|
Post by Stormyweather on Dec 13, 2006 11:13:25 GMT -6
Evidence questioned ahead of execution
Jenny Greenburg didn't mince words when talking about the execution of Angel Nieves Diaz, scheduled today at Florida State Prison. "Putting someone to death on the word of a jailhouse snitch is un-American," said Greenburg, director of the Florida Innocence Initiative. Nieves, 55, was convicted and sentenced to death for killing Miami topless club manager Joseph Nagy in 1979. The conviction was largely based on the testimony of a jailhouse informant, Ralph Gajus, who occupied a nearby cell and said Nieves — who spoke poor English — admitted he was the triggerman by miming the shooting. Gajus later said he made up the story. But unless the Supreme Court steps in, Nieves will be executed at 6 p.m. today in the Bradford County prison. State and federal appeals courts have found the evidence has already been considered and also rejected Nieves's claim that lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment. Greenberg, who runs the nonprofit seeking to overturn wrongful convictions, said the case illustrates that jailhouse informants are notoriously unreliable. Such informants often trade testimony for lesser sentences or favorable treatment, she said. Jailhouse informants are the leading cause of wrongful convictions in U.S. capital cases, according to a report by the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University. The report found that 51 death row inmates have been exonerated who were initially convicted on the word of jailhouse informants. State Attorney Bill Cervone, prosecutor for the six-county district including Alachua County, said he's reluctant to rely on the word of a jailhouse informant. He said he'd be unlikely to base a case on an informant's word if there was no other evidence. "We're very cautious about it because there are obvious agendas involved," he said. In the Nieves case, Gajus said police promised to help him with his own case. He was later sentenced to 20 years for second-degree murder. Greenburg said one of Florida's best known wrongful convictions was due to a jailhouse informant. Based on the testimony from convicted murderer Clarence Zacke, Wilton Dedge was sentenced to life in prison for sexual battery and other changes in Brevard County. An investigation by the New York-based Innocence Project found Zacke received a drastic reduction in his sentence by claiming Dedge confessed while they were being transported together. DNA evidence proved Dedge didn't do it, leading to his release after 22 years in prison. Carolyn Snurkowski, who is representing the state in the Nieves case, said it's up to a jury to decide whether an informant is reliable. She said she doesn't have a problem with such testimony being used if jurors are informed of any deals being given. "It's in their hands to make a credibility determination," she said. But Greenburg supports allowing judges to determine credibility before allowing such testimony. "The presumption should be this is not credible evidence unless the state proves otherwise," she said. Nieves was convicted of first-degree murder, four counts of kidnapping, two counts of armed robbery, one count of attempted robbery and one count of possessing a firearm during the commission of a felony for a holdup at a bar. Nieves' prior record includes a second-degree murder conviction in his native Puerto Rico and escapes there and in Connecticut. In 1981, he escaped from the Hartford Correctional Center by holding one guard at knifepoint while another was beaten as he and three other inmates escaped, according to court records. www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061213/LOCAL/612130315/-1/news
|
|
|
Post by yasgersfarm on Dec 13, 2006 11:56:28 GMT -6
Nieves' prior record includes a second-degree murder conviction in his native Puerto Rico and escapes there and in Connecticut. In 1981, he escaped from the Hartford Correctional Center by holding one guard at knifepoint while another was beaten as he and three other inmates escaped, according to court records.
This alone is sufficient.
Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Dec 13, 2006 12:00:24 GMT -6
Nieves' prior record includes a second-degree murder conviction in his native Puerto Rico and escapes there and in Connecticut. In 1981, he escaped from the Hartford Correctional Center by holding one guard at knifepoint while another was beaten as he and three other inmates escaped, according to court records. This alone is sufficient. Thanks. Am I understanding you're supporting his execution?
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Dec 13, 2006 12:19:34 GMT -6
Nieves' prior record includes a second-degree murder conviction in his native Puerto Rico and escapes there and in Connecticut. In 1981, he escaped from the Hartford Correctional Center by holding one guard at knifepoint while another was beaten as he and three other inmates escaped, according to court records. This alone is sufficient. Thanks. Am I understanding you're supporting his execution? That's certainly how I read his post, Stormy.
