# So what should happen to these two defendants? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [September 14, 2010, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740 "2010-09-14T17:07:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Projammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/projammer/32/559_2.png) [@Projammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Projammer)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/41 "2010-09-15T01:16:15Z")
> [@villa](#): > > > [@Projammer](#): > > > > Punishment should be cruel and unusual. > > > > It’s more effective that way. > > And private property (specifically that of **ProJammer** ) should be taken for public use without just compensation. > > It’s more economic that way. You are certainly welcome to present your arguments to Judge Taurus. Come back and let us know how that works out for you. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/42 "2010-09-15T01:17:43Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > How is it best for society to kill people? It prevents someone from killing again, including other prisoners. I think prison is far worse than the death penalty but I would chain them in such a way as to never be able to harm someone else. ---
**Author:** ![Corner\_Case](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/corner_case/32/234_2.png) [@Corner\_Case](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corner_Case)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/43 "2010-09-15T01:31:16Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > [@Corner\_Case](#): > > > > I think murders/rapists/pedophiles/etc. - those who physically, mentally, or emotionally remove a person from society - need to be given one appeal, six months to exercise it, and if the conviction is sustained then they be executed immediately and painlessly. Why doesn’t the above apply to the executioner? Because the convicted have already removed themselves from society due to their acts and the execution is a mercy for society. > > Except for when we kill people who didn’t do it. Do you give a shit that dozens of people have been released from death row because DNA proved they were innocent? Are you willing to be one of the innocent people wrongly exceuted? > > And don’t forget, everytime the state kills an innocent person, the real guilty person got away with something. > > Your time table for appeals is asinine, by the way. I would rather not convict innocent people. I’m not perfect. I try to do the best I can. Are youstarting from the position that people usually make mistakes and are malfeasant - people seek to kill people who didn’t do it rather than find the guilty? I start from the position that most people want to find the guilty and that there are then mistakes and malfeasance. Do you … care that many people have been convicted and found guilty? Or do you want everyone else to suffer for their misdeeds? Am I _willing_ to be accused if innocent? No, I’ll dispute it. Would I think that everyone is out to get me if I was suddenly arrested? No. Don’t forget, everytime the state kills a guilty person, the innocent people can breathe a little easier. My timetable is my opinion, considered, open to discussion, and not heckling, by the way. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/44 "2010-09-15T01:37:25Z")
> [@Corner\_Case](#): > > Don’t forget, everytime the state kills a guilty person, the innocent people can breathe a little easier. “Breathing easier” is in any way analogous to killing an innocent person? How many victims relatives are you willing to have “breathe easier” for every wrongfully convicted person who will never be able to breathe again? ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/45 "2010-09-15T01:41:09Z")
Give them the choice. Life in prison without parole, or a quick painless death whereupon their organs will be donated. They can save some people on the way out, at least. I think this choice should be offered to anyone convicted of a capital offense, but I don’t think the state should be the one making the choice. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/46 "2010-09-15T01:47:04Z")
> [@Corner\_Case](#): > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > Except for when we kill people who didn’t do it. Do you give a shit that dozens of people have been released from death row because DNA proved they were innocent? Are you willing to be one of the innocent people wrongly exceuted? > > > > And don’t forget, everytime the state kills an innocent person, the real guilty person got away with something. > > > > Your time table for appeals is asinine, by the way. > > I would rather not convict innocent people. I’m not perfect. I try to do the best I can. Are youstarting from the position that people usually make mistakes and are malfeasant - people seek to kill people who didn’t do it rather than find the guilty? I start from the position that most people want to find the guilty and that there are then mistakes and malfeasance. Do you … care that many people have been convicted and found guilty? Or do you want everyone else to suffer for their misdeeds? Am I _willing_ to be accused if innocent? No, I’ll dispute it. Would I think that everyone is out to get me if I was suddenly arrested? No. Your questiona are all meaningless, and you never really answered my question. Woud you be willing to be one of the innocent people executedm yes or no? As for your other questions, basically I satrt from the KNOWLDEGE that people are fallible and fuck up. Theur motivatios or “malfeasance” is neither here nor there. They are fallible. As long as we have a human system, we will have error. As lomg as we have error, we will kill innocent people. By the way, solitary confinement works perfectly well at protecting society too. We are not scarificing security by not killing them. