This x whatever huge number. The man was on death row for what? 20 years? At what point do these folks realize that if he couldn’t prove his innocence during all that time, gosh maybe he was guilty?
You can dislike the death penalty all you want, but unless you are willing to personally pay to keep these assholes alive instead of putting them out of our misery you can just shut up. And using the media circus du jour as “proof” that we shouldn’t be putting scum to death just weakens your case.
Does anyone have with them the cost to keep someone in prison and the cost of an execution? (Looking for factual information, no opinions need reply).
It’s kind of sweet how you come in saying people shouldn’t pretend expertise in shit they don’t know about, then pretend expertise while demonstrating you know dick-all about it.
[QUOTE=bup]
You don’t know that. Nobody does.
[/quote]
It’s based on facts already cited. This -
is not.
Did you happen to read my cite?
There are, of course, more examples - Tookie Williams, who plotted to kill law enforcement officers after his capture. Jamie Biendi, who was murdered by a prisoner who was serving life without paroie, etc.
Regards,
Shodan
Which, if I’d done so, might provide you with a point. But alas, I didn’t.
That’s cited? I missed that. How could it be? Is it a cite from God? All we humans can say is that convicted people have been executed.
And I did read your link, which is why I qualified my response with ‘on the public’:
Maybe I should have stressed it more. But you are correct, the 95+% of people on death row who really committed the crimes they’re convicted for, and the large fraction of the other small percent who didn’t, but are still not terrible nice people, still get “kill-y” in prison.
I’m pre-supposing, as I stated, that those who are now on death row would be changed to life-without-parole.
Pardons with recidivism I can’t really defend. If people are convicted based on illegally obtained evidence, and the like, where we have to let a bad guy go free, are a real cost to the system I propose.
You implied that it’s cheaper to execute than commit to life in prison, which it ain’t.
You said that if somebody’s innocence hasn’t been shown in twenty years, it never will. Also incorrect.
You know dick-all about it but thought you knew more.
Most pro death sentence fans are right wingers. i wonder why that is?
They speak in absolutes. He was guilty are deserved to die. There is no room for doubt when you are cheering the execution of a fellow human being. Most can not harbor doubts.
Although there are a couple who don’t seem to care if some innocent people get killed as long as the bulk of them are guilty.
The Troy Davis case has lots of people very familiar with the case to have doubts about his guilt. That includes lawyers and cops. But the advocates are able to simply state he was guilty, fuck him. I glad they can sleep better that way and they are able to dismiss all contrary evidence so easily.
You claimed to believe that there was a good chance that someone innocent has been executed -
OK - pick one out, and prove what you believe to be true.
Keep in mind that you have to prove that a bunch of them are innocent, because I have already cited a number of murders committed by repeat murderers, including those sentenced to life without parole.
DNA evidence exonerating a few people who were actually executed would work. Keep in mind that DNA is a two edged sword.
It is - much cheaper. What costs is endless appeals.
Which is another problem. Assuming that you are really concerned about the innocent suffering, suppose we eliminated the DP in favor of life without parole. The cost of appeals for those serving LWOP would automatically go up, since all the folks who are so concerned with the innocence of murderers would (of course) instantly turn the same amount of energy and attention to appealing all the LWOP sentences. And since LWOP convicts are not executed, there will be no end to the appeals on their behalf, just as there is no end to appeals for those on death row.
So we aren’t going to save a dime by switching to LWOP.
Unless there is some point at which the cost and trouble of appeals is not worth it. So, either
[ul][li]We won’t save any money by switching to LWOP -instead we will spend more, or[/li][li]there is a point at which further appeals are a waste of time.[/ul]So which is it? [/li]
Regards,
Shodan
Shodan,
You agree that people have been convicted, sentenced to death, and been on Death Row awaiting execution when their innocence was proved via DNA, yes?
Accepting that truth, I’m curious why you take the position that no innocent person has been executed. What about the people for whom no DNA evidence was available? Why are you so confident in their guilt?
You seem to be saying, in effect, “Prove it.” Obviously, if proof as to an individual existed, he’d be released – and you would presumably point to that as proof the system works. But I’m saying that in the aggregate, considering all the death penalty cases of, say, the past 30 years, and looking at those verdicts in which the accused was ultimately exonerated, it seems very likely that there’s at least one other person also convicted, but unlucky enough to be in a case that does not involve DNA samples surviving to be tested, if they existed at all.
Did that happen during the years between Furman v. Georgia and Gregg v. Georgia, when the death penalty was eliminated by Supreme Court decision?
No, this is an assumption on your part. It does not necessarily hold that your assumption will translate into fact.
And Black, don’t forget that one.
You first - *you *said that nobody has been executed wrongfully in the USA since 1976 - and you said it was cited.
I would love for all the physical evidence of executed criminals to be subject to DNA testing. The states aren’t as big on it.
Assumes facts not in evidence. Ted Kasczinsky and Charles Manson aren’t getting days in court (Manson has tried to appeal but been shot down).
Cite? I find it extremely difficult to believe that it costs more to throw the switch or push the plunger than to provide someone with room, board and around the clock security for 30-40-50 years.
Nope, didn’t say that at all. Try again. This time try not to ass-ume.
Apparently you know dick-all about it as well. Whatever that’s supposed to mean anyway.
No, I think not. It seems so only because there is a strong correlation between poverty and being black, but a wealthy black man can bring resources to bear that will likely stave off death (or even conviction).
The key is the money to mount an effective death penalty defense. I don’t want to get into the hijack of how we fund indigent defense in this country, so let’s just say that Clarence Earl Gideon’s legacy has been pissed on rather than passed on.
You’ve come to the heart of the death penalty issue. The problem is that death sentences aren’t based on the crime, they’re based on a prosecutors ability to paint a picture of a defendant as someone deserving death, and a defenders inability to paint a picture of a defendant as someone deserving life. And the deck is stacked in favor of the prosecution. It doesn’t matter what form of prejudice affects the decisions of the prosecution, the judge, the jury, and the witnesses, the result is the same. We only execute those who are found to be inferior, unworthy of consideration.
Bricker, I find it unsettling to see you arguing a position that is more liberal than mine. Especially when you then go on to present very good arguments for that position.
Heh. It’s only here that I’m seen as a hard-nosed conservative; among my hard-nosed conservative friends, I’m considered insufficiently doctrinaire.
But … I have very good arguments for ALL my positions. 
Yes.
Because they were proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Yes, I am.
OK - prove it.
Regards,
Shodan