Death Penalty at age 16?

Parent Cafe
21

<p>i keep reading that the death penalty guarantees the criminal won’t even harm anyone again to the average joe. but then again, wouldn’t a life sentence without parole do that as well?</p>

<p>also it doesn’t matter if it’s 10% or 1% or .005% of people on death row are innocent. killing just one innocent person is too much. no one should die for a crime they never committed. and the fact of the matter is that even with one of the better legal systems in the world, we can’t guarantee anything without beyond a shadow of a doubt. in order for that to happen our legal system would have ot be perfect and so would humans since that’s what our courts rely on to carry out verdicts.</p>

22

<p>Christcorp—your willingness to hypothetically accept the execution of the innocent is refreshingly honest, if quite chilling.</p>

<p>But, from a logical point of view, how do you reconcile your demand for less appeals along with your assertion that there must be no shadow of a doubt (which, besides, is not the standard we convict by in the first place)?</p>

<p>Eyewitness testimony being notoriously unreliable, confessions being even more so, what would be ironclad to you?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>[The</a> Innocence Project - Understand the Causes: False Confessions](<a href=“http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/False-Confessions.php]The”>http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/False-Confessions.php)</p>

<p>A psychological perspective on the issue:</p>

<p>[Psychology</a> Today: The False Confession](<a href=“http://psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20030430-000002.html]Psychology”>http://psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20030430-000002.html)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>So, can we ever, really know, and should lives hang in that gap?</p>

23

<p>“Don’t support the death penalty for anyone (though, admittedly, I’d lose less sleep in some cases).”</p>

<p>This is how I feel. I just can’t accept the taking of a human life. I’ve worked on two death penalty cases over the years where I was confident that the defendant was guilty of heinous crimes. I still can’t condone taking their lives. But, like Jeffrey Dahmer, sometimes justice has a way of asserting herself.</p>

24

<p>When I heard Ron McAndrew, the ex death row warden who’s now against the death penalty, speak, he suggested reading John Grisham’s “The Innocent Man,” a nonfiction story about a man who was sent to death row for a crime he didn’t commit.</p>

<p>Here’s info from a review on Amazon.
"The Innocent Man is Ron Williamson, a small-town baseball hero from Ada, Oklahoma. Williamson was on top of the world when he was drafted by the Oakland A’s in the early 1970’s. Six years later, he crashed back to reality due to an injured arm, bad choices, lack of discipline and drug and alcohol abuse. Not only did he lose his chance to finally make it to the majors, but he also lost his pretty young wife and his sanity. </p>

<p>In 1982, a 21 year old cocktail waitress was brutally raped and murdered. The names of Williamson and a friend, Dennis Fritz, were mentioned as possible suspects. But it wasn’t until five years later that they were arrested on very circumstantial evidence. Grisham relates how these two were rail-roaded by a ruthless and arrogant district attorney, Bill Peterson. Both men were found guilty on the flimsiest of evidence manufactured by quack scientists and jail house snitches. Evidence was also altered, hidden or tampered with by the prosecution.</p>

<p>It is during the appeals process that the true heroes of The Innocent Man come alive, and they are the lawyers and staff from the Appellate Public Defender’s Office, the Oklahoma Indigent Defense System and The Innocence Project. “Long before DNA erased the mysteries, they had found the truth the old way with brains and sweat.”</p>

25

<p>“how do you reconcile your demand for less appeals along with your assertion that there must be no shadow of a doubt”</p>

<p>That’s just what I was going to ask.</p>

26

<p>Yes, I’m with garland and Hanna on being interested on how those stances are reconciled.</p>

<p>And I second Northstarmom’s recommendation - The Innocent Man is a truly excellent book. There are certain questions as to how completely factual it is - and Grisham has been sued over the book - but it’s overall an excellent and very chilling look at the way the death penalty frequently misfires.</p>

27

<p>I wonder how many here know that since COLONIAL TIMES; that only about 13,000 people have been given a death penalty for their crimes. Here is a very good paper on the death penalty.
<a href=“http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html[/url]”>http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html&lt;/a&gt;
I won’t mention the innocent who have been executed because the attitude here is obviously; “if 1 innocent is executed by mistake, then that’s 1 too many”. I don’t agree, so debating that point is useless.</p>

<p>It is true however that an inmate has a 6 times better chance of getting off death row than they have of being executed. Also; about 70% of Americans approve of the Death penalty. Also; even though the death penalty has been eliminated in Canada, about the same 70% of Canadians believe the death penalty should be brought back.</p>

<p>There are definitely certain crimes like serial murders; and with the help of DNA; that the errors of the past are greatly improved. There is most definitely times when the death penalty is the right choice.</p>

28

<p>You still project an apparent contradiction between the need for greater checks against “the errors of the past” and the desire for swifter, more widespread usage.</p>

<p>But, in the essentials, you are correct: I cannot debate with someone who’s willing to kill the innocent.</p>

29

<p>“I won’t mention the innocent who have been executed because the attitude here is obviously; “if 1 innocent is executed by mistake, then that’s 1 too many”. I don’t agree, so debating that point is useless.”</p>

<p>What if that executed innocent was your kid?</p>

30

<p>" Also; about 70% of Americans approve of the Death penalty"
An editorial in the Lexington, Kentucky Herald-Leader in Jan., 2007, said,</p>

<p>"It’s interesting that public support for the death penalty has declined in the almost 10 years since Kentucky resumed executions.</p>

<p>Most Kentuckians still say they support capital punishment. But given the choice of sentencing a convicted murderer to death or a long prison term, 68 percent say prison is the appropriate sentence.</p>

<p>Just 30 percent pick death, according to the University of Kentucky Survey Research Center.</p>