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Agave on Dec 13, 2006 12:52:40 GMT -6
Nieves' prior record includes a second-degree murder conviction in his native Puerto Rico and escapes there and in Connecticut. In 1981, he escaped from the Hartford Correctional Center by holding one guard at knifepoint while another was beaten as he and three other inmates escaped, according to court records. This alone is sufficient. Thanks. Am I understanding you're supporting his execution? I don't think Yas is necessarily saying that. One can be an anti and still agree that said inmate is guilty of the crime that landed him on DR.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Dec 13, 2006 12:58:12 GMT -6
Am I understanding you're supporting his execution? I don't think Yas is necessarily saying that. One can be an anti and still agree that said inmate is guilty of the crime that landed him on DR. Yag's didn't say he was guilty of what he was being executed for but his other crimes made in sufficent.
|
|
|
Post by yasgersfarm on Dec 13, 2006 14:55:00 GMT -6
Nieves' prior record includes a second-degree murder conviction in his native Puerto Rico and escapes there and in Connecticut. In 1981, he escaped from the Hartford Correctional Center by holding one guard at knifepoint while another was beaten as he and three other inmates escaped, according to court records. This alone is sufficient. Thanks. Am I understanding you're supporting his execution? Again. Isn't the above sufficient enough? That dog Bites. I'm recently having an extraordinarily difficult time with my personal pro/anti position. Some days, like today, it is very very clear to me that this particular individual, based on the last paragraph of the article, is dangerous enough to be eliminated from society. Being from Texas where something like 100 years ago we were still hanging people for stealing horses (and justifiably so). When I was in high school, it was up to life in Texas for first posession of marijuana and first conviction of burglary of a habitat. But you could drive down I35 with an open bottle of Jack Daniels between your knees. Go figure. Lately I am particularly vexed by the government intruding into my life and thieves intruding into my house. And babysitters murdering their charges and having a certain segment of our contemporary american society question the diligence of the parents in choosing the sitter, ergo blaming them for the murder. But that's another thread. And a president who takes the bit in his mouth and attempts an Alexander the Great. I, for one, am just delighted to see the recent Republican defection. To the war mongers with whom I have been engaging in our own private little virtual war on this site, looks like I was right. My wife and I have recently been having real conversations about changing countries. We both really like The Netherlands and Norway. Anywhere up there. Man. What a rant.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Dec 13, 2006 15:56:35 GMT -6
Sorry Yags, I was unaware that you were a pro some days.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Dec 13, 2006 16:00:13 GMT -6
My wife and I have recently been having real conversations about changing countries. We both really like The Netherlands and Norway. Anywhere up there. Man. What a rant. I think you should do it. If you're not happy here then you should go where you think you might be happier.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2006 16:12:28 GMT -6
This case seems a little week, but factor in his previous homicide and jail escape, I have no problem seeing him juiced.
|
|
|
Post by yasgersfarm on Dec 13, 2006 16:27:00 GMT -6
This case seems a little week, but factor in his previous homicide and jail escape, I have no problem seeing him juiced. THAT's what I mean. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by yasgersfarm on Dec 13, 2006 16:31:58 GMT -6
My wife and I have recently been having real conversations about changing countries. We both really like The Netherlands and Norway. Anywhere up there. Man. What a rant. I think you should do it. If you're not happy here then you should go where you think you might be happier. Aww, grass is greener syndrome. It just seems that things are getting a little screwy around here. Big Brother is not just watching you, he's standing in your shower with you nowadays. I thought the 'right to keep and bear arms' was a constitutional right. What are all the laws and restrictions about? WHY does it take 20 years to execute someone who has been sentenced? I have avoided involvement in programs at Church and Schools involving my interaction with children for fear of some toddler's parents taking criticism of their childs performance as 'scarring for life' and me winding up in court. It's just gotten rediculous. There is absolutely No Such Thing as a simple 'accident' anymore. this whole country is locked into the 'Blame Assessment Phase' of the great American project. Harrumh...
