Not in the lifetimes of the overwhelming majority of this board’s inhabitants.
There’s no way you could possibly know this for sure, deluded man.
Show me a person within the last 50 years who was executed and whose conviction was subsequently overturned.
You’d think there’d be at least one.
I wonder if he gets to have an awesome “Last Meal” again?
But how would that work?
After all, every single assessment of guilt in a court of law is supposed to be “beyond reasonable doubt.” And yet literally hundreds of people, about whose guilt the juries apparently had no doubt, have been exonerated while in prison and/or on death row.
“We are really, really sure he did it” is supposed to be the minimum standard for conviction in the first place, and yet it’s often not sufficient to ensure accuracy, so it’s rather pointless to hold this up as the standard for administering the death penalty.
Well, no, you wouldn’t think that if you had any familiarity with American courts. Do you know what happens if you file a habeas corpus petition concerning a dead man?
This feels almost absurd. There have been 1411 executions since my birth year, 1981 (cite), and I suspect I’m not particularly old compared to the SDMB average. Even if we assume a 0.995 success rate, we’ve still put to death something like 7 innocent people in the past 34 years. Are you really suggesting that our justice system is totally infallible?
Why wasn’t Justin Sneed given the death penalty? Is it because he made a deal with the prosecutor to testify against Glossip? But why would the prosecutor be interested in this if he already had strong evidence that Glossip was guilty?
Post mortem corporis non habet?
Can’t name them all, but I know of over 50 inmates on death row who WERE innocent, and almost executed, but released from prison. Of course, this is after spending over 10 years in a prison for no reason. For me, Glossip may have withheld evidence, or suspected and didn’t report it. If he gets released, I’d say he certainly paid his debt spending 18 years on death row.
We’ll have to wait a couple weeks to see what the lawyers came up with. It may involve another hearing on evidence and drag on.
Some say the zombie apocalypse all started with a misguided habeas ruling…
First time dealing with Smapti?
That’s a feature, not a bug. If someone is truly innocent, then the appeals process will vindicate them.
Is this your first visit to Smaptiland?
eta: Ninja’d!
And it only took 70 years.
Congratulations, Smapti.
You actually made me angry. I had to stay away from the board for a while yesterday. Normally I have fun in the BBQ Pit, and the assholes don’t get to me, but your intentional misunderstanding of “everyone agrees he was not the killer” did it.
My anger, my responsibility. **doorhinge *and bob&#^^$# can’t do it, because they misunderstand everything. **Shodan **couldn’t, because though he’s smug, his response had some substance.
You pissed me off. It won’t happen again.
No, it didn’t.
That case involves the writ of coram nobis, not the writ of habeas corpus. That writ is slightly different state to state, but generally does not allow the re-opening of the conviction of a deceased inmate for reasons like newly-discovered DNA evidence or errors of law.
IMHO, all executions are wrong and should be halted, at least in the content of civilian criminal law.
That said, the OP simply presents a completely false representation of the facts by claiming Sneed’s testimony is the only evidence against Glossip. It absolutely is not; the evidence against Glossip is vastly more detailed than that and, frankly, I find it quite convincing, at least for having done ten or fifteen minutes of reading on it.
I still don’t think he should be executed, but it seems to me a hell of ma stretch to say he’s clearly innocent. Frankly, I think he looks guilty as hell.
After reading some more about this whole mess, it’s pretty clear that Glossip is an idiot. Initially, he was warned about having any involvement. So he shows up for interviews without an attorney. Good fuck, you should never do that. And he gives them all kinds of details that would bring more questions-- the plexiglass window repair, the money his boss collected each day, etc.
And sure, this Sneed dope seemed like an easy pawn-- high-school dropout, odd jobs-- so a few thousand smackeroos might seem like enough to join in a crime.
From his interviews, I’d say it’s pretty clear that he withheld evidence by not reporting this. Also from his help on searching for the body. And again on possibly helping Sneed cover up the evidence.
I still see no real evidence he hired Sneed to do the murder. As dumb as you can be, how would you trust this kid Sneed to do the deed and do it right?
If the DP comes entirely from Sneed’s testimony saying he was hired by Glossip, I don’t see how this giant leap to guilt is possible. Sneed’s story changed a few times too. So it’ll be interesting to see what Glossip’s lawyers came up with.