites.


Some disclose more than others. Lengthy orders and documents of complaints get issued in the Northeast's 1st and 2nd circuits, as well as by the 9th Circuit in San Francisco.
5th Circuit stands out

The New Orleans-based 5th Circuit has most aggressively sought punishment — taking on rogue judges who lied to judicial investigators or broke laws.



The 11th Circuit oversees about 175 full-time judges in Alabama, Georgia and Florida. But it's hard to tell what — if anything — the circuit has done, based on public orders.


In 2005, the chief judge launched a probe into allegations that a Georgia magistrate judge abused his powers to enrich friends and family. Results were never revealed.


The incestuous nature of reviews gets more complicated when chief judges stand accused.


Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski, based in San Francisco, turned critic breaking ranks with his 9th Circuit peers for failing to respond to reports of abuse of power by a senior Los Angeles district judge.



“It does not inspire confidence in the federal judiciary, when we treat our own so much better than we treat everyone else,” he wrote in a rare disciplinary dissent.


When he became the 9th Circuit Chief Judge in 2007, he began posting misconduct reviews on the Internet. But he also quickly drew complaints about his behavior: While overseeing an obscenity case in 2008, Kozinski ran a personal Web site that included lewd photos of women, an aroused donkey and other off-color content, a complaint disclosed.

In 2009, Kozinski was admonished, a public scolding considered just short of formal discipline, by the Philadelphia-based 3rd Circuit for showing “poor judgment” that “caused embarrassment” to the judiciary.”


That circuit has no reported disciplinary actions.
I'd be surprised if prosecutors have it much harder than judges. The mice are in charge of the cheese.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6793055.html

[DarrinS]

Does anyone know how many innocent people have been wrongly executed?


While I do agree that this is something to be worried about, I'm pretty sure that 100% of aborted humans have comitted no crime and that doesn't appear to give most libs any moral dillema about the right to "chose".

[admiralsnackbar]

Does anyone know how many innocent people have been wrongly executed?

That's precisely the problem, isn't it?



While I do agree that this is something to be worried about, I'm pretty sure that 100% of aborted humans have comitted no crime and that doesn't appear to give most libs any moral dillema about the right to "chose".

Isn't one hot-button issue enough for the thread?

[Blake]

I think prosecutors have to ignore a lot of exculpatory evidence to relentlessly pursue a death penalty in a case where the defendant's guilt is in doubt.


If a prosecutor knowingly let an innocent person be executed? Yep. I'd make that a capital crime. It's murder. Worse, the prosecutor used the State to commit the crime.

Really? You'd kill off a prosecutor for making a mistake in good faith?

What about the cops who mistakenly arrested the wrong guy to begin with? Them too? What about the jurors or judge who make the final determination of guilt?

What if a convict gets the lethal injection but is determined later to have been innocent so the prosecutor gets lethally injected as well......only to find later that the original convict really was guilty after all......are you going to sentence the person(s) to die that were involved in sending the prosecutor to death row?

:lol Which kid coming out of law school wouldn't want to aspire to be a prosecutor in your world? It sounds great :tu

[Blake]

I'd be surprised if prosecutors have it much harder than judges.

I'd be surprised too.

I wonder if Yoni would also want to kill the defense attorney that failed to keep his innocent client from getting the needle.

[Blake]

I completely agree

Prosecutors should be held accountable for sending innocent people to jail.

no surprises here.

[ChumpDumper]

Does anyone know how many innocent people have been wrongly executed? How many is enough for you?

Cases are easily found if you are genuinely curious. Somehow I doubt it.



While I do agree that this is something to be worried about, I'm pretty sure that 100% of aborted humans have comitted no crime and that doesn't appear to give most libs any moral dillema about the right to "chose".So amend the constitution.

[DarkReign]

Just one question.

For sure executing an innocent man is unjust.

But executing the guilty one, is that unjust?

That's what it boils down to.

Executing a guilty murder is just. But even one person being unfairly executed fucks every bit of justice associated with the process.

We are imperfect beings with an imperfect system of law trying to be perfect in the arena of death. High hopes, that.

[Yonivore]

Executing a guilty murder is just.
Okay.


But even one person being unfairly executed fucks every bit of justice associated with the process.
I disagree.

Mistakes happen. Policemen accidentally shoot innocent people. When it's not an accident, they are investigated and, if warranted, indicted, tried, and punished (if found guilty). Doctors accidentally kill people all the time...albeit, in many cases, in an attempt to save an already dying person. When it's not an accident, they are investigated and, if warranted, indicted, tried, and punished.

Executions, on the other hand, usually only occur after years and years of appeals and opportunities for the truth to come out. If, after all that, it doesn't, I'm more inclined to believe the truth was willfully and intentionally withheld by someone -- and that warrants an investigation and holding someone responsible.


We are imperfect beings with an imperfect system of law trying to be perfect in the arena of death. High hopes, that.
I would draw the analogy that because some fetuses survive abortion attempts and must then be summarily executed -- outside the womb -- we should ban all abortions. More cynically, I could say that because a significant excuse for abortions is that it is feared the child will suffer an unbearable existence, we should execute children suffering an unbearable existence.

Capital Punishment works. Every time. Not one repeat offender...ever.

[ChumpDumper]

Why can't you people stick to one subject?

It is not analogous with abortion at all.

[spursncowboys]

Really? You'd kill off a prosecutor for making a mistake in good faith?

What about the cops who mistakenly arrested the wrong guy to begin with? Them too? What about the jurors or judge who make the final determination of guilt?

What if a convict gets the lethal injection but is determined later to have been innocent so the prosecutor gets lethally injected as well......only to find later that the original convict really was guilty after all......are you going to sentence the person(s) to die that were involved in sending the prosecutor to death row?

