http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080327/ap_on_re_us/mumia_abu_jamal
This is my main problem with the death penalty as it is administered in the U.S. It is now 27 years after his conviction and just now the federal courts have decided that his penalty phase was constitutionally defective. I guess when he dies of old age, the death penalty will be carried out…
Considering the number of people exonerated (which to me is any number greater than zero) it’s probably a good thing.
jtgain, could you be a bit more specific about what is your “main problem with the death penalty as it is administered in the U.S.”? Is it that the appeals drag on for so many years? Is it that the death penalty is often given in a trial that’s “rife with racism” as the defense lawyer claims? Is it that it’s more expensive to go through all the appeals and finally execute a man than it is to keep him in a concrete crate for the rest of his life?
Between your post and the linked article, there are several possibilities. I’d like to know which one sets your teeth on edge. I’m not sure if I agree with you or not.
Don’t know about jtgain, but for me the problem is that someone who is clearly, unambiguously guilty of the deliberate murder of a police officer is still alive 27 years after conviction. His corpse should have rotted away to dust by now.
Regards.
Shodan
I don’t have a problem letting him slowly rot in prison. It’s important that our legal system bends over backwards when convicting a person, and the punishment phase of his trial was a farce. The Third Circuit decision was the right one to make.
Hmm - did you notice that the court ruling has nothing to do with his guilt or innocence?
Regards,
Shodan
When living in Philly I got pretty sick of both sides on the whole Mumia issue. Both those who presumed Mumia to be innocent, and those who bayed for his blood.
I don’t see the length of the appeals process as being one of the major problems with the death penalty in the US - if we are going to impose the ‘ultimate penatly’ (though I am far from sure that capital punishment is the ultimate penalty, I would have thought even the most gung-ho defenders of frying people would want to ensure that the system worked properly.
There are multiple bigger issues in my mind - the paucity of resources for defending the indigent, the allegations of racial bias, the extent of police/prosecutorial misconduct, the shaky nature of much eye-witness and informant testimony etc etc.
But my biggest problem with it is how it distorts the justice system as a whole. It may lead to disputable pleas for lesser penalties for those who may not be guilty at all. And it certainly displaces resources for those individuals facing extremely long sentences, up to and including life without possibility of parole, because all the high profile attention is focused on capital cases.
My problem is that, if we are going to have a death penalty, and I generally support it, then what is the point of waiting 27 years, not to determine guilt or innocence, but to rule on a procedural matter of whether or not the jury was instructed properly in the sentencing phase.
The whole penalty is meaningless if it takes 27 years to play out period. I didn’t post this to debate the pros and cons of the death penalty, because point of fact, the Supreme Court has decided to allow it, and the state of Pennsylvania has decided to implement it, but it is done in such a way to make it an absolute joke for the victims, and the offenders become so old and senile that they probably forget why they are being executed to begin with.
I think it’s funny that a member of one of the most racist organizations in the US killed a man, and then claimed he was a victim of racism.
Just out of curiosity, how long does it typically take for the death penalty to be carried out? Is it typical for a death sentence to take decades to carry out?
Mosier, if I am remembering correctly from my Criminology and Penology classes, the average time in the USA between the start of the appeals process and execution for death row inmates is eight years. This does not take into account any pre-trial incarceration, nor does it take into account any incarceration before the first appeal (during the trial, pre-sentencing, etc.).
The OP didn’t address guilt or innocence; he seemed to be implying that the guy should have been executed by now. If I’m wrong on that count’ I’ll happily withdraw that characterization. That’s what I addressed and nothing more. In regards to Mumia, I haven’t read anything that would lead me to believe he is anything but guilty, although the circumstances seemed to be muddy and he was clearly a liability to his defense rather than the other way around.
I agree, it’s ridiculous. The death penalty as it is applied now is totally ineffective because it takes too damn long, and by the time they actually get around to executing someone, hardly anyone can even remember what it’s for. “Here we are, killing this guy for…uh…what did he do again?”
Bullshit. They should carry out executions right away (and I’ve never understood why they use costly and convoluted methods like they do now, either - they should just shoot them.) If they did it like this, maybe the fear of the death penalty might actually deter some crimes. As it is used now, I’m convinced that it has no effect.
Cop killers (and all killers) don’t deserve to live. They certainly don’t deserve to be made into martyrs like Mumia has been. Although I do agree that he should be freed - but not from his cell. From existence.
Timothy McVeigh, who killed 168 people, who never denied that he killed 168 people, who deserved to die and never wanted any punishment but death, commited his heinous act on April 19, 1995 and was executed on June 11, 2001. Slightly over six years.
I personally wished he had been kept alive for four more months so he would not have died thinking he was some major terrorist, but he would have died knowing that in the world of terrorism, he was chickenshit.
I’m also convinced that it has no effect.
If we could know, right away, that a person was definitely the perpetrator of a heinous crime, you might have a valid argument. But with the numbers of people who have been exonerated, that’s not possible.
All this is why I’ve changed my stance on the DP in the last few years.
Well, Mumia is definitely the perpetrator of a heinous crime. So fry his sorry ass.
Regards,
Shodan
Of course, we’ve had plenty of people who argued with equal certainty about other convicted "killer"s’ guilt, only to be proven wrong.
I think he did it. And I think he should die a slow lonely death behind bars for it.
THE COURT: Has the jury reached a verdict?
FOREMAN: We have, Your Honor.
THE COURT: What say you?
FOREMAN: Guilty.
THE COURT: Thank you. The bailiff may fire when ready.
/cue dramatic music
dum dum DUMMMMMMM
the death penalty is cruel and unusual on the victims family and friends. ms falkner had to move to the west coast to get away from what was going on. she hasn’t been able to forget mumia even for a moment.
should he have been sentenced to life in prison, in a cell, alone for 23 hours a day; very few people would even know he was there. because of the death penalty his name is known the world around.
very, very, wrong.
How is this the death penalty’s fault? If it was done effectively, and Mumia had a full round of speedy appeals, and was put to death in, say, 1984, then it would have been way over a long time ago and Mrs. Falkner would not even be sharing oxygen with Mumia now.
You are blaming the death penalty in general for what I think is the gross misapplication of it.