Would you rather let a thousand guilty men go free or put one innocent man to death?

[Hamlet]

@pervert

Once again, Hamlet, outstanding post. You are quickly becoming my favorite SDMBer.

Thank you. I appreciate that your genuine interest in the case keeps me on my toes and researching the case. I keep learning more and more myself. So many thanks to you too.

I’ll take your post a little out of order, but I hope it clears some things up.

@pervert

Did I confuse whether he was on the back or front? I’ve built up a picture of two cars along the highway, and if he was bent over the hood of the patorl car, he would have had a long way to go to get to the back of the Camero to do the fatal shooting. However, if the cars were along side each other, or if Tafero had been restrained at the back of the patorl car this changes considerably.

The murders did not occur on the highway, but rather at a rest stop. The police officers were checking on people sleeping in the car, which was Rhodes, Tafero, and Jacobs (and her two children). Officer Black saw a gun in the vehicle at Rhodes’ feet, so he confiscated that gun and started the investigation. Although I haven’t been able to find a definitive answer on how the vehicles were parked, I think your visual image of the murders occuring after a traffic stop is mistaken.

@pervert

I am still confused about a couple things. The Florida supreme court says that Rhodes testimony is coroberated by physical evidenc and the other eyewitnesses. However, I’m not sure those eyewitnesses nor the physical evidence contradicts Tafero’s testimony. We have good evidence that Jacobs shot the first few shots from the rear of the Comero.

I’m pretty sure that Jacobs actually only fired one shot. However, as far as physical evidence goes, I found this information in Jacob’s case:

@Jacob's appeal

Tests conducted by the state’s ballistics expert showed only that it was possible for a gun to have been fired from the inside of the car. The medical examiner was unable to draw conclusions about the origin of the shots from his examination of the victims. All of the identifiable shell casings and bullets matched the type of gun found on Tafero.

@pervert

The physical evidence suggests that the fatal shots came from that area. But most of the eyewitness testimony agrees with the contention that Rhodes was at the front of the Camero with his hands up and Tafero was restrained at the patrol car. This seems to suggest that the first shots were from Jacobs, and she does not seem to dispute this. However, this does not clear up the matter of who killed the officers. We know one of the trio did.

No. We know Tafero did. Rhodes testified that Tafero grabbed the gun from Jacobs (or that jacob’s gave him the gun) and fired 4 or five shots at the Trooper and another two at Irwin. This is exactly how Jacob’s described it in her statement to a police officer:

@Jacob's appeal

Jacobs told Lieutenant Farinato (Farinato) that she wanted to talk to him in private. Farinato arranged to transport Jacobs in his car. After being advised of her rights by Farinato, Jacobs explicitly waived her right to remain silent. Jacobs purportedly told him that she fired the first shot from the car. She stated that someone then said “give me a gun, give me a gun.” Jacobs threw the gun to Tafero, who proceeded to shoot “the trooper and … the Canadian.”

But if the evidence as to this is insufficient to hold two of them for life in prison, how can it be said to be sufficient to kill Tafero? I guess this is the central issue in this case. If the original trial and evidence was not sufficient to sustain a life sentence for two of the three involved in the deaths, how can we say it was sufficient to sustain a death penalty for Tafero.

I suppose one could make the argument that pleading out Rhodes was a prosecutorial decision, and so it does not prove that a life sentence was unsustainable in his case. Meanwhile, Jacobs was not released until it would have been unwise to retry her. So, perhaps the evidence in the first trial is not proven insufficient for her either.

Well, first you have to put aside the issue of culpability. The roles each of the three played in the murder of the two police officers was different. Rhodes, who aided and abetted, and kidnapped and stole the vehicle they used to attempt to escape, may not have deserved the death penalty. Jacobs, who, from my understanding, shot Black, gave the gun to Tafero, and helped flee the scene, is more culpable. Should she have gotten the death penalty? Maybe. Tough Call. But Tafero took the gun, shot both officers, killing them. He is the most culpable and, if you believe in the death penalty, is clearly the most deserving.

Did that make sense?

Most certainly. But I feel much as Shodan does about the issue, except I’m not as sure about what Jacobs deserves. But the fact that she was allowed to plead and be released has little or nothing to do with Tafero’s actions that night. Jacob’s was not, in any sense of the word, exonerated, yet her case is touted as such and shown to be proof that Tafero was an innocent man. Simply put, he wasn’t. He killed two police officers.

As yet another aside, as I looked more into the case, it appears that another reason Jacobs was allowed to plead was the appellate court suppressed some of her statements that were allowed in her first trial. I’m not sure how much bearing that has, but it was probably another thing that was considered. Oh, and while I’m clearing the air, I did find this statement:

Finally, Rhodes testified at trial that he heard a first shot from a nine millimeter gun, followed immediately by a louder shot from the trooper’s gun.

