|
Post by SubSurfCPO(ret) on Mar 19, 2009 9:17:00 GMT -6
Yes sir, it is gray at best.
However, I have to evaluate the facts before me and the fact remains that no one, not one person or group has been able to prove that an innocent person has been executed.
Felix took me to task in an earlier post on my perceived ambiguity. I am clearing things up a bit and making a definitive statement.
There is no proof I am wrong, there is equal lack of proof that I am right and that is the rub. I say that the circumstantial evidence and the lack of any real proof that an innocent person has been executed is satisfactory. Many are going to disagree with me because of the same lack of proof. Personally, I have to draw a line and take a stand somewhere. What if scenarios are an exercise in endless arguments and I find them to be a waste of time.
To quote Dennis Hopper again - if are the two middle letters in life
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Mar 19, 2009 9:28:49 GMT -6
too many on the pro dp side have a vested interest and strong personal belief in that its working. That's exactly what I see, as well. The weakest pros are the ones who couldn't handle the execution of an innocent and therefore block such a possibility from their minds. There is no reasoning with such people. Present them with proof, and they still won't believe it. You might as well argue with a chimpanzee. some think if one is executed accidentally then that is a price to pay. That is the only credible defense of capital punishment. One has to weigh the high probability of an executed innocent, in the past or in the future, against whatever benefits accrue from a working death penalty. The problem with capital punishment now is that it has been fined-tuned beyond all reason, and that's the fault of the pros, not the antis. Justice is now delayed for decades, long after the public has forgotten about the murders being punished, and, like dumb animals, the public does absolutely nothing about it. I would find it very difficult to come to terms with anyone deliberately going out of their way to ensure a conviction especially if they knew that the individual in the dock is innocent. That would be evil beyond words and callous in the extreme. Even more so if they use DNA evidence to frame an innocent defendant. That will happen, if it hasn't happened already.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2009 10:29:40 GMT -6
Impossible - no More likely to be struck by lightning - yes All the "what ifs" made up and posted on the internet by activist antis and pen pals - these do not innocents make. If anyone assumes that I have little reason to believe those claims, well they are right. More of those claims have been proven to be fabrications than there have been exonerations (and those exonerations were in the vast majority based on technicalities anyway to boot). You'll never know for sure unless you observed each trial yourself. The appeals opinions only list those things being contested. They don't always address the totality of the evidence that was presented. And they cannot address the observation of the witnesses' demeanor, which can indicate whether they are telling the truth or not. That's what the juries are for. That's what trials being open to observation by the public are for. So it's all done in public and the totality of the facts are subject to public scrutiny from the beginning. So will I believe that penpal/activist websites on the internet are more reliable sources of information? Not after all the lies and misrepresentations on the internet I have seen going on about my daughter's murderer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2009 10:32:53 GMT -6
Well, now I'm totally baffled... www.vvdailypress.com/news/jury_11398___article.html/bad_meth.htmlZimmerman was convicted of first-degree murder of Paul January but only faces 25 years to life. I thought if the prosecution went for a capital offense (nowadays) and a jury found for 1st degree murder, it was an automatic LWOP or death, and to get a lesser sentence, the jury would have to find the perp guilty of a lesser murder (2nd, etc). What gives?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2009 10:41:32 GMT -6
It is called circumstantial evidence and is used in many cases when no "smoking gun" can be found. Can you prove an innocent person has been executed - No, you cannot. In all of the years all of the trials, all of the executions, all of the hashing and rehashing of evidence can you prove it - again No.? Did you see it - No, can you prove it beyond the shadow of a doubt - No.? That is what the evidence tells me. Theoretically, I can argue anything up to and including aliens did it. Can I prove it - No.? What do the facts in evidence indicate - they indicate that we have not executed an innocent person. Conclusion - we have not executed an innocent person in the US in recent history and definitely not since the advent and use of DNA. Back to you I understand your point of view but I cannot understand your belief in scientific proof and evidence. It would mean that scientists never argue with each other, right? Well, they do. There are hundreds of theories about the early beginning of the earth, the development of living creatures and even the snoring of cats. One group of scientists can come up with proof and immediately get attacked by other scientists and their kinds of evidence. So, I agree with your "can you prove that an innocent is been executed? No." I also agree with my: "Can you prove that no innocent has ever been executed? No". But even without evidence about the dp, there IS evidence that human beings make mistakes. They do. So how can you be absolutely sure that after more than 1200 executions no one, without any doubt, has been innocent and executed anyway, while this simple fact that human beings make mistakes does excist? Yep scientific proof and the totality of the evidence presented in a publicly scrutinized and lawful process aside, the experience that comes from 25 years of a relationship with a proven brutal vicious murderer could let us all know what's most important to consider. Sure.
|
|
|
Post by SubSurfCPO(ret) on Mar 19, 2009 10:59:38 GMT -6
...and sometimes we must rely on people to make a decision based on the evidence before them. They would actually have to think and reach an informed conclusion and decision.