:lol Which kid coming out of law school wouldn't want to aspire to be a prosecutor in your world? It sounds great :tu
Agree one hundred percent. I don't think they should have full immunity but it is a slippery slope and it will probably just keep DA from going for the death penalty if implemented. Your last sentence should be used in regards to health care professionals.

[ChumpDumper]

Agree one hundred percent. I don't think they should have full immunity but it is a slippery slope and it will probably just keep DA from going for the death penalty if implemented. Your last sentence should be used in regards to health care professionals.Are medical school applications down?

[Yonivore]

Really? You'd kill off a prosecutor for making a mistake in good faith?

What about the cops who mistakenly arrested the wrong guy to begin with? Them too? What about the jurors or judge who make the final determination of guilt?

What if a convict gets the lethal injection but is determined later to have been innocent so the prosecutor gets lethally injected as well......only to find later that the original convict really was guilty after all......are you going to sentence the person(s) to die that were involved in sending the prosecutor to death row?

:lol Which kid coming out of law school wouldn't want to aspire to be a prosecutor in your world? It sounds great :tu
We're not talking about good faith.

[ChumpDumper]

Okay.


I disagree.

Mistakes happen. Policemen accidentally shoot innocent people. When it's not an accident, they are investigated and, if warranted, indicted, tried, and punished (if found guilty). Doctors accidentally kill people all the time...albeit, in many cases, in an attempt to save an already dying person. When it's not an accident, they are investigated and, if warranted, indicted, tried, and punished.

Executions, on the other hand, usually only occur after years and years of appeals and opportunities for the truth to come out. If, after all that, it doesn't, I'm more inclined to believe the truth was willfully and intentionally withheld by someone -- and that warrants an investigation and holding someone responsible.Sure you're inclined to believe -- but what if you are wrong?

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann

A very long article, but very telling in many ways.

[Blake]

We're not talking about good faith.

I misread your reply to CD about 'good faith'.

I'd agree if there is sufficient evidence that a prosecutor has fudged evidence then a special prosecutor, [maybe from the state or federal level] should be brought in to bring forth whatever charges should be necessary.

I don't agree with them being executed though......but then again, I don't really agree with anyone being executed at all to begin with.

[sabar]

There are already punishments for the crimes of forged evidence, obstruction of justice, etc.

Anyways, death can't be that much of a failure if prosecutors like to push for it so often. They're all elected or picked by higher ups that are elected. Clearly the people that they represent enjoy having it as a tool of revenge against the guilty.

I think the state executing its own citizens is an offensive notion, but on the other hand the guilty party has broken it's contract with society and forfeits their rights.

[admiralsnackbar]

We're not talking about good faith.

Why shouldn't we? Aren't mistakes mistakes, whether they be malicious and intentional or perfectly accidental?

[DarkReign]

@ Yoni

I wouldnt draw a parallel with state execution and abortion on my worst day. The only thing those two have in common is their moral implications. Thats it.

As it pertains to execution, it is just a personal preference of mine that it should only be reserved for extraordinary cases like treason, mass murderers and terrorists.

Selling state secrets to foreign entities? Death upon conviction.

Pick a mass murderer from the 20th century...you know who I am talking about. Berkowitz (sp?), Bundy, Gacey, Dahmer. Death upon conviction. (so its known, Manson does not qualify under these terms).

McVeigh, Osama, KSM, etc. Death upon conviction.

Beyond those extraordinary cases, I see no reason for a state death penalty. Too prone to error, even if that error rate is less than 2% its entirely too high. That means there are men who were pleading for their lives on a table in some penitentiary who were put to death for a crime they did not commit.

Punishing the prosecutor does not bring him back to life. What about his justice now? You want to further complicate this tangled web by now trying the prosecutor to even as far as killing him/her if impropriety is found on their behalf?!

If this were the system we had, we'd be killing more people than China in no time, what with all the deaths needed after someone tried a case too hard, or left a piece of evidence out, or didnt allow certain testimony to be heard, etc.

Our Courts would be built on rivers of blood. Not my kind of country, certainly not the one I was raised in.

[Blake]

Why shouldn't we? Aren't mistakes mistakes, whether they be malicious and intentional or perfectly accidental?

you think the death penalty should apply for prosecutors acting in good faith?
why?

[Spurminator]

When we start incarcerating prisoners inside of women's wombs, we can start comparing capital punishment and abortion.

[spursncowboys]

When we start incarcerating prisoners inside of women's wombs, we can start comparing capital punishment and abortion.
There cannot be a comparison. Two different things. One is murdered. The other is given a trial and sentenced to death for a heinous crime. The criminal has two chances to prove that their actions do not constitute being put to death. The child is just murdered.

[Yonivore]

@ Yoni

I wouldnt draw a parallel with state execution and abortion on my worst day. The only thing those two have in common is their moral implications. Thats it.
When a botched abortion results in a living, but horribly injured fetus, what do you call what the abortionist does next? And, that happens quite a bit more than does execution of the innocent.

I think the parallel works because those who typically oppose capital punishment are strong supporters of abortion. I think it's a hypocritical position.



As it pertains to execution, it is just a personal preference of mine that it should only be reserved for extraordinary cases like treason, mass murderers and terrorists.

Selling state secrets to foreign entities? Death upon conviction.

Pick a mass murderer from the 20th century...you know who I am talking about. Berkowitz (sp?), Bundy, Gacey, Dahmer. Death upon conviction. (so its known, Manson does not qualify under these terms).

McVeigh, Osama, KSM, etc. Death upon conviction.