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/47 "2010-09-15T01:59:32Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > These guys need killing. However, it is best for SOCIETY that the death penalty have tons of hurdles in front of it; it should be reserved for the very worst of rapists, murderers, and traitors. It disturbs me greatly when I agree with you. ---
**Author:** ![Corner\_Case](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/corner_case/32/234_2.png) [@Corner\_Case](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corner_Case)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/48 "2010-09-15T03:16:05Z")
> [@Ludovic](#): > > > [@Corner\_Case](#): > > > > Don’t forget, everytime the state kills a guilty person, the innocent people can breathe a little easier. > > “Breathing easier” is in any way analogous to killing an innocent person? How many victims relatives are you willing to have “breathe easier” for every wrongfully convicted person who will never be able to breathe again? I thought someone would jump at “breathing easier”. Try to phrase a question less like the proverbial “Have you stopped beating your wife?” You worry so much about making a mistake that everyone else must suffer. “They might have been framed or the prosecution might have just been trying to get their stats up”. Better to err on the side of believing the police/prosecution/judge is guilty of mistakes and vengence than a trial found a guilty man. That way you don’t have to be responsible for a choice. “No, I didn’t kill him. I thought the evidence didn’t quite add up and that mistakes could have been made - so I just locked him in a small room and gave him limited human contact until he died of his own accord”. ---
**Author:** ![aruvqan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aruvqan/32/2891_2.png) [@aruvqan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aruvqan)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/49 "2010-09-15T03:35:24Z")
> [@Quercus](#): > > > [@aruvqan](#): > > > > Is there any question at all that they did in fact commit the murders [and robbery, and rape]? > > Aru, you seem to acknowledge that lots of defendants on death row have been eventually proven to be innocent (by DNA and other evidence). I’m really curious what you think the jury, prosecutors, Governor, etc. in those cases thought about the defendant’s guilt. Do you think they were less sure, but went ahead with the death penalty anyway? I mean, I’ve been wrong about things before. And probably I’m a lot more likely to be wrong about something when I’m really angry. > > My attitude is that we all screw up once in a while. And (to paraphrase someone else), until we can bring people back to life, let’s not as a society kill them either. In the past I am certain that innocent people were executed [or incarcerated until they died/were killed by other prisoners] _however_ there are cases where we are literally 100% certain that the person/s are in fact guilty [some even have confessed, and actually led police to even more bodies] Why should we warehouse these broken individuals where they can possibly escape or harm others [even if the others are also criminals]? > [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > > [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > > > However, it is best for SOCIETY that the death penalty have tons of hurdles in front of it; it should be reserved for the very worst of rapists, murderers, and traitors. > > How is it best for society to kill people? > > Ah, okay, we’re talking about what you’d \*like \*to see happen to them, not which \*legal \*option you’d prefer? > > > [@](#): > > > > Main deal is this - they are guilty, they have been adjudged guilty, so why it should take 15 years to actually make them dead is baffling. Take them to the place of execution and perform the sentence. Is there any question at all that they did in fact commit the murders [and robbery, and rape]? Then why do they need all the bullshit appeals? _That_ is what is expensive about death sentences, warehousing them and sitting through appeal after appeal after appeal. I can understand if there is the tiniest shred of doubt over guilt [like with the pre-DNA cases] but did you even bother reading the article? I have, hard to miss this case - off and on in the news papers and television and radio since 2007 when it happened. It reads like something you would get in CSI or Law and Order, or a movie. > > 1.) Our system is not perfect. Innocent people are convicted not infrequently, even in death penalty cases. The appeals process is necessary to give an innocent person as much of a chance as possible to have the mistake