All twelve of them must do this at one time. It is like the planets aligning. It doesn't just happen and innocent people don't get convicted in this scenario. Then just to make sure we got it right; the condemned gets to appeal and appeal and appeal. There is no rubber stamp and as many here are painfully aware of, sometimes an obviously guilty person is saved from the DP on a technicality just because we err on the side of caution. Then, if the seemingly endless appeal process were not enough, the condemned gets a chance with a governor. The length of time these people spend on death row does not guarantee the governor will be a pro or anti so, they have as good a chance as any at getting lucky.
Then and only then after years the state gets to carry out a sentence that was handed down years sometimes decades before.
This is very far from the casual and frivolous route some would make you believe is the path from crime to trial to prison to death chamber.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Mar 19, 2009 11:19:50 GMT -6
Zimmerman was convicted of first-degree murder of Paul January but only faces 25 years to life. I thought if the prosecution went for a capital offense (nowadays) and a jury found for 1st degree murder, it was an automatic LWOP or death, and to get a lesser sentence, the jury would have to find the perp guilty of a lesser murder (2nd, etc). What gives? Under California Penal Code Sec. 190, the default penalty for first degree murder is 25-to-life. Special circumstances must be alleged and found to be true in order to sentence a first-degree murderer to either LWOP or DP.
|
|
|
Post by Lisa on Mar 19, 2009 11:21:07 GMT -6
Zimmerman was convicted of first-degree murder of Paul January but only faces 25 years to life. I thought if the prosecution went for a capital offense (nowadays) and a jury found for 1st degree murder, it was an automatic LWOP or death, and to get a lesser sentence, the jury would have to find the perp guilty of a lesser murder (2nd, etc). What gives? Under California Penal Code Sec. 190, the default penalty for first degree murder is 25-to-life. Special circumstances must be alleged and found to be true in order to sentence a first-degree murderer to either LWOP or DP. What are those special circumstances? Never mind. I found it here. www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=187-199
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Mar 19, 2009 12:24:39 GMT -6
There are 20-something, enough to cover almost all murderers. They ought to add "murder committed while breathing." That would close any loopholes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2009 16:53:24 GMT -6
It's okay King. somebody is just throwing the garbage that she was taught by a cult(IMO, that is what the group is that she has told me about). What ifs are the biggest questions that MVSs ask themselves all the time. Being a therapist(for some MVSs) she should have realized this and known that it might cause some harm to the MVSs here that she has posted on the board that we must be careful around. GET THAT. SHE HAS TO BE CAREFUL AROUND MVSs BUT SHE WRITES TO A MURDERER. Seems to me this therapist needs therapy. Btw, lawrence and somebody, you mentioned that there are victims on this board. I THINK NOT. ALL OF THE VICTIMS WHICH YOU SPEAK OF ARE DEAD. Get it straight we are the survivors. It seems this is a great argument for some, you know, the victims are dead and we can't do anything but tapdance on their graves, so lets fight for the POS that did the killing. Another thing lawrence and somebody, MVSs did not lose their ability to read because some POS murdered our loved one. When you post that you must be careful around us. We can read it and feel that you think you know how to handle us. ;D Sorry for the mistakes. I tried to be careful but sometimes it is just not enough. I know that you don't believe the things I write. I also know that pen pals have been rude on this board, so I can see your point here. I just hope that you will give it some time. There are people out there who know about both sides. Families of dr-inmates who feel shame because of what their relative did, doctors and nurses who treat both murderers and MVS's, priests who listen to confessions, therapists who talk to both murderers and MVS's, etc. Although they have contact with the murderer(s) they still can find the crimes disgusting. I think about crimes being disgusting as well. In my way of thinking I'm more tough on crime than other Europeans can be, because I believe in LWOP. You do not believe the things I say though. So, let it rest and give it some time? Maybe if I am here long enough you will find out that I am a Children's Therapist and I do care for MVS's? People that know both sides. Well, I can tell you that I wouldn't want anything to do with those people. They are not there for any MVSs or the victims. They are manipulators of us and I know it and I know many MVSs that know of this, also. You have asked me to give it a rest. Why should I? You don't. This is much more important to me than it is to you and if you don't think so, GUESS AGAIN. Scumpals send letters, money, get legal help, set up websites, send cell phones, lie for their very special someone, make excuses, visit, send crusty undies, dirty letters, dirty pics, and almost any disgusting thing you can imagine. The victims have nothing. Who cares how you scumpals feel? Your choice, your stupidity. Btw, about that innocent being executed. I have brought this up before and a few others have, too. If an innocent is executed than the ones that illegaly got him/her executed should also be executed. If the idiot confessed. Too dam bad. If all else fails execute a pro. I volunteer to be the first pro executed in that case BUT if a murderer gets out off because of the work of some radical antis and murders again then a radical anti gets executed. Any takers. I bet, there would be better investigations and not so much sympathy for murderers. Whadda Say??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2009 16:59:11 GMT -6