So it does appear I was mistaken earlier when I said the trooper may not have fired his weapon. Sorry.

[pervert]

@Shodan

What I mean is that I am interested in arguments that “we got the wrong guy”. Much less so if the argument is “sure, he did it, but he should only get life in prison”.

I agree. Many of the “innocent executed” listed in the anti DP sites suffer from this logic. As I said at the begining I am not against the Death penalty on any sort of “we should never kill people” grounds. I am simply averse to granting the government this particualr power. Its more a limited government concept with me.

[pervert]

@Hamlet

The murders did not occur on the highway, but rather at a rest stop. The police officers were checking on people sleeping in the car, which was Rhodes, Tafero, and Jacobs (and her two children). Officer Black saw a gun in the vehicle at Rhodes’ feet, so he confiscated that gun and started the investigation. Although I haven’t been able to find a definitive answer on how the vehicles were parked, I think your visual image of the murders occuring after a traffic stop is mistaken.

Right. When the fact that it occured at the rest stop finally sunk in, I began to reconfigure the cars in my head. I think my original view is wrong. However, we still have Rhodes at the front of the Camero with his hands up, apperently surrendering to the officers. This leads me to believe that they were towards the front of the Camero. If Tafero was bent over the back, this still means he had to traverse much of the length of the Camero to get to the back seat. This, in my mind leaves a time gap during which the officers could have moved or done something else. I’m most definatlely NOT tryin to blame them in any way. I’m just trying to get an understanding of the events which makes sense in my mind.

No. We know Tafero did. Rhodes testified that Tafero grabbed the gun from Jacobs (or that jacob’s gave him the gun) and fired 4 or five shots at the Trooper and another two at Irwin. This is exactly how Jacob’s described it in her statement to a police officer:

Well, this is the central issue. Jacob’s and Rhodes statements are both self serving to some degree. Rhodes testimony, especially, was obtained with a plea agreement. I am much more interested in the accounts given by the truckers and any physical evidence which discounts the possibility that Rhodes or even Jacobs could have shot any of the fatal rounds.

Well, first you have to put aside the issue of culpability. The roles each of the three played in the murder of the two police officers was different. Rhodes, who aided and abetted, and kidnapped and stole the vehicle they used to attempt to escape, may not have deserved the death penalty. Jacobs, who, from my understanding, shot Black, gave the gun to Tafero, and helped flee the scene, is more culpable. Should she have gotten the death penalty? Maybe. Tough Call. But Tafero took the gun, shot both officers, killing them. He is the most culpable and, if you believe in the death penalty, is clearly the most deserving.

Well, but this is only if we accept the prosecution’s version of events “beyond a reasonable doubt”. I’m not trying to say that someone else might have killed the officers. but I still think there is a little doubt (I’m not sure it is reasonable yet) as to who shot the officers.

Jacob’s was not, in any sense of the word, exonerated, yet her case is touted as such and shown to be proof that Tafero was an innocent man. Simply put, he wasn’t. He killed two police officers.

I agree that the characterizations made int he anti DP sites over state this. I think I mentioned reservations about linking them early on. I was actually quite nervous about it. It is one reason I am gushing so much with appreciation for your posts. They prevent mine from lookin like partisan spin.

As yet another aside, as I looked more into the case, it appears that another reason Jacobs was allowed to plead was the appellate court suppressed some of her statements that were allowed in her first trial. I’m not sure how much bearing that has, but it was probably another thing that was considered. Oh, and while I’m clearing the air, I did find this statement: So it does appear I was mistaken earlier when I said the trooper may not have fired his weapon. Sorry.

I wonder which statements were supressed? Was it for merely technical reasons? Were the statements any of those which we are now relying on to say that “No. We know Tafero did.”?

Again, I am not saying that Tafero was a completely innocent man. Even if he never touched a gun at the rest stop (I know that is an if), he certainly helped in the getaway later. I’m not certain how the felony murder laws work, but in some states they may be enough to qualify one for the death penalty. I’m willing to concede that the Tafero case may be more of a “possible slight mistake, but certainly not an innocent executed.”

I’m willing to switch to another case if you guys want, or we could continue the discussion on a more general vein. For instance, I would prefer some sort of process whereby executions could be reviewed. If governments could sue anti DP groups or they could sue the government in some way so that each side could present their evidence and a finding of acceptable or unacceptable execution could be made, then our discussion could proceed more easily. As it is, I’m arguing for the anti DP guys and you are arguing for the state. Neither of us has direct access to any of the evidence.

I realize that such a proceeding would add expense to the DP process. I’m not really advocating for it. But it would help quell my own doubts if the government were more willing to examine its decisions after the executions.