corrected. This means that even when there’s someone you really don’t like who you’re really sure is guilty, yeah, that guy gets his chances, too. Because we don’t get to selectively apply justice based on our personal whims, even when this time you’re so totally sure that the guy did it (and most certainly did). Because all those other convictions? Well, damn, they were \*so sure \*those guys did it, too. > > 2.) People who are poor and/or part of a minority group are much more likely to be given death penalties than rich white people for the same crimes. > > 3.) The kinds of crimes that rich white people tend to commit, even when they are horribly damaging and may cause the equivalent of many murders, generally are not eligible for the death penalty. > > 4.) Executions do not act as deterrents. In the U.S., they are not timely, local, or visible. > > 5.) What you are describing is revenge, not justice. They did something terrible, so you want to make them hurt, and the best way you can think of to make them hurt is to kill them. That’s not the job of the state–at least, it shouldn’t be. Executions are not timely mainly because of the prolonged appeals process. And I don’t want revenge, I don’t know the victims from jack shit. Those killers are just like rabid dogs to me. They are permanently broken. They are career lifetime criminals who have demonstrated they have no compunctions about torturing and killing. They are permanently broken, exactly like a rabid dog and need to be permanently rendered incapable of harming anybody, and I do not see why my tax money needs to go towards warehousing them when I would prefer it go to buying school supplies. I am not responsible for white collar criminals legal punishments either, though in general they tend to be a lot less permanently damaging and rarely actually kill people. I would actually be perfectly happy with caning and flogging for lesser crimes, to be perfectly honest. I bet that fucking asshole from Singapore will never break the law in Singapore again. [if he ever grew a pair of nads and wanted to go back that is.] Would you litter if it meant 5 lashes of a bamboo cane instead of some amount of money? > [@Corner\_Case](#): > > I hear the case for life in prison, the concern that the justice system is broken, and the wish/obligation not to exact revenge. Once anger and fear subside and I consider keeping a murderer/rapist/pedophile/etc. in prison for life, I don’t understand it. Indirectly, everyone grows to become a part of a society and indirectly agrees to act within the implied rules and morals of it. What good (or right or benefit) does it serve society to declare “we will take you out of society until you die of natural causes”? > > You say it is cruel and unusual to kill a murder/rapist/pedophile/etc., but not cruel to lock them away from most human contact until they expire? It’s cruel to deprive them of visitors, books, exercise, but not cruel to have the victims, or their families, or the public fear escape, retribution, and victimization of others? Why are the assailants rights more important than the victims? > > No system is perfect. The worst criminal, caught in the act, unrepentant, boasting about doing other crimes, could come to see the light while in prison and turn into a saintly person who saves millions. I don’t like the odds and the risk to society. > > I think murders/rapists/pedophiles/etc. - those who physically, mentally, or emotionally remove a person from society - need to be given one appeal, six months to exercise it, and if the conviction is sustained then they be executed immediately and painlessly. Why doesn’t the above apply to the executioner? Because the convicted have already removed themselves from society due to their acts and the execution is a mercy for society. Sometimes society needs to treat a damaged individual like a rabid dog or a cancer and remove it permanently. If the sentence was carried out within the 6 month limit, it would definitely be a deterrent. Now, you get a death sentence you spend 20 years on death row, just like being a regular prisoner. You know that you can legally jerk the court system around until the cows come home. With newer technology, fewer and fewer incorrect convictions are being handed down. Yes mistakes can and will be made, but they are getting to be harder to make. ---
**Author:** ![Corner\_Case](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/corner_case/32/234_2.png) [@Corner\_Case](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corner_Case)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/50 "2010-09-15T03:39:46Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > [@Corner\_Case](#): > > > > I would rather not convict innocent people. I’m not perfect. I try to do the best I can. Are youstarting from the position that people usually make mistakes and are malfeasant - people seek to kill people who didn’t do it rather than find the guilty? I start from the position that most people want to find the guilty and that there are then mistakes and malfeasance. Do you … care that many people have been convicted and found guilty? Or do you want everyone else to suffer for their misdeeds? Am I _willing_ to be accused if innocent? No, I’ll dispute it. Would I think that everyone