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Dec 13, 2006 16:42:56 GMT -6
I think you should do it. If you're not happy here then you should go where you think you might be happier. Aww, grass is greener syndrome. It just seems that things are getting a little screwy around here. Big Brother is not just watching you, he's standing in your shower with you nowadays. I thought the 'right to keep and bear arms' was a constitutional right. What are all the laws and restrictions about? WHY does it take 20 years to execute someone who has been sentenced? I have avoided involvement in programs at Church and Schools involving my interaction with children for fear of some toddler's parents taking criticism of their childs performance as 'scarring for life' and me winding up in court. It's just gotten rediculous. There is absolutely No Such Thing as a simple 'accident' anymore. this whole country is locked into the 'Blame Assessment Phase' of the great American project. Harrumh... I'm not sure what you've been sniffing and I'm not sure what you're point exactly is. Like I said if you're miserable in the USA go where you think you'll be happier. I don't like to see people be miserable.
|
|
|
Post by yasgersfarm on Dec 13, 2006 17:45:24 GMT -6
Aww, grass is greener syndrome. It just seems that things are getting a little screwy around here. Big Brother is not just watching you, he's standing in your shower with you nowadays. I thought the 'right to keep and bear arms' was a constitutional right. What are all the laws and restrictions about? WHY does it take 20 years to execute someone who has been sentenced? I have avoided involvement in programs at Church and Schools involving my interaction with children for fear of some toddler's parents taking criticism of their childs performance as 'scarring for life' and me winding up in court. It's just gotten rediculous. There is absolutely No Such Thing as a simple 'accident' anymore. this whole country is locked into the 'Blame Assessment Phase' of the great American project. Harrumh... I'm not sure what you've been sniffing and I'm not sure what you're point exactly is. Like I said if you're miserable in the USA go where you think you'll be happier. I don't like to see people be miserable. Ok. Let's try again: Aww, grass is greener syndrome. Read: 'just groussing' On the other hand, NPR had a segment about America loosing foreign business investment because it has become Rediculously difficult to conduct business here because of all of the documentation and regulations and risk of getting sued. It's just too expensive.
|
|
|
Post by phatkat on Dec 13, 2006 18:16:22 GMT -6
I don't think that the testimony of a jailhouse snitch should ever be the basis for giving someone the dp.
Granted, I think the dp should be abolished; but while we've got it, it should never be used on that basis.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Dec 13, 2006 18:29:36 GMT -6
I'm not sure what you've been sniffing and I'm not sure what you're point exactly is. Like I said if you're miserable in the USA go where you think you'll be happier. I don't like to see people be miserable. Ok. Let's try again: Aww, grass is greener syndrome. Read: 'just groussing' On the other hand, NPR had a segment about America loosing foreign business investment because it has become Rediculously difficult to conduct business here because of all of the documentation and regulations and risk of getting sued. It's just too expensive. Stop smoking you know what!
|
|
|
Post by Lotus Flower on Dec 13, 2006 23:03:55 GMT -6
I don't think that the testimony of a jailhouse snitch should ever be the basis for giving someone the dp. Granted, I think the dp should be abolished; but while we've got it, it should never be used on that basis. It wasn't. During the sentencing phase, the defendant's past criminal behavior as well as other items that may not have been brought to trial previously can be admissable and in this instance, I believe they were. I have a question though. If you are saying that someone in jail is a liar and shouldn't be believed, why do you write them?