Now this is preaching, justice should not include killing people (lol, sorry had to do it) What purpose do it serve keeping people like Clifford Olsen alive, other than letting some antis feel good? I am sorry it took so long to respond, but I had 2 big exams this week that I had to prepare for. Clifford Olsen is a great topic to discuss the death penalty. His crimes I rate (if it is possible to rate murder) as the worst of the worst, he was a child serial killer. He is so evil, that I could almost say if he was executed, I would have joined your celebrations. If he died of any unnatural cause, I would have no sympathy or empathy for him, as long as it wasn’t in the name of justice. There are a few reasons that “keeping him alive” was best for society. First I would like to say I really support Canada’s stance on human rights and especially, “The Right to Life”. “The abolition of the death penalty is a significant development in the advancement of human rights. Everyone's right to life is enshrined in Section 7 of our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This fundamental right is also enunciated in Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” (http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/pblct/rht-drt/08-eng.shtml) Now when you support “Rights” of any sorts, it always seems like you support them for the worst people, but that is not the case. An example is Americans “Right to Free Speech”, which is probably the strongest right to free speech in the world. It wasn’t “The Right to Free Speech, for those who we agree with”, it gives the right to everybody, including people you don’t agree with. An excellent case would be when a court battle was fought over the right of the KKK to hold a demonstration in Chicago (I believe) 20 or so years back. I surely don’t want to hear their filth, but I understand that they had the right. If you defend the right of an evil group like that, you can have confidence that a deserving person will also have that right. The same has to be for these evil killers, if you can demand that they have a right to life (even though they do not have the same belief), It is less likely other state-supported killings will happen (ie. Political opponents or Genocide). This (at this time) may not be an issue in Canada or the US, but in other parts of the world, it does. Another reason it was good keeping Olsen alive, is the “Innocence Claim. I am in no way saying Olsen was innocent, but if we had executed Olsen, we would have executed at least 1 innocent person. If Canada had the Death Penalty, it would be most likely that one of James Driskell, Donald Marshall, David Milgaard or Steven Truscott would have been sentenced to death and executed. (See Note Below) Now the last reason is personal and will most likely receive the most noise. I understand that few of you share this, but I am only staying true to myself. I have all the sympathy for the victims, they in no way deserved to be murdered, but (I am not sure if this is the right word) I do have empathy for the murderers at the time of their execution. I understand that they have taken a life of someone and this can never be “FIXED”, but when they are brought to the gurney, chair or whatever method, I understand how frightened they must feel. They may be vile humans, but I am not, so I can not (completely) wish for their demise. (Guess that goes in your "anti feel good" file, although I don't like to be considered an anti) Ron Milgaard was sentenced to life in 1969 and Truscott sentence was reduce from the DP to 10 years in the 60’s, but Canada had already (In Practice) abolished the DP, even though the law was not chaged until 1976.
|
|
|
Post by somebody on Mar 19, 2009 18:19:36 GMT -6
Sorry for the mistakes. I tried to be careful but sometimes it is just not enough. I know that you don't believe the things I write. I also know that pen pals have been rude on this board, so I can see your point here. I just hope that you will give it some time. There are people out there who know about both sides. Families of dr-inmates who feel shame because of what their relative did, doctors and nurses who treat both murderers and MVS's, priests who listen to confessions, therapists who talk to both murderers and MVS's, etc. Although they have contact with the murderer(s) they still can find the crimes disgusting. I think about crimes being disgusting as well. In my way of thinking I'm more tough on crime than other Europeans can be, because I believe in LWOP. You do not believe the things I say though. So, let it rest and give it some time? Maybe if I am here long enough you will find out that I am a Children's Therapist and I do care for MVS's? People that know both sides. Well, I can tell you that I wouldn't want anything to do with those people. They are not there for any MVSs or the victims. They are manipulators of us and I know it and I know many MVSs that know of this, also. You have asked me to give it a rest. Why should I? You don't. This is much more important to me than it is to you and if you don't think so, GUESS AGAIN. Scumpals send letters, money, get legal help, set up websites, send cell phones, lie for their very special someone, make excuses, visit, send crusty undies, dirty letters, dirty pics, and almost any disgusting thing you can imagine. The victims have nothing. Who cares how you scumpals feel? Your choice, your stupidity. Btw, about that innocent being executed. I have brought this up before and a few others have, too. If an innocent is executed than the ones that illegaly got him/her executed should also be executed. If the idiot confessed. Too dam bad. If all else fails execute a pro. I volunteer to be the first pro executed in that case BUT if a murderer gets out off because of the work of some radical antis and murders again then a radical anti gets executed. Any takers. I bet, there would be better investigations and not so much sympathy for murderers. Whadda Say?? I don't get it. Why should you volunteer to be executed when an innocent inmate is executed? Why should an anti be executed when a murderer gets out and murders again?