Beyond those extraordinary cases, I see no reason for a state death penalty. Too prone to error, even if that error rate is less than 2% its entirely too high. That means there are men who were pleading for their lives on a table in some penitentiary who were put to death for a crime they did not commit.
Kill 1, kill 100, I don't see the difference. Where's your line for the most heinous criminal?


Punishing the prosecutor does not bring him back to life. What about his justice now? You want to further complicate this tangled web by now trying the prosecutor to even as far as killing him/her if impropriety is found on their behalf?!

If this were the system we had, we'd be killing more people than China in no time, what with all the deaths needed after someone tried a case too hard, or left a piece of evidence out, or didnt allow certain testimony to be heard, etc.

Our Courts would be built on rivers of blood. Not my kind of country, certainly not the one I was raised in.
Now, you're just building straw men.

Punishing the murderer doesn't bring back the victim, either. But, it is justice. And, a prosecutor that would callously allow an innocent person to be executed is no better than the murderer executed for committing a capital crime.

[ploto]

...those who typically oppose capital punishment are strong supporters of abortion.

Just as many claim to be pro-life yet strongly support the death penalty.

[boutons_deux]

"Aren't mistakes mistakes, whether they be malicious and intentional or perfectly accidental"

a "malicious and intentional mistake" ? :lol

[ChumpDumper]

Just as many claim to be pro-life yet strongly support the death penalty.All life is precious unless I decide it isn't.

[Yonivore]

Just as many claim to be pro-life yet strongly support the death penalty.
Because we recognize the difference between an innocent child and a murderer.

[ChumpDumper]

Eh, more like bringing up abortion unsolicited in a death penalty thread makes you feel like you actually care about life.

[panic giraffe]

Because we recognize the difference between an innocent child and a murderer.


so i'm curious, how do soldiers fit in on the "pro-life" spectrum?

i mean i've always been amazed as how the average "pro-lifer" i meet is also rabidly for the death penalty, but what about those who kill in a warzone are they still a murderer?

[ChumpDumper]

I told you that all life is precious except when I decide it isn't.

Jeez.

[spursncowboys]

Just as many claim to be pro-life yet strongly support the death penalty.

Yeah it's ridiculous how pro-life people can be for the murder of an innocent child and at the same time be in favor of killing someone who is not innocent and made the decision knowing before hand what they do might put them to death.

[spursncowboys]

so i'm curious, how do soldiers fit in on the "pro-life" spectrum?

i mean i've always been amazed as how the average "pro-lifer" i meet is also rabidly for the death penalty, but what about those who kill in a warzone are they still a murderer?

Do you think soldiers are murderers?

[ploto]

Yeah it's ridiculous how pro-life people can be for the murder of an innocent child and at the same time be in favor of killing someone who is not innocent and made the decision knowing before hand what they do might put them to death.

You might want to re-read what you wrote.

I don't know anyone who calls themselves pro-life but who supports abortion rights-- no one. I do know many people who call themselves pro-life and yet strongly support the death penalty.

If you are pro-life then you are pro all-life -- it is not your place to decide which lives are valuable and which are not. You can not support the state executing anyone and still call yourself pro-life. You simply can't.

I oppose abortion and the death penalty. At least my views are consistent.

[MannyIsGod]

Being too expensive should not be a reason for not using the death penalty.

No - just any progressive initiative you're against.

[spursncowboys]

You might want to re-read what you wrote.

I don't know anyone who calls themselves pro-life but who supports abortion rights-- no one. I do know many people who call themselves pro-life and yet strongly support the death penalty.

If you are pro-life then you are pro all-life -- it is not your place to decide which lives are valuable and which are not. You can not support the state executing anyone and still call yourself pro-life. You simply can't.

I oppose abortion and the death penalty. At least my views are consistent.
Consistent with what? Pacifism? SOrry but I don't need a complete absolute view to justify what I think. I am pro-life because I don't believe we should be able to murder innocent children. I am also for executing because I believe there should be standards that our society should not allow to happen. That there are people in this world who should be taken out of our society. People on death row get a trial. Then, if found guilty, automatically get another trial. In reality it is about 4-5 trials lasting a little over 10 years. The law was made before they committed the crime. These people aren't innocent. It's not murder.

[spursncowboys]

No - just any progressive initiative you're against.

Free healthcare, foodstamps, redistribution of wealth and free education is not in the Constitution. Protecting the citizens is.

[ChumpDumper]

Consistent with what?The words "pro" and "life."

[spursncowboys]

The words "pro" and "life."
:lol Then explain how an unborn child gets to choose.

[Nbadan]

...all politicians are the same right?

2icSPK7cDeI

[ChumpDumper]

:lol Then explain how an unborn child gets to choose.It doesn't.

It can't.

I don't like calling pro-abortion pro-choice either.

They and the so-called pro-life folks are pretty much all pro-death one way or another.

[Blake]

:lol Then explain how an unborn child gets to choose.

:lol I'd ask you to explain how a death row inmate gets to choose too, but it would be just as irrelevant.

[Yonivore]

so i'm curious, how do soldiers fit in on the "pro-life" spectrum?

i mean i've always been amazed as how the average "pro-lifer" i meet is also rabidly for the death penalty, but what about those who kill in a warzone are they still a murderer?
Once again, there is a distinct difference between an unborn child and a soldier engaged in battle.

[Yonivore]

:lol I'd ask you to explain how a death row inmate gets to choose too, but it would be just as irrelevant.
He chooses when he commits a capital crime knowing the possible consequences.