|
|
|
Post by RickZ on Dec 13, 2006 23:58:02 GMT -6
My wife and I have recently been having real conversations about changing countries. We both really like The Netherlands and Norway. Anywhere up there. On this point, you may want to do some reading, like this Afterposten article. [ftp]http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article1567514.ece[/ftp] 12 Dec 2006 Rape reports soar in Oslo Nearly 300 women have sought help so far this year from Oslo's emergency clinic handling rape victims. That's a higher per capita rate than New York City's, . . . The clinic (voldtektsmottak) at the emergency hospital known as Legevakt has never had so many rape victims to treat. Its ability to care for them all is being severely tested. The number of reported rapes has skyrocketed this year, from 235 last year. . . . ----- And just who is responsible for the increase in rapes in Oslo? Who else? From 2001: www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article190268.ece05 Sep 2001 Oslo rape statistics shock Two out of three charged with rape in Norway's capital are immigrants with a non-western background according to a police study. The number of rape cases is also rising steadily.The study is the first where the crime statistics have been analyzed according to ethnic origin. Of the 111 charged with rape in Oslo last year, 72 were of non-western ethnic origin, 25 are classified as Norwegian or western and 14 are listed as unknown. Rape charges in the capital are spiraling upwards, 40 percent higher from 1999 to 2000 and up 13 percent so far this year. Nine out of ten cases do not make it to prosecution, most of them because police do not believe the evidence is sufficient to reach a conviction. Police Inspector Gunnar Larsen of Oslo's Vice, Robbery and Violent crime division says the statistics are surprising - the rising number of rape cases and the link to ethnic background are both clear trends. But Larsen does not want to speculate on the reasons behind the worrying developments. [Ed. - But of course he doesn't want to speculate! It would be 'islamophobic' of him to do so.]----- I would say that while the grass may appear greener, it might just be a paint job.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 14, 2006 4:18:25 GMT -6
I don't think that the testimony of a jailhouse snitch should ever be the basis for giving someone the dp. I could not agree more!
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Dec 14, 2006 4:49:05 GMT -6
I don't think that the testimony of a jailhouse snitch should ever be the basis for giving someone the dp. I could not agree more! Me too, it seems anything a criminal says is taken with a pich of salt and considered worthless, unless they are convincting another person or even sending them to DR. Seems like a double standard and hypocritical to my mind.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 14, 2006 5:14:35 GMT -6
My wife and I have recently been having real conversations about changing countries. We both really like The Netherlands and Norway. Anywhere up there. On this point, you may want to do some reading, like this Afterposten article. [ftp]http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article1567514.ece[/ftp] 12 Dec 2006 Rape reports soar in Oslo Nearly 300 women have sought help so far this year from Oslo's emergency clinic handling rape victims. That's a higher per capita rate than New York City's, . . . The clinic (voldtektsmottak) at the emergency hospital known as Legevakt has never had so many rape victims to treat. Its ability to care for them all is being severely tested. The number of reported rapes has skyrocketed this year, from 235 last year. . . . ----- And just who is responsible for the increase in rapes in Oslo? Who else? From 2001: www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article190268.ece05 Sep 2001 Oslo rape statistics shock Two out of three charged with rape in Norway's capital are immigrants with a non-western background according to a police study. The number of rape cases is also rising steadily.The study is the first where the crime statistics have been analyzed according to ethnic origin. Of the 111 charged with rape in Oslo last year, 72 were of non-western ethnic origin, 25 are classified as Norwegian or western and 14 are listed as unknown. Rape charges in the capital are spiraling upwards, 40 percent higher from 1999 to 2000 and up 13 percent so far this year. Nine out of ten cases do not make it to prosecution, most of them because police do not believe the evidence is sufficient to reach a conviction. Police Inspector Gunnar Larsen of Oslo's Vice, Robbery and Violent crime division says the statistics are surprising - the rising number of rape cases and the link to ethnic background are both clear trends. But Larsen does not want to speculate on the reasons behind the worrying developments. [Ed. - But of course he doesn't want to speculate! It would be 'islamophobic' of him to do so.]----- I would say that while the grass may appear greener, it might just be a paint job. I have seen more of Scandinavia than 99% of all Scandinavians and there is no doubt in my mind that the raising crime rate in Oslo, and elsewhere in Scandinavia, is a direct result of so many immigrants from the Third World living there. About 15 years ago my uncle (now deceased) had no sooner stepped off of a train in Copenhagen than he was knocked down by a gang of individuals (None of them Danes) and relieved of his luggage. A few months ago I was standing on a sidewalk in Copenhagen reading some real state flyers when I suddenly felt a hand go into my right back pocket. I turned around in a flash and latched onto the would-be pickpocket and used my grappling skills to subdue him with a wristlock. As it turned out he was not Danish (He was black) and he had not gotten my wallet.