|
|
|
Post by kingsindanger on Mar 19, 2009 18:28:05 GMT -6
What in the blue hell does Columbus have to do with the dp? My point is you are throwing "hypothetical what-ifs" around talking about an innocent person being executed when you have zero cases to support your position. Just joking a little! Without proof you can still debate about "what if an innocent men is executed". I don't understand why that is wrong. A lot of debates over here contain "what if" questions because proof and facts are not solid either. Anti's can provide proof which easily can be overturned by the proof pro's can give- and vice versa. Did you just say that proof and facts are not solid. What would it be, a liquid? Everything you want to discuss has been answered before. So once again. If, in the future, we learn that an innocent person was executed, it might change my opinion on how I see the dp. Until that point, there is no debate because it hasn't happened yet. Was there anything you wanted to add to the debate?
|
|
|
Post by kingsindanger on Mar 19, 2009 18:33:13 GMT -6
Where did I say that all murderers are behind bars or any of the other rubbish you are spewing out? Please show the quote where I said that. NO quote! You just seem to repeat that everything is fine as it is, and you are not worried about a thing. A little sense of humor is nice, when being here, ;D but if you don't like it I apologize and will quit, ok? Are you for real? Where did I say, much less repeat? that everything is fine? Perhaps you do not recall my post where I said that I hope forensic science leads to more murderers being caught and punished? Oh yeah, that thread.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2009 18:33:34 GMT -6
I don't get it. Why should you volunteer to be executed when an innocent inmate is executed? Why should an anti be executed when a murderer gets out and murders again? I wouldn't DARE to speak for Sharon, but for my own self, you aren't reading her 'challenge' correctly. She made a specification in the 'when' of whether an anti should be executed ~~ and that's if he murders again thanks to the 'work' of radical antis. I dare say many more murderers will be released to kill again than will be executed, but the vast majority of them won't be the 'work' of antis hell bent on saving a few ~ but even those will outnumber the ones we executed wrongfully.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2009 18:44:25 GMT -6
Everything you want to discuss has been answered before. So once again. If, in the future, we learn that an innocent person was executed, it might change my opinion on how I see the dp. Until that point, there is no debate because it hasn't happened yet. Was there anything you wanted to add to the debate? If, for you, there's no debate, nothing to discuss, why jump into a discussion about it in the first place? If there weren't at least some people interested in discussing the various issues beyond a cheer each time there was an execution, I think Charlene would have closed the doors long since, since there'd likely be very few here besides those interested in saying 'yup.... yeehaw... and NEXT'.
|
|
|
Post by somebody on Mar 19, 2009 18:44:36 GMT -6
Just joking a little! Without proof you can still debate about "what if an innocent men is executed". I don't understand why that is wrong. A lot of debates over here contain "what if" questions because proof and facts are not solid either. Anti's can provide proof which easily can be overturned by the proof pro's can give- and vice versa. Did you just say that proof and facts are not solid. What would it be, a liquid? Everything you want to discuss has been answered before. So once again. If, in the future, we learn that an innocent person was executed, it might change my opinion on how I see the dp. Until that point, there is no debate because it hasn't happened yet. Was there anything you wanted to add to the debate? Yes, proof can not be solid. Same with facts. Look at all those dr inmates who got released after years on death row. When they were put behing bars everybody thought proof and facts were there, but proof and facts turned out to be false. Those inmates are on the streets again: free, innocent. Do you actually think that there is absolutely no chance at all that a dr inmate had been innocent and was executed anyway?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2009 18:50:46 GMT -6
What purpose do it serve keeping people like Clifford Olsen alive, other than letting some antis feel good? I am sorry it took so long to respond, but I had 2 big exams this week that I had to prepare for. Clifford Olsen is a great topic to discuss the death penalty. His crimes I rate (if it is possible to rate murder) as the worst of the worst, he was a child serial killer. He is so evil, that I could almost say if he was executed, I would have joined your celebrations. If he died of any unnatural cause, I would have no sympathy or empathy for him, as long as it wasn’t in the name of justice. There are a few reasons that “keeping him alive” was best for society. First I would like to say I really support Canada’s stance on human rights and especially, “The Right to Life”. “The abolition of the death penalty is a significant development in the advancement of human rights. Everyone's right to life is enshrined in Section 7 of our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This fundamental right is also enunciated in Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” (http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/pblct/rht-drt/08-eng.shtml) Now when you support “Rights” of any sorts, it always seems like you support them for the worst people, but that is not the case. An example is Americans “Right to Free Speech”, which is probably the strongest right to free speech in the world. It wasn’t “The Right to Free Speech, for those who we agree with”, it gives the right to everybody, including people you don’t agree with. An excellent case would be when a court battle was fought over the right of the KKK to hold a demonstration in Chicago (I believe) 20 or so years back. I