[spursncowboys]

:lol I'd ask you to explain how a death row inmate gets to choose too, but it would be just as irrelevant.
From the Texas Penal Code:

Sec. 1.02. Objectives of Code.
The general purposes of this code are to establish a system of prohibitions, penalties, and
correctional measures to deal with conduct that unjustifiably and inexcusably causes or threatens
harm to those individual or public interests for which state protection is appropriate. To this end,
the provisions of this code are intended, and shall be construed, to achieve the following
objectives:
(1) to insure the public safety through:
(A) the deterrent influence of the penalties hereinafter provided;
(B) the rehabilitation of those convicted of violations of this code; and
(C) such punishment as may be necessary to prevent likely recurrence of criminal
behavior;
(2) by definition and grading of offenses to give fair warning of what is prohibited and of
the consequences of violation;
(3) to prescribe penalties that are proportionate to the seriousness of offenses and that
permit recognition of differences in rehabilitation possibilities among individual
offenders;
(4) to safeguard conduct that is without guilt from condemnation as criminal;
(5) to guide and limit the exercise of official discretion in law enforcement to prevent
arbitrary or oppressive treatment of persons suspected, accused, or convicted of offenses;
and
(6) to define the scope of state interest in law enforcement against specific offenses and
to systematize the exercise of state criminal jurisdiction.

Sec. 19.02. Murder.
(a) In this section:
(1) "Adequate cause" means cause that would commonly produce a degree of anger, age,
resentment, or terror in a person of ordinary temper, sufficient to render the mind
incapable of cool reflection.
(2) "Sudden passion" means passion directly caused by and arising out of provocation by
the individual killed or another acting with the person killed which passion arises at the
time of the offense and is not solely the result of former provocation.
(b) A person commits an offense if he:
(1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual;
(2) intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits an act clearly dangerous to human
life that causes the death of an individual; or
(3) commits or attempts to commit a felony, other than manslaughter, and in the course of
and in furtherance of the commission or attempt, or in immediate flight from the commis-
sion or attempt, he commits or attempts to commit an act clearly dangerous to human life
that causes the death of an individual.
(c) Except as provided by Subsection (d), an offense under this section is a felony of the first
degree.
(d) At the punishment stage of a trial, the defendant may raise the issue as to whether he caused
the death under the immediate influence of sudden passion arising from an adequate cause. If
the defendant proves the issue in the affirmative by a preponderance of the evidence, the offense
is a felony of the second degree

Sec. 19.03. Capital Murder.
(a) A person commits an offense if the person commits murder as defined under Section
19.02(b)(1) and:
(1) the person murders a peace officer or fireman who is acting in the lawful discharge of
an official duty and who the person knows is a peace officer or fireman;
(2) the person intentionally commits the murder in the course of committing or
attempting to commit kidnapping, burglary, robbery, aggravated sexual assault, arson,
obstruction or retaliation, or terroristic threat under Section 22.07(a)(1), (3), (4), (5), or
(6);
(3) the person commits the murder for remuneration or the promise of remuneration or
employs another to commit the murder for remuneration or the promise of remuneration;
(4) the person commits the murder while escaping or attempting to escape from a penal
institution;
(5) the person, while incarcerated in a penal institution, murders another:
(A) who is employed in the operation of the penal institution; or
(B) with the intent to establish, maintain, or participate in a combination or in the
profits of a combination;
(6) the person:
(A) while incarcerated for an offense under this section or Section 19.02, murders
another; or
(B) while serving a sentence of life imprisonment or a term of 99 years for an
offense under Section 20.04, 22.021, or 29.03, murders another;
(7) the person murders more than one person:
(A) during the same criminal transaction; or
(B) during different criminal transactions but the murders are committed pursuant
to the same scheme or course of conduct;
(8) the person murders an individual under six years of age; or
(9) the person murders another person in retaliation for or on account of the service or
status of the other person as a judge or justice of the supreme court, the court of criminal
appeals, a court of appeals, a district court, a criminal district court, a constitutional
county court, a statutory county court, a justice court, or a municipal court.
(b) An offense under this section is a capital felony.
(c) If the jury or, when authorized by law, the judge does not find beyond a reasonable doubt that
the defendant is guilty of an offense under this section, he may be convicted of murder or of
any other lesser included offense.
Sec. 6.03. Definitions of Culpable Mental States.(a) A person acts intentionally, or with intent, with respect to the nature of his conduct or to a
result of his conduct when it is his conscious objective or desire to engage in the conduct or
cause the result.
(b) A person acts knowingly, or with knowledge, with respect to the nature of his conduct or to
circumstances surrounding his conduct when he is aware of the nature of his conduct or that the
circumstances exist. A person acts knowingly, or with knowledge, with respect to a result of his
conduct when he is aware that his conduct is reasonably certain to cause the result.

Sec. 12.31. Capital Felony.
(a) An individual adjudged guilty of a capital felony in a case in which the state seeks the death
penalty shall be punished by imprisonment in the institutional division for life without parole or
by death. An individual adjudged guilty of a capital felony in a case in which the state does not
seek the death penalty shall be punished by imprisonment in the institutional division for life
without parole.
(b) In a capital felony trial in which the state seeks the death penalty, prospective jurors shall be
informed that a sentence of life imprisonment without parole or death is mandatory on conviction
of a capital felony. In a capital felony trial in which the state does not seek the death penalty,
prospective jurors shall be informed that the state is not seeking the death penalty and that a
sentence of life imprisonment without parole is mandatory on conviction of the capital felony.


http://www.texaspolicecentral.com/penal_code.html

[ploto]

People on death row get a trial. Then, if found guilty, automatically get another trial. In reality it is about 4-5 trials lasting a little over 10 years. The law was made before they committed the crime. These people aren't innocent.

Some of them are, and we know that for a fact.