|
|
|
Post by Lotus Flower on Dec 14, 2006 8:11:35 GMT -6
I have a question though. If you are saying that someone in jail is a liar and shouldn't be believed, why do you write them? Okay then, Felix, Oslo and Phat...can you answer the above then? Since you all so eloquently stated they are not to be believed on anything they say. Or is it just in the case of another criminal?
|
|
|
Post by phatkat on Dec 14, 2006 8:29:30 GMT -6
I don't think that the testimony of a jailhouse snitch should ever be the basis for giving someone the dp. Granted, I think the dp should be abolished; but while we've got it, it should never be used on that basis. It wasn't. During the sentencing phase, the defendant's past criminal behavior as well as other items that may not have been brought to trial previously can be admissable and in this instance, I believe they were. I have a question though. If you are saying that someone in jail is a liar and shouldn't be believed, why do you write them? I have written to one, in the past, and I have said before that I didn't take much of anything he said to the bank. I was more curious about what he had to say and how he would say it. I'll never know what was true and what was false, and that's one of the reasons it was interesting. Gave me some perspective. Remember, I'm not one of the ones who meets my boyfriends through the mail. I believe that the testimony of a jailhouse snitch shouldn't be believed because they have too much to gain, in many cases, from making up a story. They often get reduced sentences in exchange for their testimony. Heck, if I were serving 30 years for a crime and I knew that all I had to do was go to court and say that my cellmate told me all about killing some guy, and I'd go down to 10, maybe 5 years, I'd do it in a heartbeat. There's virtually no way to catch them in a lie since it's one person's word against another. Past criminal behavior...that's kinda sketchy too. On one hand, I can see why it's admissible - people who commit crimes are more likely than the average joe to do it again. At the same time, those crimes are over and done with and the guy's (legally) paid the price for them. It's evidence, but it's slim evidence at best. It doesn't really prove the guy had anything to do with the crime in question.
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Dec 14, 2006 9:37:18 GMT -6
I have a question though. If you are saying that someone in jail is a liar and shouldn't be believed, why do you write them? Okay then, Felix, Oslo and Phat...can you answer the above then? Since you all so eloquently stated they are not to be believed on anything they say. Or is it just in the case of another criminal? Well for a start I dont write to anybody in jail. You appear to be inviting to to reply for someone that does, and I cant really answer for another p0erson why they do. I can merely guess, with some folk I could see them write out of religious convictions and beleifs coming from jesus said about prisoners. For a secular humanist they may think that someone on death row, albeit their crime, deserves some human contact. Was'nt it Mother Theresa who wrote a verse, to the effect that sometimes your kindness is not returned, or your trust justified, but she advises do it anyway. I can accept the crime of killing another is indeed a terrible one, but I can also see why folk feel that locking someone up with the intention of killing them at some point, and then trying to treat then like sh1t in the meantime on top is equally cruel and inhuman.
|
|
|
Post by Lotus Flower on Dec 14, 2006 10:57:04 GMT -6
Okay then, Felix, Oslo and Phat...can you answer the above then? Since you all so eloquently stated they are not to be believed on anything they say. Or is it just in the case of another criminal? Well for a start I dont write to anybody in jail. You appear to be inviting to to reply for someone that does, and I cant really answer for another p0erson why they do. I can merely guess, with some folk I could see them write out of religious convictions and beleifs coming from jesus said about prisoners. For a secular humanist they may think that someone on death row, albeit their crime, deserves some human contact. Was'nt it Mother Theresa who wrote a verse, to the effect that sometimes your kindness is not returned, or your trust justified, but she advises do it anyway. I can accept the crime of killing another is indeed a terrible one, but I can also see why folk feel that locking someone up with the intention of killing them at some point, and then trying to treat then like sh1t in the meantime on top is equally cruel and inhuman. No hon, you missed the point. I think Kat got more where I was going. If you say that the guy in jail who fingered him could not be believed, then why believe ANYTHING ANY prisoner has to say? We've heard the argument that some of those on DR are innocent and it's mainly on the inmate's word that most are saying this. So, I'm asking, is it only when they happen to be someone "you" would personally sympathize with for whatever reason that you say... "OMG there are innocents on DR" and believe the guy? Because an inmate technically has no freedom, so whether it's offering up info on another inmate for a deal or offering up their "innocence" story to a gullible writer, they would have something to gain in both scenarios, no? Then why is one out but the other not? And btw, Kat, thanks for the honest response. You and I have come to an understanding on this issue and I see where you come from. So if/when I say scumpal, I never see you, just so ya know. Frankly, you seem far too intelligent for that. Obviously you are, you tried it, thought okay yeah thanks, then stopped. Also, you recognize that the guy was/could be blowing smoke. That seems very honest to me.