is out to get me if I was suddenly arrested? No. > > Your questiona are all meaningless, and you never really answered my question. Woud you be willing to be one of the innocent people executedm yes or no? > > As for your other questions, basically I satrt from the KNOWLDEGE that people are fallible and fuck up. Theur motivatios or “malfeasance” is neither here nor there. They are fallible. As long as we have a human system, we will have error. As lomg as we have error, we will kill innocent people. > > By the way, solitary confinement works perfectly well at protecting society too. We are not scarificing security by not killing them. My questions are the opposite of yours and are just as easy to answer as “Have you stopped beating your wife?” Would I be willing to be an innocent person executed? What kind of stupid question is that? “Yes, I would like to be an innocent person executed.” - “No, I would not like to be an innocent person executed.” I’ll choose no, thanks. What’s your point? I think what you are unable to communicate clearly is the question:“Are you willing to live in a society that might make a mistake and kill an innocent person?” Yes. Or perhaps it’s: “Must a society have absolutely positively no doubt that there were no mistakes, no vengeance, no coverups, no holograms, no nanobots changing DNA, no clones, no alternate universe personas, etc. that were really responsible?” No, that’s ludicrous. So apparently you want a non-human system (or at least one without humans in it) so that we can prevent error and never kill an innocent person? Good luck with that - Actually, no. I would rather have a system with people judging people. I start from assuming people make the best choice first and want to find the guilty, not the innocent. I guess your username really fits. ---
**Author:** ![Corner\_Case](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/corner_case/32/234_2.png) [@Corner\_Case](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corner_Case)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/51 "2010-09-15T03:50:24Z")
> [@aruvqan](#): > > Sometimes society needs to treat a damaged individual like a rabid dog or a cancer and remove it permanently. If the sentence was carried out within the 6 month limit, it would definitely be a deterrent. Now, you get a death sentence you spend 20 years on death row, just like being a regular prisoner. You know that you can legally jerk the court system around until the cows come home. With newer technology, fewer and fewer incorrect convictions are being handed down. > Yes mistakes can and will be made, but they are getting to be harder to make. Newer technology will make more and more ideas that defied common sense look like loopholes to the people who want to assuage their guilt. “That video tape could have been doctored even though the expert witness says it wasn’t.” “That DNA only matches 97% and there are still statistically 2 million people it could match.” “The officer only saw one side of the bus he was chasing and the thief could have gotten off as my client got on.” and on and on. Statistical noise now becomes weightier than evidence. [sub]Wow, that nested quoting could really get hairy if you let it get away from you.[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/52 "2010-09-15T04:02:18Z")
I would probably get banned for specifying what should happen to them. Did that you find that description of the crime disturbing? Well you wouldn’t be able to handle what I have in mind for them. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/53 "2010-09-15T04:22:14Z")
> [@Corner\_Case](#): > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > Your questiona are all meaningless, and you never really answered my question. Woud you be willing to be one of the innocent people executedm yes or no? > > > > As for your other questions, basically I satrt from the KNOWLDEGE that people are fallible and fuck up. Theur motivatios or “malfeasance” is neither here nor there. They are fallible. As long as we have a human system, we will have error. As lomg as we have error, we will kill innocent people. > > > > By the way, solitary confinement works perfectly well at protecting society too. We are not scarificing security by not killing them. > > My questions are the opposite of yours Your questions are bullshit non-sequiturs. > [@](#): > > Would I be willing to be an innocent person executed? What kind of stupid question is that? “Yes, I would like to be an innocent person executed.” - “No, I would not like to be an innocent person executed.” I’ll choose no, thanks. What’s your point? The point is that you have already said you are willing to kill innocent people. I’m just trying to clarify whtehre you would insist that those innocent people be somebody besides yourself, or whether you believe that you’re special. > [@](#): > > I think what you are unable to communicate clearly is the question:“Are you willing to live in a society that might make a mistake and kill an innocent person?” Yes. No. I already knew your answer to that question My question is about whether you’re willing to BE one of those innocent people. It’s not a trick question. It’s just one that you aren’t willing to answer. > [@](#): > > Or perhaps it’s: “Must a society have