[Spurminator]

Capital punishment's time is limited. Soon it will be one of those things our children and grandchildren look back on in wonderment of how enough people in a society could be so backward as to let the practice continue... Like slavery, segregation, and anti-gay-marriage legislation.

You guys are on the wrong side of history. Sorry.

[Yonivore]

Capital punishment's time is limited. Soon it will be one of those things our children and grandchildren look back on in wonderment of how enough people in a society could be so backward as to let the practice continue... Like slavery, segregation, and anti-gay-marriage legislation.

You guys are on the wrong side of history. Sorry.
You left abortion off your list.

[Blake]

He chooses when he commits a capital crime knowing the possible consequences.

meh. indirectly.

unless he looks at a map of states with or without the death penalty beforehand.

[Blake]

From the Texas Penal Code:


http://www.texaspolicecentral.com/penal_code.html

Irrelevant. That's why I didn't ask.

[Blake]

You left abortion off your list.

are you 100% against all kinds of abortion?

[Yonivore]

are you 100% against all kinds of abortion?
We've discussed this a bazillion times in this forum.

I have a great deal of compassion for women who choose abortion because of rape, incest, or the fear a pregnancy may cost them their lives and I truly don't know how I would respond if someone I loved found themselves in that situation.

Having said that, I'm 100% opposed to the 99.9% of abortions that do not fall into one of those categories.

If we can't reach agreement on those millions of abortions annually, why interrogate me over the less than 1% that are performed under duress?

[Spurminator]

Abortion will eventually be reduced to rare occurrences as a result of improved birth control and sex education (whose opponents are also on the wrong side of history) as well as scientific advances in completing the development of fetuses outside the womb.

Unfortunate that abortion's opponents continue to fight against the very advances that will eventually bring it to a stop.

[Yonivore]

Abortion will eventually be reduced to rare occurrences as a result of improved birth control and sex education (whose opponents are also on the wrong side of history) as well as scientific advances in completing the development of fetuses outside the womb.

Unfortunate that abortion's opponents continue to fight against the very advances that will eventually bring it to a stop.
So, you condone the killing because people don't have the technological advances necessary to offset their inability to keep their pants on?

[Blake]

We've discussed this a bazillion times in this forum.

I have a great deal of compassion for women who choose abortion because of rape, incest, or the fear a pregnancy may cost them their lives and I truly don't know how I would respond if someone I loved found themselves in that situation.

Having said that, I'm 100% opposed to the 99.9% of abortions that do not fall into one of those categories.

If we can't reach agreement on those millions of abortions annually, why interrogate me over the less than 1% that are performed under duress?

because you are one of the ones bringing up abortion in this thread and I dont recall your stance.

If you think there are circumstances that might require abortion even .01% of the time, then why do you think abortion will be history one day?

[Yonivore]

because you are one of the ones bringing up abortion in this thread and I dont recall your stance.

If you think there are circumstances that might require abortion even .01% of the time, then why do you think abortion will be history one day?
I never said it would be "required" in any circumstances just that I have compassion for those that choose it in some circumstances.

[ChumpDumper]

You left abortion off your list.Because this thread isn't about abortion.

[Spurminator]

So, you condone the killing because people don't have the technological advances necessary to offset their inability to keep their pants on?

It's an unfortunate but temporary necessity until we figure out an alternative to pregnancy. Or agree on how to educate on birth control methods. I'm betting the former comes sooner.

[Yonivore]

It's an unfortunate but temporary necessity until we figure out an alternative to pregnancy.
Pregnancy isn't a disease. And, abortion is taking the life of a human being. It shouldn't be an alternative to anything.

The alternative to pregnancy is not engaging in activities that will result in pregnancy.

[Spurminator]

You should make a sign.

[ChumpDumper]

You should make a sign.Or an amendment.

[Blake]

I never said it would be "required" in any circumstances just that I have compassion for those that choose it in some circumstances.

you said "I'm 100% opposed to the 99.9% of abortions that do not fall into one of those categories."

Again, if you, who are making a hard stance against it, are still leaving the door open, even at less than 1%, then how do you figure it will be history some day?

[Yonivore]

you said "I'm 100% opposed to the 99.9% of abortions that do not fall into one of those categories."

Again, if you, who are making a hard stance against it, are still leaving the door open, even at less than 1%, then how do you figure it will be history some day?
Like Spurminator, I believe it will be much easier to prevent pregnancy in the future and the less than 1% of duress abortions will be unecessary because those that face the problem will have a way of preventing the pregnancy to begin with.

I'm not as equally convinced the sluts of America will avail themselves of the same advances and will, even after the problem is solved, be seeking abortions after the time when such advances would have been effective.

[ChumpDumper]

Like Spurminator, I believe it will be much easier to prevent pregnancy in the future and the less than 1% of duress abortions will be unecessary because those that face the problem will have a way of preventing the pregnancy to begin with.

I'm not as equally convinced the sluts of America will avail themselves of the same advances and will, even after the problem is solved, be seeking abortions after the time when such advances would have been effective.So he shouldn't have included abortion in his list according to you.

[Winehole23]

more on the practical failure. Oklahoma botched the execution of Clayton Lockett:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/state/eyewitness-account-a-minute-by-minute-look-at-what-happened/article_f7764efc-d036-11e3-af7e-0017a43b2370.html

[TDMVPDPOY]

if u dont adapt to society, why should society adapt to you?

[Wild Cobra]

It's only a practical failure because it takes too long to implement.

[Winehole23]

if u dont adapt to society, why should society adapt to you?we have standards in our foundational political compact. procedures like this flaut them.

