Intentionally ironic. 
Count me in with those who don’t have a moral problem with the death penalty for the most heinous criminals, but can’t accept the unreliability of the system. That’s really the issue here, and it’s a far greater issue than just capital cases, right? How many more people are in prison with lesser sentences for crimes they didn’t commit? I suspect the system is far more error-prone when its participants can tell themselves that it’s only a prison term, not the needle. I’d feel much, much better if there were any concerted, organized effort to clean up the system - does anyone know of any?
Assuming that second word was meant to be “quiet,” what would be the fucking point? This isn’t GD, and the tone in this thread is clearly not supportive of any kind of reasonable discussion on the matter – which is all right and good, this being the Pit and all. So why would “all those” pro-death-penalty folks bother posting in this thread?
Here’s another cite from a notable non-Doper claiming that Texas had never executed an innocent person:
“I’m confident we [Texas] have not put to death anyone who has been innocent.”
–George W. Bush
I blame the prosecutors the most. They are entrusted with a tremendous amount of power and discretion. Most defendants can’t hire Johnny Cochran. This is what happens when they care more about padding their conviction record than with finding out the truth.
This is also (obviously) the single biggest problem with the death penalty. There is too much potential for error.
Larger and more comprehensive article than news item link in OP re execution of Ruben Cantu.
I couldn’t tell you. I know that the state of Illinois took 100 people off death row in recent years - and some were freed entirely. While there were circumstances in Illinois you hope are unusual, like a police chief who was accused of having his men routinely beat and torture suspects, it makes you wonder.
An additional “fuck you” to this witness. Way to stand up when it mattered. In another article I read about this case, he was quoted as saying “The state of Texas committed murder.” :rolleyes:
Thanks for that. I sort of do remember that thread.
And I do remember, waaaaaaay back when I first joined this board, there were a lot of posters who had some awfully funny ideas of justice. Some paraphrased gems from that era:
“I think the death penalty should be legal, but should only be carried out if the family of the deceased has the nuts to carry it out themselves.”
“Everyone who opposes the deathe penalty should be shot.”
“Police should have the authority to carry out the death penalty while they are making arrests.”
It was truly a more enlightened time. :rolleyes:
Oh, it’s not simply because of that. 
I think people like to pick on Texans because of their stereotypical attitude.
Also liked by Duke of Rat up in post #11.
That’s just the thing. A court case is often not a search for the truth, but a popularity contest for opposing lawyers. In the typical murder trial, what you get on one side is a prosecutor who is often ambitious about getting reelected based on his conviction record. On the other side you have a public defender who doesn’t get paid enough to care one way or the other. The system is built lopsided.
(Bricker, if I’m in error, feel free to correct me.)
For the same reason that anyone defends a position, ever.
I would very much like to know if people who have used the “We’ve never executed anyone innocent” argument in favor of the dp would have something to say to this particular situation. That is a common statement, and I would like to hear pro-dp persons address it in this context.
You know, I have a lot of reasons for thinking that Texas sucks. This is just one of them, Cowboy…
Congratulations! You just made it where almost zero cases are eligible for the death penalty. Well, except for the ones where the perp is framed… You are aware that no parameters are 100% safe, right?
So we’re executing innocent people and the putz wants to speed up the process. How typical…
Not that I ever made such a pro-dp statement but as I said in post #32: “I believe the conventional wisdom is that the ones being put to death are guilty of something but not necessarily what they were convicted for.”
All the untested virtue in this thread is really funny.
Got a video showing where you take your whole family and sit them down and tell them that if a terrible crazy killer came in and raped and tortured all of them, that you would publicly work to see that the killer was not given the DP. That you would be perfectly ok with life without parole which is not really life without possibility of parole.
And ( some of you ) would make sure that the police and everyone did not try to trick the killer into admitting it, and only if there was DNA and eye witnesses and 100% proof would you even be comfortable with jail time because of the POSSIBILITY that you might have the wrong guy.
Post links to videos here:
Well, according to statistics, Texas deserves the reputation of a state filled with blood thirsty thugs who execute the most people. Don’t blame the rest of the world for calling you on it.
Well, a long time ago the younger sister of a friend of mine was murdered (stabbed to death on a train). And more recently, a good friend of mine was raped and left to die in the boot of a car – but fortunately she survived.
I don’t believe the death penalty is appropriate for any crime. It’s just putting the state at the same level as the killer, regardless of how evil they are, and regardless of how certain you are of the guilt.
For the Christians, there’s the commandment, “Thou shalt not kill.” It doesn’t have an escape clause, saying “except for people convicted of murder, etc.”
This is going to hurt to type, but I’m with ElvisL1ves. There are some people who’s continued life serves no purpose: the BTK killer, Charles Manson, Carrot Top et al. Still, the system makes mistakes, and the system is heavily biased against poor and non-white defendants. It is not 100% reliable, it is not applied equally, and it should not be used.
There’s no question in my mind that there’d be a large part of me that would want the perp killed (if a family member was murdered). I’d probably say at some point that I’d like to do it myself. That DOES NOT mean they should make a law based on that feeling.
You have to have the forsight to realise that killing someone won’t bring your family member back and killing the wrong person does the same thing to someone else that has happened to you. To have the faculties to think this during such a tragic time in ones life would be incredibly difficult, I grant you. Thats why someone else, the legal system, should be thinking this for me.
I shall attempt to be as self-righteous as you are. Let’s see if I can succeed:
You come home and your wife or husdand or soulmate or whatever you wanna call the love of your life is dead. You see a person in the room with blood on their hands holding a knife. You immediately lunge at the person, killing them in a rage of revenge.
Only afterwards do you find out that the person you killed happened upon the crime scene and was trying to help. The real killer got away. You killed an innocent person because of circumstantial evidence and the rage and pain and desire for revenge.
How do you feel and what do you tell his family?
You know what? The guy here was… this is the complicated part now… NOT the murderer.
So the family that wanted swift brutal justice gets to find out that the real murderer has been out on the street for 20 years, because our crap-ass justice system picked the wrong guy and pressured the witness to finger him. Bang up job the prosecutor did here, he put the screws to the witness and got his man. The wrong man, but who really cares, right?
Like ElvisL1ves and D_Odds, I have no problem with murderers being killed, it’s the system I don’t trust to actually get the right guy.