surely don’t want to hear their filth, but I understand that they had the right. If you defend the right of an evil group like that, you can have confidence that a deserving person will also have that right. The same has to be for these evil killers, if you can demand that they have a right to life (even though they do not have the same belief), It is less likely other state-supported killings will happen (ie. Political opponents or Genocide). This (at this time) may not be an issue in Canada or the US, but in other parts of the world, it does. Another reason it was good keeping Olsen alive, is the “Innocence Claim. I am in no way saying Olsen was innocent, but if we had executed Olsen, we would have executed at least 1 innocent person. If Canada had the Death Penalty, it would be most likely that one of James Driskell, Donald Marshall, David Milgaard or Steven Truscott would have been sentenced to death and executed. (See Note Below) Now the last reason is personal and will most likely receive the most noise. I understand that few of you share this, but I am only staying true to myself. I have all the sympathy for the victims, they in no way deserved to be murdered, but (I am not sure if this is the right word) I do have empathy for the murderers at the time of their execution. I understand that they have taken a life of someone and this can never be “FIXED”, but when they are brought to the gurney, chair or whatever method, I understand how frightened they must feel. They may be vile humans, but I am not, so I can not (completely) wish for their demise. (Guess that goes in your "anti feel good" file, although I don't like to be considered an anti) Ron Milgaard was sentenced to life in 1969 and Truscott sentence was reduce from the DP to 10 years in the 60’s, but Canada had already (In Practice) abolished the DP, even though the law was not chaged until 1976. I know Canada had abolished the DP in the 60's, but even with what you have listed Abolishing the DP serves little more than being a feel good measure for anti's.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2009 19:25:43 GMT -6
What purpose do it serve keeping people like Clifford Olsen alive, other than letting some antis feel good? I am sorry it took so long to respond, but I had 2 big exams this week that I had to prepare for. Clifford Olsen is a great topic to discuss the death penalty. His crimes I rate (if it is possible to rate murder) as the worst of the worst, he was a child serial killer. He is so evil, that I could almost say if he was executed, I would have joined your celebrations. If he died of any unnatural cause, I would have no sympathy or empathy for him, as long as it wasn’t in the name of justice. There are a few reasons that “keeping him alive” was best for society. First I would like to say I really support Canada’s stance on human rights and especially, “The Right to Life”. “The abolition of the death penalty is a significant development in the advancement of human rights. Everyone's right to life is enshrined in Section 7 of our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This fundamental right is also enunciated in Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” (http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/pblct/rht-drt/08-eng.shtml) Now when you support “Rights” of any sorts, it always seems like you support them for the worst people, but that is not the case. An example is Americans “Right to Free Speech”, which is probably the strongest right to free speech in the world. It wasn’t “The Right to Free Speech, for those who we agree with”, it gives the right to everybody, including people you don’t agree with. An excellent case would be when a court battle was fought over the right of the KKK to hold a demonstration in Chicago (I believe) 20 or so years back. I surely don’t want to hear their filth, but I understand that they had the right. If you defend the right of an evil group like that, you can have confidence that a deserving person will also have that right. The same has to be for these evil killers, if you can demand that they have a right to life (even though they do not have the same belief), It is less likely other state-supported killings will happen (ie. Political opponents or Genocide). This (at this time) may not be an issue in Canada or the US, but in other parts of the world, it does. Another reason it was good keeping Olsen alive, is the “Innocence Claim. I am in no way saying Olsen was innocent, but if we had executed Olsen, we would have executed at least 1 innocent person. If Canada had the Death Penalty, it would be most likely that one of James Driskell, Donald Marshall, David Milgaard or Steven Truscott would have been sentenced to death and executed. (See Note Below) Now the last reason is personal and will most likely receive the most noise. I understand that few of you share this, but I am only staying true to myself. I have all the sympathy for the victims, they in no way deserved to be murdered, but (I am not sure if this is the right word) I do have empathy for the murderers at the time of their execution. I understand that they have taken a life of someone and this can never be “FIXED”, but when they are brought to the gurney, chair or whatever method, I understand how frightened they must feel. They may be vile humans, but I am not, so I can not (completely) wish for their demise. (Guess that goes in your "anti feel good" file, although I don't like to be considered an anti) Ron Milgaard was sentenced to life in 1969 and Truscott sentence was reduce from the DP to 10 years in the 60’s, but Canada had already (In Practice) abolished the DP, even though the law was not chaged until 1976. Ron, I agree with a lot of what you say in this post, although I can't say I feel for murderers about to die, since we're all going to die, many of us quite painfully regardless of deservedness. However, I do feel for their families, some of whom are mere victims of the choices their loved ones made on behalf of us all. I'm interested in why you 'don't like to be considered an anti' ~ perhaps you could elaborate?