[Winehole23]

(8th Amendment, I'm looking in your direction)

[boutons_deux]

Study: 4.1% of death sentences bogus (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/29/1295588/-Study-4-1-of-death-sentences-bogus)


http://images.dailykos.com/images/80810/large/lethal_injection.jpg?1398795292


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/29/1295588/-Study-4-1-of-death-sentences-bogus?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailykos%2Findex+%28Daily+Kos %29

but dubya swears the 500+ that TX executed on his watch were 100% guilty.

[Wild Cobra]

Study: 4.1% of death sentences bogus (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/29/1295588/-Study-4-1-of-death-sentences-bogus)


http://images.dailykos.com/images/80810/large/lethal_injection.jpg?1398795292


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/29/1295588/-Study-4-1-of-death-sentences-bogus?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailykos%2Findex+%28Daily+Kos %29

but dubya swears the 500+ that TX executed on his watch were 100% guilty.


So?

Just carry out the ones where their is absolute certainty of guilt.

[Blake]

So?

Just carry out the ones where their is absolute certainty of guilt.

smh

[angrydude]

So?

Just carry out the ones where their is absolute certainty of guilt.

Cops lie, prosecutors hide evidence, judges don't care, jurors don't want to be there.

LOL..........good luck.

I don't trust the state enough to let it execute anybody.

[Shastafarian]

So?UAS! UAS! UAS!


Just carry out the ones where their is absolute certainty of guilt.
How do you propose that be done?

[scott]

So?

Just carry out the ones where their is absolute certainty of guilt.

Yep, we should definitely stop all the "we aren't sure but fry him just in case" executions....

[The Reckoning]

death penalty isn't necessary imo. switch our justice system from one of privately owned slave complexes to a rehabilitation role, legalize substances that don't pose danger to others, and use all that extra freed space to lock up these guys life without parole. done and dusted.

[Winehole23]

Now maybe it’s the fact that Dow is supposedly a two-time offender—over a 20-year career representing scores of clients, in the last-minute chaos of capital litigation—that led to an unprecedented and extreme sanction for a trivial administrative mistake. Or maybe it’s the history of public feuding and recriminations (http://www.abajournal.com/mobile/article/capital_defense_lawyer_suspended_for_late_filing) between the very outspoken Dow and the CCA (http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2009/12/cca-calls-david-dow-on-carpet-for-tardy.html) that led to this bizarre punishment. But no matter the reason, it comes down to this: When one Texas lawyer repeatedly files late and his clients die, he is deemed competent and rewarded with yet more defense work. When another Texas lawyer files late, he’s ineligible to represent his clients for a full year. It could lead Kafka to swallow his own tongue.http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/03/david_dow_suspended_by_texas_court_death_penalty_d efense_lawyer_s_conflicts.single.html

[Blake]

Yep, we should definitely stop all the "we aren't sure but fry him just in case" executions....

Lol

[boutons_deux]

"absolute certainty of guilt"

with long-term, widespread corrupt cops and prosecutors, that just ain't possible.

[Winehole23]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/03/david_dow_support_from_300_lawyers_petition_to_tex as_supreme_court_to_overturn.html

[angrydude]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/03/david_dow_support_from_300_lawyers_petition_to_tex as_supreme_court_to_overturn.html

Sounds like somebody had a big axe to grind.

[Winehole23]

the CCA hates David Dow for being a good lawyer and shaming Sharon Keller, who frankly deserved it.

[Winehole23]

"conduct unbecoming a public servant"

[boutons_deux]

Texas Bar seeks punishment for prosecutor in death penalty conviction

The State Bar of Texas has sought punishment for the prosecutor in a 1992 trial who is suspected of withholding evidence that could have cleared a man convicted of setting a fire that killed his three daughters and was later executed.

Death penalty opponents have said Texas may have executed an innocent man when it sent Cameron Todd Willingham to the death chamber in 2004 after he was convicted of murder in the 1991 house fire, largely on the testimony of a prison informant who told a jury that Willingham had confessed to the crime.

The Texas Bar Association filed a petition this month with a district court to discipline the prosecutor in the case, John Jackson, who could be disbarred.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/19/us-usa-texas-prosecutor-idUSKBN0MF2B220150319?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews

"could be disbarred"? :lol he committed murder, so execute him

[Blake]

Texas Bar seeks punishment for prosecutor in death penalty conviction

The State Bar of Texas has sought punishment for the prosecutor in a 1992 trial who is suspected of withholding evidence that could have cleared a man convicted of setting a fire that killed his three daughters and was later executed.

Death penalty opponents have said Texas may have executed an innocent man when it sent Cameron Todd Willingham to the death chamber in 2004 after he was convicted of murder in the 1991 house fire, largely on the testimony of a prison informant who told a jury that Willingham had confessed to the crime.

The Texas Bar Association filed a petition this month with a district court to discipline the prosecutor in the case, John Jackson, who could be disbarred.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/19/us-usa-texas-prosecutor-idUSKBN0MF2B220150319?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews

"could be disbarred"? :lol he committed murder, so execute him




Fuck...

Texas is so retarded.

[Shastafarian]

Texas Bar seeks punishment for prosecutor in death penalty conviction

The State Bar of Texas has sought punishment for the prosecutor in a 1992 trial who is suspected of withholding evidence that could have cleared a man convicted of setting a fire that killed his three daughters and was later executed.

Death penalty opponents have said Texas may have executed an innocent man when it sent Cameron Todd Willingham to the death chamber in 2004 after he was convicted of murder in the 1991 house fire, largely on the testimony of a prison informant who told a jury that Willingham had confessed to the crime.

The Texas Bar Association filed a petition this month with a district court to discipline the prosecutor in the case, John Jackson, who could be disbarred.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/19/us-usa-texas-prosecutor-idUSKBN0MF2B220150319?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews

"could be disbarred"? :lol he committed murder, so execute him





So?

