Sitting on death row awaiting Execution...?

[Jarlaxle]

I flat do not trust the court system enopugh to support the death penalty in most cases...I would make exceptions only for corrupt public officials (who should be publicly beheaded) and bad cops.

I watched someone spend more than ten years in prison (he's still on probation, so is his sister...his mother died before he was released) for a crime that he not only didn't commit, but that SIMPLY NEVER HAPPENED. The prosecution simply made the entire thing up out of thin air. He should be a free man, and should collect several billion dollars for having his life ruined...the prosecutor that railroaded him should be flayed to death.

 

[65cuda]

I guess that you are right. Shame that I actually feel that people that are innocent shouldn't be executed in the name of money or to expedite things.

 

[rjacket]

Apart from the personal impact of crime, crime has huge costs to all of us through taxes as well as the direct changes we have to make to our lives.

Once incarcerated, all criminals should be made to pay back to society rather than continuing to be a cost to us.

Where physical labor is not possible, one idea would be to give them computer based work. That way, they might even come out with some sort of skill as well as a work ethic when they are released.

While keeping prisoners in for life costs a lot of money, executing prisoners also costs a fortune. The legal costs are way higher because of the appeals and death row is way more expensive than regular parts of prison. The execution itself costs a fortune.

Given the reality of high costs associated with death row, keeping prisoners in for life but making them pay back to society seems to me to be a morally and practically better approach.

 

[65cuda]

I've heard of the prisioners being able to work like for telemarketing, but do you really want them to have access to private info?

 

[rjacket]

Originally Posted By: 65cuda
I've heard of the prisioners being able to work like for telemarketing, but do you really want them to have access to private info?


No you have to choose what you want them to do carefully, which isn't difficult with computers, and worth doing if your labor is free.

 

[OtisBlkR1]

Have any of you participated in a exacution ?

 

[buickman50401]

wtd, I was a CO for 5 years and concur with your sentiments. Prisons are not what the general public imagines or how they are portrayed by the media in film and reality TV. The one I worked at was the subject of a National Geographic episode of Lockdown. The specific episode is First Timers. They made the conditiins sound 10x more brutal than they are. In fact they're not brutal at all.

Free and top notch health care provided by interns at the University of Iowa teaching hospital. Rights and priviledges up the wazoo. In the 5 years I was there I watched probably 100+ new release movies with the inmates while working on the wings of housing units. The activities staff would rent 2 new releases and 2 older movies on a Friday, put them in the 5 disc changer and run them on repeat from fri night to sun night broadcast on the prisons internal co-ax network.

At one point our idiot warden now since fired put xboxes and PS2s in the "honor unit" and on the level 4 wing of the seg unit for the seg orderlies to use. Thankfully a call to the deputy director of the DOC got him up for a surprise walkthrough a week after they were installed and he ordered them removed immediately.

3 of our lifers lived on the honor unit and had for years. Keys for their cells, with no way for staff to actually secure them in their rooms (think wooden dormitory style doors).


Originally Posted By: 65cuda
I can understand your feelings about it but the problem is still the part about innocent people being executed. Your wesite idea only tells what they were convicted of. It still doesn't mean that they all were actually guilty. Yes people people die all the time, but on the other hand these cases are one's that you have a choice to execute or not. Might want to look at the cost to keep a person on death row and the appeals also. Nobody is saying that they should have a fine living, but again you would almost certainly feel different about it if you were innocent, but convicted of a crime you didn't commit and then sentenced to death. The feelings do go both ways.


How about execution for those we are certain are guilty? Firstly lets correct a misconception about how the court system is supposed to work. Convictions are supposed to be based on a lack of reasonable doubt, not the prevailing public notion of beyond a shadow of any doubt no matter how ludicrous the "alternative theories" presented by the defense... and the appeals process is there to make sure that reasonable doubt is taken into account.

So in these days of DNA evidence and cameras everywhere if we catch a killer and find forensic evidence that clearly demonstrates he is guilty, let him have one appeal to re-examine the forensics to make sure they are solid and if so then execute him.

What about catching a homicide on film? If in the trial it cannot be demonstrated to be an act of self defense then why not execute him?

What about the likes of Dahmer. Body parts in the freezer? Why did we not execute him forthwith?

 

[buickman50401]

Originally Posted By: OtisBlkR1
Have any of you participated in a exacution ?


