What evidence? Here’s something from a cite dedicated to rebutting all the Mumia bullshit being flung incessantly in defence of this creep. And this might be interesting as well.
I am from Philly and I am absolutely sick of the crap that people offer as evidence or mitigating factors for this guy. It never ends. I am familiar with the evidence. I’ve read large parts of the transcript. Nobody has ever offered a credible explanation for what happened that day other than Mumia killed an officer who was doing his job. God almighty, this is tiresome.
Provided that we used the quick and cheap shot-in-the-head method and not convoluted, Bond-villain bullshit like the electric chair, how on earth could it cost more? I just want to know. I’m genuinely curious.
Just for a start your proposed “quick and cheap shot-in-the-head method” would kill some people who turn out to be innocent, and a lot more that arew guilty of lesser crimes than capital murder. You might not care about that, but most folks do, which is why the process is so long and drawn out.
Yes, if you were tpo abolish all the protections and appeals, proceed straight from trial to execution, then it would be cheaper. But that isn’t the system you’ve got. Under the system you’ve actually got the death penalty is more expensive than imprisonment.
The reason is simple. Most death sentences are overturned on appeal. That means you have all the expense of the death penalty process, and then when it’s all over you have to pay for life imprisonment AS WELL.
Much cheaper if you just sentence them to life in the first place.
There is no such evidence. It is totally invented. Why must Daniel Faulkner’s name be attached to this bullshit from the mouthpiece of MOVE? Is slandering the victim the only way to exonerate a guy who executed a cop with bullets to his face?
Assuming you mean his second paragraph, the answer is still no. Blake assumed I was advancing an argument against long sentences as well as the death penalty - untrue. While I know some people who make that argument, I know very few. Long sentences where warranted are fine by me. Just I would rather the money spent on procedural appeals in capital cases was spent on ensuring the actual guilt of those we are sentencing to long terms. Call me crazy that way.
And imprisoning fewer innocent people would presumably save money. It might also do the justice system a bit of good too.
The doctors never heard Mumia confess because doctors are not in the habit of being outside the emergency room helping police drag in beligerent patients into the emergency room. It wasn’t like he said it over and over.
No, having a bias means that their data is questionable.
Look, you claim to be a skeptic and a breaker of kooks, right? Maybe you should apply a little critical thinking to the situation. Maybe a website run by people who want Mumia dead might not tell the whole truth. Perhaps they have something to gain by lying.
After all, you wouldn’t want to associate yourself with a known liar, would you? You wouldn’t want to turn a blind eye to dishonesty just because the lies happen to support your point of view…
Argent Towers, I presume your misrepresentation of my words was accidental, and due to poor reading comprehension on your part. I am sure that you would not *deliberately *misrepresent my words so.
Since it is obviously a blunder on your part, and not an act of deliberate malice, I see no need to report your misrepresentation to the mods.
Perhaps you would care to admit your mistake, offer a humble, groveling apology, and withdraw your comment.
Their data comes from the trial. The trial is a matter of public record. If you have anything that counters their arguement, present it.
The one would figure that after 10 years of being on the web, and given the number of rabid Mumia fanatics out there, that someone might have managed to point out one of these lies.
But no! Every single time its the same thing: “They have a bias, and they disagree with me, so they must be lying…just don’t ask me where and how! Wah!”
Grow up, Peter. You lost that arguement years ago. I am not a mod but I am certain they would not appreciate your attempt at a derail.
For a start, the lies on that website have been exposed. You would never accept it, of course.
And what the hell are you talking about? I’m asking you a direct question, would you ignore lies just because they happen to support your point of view, Mr so called skeptic?
Just for a start, look at your own quote which you took from the site. Look at the feebleness of the excuses they make. They explain how the police witness came to change their original statements, how we should accept their later statements, rather than their earlier ones, and how it differs from the doctors statements. It is way beyond obvious to me that the writer of that piece doesn’t believe a word of it, he’s just trying to snare the credulous.
It does however mean that we should question their statements before accepting them.
Just because their point of view happens to match yours doesn’t make them truthful.
I should have known that some of the “Free Mumia” contingent was on this board. I guess I just ignored it because it was so implausible. Imagine my surprise when I saw that there are people in this thread defending the scumbag.
Defending Mumia is right up there with the Kennedy kooks and the 9/11-missile/government took down the towers contingent. It flies in the face of reason and reality, yet there we have it, right there on the screen. Unbelievable.