Just carry out the ones where their is absolute certainty of guilt.

[DMX7]

I fully support the death penalty. Given the number of people who have been executed, has even one person been proven innocent that was executed?

[Winehole23]

They don't hold trials for folks who were already executed, but Todd Willingham might be a good candidate. The prosecutor likely faked documents, hid evidence favorable to the defendant and suborned perjury. And that's totally disregarding the fact that the forensics linking Todd Willingham to the death of his own children was determined to be pseudoscientific and basically folklorical by a panel of scientists after the fact. Rick Perry knew most of this and refused to pardon Willingham or commute his sentence..

[Winehole23]

The Texas CCA recently stayed Rodney Reed's execution for the killing of Stacey Stites. Whether his innocence can be established is neither here nor there...actual innocence is no basis to contest execution post-conviction: in the USA one has to prove the trial was unfair.

[Winehole23]

these guys came very close:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/09/henry_lee_mccollum_cleared_by_dna_evidence_in_nort h_carolina_after_spending.html

[Winehole23]

That same Scalia, in an unrelated case before the Supreme Court 20 years ago, name-checked McCollum as the reason to continue to impose the death penalty. In that case, Callins v. Collins (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/angel/procon/deathissue.html), Justice Harry Blackmun famously announced in dissent that he would no longer “tinker with the machinery of death” and would never again vote for the death penalty in any case. As Blackmun put it at the time: “The problem is that the inevitability of factual, legal and moral error gives us a system that we know must wrongly kill some defendants, a system that fails to deliver the fair, consistent and reliable sentences of death required by the Constitution.”same

[Winehole23]

As of December 10, 2014 there have been 150 exonerations in 26 different States.http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence

[CosmicCowboy]

Texas Bar seeks punishment for prosecutor in death penalty conviction

The State Bar of Texas has sought punishment for the prosecutor in a 1992 trial who is suspected of withholding evidence that could have cleared a man convicted of setting a fire that killed his three daughters and was later executed.

Death penalty opponents have said Texas may have executed an innocent man when it sent Cameron Todd Willingham to the death chamber in 2004 after he was convicted of murder in the 1991 house fire, largely on the testimony of a prison informant who told a jury that Willingham had confessed to the crime.

The Texas Bar Association filed a petition this month with a district court to discipline the prosecutor in the case, John Jackson, who could be disbarred.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/19/us-usa-texas-prosecutor-idUSKBN0MF2B220150319?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews

"could be disbarred"? :lol he committed murder, so execute him




For once, I agree with Boutons. Punishment IS a deterrent to crime. Give this lying prick the needle as an example to other prosecutors to play by the rules.

[spursncowboys]

It is a failure! We need to add child molesters to the kill list!

[boutons_deux]

"Punishment IS a deterrent to crime."

I didn't say that, and obviously it is untrue, but myths and lies are all you right-wingers live by and for.

[Blake]

I fully support the death penalty. Given the number of people who have been executed, has even one person been proven innocent that was executed?

Can't tell if srs...

[TDMVPDPOY]

doesnt matter how many u kill, t heres still plenty of them clowns in prison or in public...

waiting for darwins theory to take effect is very slow, the man needs to outperform darwins theory

[boutons_deux]

Prosecutor Pens Apology to Innocent Man He Sent to Prison for 30 Years: ‘I Wasn’t Interested in Justice’http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/prosecutor-pens-apology-innocent-man-he-sent-prison-30-years-i-wasnt-interested

[Winehole23]

In a major turn in one of the country’s most-noted death penalty cases, the State Bar of Texas has filed a formal accusation of misconduct against the county prosecutor who convicted Cameron Todd Willingham (http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2014/08/03/fresh-doubts-over-a-texas-execution/), a Texas man executed in 2004 for the arson murder of his three young daughters.


Following a preliminary inquiry that began last summer, the bar this month filed a disciplinary petition in Navarro County District Court accusing the former prosecutor, John H. Jackson, of obstruction of justice, making false statements and concealing evidence favorable to Willingham’s defense.


“Before, during, and after the 1992 trial, [Jackson] knew of the existence of evidence that tended to negate the guilt of Willingham and failed to disclose that evidence to defense counsel,” the bar investigators charged.
The bar action was filed March 5 without any public announcement. It accuses Jackson of having intervened repeatedly to help a jailhouse informant, Johnny E. Webb, in return for his testimony that Willingham confessed the murders to him while they were both jailed in Corsicana, the Navarro County seat.


Webb has since recanted that testimony. In a series of recent interviews, he told the Marshall Project that Jackson coerced him to lie, threatening a long prison term for a robbery to which Webb ultimately pleaded guilty, but promising to reduce his sentence if he testified against Willingham.


Jackson has repeatedly denied that he made any pretrial agreement with Webb in exchange for his testimony. The former prosecutor acknowledged that he and others made extraordinary efforts to help Webb, but said they were motivated only by concern for a witness who had been threatened by other prisoners because of his testimony.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/prosecutor-accused-of-misconduct-in-disputed-texas-execution-case/2015/03/18/caa37050-cd77-11e4-8a46-b1dc9be5a8ff_story.html

[Winehole23]

SCOTUS slaps Texas, CCA:


For more than three decades, Moore fought his appeals, once coming within hours of execution. Then, in 2017, the Supreme Court handed down a groundbreaking decision, in a 5-3 ruling determining that Texas had been, for years, not properly measuring intellectual disability in cases like Moore's. The ruling booted Moore's claims back to a lower court, where prosecutors switched course and asked for a life sentence.