Nope, but it wouldn't bother me in the least witnessing one or even being placed in the role of the hangman.

 

[65cuda]

How about execution for those we are certain are guilty? Firstly lets correct a misconception about how the court system is supposed to work. Convictions are supposed to be based on a lack of reasonable doubt, not the prevailing public notion of beyond a shadow of any doubt no matter how ludicrous the "alternative theories" presented by the defense... and the appeals process is there to make sure that reasonable doubt is taken into account.
In the first place there are many that they were certain were guilty so that isn't always an easy or certain thing. DNA evidence has made it more certain, but there have been cases where later it was found that the DNA wasn't tested correctly or was contaminated. Like I've said I have no doubt that most would have a different opinion if it was their tail heading for execution when they knew they were innocent. For me they wouldn't have the new release movies or anything else. A simple basic room with no access to the outside world or contact with another person.

 

[buickman50401]

Originally Posted By: 65cuda

In the first place there are many that they were certain were guilty so that isn't always an easy or certain thing. DNA evidence has made it more certain, but there have been cases where later it was found that the DNA wasn't tested correctly or was contaminated.

Hence the appeals process to re-examine the veracity of the forensic evidence before going through with the execution.

You can post the "what if" innocent scenarios all day long. And you conveniently tap danced your way around the video evidence or Dahmer type scenario.

What I'm asking you is that if someone is 100% guilty would you support their execution?

For example, a shooting caught on security cameras:

1) with clear easily identifiable view of perpetrators face

2) forensic evidence in the form of DNA backing up the tape

3) and heck lets toss in gun discovered on the perpetrator when arrested that is matched to the bullet extracted from the victim

4) not a case of self-defense (for arguments sake, lets say this was along the lines of a homicide committed during an armed robbery or perhaps the death of an innocent bystander in a gang-related shooting)

Would you support an execution in this case? Its a simple yes or no. Don't toss out the "well how can we be 100% certain" line again as I've just given you a 100% airtight case - visual ID and video capturing the entirety of the crime, DNA confirmation, forensic matching of weapon to bullet in victim.

Or if that example is not to your liking, I'll give you a real life one.

100% premeditated. Man drives to home of 17y.o., knocks on door, kid answers, .45 slug put through kids head while father is inside the house with clear line of sight of the event and a clear view of the man's face during the shooting, man waits for police to arrive and is arrested on scene.

So yes or no?

 

[Shannow]

OK, I'll bite...

No

 

[buickman50401]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
OK, I'll bite...

No

Fantastic. Finally an answer without equivocation.

So I take it you support the continued victimization of others (inmates in this case)? Its not like once we lock up a criminal their desire and ability to victimize others suddenly stops.

WTD can confirm this, but the simple fact is that some criminals, particularly those willing to engage in such callous acts as WTD mentioned will continue that behavior in prison.

The usual response to this is "well throw them in solitary etc etc... to prevent that from happening". That'd be great except that the same people who are against the death penalty (in general) are also the same people who have fought the court battles for "prison reform" that prevent prisons from being able to take these (often mythical) actions to prevent the worst of the worst from continuing their victimization of others in prison. For example, in many states you cannot indefinitely hold someone in solitary for more than X days without some sort of disciplinary infraction. Even then you can only put them there Y time (usually 1 year or less).

I'm not for the death penalty for reasons of deterrence. I'm for it for reasons of prevention. Prevention of continued violence and victimization once these guys are locked up.

 

[Jarlaxle]

LWOP in solitary confinement, never let out of his cell again.

 

[Al]

Originally Posted By: buickman50401

Hence the appeals process to re-examine the veracity of the forensic evidence before going through with the execution.

You can post the "what if" innocent scenarios all day long. And you conveniently tap danced your way around the video evidence or Dahmer type scenario.

Its a fact of life that some folks feel that the court system is not capable of being fair. Not withstanding there are 12 jurors who have to unanimously agree to guiltily "beyond reasonable doubt". And then we have endless appeals and opportunities for mistrials based on protocol.

So when one doesn't trust the "system": Jurors, judge, protocol, appeals, etc. Its evident that they could never agree a person guilty. Arguing is just a waste of air.

Thank goodness O.J was found "not Guilty" That is the dysfunctional system that they want.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: buickman50401
Originally Posted By: Shannow
OK, I'll bite...

No

Fantastic. Finally an answer without equivocation.

