|
Post by fuglyville on Dec 7, 2012 20:31:25 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by dogrose on Dec 12, 2012 13:50:41 GMT -6
Funny isnt it, that not one pro had anything to say to this.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Dec 12, 2012 14:18:34 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Dec 13, 2012 10:19:47 GMT -6
Funny isnt it, that not one pro had anything to say to this. There's not much to say. A determination of guilt is the result of human judgment, which isn't infallible. As long as the criminal justice system operates in good faith, the death penalty is supportable. Errant executions don't change that.
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Dec 13, 2012 10:50:02 GMT -6
Funny isnt it, that not one pro had anything to say to this. There's not much to say. A determination of guilt is the result of human judgment, which isn't infallible. As long as the criminal justice system operates in good faith, the death penalty is supportable. Errant executions don't change that. And what of the cases which demonstrate that the criminal justice system cannot be relied upon to operate in good faith? To my mind in such cases no one person has all of the facts or is in a position to ensure the various processes took place as they should have, but then I suppose you've already covered that, innocence count for little as long as the ignorant have their instincts for revenge satisfied. As long as this penalty continues to operate in the uS the way it has, ie: probale cause and motive being enough for thew sate to take your life I think it will never enjoy the unequivocal and unrelating support some pros crave.
|
|
|
Post by kma367 on Dec 13, 2012 10:56:48 GMT -6
This case actually demonstrates that due process works when a person is factually innocent of the crimes for which they were convicted and sentenced to death. Additionally, as I understand it, the evidence that exonerated Thibodaux wasn't available at his original trial, meaning he wasn't convicted due to constitutional error, or in spite of the existence of exculpatory evidence.
kma367
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Dec 14, 2012 11:33:58 GMT -6
This case actually demonstrates that due process works when a person is factually innocent of the crimes for which they were convicted and sentenced to death. Additionally, as I understand it, the evidence that exonerated Thibodaux wasn't available at his original trial, meaning he wasn't convicted due to constitutional error, or in spite of the existence of exculpatory evidence. kma367 Due process works when innocents are executed, as well, as long as the executed were tried fairly.
|
|
|
Post by Potassium_Pixie on Dec 22, 2012 2:31:55 GMT -6
If innocent people are executed, its like the people that committed the crime that the innocent got executed for has another murder under their belt.
|
|
|
Post by starbux on Jan 2, 2013 5:43:47 GMT -6
System works, He's free. If it did not work he would be dead. I think he is happy as a clam
|
|