|
|
|
Post by phatkat on Dec 14, 2006 13:57:56 GMT -6
Thank you. And as far as innocence goes, there are/have been some people on DR whose innocence I question, but I have never (a) said there are definitely innocent people on DR, or (b) said that any DR inmate specifically is innocent (I have said they may be). I believe that there are people on DR that, as far as I can see, don't have enough evidence against them to warrent their being there. I have come to those conclusions based on documentation, not on the inmate's own words on a website.
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Dec 14, 2006 15:36:00 GMT -6
I thought the 'right to keep and bear arms' was a constitutional right. What are all the laws and restrictions about? Holland and Norway are both great places, but I'm sure you realize that whatever gun access restrictions you feel are a burden to you in America will pale in comparison to those over there!
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 14, 2006 23:23:04 GMT -6
Bruce Bawer writes in the Hudson Review:
"Yes, there’s much about the American news media that deserves criticism, from the vulgar personality journalism of Larry King and Diane Sawyer to the cultural polarization nourished by the many publishers and TV news producers who prefer sensation to substance. But to suggest that American journalism, taken as a whole, offers a narrower range of information and debate than its foreign counterparts is absurd. America’s major political magazines range from National Review and The Weekly Standard on the right to The Nation and Mother Jones on the left; its all-news networks, from conservative Fox to liberal CNN; its leading newspapers, from the New York Post and Washington Times to the New York Times and Washington Post. Scores of TV programs and radio call-in shows are devoted to fiery polemic by, or vigorous exchanges between, true believers at both ends of the political spectrum. Nothing remotely approaching this breadth of news and opinion is available in a country like Norway. Purportedly to strengthen journalistic diversity (which, in the ludicrous words of a recent prime minister, “is too important to be left up to the marketplace”), Norway’s social-democratic government actually subsidizes several of the country’s major newspapers (in addition to running two of its three broadcast channels and most of its radio); yet the Norwegian media are (guess what?) almost uniformly social-democratic—a fact reflected not only in their explicit editorial positions but also in the slant and selectivity of their international coverage.3 Reading the opinion pieces in Norwegian newspapers, one has the distinct impression that the professors and bureaucrats who write most of them view it as their paramount function not to introduce or debate fresh ideas but to remind the masses what they’re supposed to think. The same is true of most of the journalists, who routinely spin the news from the perspective of social-democratic orthodoxy, systematically omitting or misrepresenting any challenge to that orthodoxy—and almost invariably presenting the U.S. in a negative light. Most Norwegians are so accustomed to being presented with only one position on certain events and issues (such as the Iraq War) that they don’t even realize that there exists an intelligent alternative position."
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 15, 2006 0:12:12 GMT -6
Okay then, Felix, Oslo and Phat...can you answer the above then? Since you all so eloquently stated they are not to be believed on anything they say. Or is it just in the case of another criminal? Where did I state, “they are not to be believed on anything they say”?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2007 18:36:09 GMT -6
Of course the crimes are being comitted by third-worlders....there's a reason why these people are unable to create a modern society. A large percentage of them are immoral morons. Of course, instead of stating the obvious and risk being called a "racist", instead we let them mass migrate into our country and rape our women and kill us.
|
|