So I take it you support the continued victimization of others (inmates in this case)? Its not like once we lock up a criminal their desire and ability to victimize others suddenly stops.

WTD can confirm this, but the simple fact is that some criminals, particularly those willing to engage in such callous acts as WTD mentioned will continue that behavior in prison.

The usual response to this is "well throw them in solitary etc etc... to prevent that from happening". That'd be great except that the same people who are against the death penalty (in general) are also the same people who have fought the court battles for "prison reform" that prevent prisons from being able to take these (often mythical) actions to prevent the worst of the worst from continuing their victimization of others in prison. For example, in many states you cannot indefinitely hold someone in solitary for more than X days without some sort of disciplinary infraction. Even then you can only put them there Y time (usually 1 year or less).

I'm not for the death penalty for reasons of deterrence. I'm for it for reasons of prevention. Prevention of continued violence and victimization once these guys are locked up.


Agreed completely

And very well stated. I'm also baffled by those who feel that everybody can be saved; that there aren't people that are simply "broken" and can never be reformed. What is the purpose of indefinitely confining somebody who has proven their inability to be a reasonable and rational member of society? So we can hold their hand and tell them that we'll make them better... Again and again, while the taxpayer houses, feeds, cloths and entertains them?

The system is broken, people are broken and if Bill shot Sally because it gave him a woody, then Bill needs to be put down like the animal he is.

 

[65cuda]

But you have no problem with executing someone even though you don't have the security camera evidence or whatever and say that even though it isn't 100% safe it is OK since I guess it is an acceptable risk, that is except for the person that is innocent but executed. Might want to google DNA failures also. You can also give all the what if and ignore the actual cases in which people were found to be innocent later, some after being executed, but hey that is OK time is money and so what if we happen to execute a few innocents. Kind of like the kill them all and let God sort them out reasoning. Better to leave this at you have your opinion and I have mine and neither will change.

 

[Al]

Well 15,000 murders per year. I wonder who killed them, considering that all the people captured and being tried for these murders are innocent?

Be very careful out there folks. There are probably at least 10,000 killers out there (every year) so obviously 100's of thousands total.

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: buickman50401

So in these days of DNA evidence and cameras everywhere if we catch a killer and find forensic evidence that clearly demonstrates he is guilty, let him have one appeal to re-examine the forensics to make sure they are solid and if so then execute him.


100% agree. If solid DNA evidence have convicted a serious crime, there should not be any doubt death penalty should be used.

 

[buickman50401]

Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Originally Posted By: buickman50401

So in these days of DNA evidence and cameras everywhere if we catch a killer and find forensic evidence that clearly demonstrates he is guilty, let him have one appeal to re-examine the forensics to make sure they are solid and if so then execute him.


100% agree. If solid DNA evidence have convicted a serious crime, there should not be any doubt death penalty should be used.


But, but, but... what IF there was an issue in processing the DNA. What if it was really Santa Clause with the Easter Bunny as his accomplice and this was all a big mistake by the lab because the DNA was contaminated by dust from the Tooth Fairy's wings. What if man... what if?

As far as cuda goes remember its beyond a reasonable doubt with the opportunity to appeal. Its not beyond a shadow of any doubt no matter how absurd. Cuda perhaps we should just let all criminals go since there will always be some doubt. Your efforts to play the can't be 100% certain card are pathetic and clearly a way to avoid the underlying question of shoul we execute?

You see a person shot right in front of you in cold blood and the perp is arrested on scene. Would that be enough evidence for you or perhaps your eyes are playing tricks or you hallucinated the entire thing?

Originally Posted By: Al
Well 15,000 murders per year. I wonder who killed them, considering that all the people captured and being tried for these murders are innocent.


Of course they're all innocent. Just ask any inmate convicted of any crime. None of them did it.

My theory is that its Sasquatch and the Chupacabra working in cahoots comitting all of these murders and that we have far too many innocents locked up in prison that we should set them all free since we're not omniscient... including the kiddie diddlers.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: buickman50401
So I take it you support the continued victimization of others (inmates in this case)? Its not like once we lock up a criminal their desire and ability to victimize others suddenly stops.


So I take it that you feel that as long the number of innocents executed is statistically less than the number of genuinely guilty, that the "collateral" damage is worth it,even if it was your mother,sister, or wife who was lead straight from the dock to the gas chamber !!!