But - even though the district attorney's office agreed to the more lenient outcome - the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals didn't, handing down a split decision Moore's lawyers condemned as an "outlier" and "inconsistent" with the higher court.


Last month, Moore's legal team appealed that ruling up to the Supreme Court again, asking the justices to yet again examine the state's standards for intellectual disability, but also asking the high court to consider whether an execution should count as unconstitutional if both sides agree that it is.
"As far as counsel is aware, this Court never has permitted an execution when both the prosecutor and the defendant agree that the defendant is intellectually disabled and ineligible for execution," defense attorney Cliff Sloan and Pat McCann wrote in their Supreme Court filing. "For good reason."
https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Texas-AG-fights-Harris-County-prosecutors-to-keep-13373197.php


1097871636869591040

[boutons_deux]

TX and other slave states imprisoning, executing blacks who were actually mentally incompetent but ruled competent was just another was of re-enslaving blacks (13th Amendment), or "racially cleansing" them.

[Winehole23]

The CCA and Texas are out of line. This is the second remand on this case -- the prosecutor and the defense agree the defendant isn't mentally competent, and the CCA, for some reason, hasn't followed the relevant SCOTUS ruling.

[boutons_deux]

CCA, for some reason, hasn't followed the relevant SCOTUS ruling.

how about "slave state still disrespecting, warring with the Feds"

(the Republic of) Texas is a long, long way from DC in many Texian heads.

[Winehole23]

how about "slave state still disrespecting, warring with the Feds"

(the Republic of) Texas is a long, long way from DC in many Texian heads.Doesn't begin to cover it. 30 states still have the death penalty, over-incarceration isn't peculiar to former slave states.

Swing and a miss.

[boutons_deux]

Doesn't begin to cover it. 30 states still have the death penalty, over-incarceration isn't peculiar to former slave states.

Swing and a miss.

Whiney, I addressed TX alone. Are those other 30 states defying SCOTUS?

[Winehole23]

your argument is still weak. muh confederacy doesn't explain the CCA's reasoning or Texas's tuff on crime posturing.

[boutons_deux]

your argument is still weak. muh confederacy doesn't explain the CCA's reasoning or Texas's tuff on crime posturing.

reasoning is the public bullshit, the real stuff remains private, secret

[Winehole23]

ah, yes, so you can infer anything you want, that's brilliant.

[CosmicCowboy]

TX and other slave states imprisoning, executing blacks who were actually mentally incompetent but ruled competent was just another was of re-enslaving blacks (13th Amendment), or "racially cleansing" them.

Hard to enslave them when you deaded them.

They would be a lot more productive alive.

[Winehole23]

Arkansas murdered the wrong man.

https://twitter.com/ArkansasOnline/status/1388249343149416454?s=20

[Winehole23]

more on the practical failure. Oklahoma botched the execution of Clayton Lockett:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/state/eyewitness-account-a-minute-by-minute-look-at-what-happened/article_f7764efc-d036-11e3-af7e-0017a43b2370.htmlSCOTUS green-lighted another botched OK execution.

1453839224772468739

[Winehole23]

Cash deals in parking lots for execution drugs from shady compounding pharmacies

1483568638053568517

[koriwhat]

:lmao buzzfeed news

[Winehole23]

Legal formalism > the 6th Amendment and doing justice.

"Innocence isn't enough" even though AZ lowered the standard to permit the appointment of an unqualified lawyer in a capital case and at least three courts found the medical testimony faulty.

1529151319918911491

[Winehole23]

the opinion

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1009_19m2.pdf

[SnakeBoy]

Legal formalism > the 6th Amendment and doing justice.

"Innocence isn't enough" even though AZ lowered the standard to permit the appointment of an unqualified lawyer in a capital case and at least three courts found the medical testimony faulty.

1529151319918911491

:tu

[pgardn]

The death penalty and abortion.

Red team still has no definition of a human life.
"You are not a human life anymore. You forfeit that designation because we feels angry at you. Thats the law now. "

[ChumpDumper]

:tuSo being innocent of a crime for which you have been convicted doesn't matter to you?

[SnakeBoy]

Must've done sumthin

[ChumpDumper]

Must've done sumthinProve the other something beyond a reasonable doubt.

Or does that not matter to you either?

[Winehole23]

Must've done sumthinindictment = guilt, interesting take

[Winehole23]

tough luck if the police or the DA get tunnel vision

[Blake]

Must've done sumthin

Being in the wrong place wrong time for some

[RandomGuy]

The death penalty and abortion.

Red team still has no definition of a human life.
"You are not a human life anymore. You forfeit that designation because we feels angry at you. Thats the law now. "

activist judges tbh.

[Winehole23]

Alabama botches another execution


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FdWUx0HXoAAmFPX?format=jpg&name=900x900

1573352906430251008

[Blake]

Yeesh. No way to just do 2- 3 bullets to the head and/or chest? It's the chosen death penalty method for castle doctrine and good guys with guns heroes

[Winehole23]

Yeesh. No way to just do 2- 3 bullets to the head and/or chest? It's the chosen death penalty method for castle doctrine and good guys with guns heroesyou're not supposed to attribute to malice what can readily be put down to incompetence, but there's no reason why the former can't motivate the latter.

[Winehole23]

the botch is a selling point to sadists

[Winehole23]

formalism >justice

1585254743395696640

[Blake]

The Trump administration announced Friday that it will authorize firing squads as a federally permitted method of execution, deepening its push to revive the death penalty — underscoring a sharp divide with Pope Leo XIV and recent Catholic teaching. Hours after the Justice Department made its announcement, the pontiff condemned the death penalty as an attack on human dignity.

https://www.npr.org/2026/04/25/g-s1-118767/pope-leo-trump-death-penalty