The death penalty in the USA

[taoist]

Tiny Net

No the victim didnt get an appeal, but mistakes happen so the convicted should get one chance.

Please reconsider your position.

There are a dozen Death Row inmates convicted wrongly in Illinois who failed numerous appeals before their recent exonerations. These were not mere technicalities. In one famous case, the prosecutors, detectives and police officers were found to have manufactered the evidence used to place two men on Death Row.

DuPage county settled the civil suit that resulted at a cost of millions of taxpayer dollars while refusing to indict the actual murderer, known to be guilty by both DNA evidence and a taped confession.

It is necessary to distinguish between conviction and guilt if justice is to be served. An arbitrary cap on the number of appeals does not serve us well. Killing the innocent is a crime in itself.

 

[wholearmor]

Originally posted by Gerald
Ever the pragmatist, I consider the "Oops, wrong guy" factor to be the cost of doing business. No human system is error-free, after all...

...even after several appeals.

 

[Tiny Net]

Originally posted by Gerald
Ever the pragmatist, I consider the "Oops, wrong guy" factor to be the cost of doing business. No human system is error-free, after all...

No system is error-free but what if you were the wrong guy?

 

[Crow]

Originally posted by taoist
Tiny Net Please reconsider your position.

There are a dozen Death Row inmates convicted wrongly in Illinois who failed numerous appeals before their recent exonerations. These were not mere technicalities. In one famous case, the prosecutors, detectives and police officers were found to have manufactered the evidence used to place two men on Death Row.

DuPage county settled the civil suit that resulted at a cost of millions of taxpayer dollars while refusing to indict the actual murderer, known to be guilty by both DNA evidence and a taped confession.

It is necessary to distinguish between conviction and guilt if justice is to be served. An arbitrary cap on the number of appeals does not serve us well. Killing the innocent is a crime in itself.

Taoist, without a cap on the number of appeals, the appeal system will be abused horrendously. I am going to address the Christian system for dealing with one who gives false testimony in a death penalty case--the liar gets the death penalty! That is enough to encourage a little more honesty.

Most of us agree that the system needs to be fixed. Endless appeals do nothing but undermine the system. I would forsee that one would be more likely not to convict if there is reasonable doubt that a person is innocent. And I can predict a real boost in the honesty of prosecution witnesses if false testamony in a capatal is punishable by death.

No system is going to be perfect. Taoist, you can go into the hospital for a tonsillectomy, and end up dead from gross medical errors. The job of administering crimimal justice is too vital to society to withold just because there will be some errors--we need to improve the system AND use it as appropriate. The burden on society of trying to "rehab" murderers and career crimimals and molesters is a crime in and of itself.

 

[Tiny Net]

Originally posted by taoist
Tiny Net Please reconsider your position.

There are a dozen Death Row inmates convicted wrongly in Illinois who failed numerous appeals before their recent exonerations. These were not mere technicalities. In one famous case, the prosecutors, detectives and police officers were found to have manufactered the evidence used to place two men on Death Row.

DuPage county settled the civil suit that resulted at a cost of millions of taxpayer dollars while refusing to indict the actual murderer, known to be guilty by both DNA evidence and a taped confession.

It is necessary to distinguish between conviction and guilt if justice is to be served. An arbitrary cap on the number of appeals does not serve us well. Killing the innocent is a crime in itself.

I agree that perhaps limiting the amount of appeals is the wrong course of action, but I do not think those who are guilty should get to sit on a cell for years bogging down the justice system with a ton of appeals. I dont want to see the innocent people convicted and murdered for a crime they didnt convict, but I also dont want to see the guilty sitting on death row for years at a time.

 

[Turbo]

Originally posted by Gerald
Ever the pragmatist, I consider the "Oops, wrong guy" factor to be the cost of doing business. No human system is error-free, after all...

I agree with Gerald. (gasp!)

Appeals make it harder to execute swiftly. Also, it's just as bad to let a guilty man go as it is to execute the wrong man unintentionally. The system should not be biased toward doing one for fear of doing the other.