|
|
|
Post by kingsindanger on Mar 19, 2009 19:56:17 GMT -6
It tells me many things. One, you do have a point. Modern science has made it possible to provide stronger evidence of a person's guilt in many cases. So sure, I'll admit that the likelihood of executing an innocent person isn't as strong as it was long ago. However, we're still talking about good tools in the hands of imperfect humans. It also goes back to what I said before - it's not as important to people to exonerate an innocent, and even if there was evidence ("proof" even - even though very few things can be 100% proven) that an executed person was innocent, how many people would be willing to let it be known? You're silly. There will ALWAYS be a question of whether they were *really* innocent. If there wasn't, they would have never been executed in the first place. It's much harder to prove a negative than a positive. Heck, *I* can't prove that I didn't kill *insert any murder victim from, say, the late 1980's on.* There's no evidence to connect me to any murder case, but that's not the same as proof that I didn't do it. Anyway, like I said, if you want to see cases that some antis (not "the antis", because I can guarantee that we're all different) say are cases where there is evidence that an innocent was executed, google "innocent executed" or "wrongfully executed." I'm not linking, listing, or naming, because I haven't done the research to know and don't want to put my name to any of the claims yet. But there's the answer to the original question, anyway. Katie, I must admit that you have a very logical argument with perhaps some merit. I will grant you that much. However, don't you suppose that some scumpals could easily start a website listing the reasons why so and so is "innocent"? I will grant you one point you made. For obvious reaons, the state isn't going to announce something like that too quickly. Thus, such a revelation would have to come from the defense. Yet, I am certain the DPIC would use an air raid siren to annouce they have a case.
|
|
|
Post by kingsindanger on Mar 19, 2009 20:03:42 GMT -6
Did you just say that proof and facts are not solid. What would it be, a liquid? Everything you want to discuss has been answered before. So once again. If, in the future, we learn that an innocent person was executed, it might change my opinion on how I see the dp. Until that point, there is no debate because it hasn't happened yet. Was there anything you wanted to add to the debate? Yes, proof can not be solid. Same with facts. Look at all those dr inmates who got released after years on death row. When they were put behing bars everybody thought proof and facts were there, but proof and facts turned out to be false. Those inmates are on the streets again: free, innocent. Do you actually think that there is absolutely no chance at all that a dr inmate had been innocent and was executed anyway? Somebody, yes there have been those convicted under a bad set of "facts" only to be exonerated. That much we know is true. However, and this is the critical point, there hasn't been a known case of an innocent being executed. That tells me the appeal process does work as it is supposed to.
|
|
|
Post by kingsindanger on Mar 19, 2009 20:20:06 GMT -6
Everything you want to discuss has been answered before. So once again. If, in the future, we learn that an innocent person was executed, it might change my opinion on how I see the dp. Until that point, there is no debate because it hasn't happened yet. Was there anything you wanted to add to the debate? If, for you, there's no debate, nothing to discuss, why jump into a discussion about it in the first place? If there weren't at least some people interested in discussing the various issues beyond a cheer each time there was an execution, I think Charlene would have closed the doors long since, since there'd likely be very few here besides those interested in saying 'yup.... yeehaw... and NEXT'. You have a rather annoying habit of answering posts that are clearly not addressed to you. For me at least, there is more to my belief in the dp then simply saying 'yup' or some something equal. If you haven't already done so, I invite you to find out why I along with others feel so strongly about the dp. WW, I will say this to you. I do owe you an apology. You have been rock solid and unwavering in your stand. Now that I know why, I respect you and your position. You continue to bear your cross out of the labor of love. It is clear to me that you hope all things, endure all things, love all things , and cherish all things relating to your son. I must say I admire that. I just wanted you to know that. However, you also have to understand that I am unwavering in my position as well. I believe firmly in the justice system. And though we are clearly on opposite sides of the fence, that doesn't make either opinion less valid. Having said that, my point is that if it turns out we executed an innocent that can be proven beyond all doubt, it would perhaps alter my opinion. Until that point in time, however, I do not see a reason to discuss a possibility that nobody has been able to find yet.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Mar 19, 2009 20:47:20 GMT -6
Sorry for the mistakes. I tried to be careful but sometimes it is just not enough. I know that you don't believe the things I write. I also know that pen pals have been rude on this board, so I can see your point here. I just hope that you will give it some time. There are people out there who know about both sides. Families of dr-inmates who feel shame because of what their relative did, doctors and nurses who treat both murderers and MVS's, priests who listen to confessions, therapists who talk to both murderers and MVS's, etc. Although they have contact with the murderer(s) they still can find the crimes disgusting. I think about crimes being disgusting as well. In my way of thinking I'm more tough on crime than other Europeans can be, because I believe in LWOP. You do not believe the things I say though. So, let it rest and give it some time? Maybe if I am here long enough you will find out that I am a Children's Therapist and I do care for MVS's? People that know both sides. Well, I can tell you that I wouldn't want anything to do with those people. They are not there for any MVSs or the victims. They are manipulators of us and I know it and I know many MVSs that know of this, also. You have asked me to give it a rest. Why should I? You don't. This is much more important to me than it is to you and if you don't think so, GUESS AGAIN. Scumpals send letters, money, get legal help, set up websites, send cell phones, lie for their very special someone, make excuses, visit, send crusty undies, dirty letters, dirty pics, and almost any disgusting thing you can imagine. The victims have nothing. Who cares how you scumpals feel? Your choice, your stupidity. Btw, about that innocent being executed. I have brought this up before and a few others have, too. If an innocent is executed than the ones that illegaly got him/her executed should also be executed. If the idiot confessed. Too dam bad. If all else fails execute a pro. I volunteer to be the first pro executed in that case BUT if a murderer gets out off because of the work of some radical antis and murders again then a radical anti gets executed. Any takers. I bet, there would be better investigations and not so much sympathy for murderers. Whadda Say?? Wow! As I have said before. You always have a way of putting things.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2009 21:56:24 GMT -6