absolutely positively no doubt that there were no mistakes, no vengeance, no coverups, no holograms, no nanobots changing DNA, no clones, no alternate universe personas, etc. that were really responsible?” No, that’s ludicrous. No. My question is whether you are willing to be one of the innocent people killed in order to have the system you want. We already know you’ve decided it’s ok to kill innocent people. What wehave not established is whether you’re willing to be one of them. Clearly you are not. You’re only willing to kill innocent people who are not you. > [@](#): > > So apparently you want a non-human system (or at least one without humans in it) so that we can prevent error and never kill an innocent person? Good luck with that - Actually, no. I would rather have a system with people judging people. I start from assuming people make the best choice first and want to find the guilty, not the innocent. I guess your username really fits. Judgements about the motivations of people are completely irrelevant. They will fuck up regardless. That whole line is a bullshit red herring. It’s SUCH bullshit, and SO beside the point that I have to wonder if you’re really even tracking the conversation. I also never said anything about wanting a different system. We already have about the best we’re going to get. BUT this system still has an error rate. BECAUSE it has an error rate, we need someway to correct errors when we find them. Executions are irreversible. Life in prison is not. Nothing is accomplished by executions that is not accomplished by life without parole, an life without parole is cheaper (no, you don’t just get to sweep away the Constitution and the appeals process). If you really want a system which will guarantee – GUARANTEE – that innocent people will die (and please don’t raise that horseshit about peple’s intentions Good or bad intentions have nothing the fuck to do with it. People with good intentions still fuck up, especially in highly emotionally charged cases), then you ought to be willing to be one the innocent people executed (because you are certainly willing for the next guy to be one. If you are not willing, then your argument has no moral validity or consistency because you want a special exception for yourself. You’re saying you want everybody else to play Russian Roulette except for you. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/54 "2010-09-15T04:24:04Z")
> [@Corner\_Case](#): > > > [@aruvqan](#): > > > > Sometimes society needs to treat a damaged individual like a rabid dog or a cancer and remove it permanently. If the sentence was carried out within the 6 month limit, it would definitely be a deterrent. Now, you get a death sentence you spend 20 years on death row, just like being a regular prisoner. You know that you can legally jerk the court system around until the cows come home. With newer technology, fewer and fewer incorrect convictions are being handed down. > > Yes mistakes can and will be made, but they are getting to be harder to make. > > Newer technology will make more and more ideas that defied common sense look like loopholes to the people who want to assuage their guilt. > > “That video tape could have been doctored even though the expert witness says it wasn’t.” “That DNA only matches 97% and there are still statistically 2 million people it could match.” “The officer only saw one side of the bus he was chasing and the thief could have gotten off as my client got on.” and on and on. Statistical noise now becomes weightier than evidence. > > [sub]Wow, that nested quoting could really get hairy if you let it get away from you.[/sub] You really find reasonable doubt to be annoying, don’t you? ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/55 "2010-09-15T04:45:18Z")
No death penalty. It makes us guilty of murder. We execute innocent people . It puts us in a group with the middle east countries that believe in it. We are supposed to be on a process of elevating our species. It is an atavistic, throwback to a less sophisticated, cruel and stupid time. ---
**Author:** ![Lanzy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/74df32/32.png) [@Lanzy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lanzy)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/56 "2010-09-15T05:00:21Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > > [@Lanzy](#): > > > > I’d risk it. No soul, no problem. > > Is this an _I’m an atheist and don’t believe humans possess immortal souls_ remark, or an _I’m a sociopath_ wisecrack? > > I don’t believe in immortal, immaterial souls either. But I believe it is psychological injurious for a person to be engaged in an occupation requiring systematic and egular infliction of physical torment on another. I guess you’re entitled to your beliefs. ---
**Author:** ![Corner\_Case](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/corner_case/32/234_2.png) [@Corner\_Case](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corner_Case)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/57 "2010-09-15T05:00:48Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Your questions are bullshit non-sequiturs. I’m not trying to doge the point. It’s just that you are being so absolute in your requirement for 100+% evidence. We’re not perfect so we can’t be 100% sure of anything, but I don’t want to act like that means we’re 100% uncertain. **“I’m just trying to clarify whtehre you would insist that those innocent people be somebody besides yourself, or whether you believe that you’re special.”