He who justifies the wicked, and he who condemns the just, Both of them alike are an abomination to the LORD. Proverbs 17:15

 

[wholearmor]

Originally posted by Tiny Net
No system is error-free but what if you were the wrong guy?

Here I come, Jesus.

 

[Tiny Net]

Originally posted by wholearmor
Here I come, Jesus.

You and I might not fear death, but that seems like a crummy way to go out.

 

[Tiny Net]

Originally posted by Turbo
I agree with Gerald. (gasp!)

Appeals make it harder to execute swiftly. Also, it's just as bad to let a guilty man go as it is to execute the wrong man unintentionally. The system should not be biased toward doing one for fear of doing the other.


He who justifies the wicked, and he who condemns the just, Both of them alike are an abomination to the LORD. Proverbs 17:15

So you are suggesting that if we are going to be guilty of doing one of the two its better to kill the innocent than to release the guilty?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Tiny, you do agree (as God states) that a swiftly instituted death penalty is a VERY efficient deterrent correct?

 

[Turbo]

Originally posted by Tiny Net
So you are suggesting that if we are going to be guilty of doing one of the two its better to kill the innocent than to release the guilty?

I'm saying that we should not bias the system so that it is more likely that the guilty go free than for the innocent to be executed.

By biasing the system in favor of freeing the guilty, more innocents will die at the hands of criminals than would be killed by a wrongful conviction, because would-be murderers will realize they have a better chance of getting away with it.

God says that a matter is established on the testimony of two or three witnesses (strong pieces of evidence). I agree that is a reasonable standard to establish guilt.

Don't forget, bearing false witness in a murder trial should be a capital crime.

 

[Turbo]

Also, by minimizing crime with proper use of the death penalty, there are far fewer opportunities to convict an innocent.

 

[Tiny Net]

Originally posted by Turbo
I'm saying that we should not bias the system so that it is more likely that the guilty go free than for the innocent to be executed.

By biasing the system in favor of freeing the guilty, more innocents will die at the hands of criminals than would be killed by a wrongful conviction, because would-be murderers will realize they have a better chance of getting away with it.

God says that a matter is established on the testimony of two or three witnesses (strong pieces of evidence). I agree that is a reasonable standard to establish guilt.

Don't forget, bearing false witness in a murder trial should be a capital crime.

What you are saying is making sense but it is hard for me to just write off the people who are executed but were innocent, even if their number is small.

 

[Turbo]

It's like a war... there may be unintentional collateral damage, but a longterm benefit (saving innocent lives by preventing crime) is greater.

 

[Turbo]

Ain't I a sweetheart?

 

[Aimiel]

Our Little 'Fix' for Society's Ills

Our Little 'Fix' for Society's Ills

I remember in grade school, several of us guys on the basketball team got together and talked about JFK being killed. We agreed that anyone who points a loaded gun at someone (outside the law / self-defense) needs to spend life in prison; and that anyone who pulled a trigger on one (same caveats) needs to be put to death, within 30 days of the crime, so people hear about it in the news.

 

[Turbo]

Ah... I found it.

"If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and who, when they have chastened him, will not heed them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city, to the gate of his city. And they shall say to the elders of his city, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.' Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death with stones; so you shall put away the evil from among you, and all Israel shall hear and fear. Deuteronomy 21:18-21

 

[Tiny Net]

Originally posted by Turbo
It's like a war... there may be unintentional collateral damage, but a longterm benefit (saving innocent lives by preventing crime) is greater.

Speaking of collateral damage, that one bothers me as well. Even though I know it is for a greater good... it still bothers me. Cant say that I make sense, can only tell ya how I feel.

 

[Turbo]

Aimiel, I'm all for the swift public/publicized execution of murderers (successful or attempted), but God's Word does not authorize prison to be used as a form of punishment for any crime.

 

[Turbo]

Originally posted by Tiny Net
Speaking of collateral damage, that one bothers me as well. Even though I know it is for a greater good... it still bothers me. Cant say that I make sense, can only tell ya how I feel.

I bothers me too, believe me... Just not as much as the alternative.