If, for you, there's no debate, nothing to discuss, why jump into a discussion about it in the first place? If there weren't at least some people interested in discussing the various issues beyond a cheer each time there was an execution, I think Charlene would have closed the doors long since, since there'd likely be very few here besides those interested in saying 'yup.... yeehaw... and NEXT'. You have a rather annoying habit of answering posts that are clearly not addressed to you. If I waited round for posts clearly addressed to me, I'd shut up like most MVS eventually do, because likely there wouldn't be many And, to return the constructive criticism, you, sir, have an annoying habit of calling the convictions and arguments of others 'blather' and other derogatory terms, particularly when you've no other response but to blather your own self .......... Thank you. And, I believe I owe you an apology as well. Regardless of the circumstances and whether or not you meant what I believed you meant, there is no excuse for my response and lapse in judgment. You act as though you're the first pro I've bumped my silly head against coming up out the sand I had it buried in... I know ~ and respect ~ and like, and even love many ~ who are as unwavering in their support of DP as you. Hell, some of them got their spot in my heart by climbing up through the rocks (and tampons ) I hurled at them. I understand why, after conviction and sentencing, the burden of proof shifts to the 'guilty'. I don't exactly understand why the burden is more than it is for the finding of that guilt ~ from 'beyond a reasonable doubt' to 'beyond all doubt'. You believe that the system is working so it hasn't happened and it can't and won't happen. I can't respect that opinion because it smacks of pure stubborn ignorance. I remember a case in Illinois some years back (and I'm sorry if someone else already bored you with this blather) ~ a DR inmate (Porter) who was close to death's door ~ within a couple of days, whose innocence was shown, not by the system (if memory serves, his appeals had run out) but by journalism students whose inquiries led to someone else's confession to the crime. Had there not been that confession, that innocent would have been executed ~ and ya know what? You'd be saying he wasn't (right along with the rest of us). You know why? Because he couldn't prove he wasn't guilty. Please understand, I'm not trying to drag you kicking and screaming, under the DP fence. I prefer you over there. I only think it'd be smart of you to accept that mistakes happen in all human endeavors, and the doling of death isn't an exception. Edited to add the story about Porter (above) if you're interested: www.cbc.ca/world/story/1999/03/15/porter990315.html
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Mar 19, 2009 23:01:33 GMT -6
Everything you want to discuss has been answered before. So once again. If, in the future, we learn that an innocent person was executed, it might change my opinion on how I see the dp. Until that point, there is no debate because it hasn't happened yet. Was there anything you wanted to add to the debate? If, for you, there's no debate, nothing to discuss, why jump into a discussion about it in the first place? If there weren't at least some people interested in discussing the various issues beyond a cheer each time there was an execution, I think Charlene would have closed the doors long since, since there'd likely be very few here besides those interested in saying 'yup.... yeehaw... and NEXT'. Like a lot, or even most, alleged "pros," this gentleman has painted himself into a logical corner. He conditions support for executions on a justice system that never makes mistakes. If such a mistake were made, his commitment to the death penalty obligates him to discount 'it as unproven or unprovable. "Pros" like him give capital punishment a bad name, because they are secretly relieved by each stay of execution, each reversal, each successful dilatory appeal -- they affirm their twisted faith in the infallibility of appellate jurists. We now have a thousand or more condemned murderers who will die of old age, and not be executed, because these so-called "pros" are too scared to kill them.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Mar 19, 2009 23:30:21 GMT -6
If an innocent is executed than the ones that illegaly got him/her executed should also be executed. If the idiot confessed. Too dam bad. If all else fails execute a pro. I volunteer to be the first pro executed in that case BUT if a murderer gets out off because of the work of some radical antis and murders again then a radical anti gets executed. Any takers. I bet, there would be better investigations and not so much sympathy for murderers. Whadda Say?? I think most prosecutors do their best and act in good faith. They are also obliged as officers of the court to admit mistakes and present credible exculpatory evidence after a conviction. That doesn't mean, however, that the system is foolproof. Statistics alone strongly suggest the execution of innocents, and such a suggestion is more than enough. It just isn't logical to infer from the lack of exculpatory revelations that all who have been executed -- more than a thousand -- are perfectly guilty, or that it can't happen in the future. Juries have been wrong before and will be again. Even so, I do support the death penalty because the process, while not perfect and can never become perfect, is still good enough. Innocents may be killed by the state but murderers kill a lot more. In any war there are casualties, and I want a total war against murderers. I want them exterminated.