** Well, I don’t think you’ll believe me, but, yes, if I was caught in a house standing over a dead body with the smoking murder weapon in my hand, a video tape showing I did it, and I knew in my mind I was innocent - I would fight to find evidence to exonerate me, plead and work and want all the appeals I could muster, [sub]and here’s the part you won’t believe[/sub], I would understand if I was convicted, sentenced to prison, and executed. I wouldn’t like it. I would yell against it! I would know it’s wrong since I knew in my mind I was innocent, but I really would understand. Geeze, I was caught with the gun in my hand! I’m really not trying to be evasive. I would undstand if I was one of the “innocent people wrongly convicted” Does that answer your question? What I don’t feel is that people are behaving in a way or with motices such that innocent people are wrongly convicted most of the time or mostly on purpose or mostly anything. But it’s just a feeling, I have no cites. **“My question is whether you are willing to be one of the innocent people killed in order to have the system you want.”** I think we have that system. That mostly people are guilty when convicted and not innocent. Every system needs improvement, but I think we have a damn good one. **“…an life without parole is cheaper (no, you don’t just get to sweep away the Constitution and the appeals process).”** I defintely don’t want to sweep these away. I was talking about the society coming around to a majority voted opinion that the appeals process needs to be streamlined. It’s just an opinion open to debate, not a mandate. I like to question ideas, not be dogmatic about them. **“If you really want a system which will guarantee – GUARANTEE – that innocent people will die…”** When did I _want_ that? It is the sad part of an imperfect system. But a system that had no death penalty I feel is a less perfect system. **“You’re saying you want everybody else to play Russian Roulette except for you”** I never exempted myself. I think that a system where the “preponderance of evidence” points in one direction is better than “no shadow of a doubt”. But then we get into what’s a preponderance and where does it overlay a shadow and all that. I don’t know, I’d have to have examples. And before you go off again, I’m not talking about sweeping away the Constitution or the appeals process. I’m talking about talking about them. Give me the sole power right now to change the system and I wouldn’t make a single move without some years of thought. I’m just expressing a point of view. I like to be Devil’s Advocate [sub]No, you don’t! Oh, shut up, yes I do![/sub] - and I do believe what I’m saying, I’m not just engaging in what-ifs. ---
**Author:** ![Corner\_Case](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/corner_case/32/234_2.png) [@Corner\_Case](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corner_Case)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 5:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/58 "2010-09-15T05:01:56Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > [@Corner\_Case](#): > > > > Newer technology will make more and more ideas that defied common sense look like loopholes to the people who want to assuage their guilt. > > > > “That video tape could have been doctored even though the expert witness says it wasn’t.” “That DNA only matches 97% and there are still statistically 2 million people it could match.” “The officer only saw one side of the bus he was chasing and the thief could have gotten off as my client got on.” and on and on. Statistical noise now becomes weightier than evidence. > > > > [sub]Wow, that nested quoting could really get hairy if you let it get away from you.[/sub] > > You really find reasonable doubt to be annoying, don’t you? No, I find unreasonable doubt to be annoying, don’t you? ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/59 "2010-09-15T13:28:43Z")
> [@Wargamer](#): > > Give them a nice 10 by 10 foot room, with three square meals a day, served through a slot in the door, absolutely no human contact whatsoever, and a gun with one bullet.n.) Why should they get to enjoy three squares a day? I would give them some drink mix with everything they need to stay alive, flavored with an obnoxious tasting (but totally harmless) chemical. ---
**Author:** ![Agent\_Foxtrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc29f/32.png) [@Agent\_Foxtrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Agent_Foxtrot)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740/60 "2010-09-15T14:10:33Z")
> [@MeanOldLady](#): > > > [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > > > No regularly administered beatings, please. Whether or not the bad guys deserve it, that is bad for the souls of the persons doing the beatings. > > How about a beating-administering robot? _snork_ 😃 I’m wondering what the defense strategy of these two perps is. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-should-happen-to-these-two-defendants/553740.md?page=4)