I can’t quickly find which one of the Arkansas murderers you refer to here, but as you report it, this proves that this convict and the murder victim were in the same place, but it doesn’t prove they were there at the same time. (Litterer drops butt on ground; hours or days or even weeks later, somebody bleeds on it.) DNA testing doesn’t necessarily tell you anything at all about WHEN the DNA was deposited, or how its deposit is chronologically related to other events.
I await whoever wrote
to come back and denounce this heinous system.
If an innocent person was executed, then that is indeed unfortunate and regrettable, and indicates a need to improve.
It does not however indict the entire notion of capital punishment.
Killing innocent people is bad. Eliminating the death penalty means no more executions of innocent people. Life imprisonment can still provide justice and deterrence for the most serious of crimes. I don’t trust our society and system nearly enough to give it the power to take the life of an imprisoned person.
If Lee was innocent, he’ll be the first innocent person executed in this country since the '40s. 1 error in 70+ years is close enough to a 100% success rate as to be statistically negligible when there are some people so evil that life in prison is too good for them.
I’m confused. Is sentencing prisoners to life in prison (or, say, 50+ years before they’re released) so much better? Since innocent people can be sentenced for life, we should definitely not hand out life sentences anymore, by your logic. Or 10 year sentences. Or fines. Or community service. Because there’s the chance that innocent people may be affected.
Also, nothing was proven with that guy yet. So I guess all any of us can do is wait and see.
Aside from all the others, of course.
The only half-compelling argument I’ve ever heard put forth that an innocent has been executed in recent decades was for Cameron Todd Willingham, and after reading up on the facts it’s pretty clear to me that he was 100% guilty
Yeah, I disagree. First *real *arson experts (not the prosecution’s trained dog) say it wasnt arson. If it wasnt arson, then- no murder.
*Fire investigator Gerald L. Hurst reviewed the case documents, including the trial transcriptions and an hour-long videotape of the aftermath of the fire scene. Hurst said in December 2004 that “There’s nothing to suggest to any reasonable arson investigator that this was an arson fire. It was just a fire.”[7]
In June 2009, the State of Texas ordered a re-examination of the case. In August 2009, eighteen years after the fire and five years after Willingham’s execution, a report conducted by Dr. Craig Beyler, hired by the Texas Forensic Science Commission to review the case, found that “a finding of arson could not be sustained”. Beyler said key testimony from a fire marshal at Willingham’s trial was “hardly consistent with a scientific mind-set and is more characteristic of mystics or psychics”.[1][2]
The prosecutor, John Jackson, and the City of Corsicana have both released formal responses to the Beyler Report on the investigation of the fire that killed Willingham’s three children at the behest of the Texas Forensic Science Commission.[3] Both were sharply critical of Beyler.[16] In a 2009 article discussing the reasons why Willingham was found guilty, Jackson recalled witness statements establishing that Willingham was overheard whispering to his deceased older daughter at the funeral home, “You’re not the one who was supposed to die.” Jackson stated that Willingham’s comment was an indicator of guilt. In a rebuttal, Grann wrote,
If the arson investigators had concluded that there was no scientific evidence that a crime had occurred — as the top fire investigators in the country have now determined — Willingham’s words at the funeral would surely be viewed as a sign that he was tormented by the fact that he had survived without saving his children.[17]
An August 2009 Chicago Tribune investigative article concluded, “Over the past five years, the Willingham case has been reviewed by nine of the nation’s top fire scientists — first for the Tribune, then for the Innocence Project, and now for the commission. All concluded that the original investigators relied on outdated theories and folklore to justify the determination of arson. The only other evidence of significance against Willingham was twice-recanted testimony by another inmate, who testified that Willingham had confessed to him. Jailhouse informants are viewed with skepticism in the justice system, so much so that some jurisdictions have restrictions against their use.”[30]*
Somehow most of the wealthy parts of the world get by without the death penalty. They have a 0% false execution rate, unlike us. And they don’t have any more or worse criminals (the opposite, in fact). I’m unconvinced that the death penalty adds anything to society but additional brutality, death, and the chance to kill innocent people.
Now of the wealthy parts of the world don’t have a runaway gun culture or unaddressed issues of generational poverty or neglecting the mentally ill. America simply is a more violent country than most of the First World, and it produces people like Ted Bundy, Tim McVeigh, and John Wayne Gacy who don’t deserve to keep drawing breath. I see no way our society would be improved by their still being alive and enjoying government-funded healthcare.
For that matter, it’s little more than squeamishness masquerading as enlightened liberalism that does away with the death penalty in most of those places. It’s a crime against humanity that Anders Breivik is still kicking.
Agreed. The wrongfully convicted are still losing a portion of their lives. Exonerating them 40 years later doesn’t take away the loss of life. The choice between the two isn’t awful vs good but awful vs less awful. Life in prison may be “better” than execution to some but it doesn’t solve the problem of the wrongly convicted.
Well, to be fair- murderers sentenced to Life do the following: escape and kill again, kill a guard or fellow prisoner (and a guy in prison for writing bad checks doesnt deserve to die, imho), arrange for a murder to be done outside, or get released accidentally- and kill again. Once executed, no one can kill again.
Now, in general I dont like the DP. BUT- if we have to have one, have one like in CA, where only the worst of the worst are sent to death row. If we reserved the DP for 2nd offenders or similar heinous crimes, the chance of a mistake gets down to zero.
Or commit multiple murders, get sentenced to death, have their death sentences commuted to life in prison when the death penalty is outlawed, get released and go on to kill a half-dozen more times (Kenneth McDuff).
I prefer less DP to more DP, so I’d vote for this. But I’d most prefer zero DP, ala most of Europe. And maybe if our prisons were more about rehabilitation, like Scandinavian prisons, than punishment, then convicts would have a chance at changing their ways (and indeed, recidivism in the US is far higher than in Scandinavian countries) rather than spiraling into more and more brutality.
There’s a part of me - the raging monkey part of my DNA - that still leaves just enough space to justify the death penalty in exceptional situations, but I’ve gradually come to the conclusion that those exceptional situations are exceedingly rare. I get that executing murderers makes us feel good, but it doesn’t make our society safer. We’re safer if we all live according to the same standard, which is that humans, generally speaking, shouldn’t be devoting lots of time and resources to plotting the killing of other humans, no matter how thirsty we are for revenge. IIRC, the stats would seem to indicate, at minimum, that there is no evidence that a death penalty deters violence. And it would seem anecdotally that states with the death penalty seem to have the highest levels of it.
I don’t see the death penalty as deterrent. I see it as punishment. When you have committed murder, you’re no longer entitled to live.
None of these are even half compelling?
Given that the argument for the innocence of most of them boils down to “they said they didn’t do it and no person on death row would ever lie about being innocent”, yes.