|
|
|
Post by lawrence on Mar 20, 2009 3:11:42 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by somebody on Mar 20, 2009 5:27:24 GMT -6
Yes, proof can not be solid. Same with facts. Look at all those dr inmates who got released after years on death row. When they were put behing bars everybody thought proof and facts were there, but proof and facts turned out to be false. Those inmates are on the streets again: free, innocent. Do you actually think that there is absolutely no chance at all that a dr inmate had been innocent and was executed anyway? Somebody, yes there have been those convicted under a bad set of "facts" only to be exonerated. That much we know is true. However, and this is the critical point, there hasn't been a known case of an innocent being executed. That tells me the appeal process does work as it is supposed to. Ok. We will agree to disagree To you the fact that there hasn't been a known case of an innocent being executed means that the appeal process does work as it is supposed to. To me the same fact only proves that there hasn't been a known case of an innocent being executed... But, because people make mistakes (and THAT is a fact) it is beyond belief to me that there will not be find proof within the nearby future, that an innocent has been executed. I don't belief in lawsystems as much as you do. But that's ok.
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Mar 20, 2009 5:35:39 GMT -6
Yes, proof can not be solid. Same with facts. Look at all those dr inmates who got released after years on death row. When they were put behing bars everybody thought proof and facts were there, but proof and facts turned out to be false. Those inmates are on the streets again: free, innocent. Do you actually think that there is absolutely no chance at all that a dr inmate had been innocent and was executed anyway? Somebody, yes there have been those convicted under a bad set of "facts" only to be exonerated. That much we know is true. However, and this is the critical point, there hasn't been a known case of an innocent being executed. That tells me the appeal process does work as it is supposed to. In my view the really critical point is that, yes, there have been exonerations, but all that really proves is that in those specific instances the so called system did notice and pick up on them. You still assume that the ones that come to light amount to all of them, and even Joe P acknowledges that assumption is unwise to make. In fact, I would go further and say that when we assume as you do that we have uncovered all that is to be uncoved, very often that very stance or assumption becomes the block to stop seriously searching for the other hidden cases that any statistician would tell you is likely to exist. The bigger leap of faith is the one you appear to be taking, and for me given the issue is innocent life I require a measure and standard of proof consistent with a respect, a real respect for the prospect of an innocent life being taken.
|
|
|
Post by SubSurfCPO(ret) on Mar 20, 2009 5:38:23 GMT -6
Like a lot, or even most, alleged "pros," this gentleman has painted himself into a logical corner. He conditions support for executions on a justice system that never makes mistakes. If such a mistake were made, his commitment to the death penalty obligates him to discount 'it as unproven or unprovable. "Pros" like him give capital punishment a bad name, because they are secretly relieved by each stay of execution, each reversal, each successful dilatory appeal -- they affirm their twisted faith in the infallibility of appellate jurists. We now have a thousand or more condemned murderers who will die of old age, and not be executed, because these so-called "pros" are too scared to kill them. Joe, your singular view on this is at once arrogant and astute And, after a protracted open debate with myself on the website I declared However, while I agree the justice system makes mistakes I do not agree that those mistakes have been made leading to an incorrect completion of sentence. The caveat I attach to this is a "no earlier than" date. This places boundaries and limits on the a question that, in reality, has no beginning date; primarily, because the justice and legal system, civil rights, and the DP have all changed in the course of my life, not to mention the time preceding. Indeed, the removal and reinstallation of the DP in this country "reset the clock" as more controls, regulations, and methods of investigation and even execution were put into place. They were put into place to prevent the very thing we are debating now - the execution of an innocent person. I do agree with you concerning the lack of commitment to the DP. The system is over cautious with fear and the lack of timely completion of sentence is a trait of cowardice.
|
|