I dont think that’s a “either/or”. I am kinda in the middle here. I think that many states, like Texas, misuse the DP. But others, like California, only execute the worst.
But yes, in a few rare cases a innocent man has been executed.
It is also true that convicted killers can & will kill again, sometimes- they escape, are mistakenly released, kill another prisoner* or guard, or order/arrange a hit from behind bars. How do we stop that? Lief w/o parole will not. It’s not a “deterrence” it’s a prevention.
I think the DP should only be used against those who have killed twice- not two people in one incident, but two separate murders.
I think that use of the DP needs to be reformed, or gotten rid of.
How often does this really happen, and what are the stats compared other prisoners?
What’s really bogus is saying the above over and over again without showing us some data.
Just trying to avoid leaping multiple steps at once.
So I’d like to focus a little bit on option (c), exoneration based on newly-discovered evidence.
Would it be fair to say that this outcome is not only possible, but has actually happened – that a person convicted, sentenced to death, and having exhausted all ordinary appeals and post-conviction reviews, has nonetheless been subsequently exonerated by newly-discovered evidence? And that it’s happened more than a hundred times since the re-institution of the death penalty in the 1970s?
I dont think that all DP advocates claim that no innocent man has ever been executed. Certainly, in the days of “legal lynchings” many innocent men so met their end. No one can doubt that.
And, I dont see that a DP advocate here has claimed “the deterrence value of the death penalty”.
I guess even with “legal,” I still consider such extrajudicial. I also like to focus on more modern times as being relevant, since that far in the past is so easily dismissed by “things are different now.”
Fine, change it to “retain the value to society offered by the death penalty”.
To completely answer your first reply first, IS there a third option I’m not seeing in the first post I made in this thread? If so, what is it, and why is not covered by my either/or?
Once he says yes to that are you going to ask him “Is it reasonable to assume that efforts to exonerate someone greatly diminish after they’ve been executed?”
I dont think that all DP advocates claim that no innocent man has ever been executed. Certainly, in the days of “legal lynchings” many innocent men so met their end. No one can doubt that.
And, I dont see that a DP advocate here has claimed “the deterrence value of the death penalty”.*
So if you reword your either/or to something like : either that the justice system has extremely rarely recently executed a factually innocent person; or that you feel it’s worth having a factually innocent person executed to keep the danger to society that a convicted killer may kill again.
And I addressed that response. I didn’t see direct rebuttal of it, so I assumed you were accepting it. My mistake.
As for your proposed reword, I find it introduces facts not in evidence. Why not boil down the question this way: do you consider the possibility of executing a factually innocent person to be an acceptable price to pay for the value the death penalty offers society?
Or does it depend on how high you think that possibility is? At what point is the possibility too high for you, if ever? Does it depend on your trust of the criminal justice system and the people in it?
(And to get it out of the way, insert “appropriate username” joke here.)
It does indeed depend upon how high you think that possibility is.
I mean how many innocent deaths do you accept as the price to get rid of the DP?
What is the alternative? Are you so opposed to the DP that you’d let 100, a 100, more innocent get murdered? if so, you’re an absolutist, which I am not.
I did give my solutions:* I think the DP should only be used against those who have killed twice- not two people in one incident, but two separate murders.
I think that use of the DP needs to be reformed, or gotten rid of. *
I dont like the DP. I hate the DP as used in states like Texas, where men are executed for political points.
Yes, obviously, executing even one innocent man is a Very Bad Thing. But having a murderer kill another innocent is also a Very Bad Thing.
This is Johnny Webb, the same jailhouse snitch who came forward and gave a recorded interview detailing how he lied and made up the supposed confession of Willingham in a bid to have his own sentence reduced and to get support from a local rancher?
Webb who submitted a formal motion to recant his testimony some four years before Willingham was executed. That was a motion that curiously the prosecution never disclosed to Willingham’s lawyers.
Webb is nearly the poster boy for unreliability when certainty is of the utmost importance. He has flip flopped so much that he simply cannot be considered reliable.
And before I answer I have to see how many you want. If it is ten- I can do that. A million- no. If* no number at all *is acceptable to you, why bother?
I am going to assume you don’t have any stats to back up your assertions, because what I “want” or don’t “want” has no bearing whatsoever on your ability to provide statistics to back your claimed reason to use the death penalty.
If you would like to read the OP, it mentions Kenneth Dewayne Williams, who was sentenced to LWOP. Then he escaped and killed two more people (cite).
Comparing this to executed murderers -
Number of innocent lives lost due to LWOP in the OP - two.
Number of innocent lives lost due to executing the murderers in the OP - zero.
Number of murders that can be committed by dead murderers - zero.