<p>In 1997, support was about equal for the death penalty and a long prison term, at just under 40 percent…
A Gallup Poll earlier this year found that 65 percent of Americans support the death penalty, down from 80 percent in 1994. Given the choice of life without parole as an alternative to execution, more chose life without parole (48 percent) than death (47 percent.)"
[Editorials</a> - Life Without Parole](<a href=“http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=2169]Editorials”>http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=2169)</p>

<p>“I won’t mention the innocent who have been executed because the attitude here is obviously; “if 1 innocent is executed by mistake, then that’s 1 too many”. I don’t agree, so debating that point is useless.”</p>

<p>So presumably if that mistakenly executed person were you or your child, that would be fine with you. </p>

<p>Ex death row warden Ron McAndrew told of a police officer who was imprisoned for the murder of his wife. He was imprisoned for about 9 years before it was learned through DNA testing that the person who killed her was another cop who had been his good friend. </p>

<p>So, it would be OK with you I imagine if the falsely accused cop had been executed?</p>

<p>And while DNA can help solve some cases, there are cases that it can’t solve. Perhaps there will be future methods that can solve those cases and cause the release of people who were convicted even though innocent. Of course, if those people have been executed, the new information wouldn’t help them.</p>

31

<p>The problem with your debate is that you believe that 1 innocent out of 100, 1000, 10,000, 100,000, or even 1,000,000 is too many. I don’t. You’re saying that no price is too high to pay for a human life. I am saying that the price for a human life CAN be too high. Just like it is technologically possible today to make a car that can just about guarantee that a person couldn’t be killed in an accident. So, why don’t we force such a vehicle to be built? Obviously, it’s because of economic impact and reasons.</p>

<p>Now; I would concede is mandatory sentencing could be implemented. If people wouldn’t be released for “Good Behavior” and other reasons; I might concede. If such and such a crime imposes a 10 year; 20 year; 30 year; life; sentence; and there is no such thing as getting that time lowered; then I might concede. Then, I wouldn’t have a problem with abolishing the death penalty. But even those on “Life” sentences, have a chance of being let out early. No plea bargains; no back room deals; no pleading guilty with the automatic stipulation of not getting a certain sentence. Until mandatory sentencing, I will support the death penalty. There are a lot of theories, but there are no hard facts that show that the death penalty doesn’t deter crime. </p>

<p>As far as trying to pull the emotional; “What if it was your kid” argument; that’s a lame game. But, I will play it. If my son was a serial killer; killed 15 people in some serial crime; wasn’t proven to be mentally disturbed; was in total control of his capacities; knew exactly what he was doing; was proven through all 15 killings via DNA and other sources that he indeed did commit the crime; and the death penalty was the sentence; then may God have mercy on his soul. Obviously, with something like serial murder, the chance of the killer being convicted of each of the 15 murders requires much more detail. Maybe an innocent person can be convicted of a single murder; but accidentally being convicted of 15 individual murders is pretty difficult… Death penalty would have to be unanimous. Any appeals would have to be unanimous. If at any time it isn’t unanimous, then it should be life in prison. MANDATORY NO EARLY RELEASE. The only time it could be changed would be if somehow so extra proof was discovered that proved innocence. But when the dust settles, if it’s the death penalty, then so be it.</p>

32

<p>“no pleading guilty with the automatic stipulation of not getting a certain sentence.”</p>

<p>If you imagine getting rid of plea bargains, which resolve well over 90% of criminal proceedings without a trial, you need to imagine about a hundred-fold increase in the workload of our courts, prosecutors, and public defenders. So you’re also imagining either a hundred-fold increase in courts’ budgets, or a hundred-fold decrease in the amount of attention the courts will pay to each trial. So if you think there are too many plea bargains, you’ve got to address what you would do to replace them.</p>

33

<p>Christcorp: The essential difference between your argument about car safety and the death penalty is that the government is not actively killing people by not spending more on seatbelt safety. Yes, every human life has a price. But though death may result in both cases, there is a world of difference between not paying more for car safety and actually actively killing someone by lethal injection. If you can’t see that difference… I don’t really know what to say.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Sorry, but when you justify the death penalty by saying “it deters crime” the onus is on you to prove that it does, not on us to disprove that. In this debate, the abolitionist side has provided many facts with clear basis against the death penalty (execution of innocents, additional expense, unequal application, etc.). When you provide a fact to support your argument like “the death penalty deters crime” it is your job to substantiate that claim.</p>

<p>Overall, I find your position absolutely abhorrent. It goes against the entire fundamentals of what America is based on. Respect for innocent life is paramount. End of discussion. Killing innocent people just to make sure the guilty ones are killed is a hallmark of barbaric, disgusting regimes and tyrants of the past, and I find it disturbing and disgusting that you consider it justified. I also don’t think you’ve fully considered the implications of what you are saying. But that’s life.</p>

<p>Hanna: Of course. But Christcorp doesn’t live in the same world as we do with its messy justice system and necessary pragmatism. He lives in the much more ideal one in which everyone gets the perfect punishment, and hasn’t yet realized his arguments are tailored to that (imaginary) place and cannot be applied here in the real world.</p>

34

<p>I agree with English jurist William Blackstone, Genesis 18:23-32, Twelfth-century legal theorist Maimonides, Exodus 23:7, Sir John Fortescue, Increase Mather, and Benjamin Franklin. </p>

<p>Christcorp agrees with Bismarck and Pol Pot.</p>

<p>To each his own.</p>

<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone’s_formulation"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone’s_formulation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

35

<p>To each his own alright. Warning–graphic language.</p>

<p>[Jennifer</a> Ertman & Elizabeth Pena - murder victims](<a href=“http://www.murdervictims.com/Voices/jeneliz.html]Jennifer”>http://www.murdervictims.com/Voices/jeneliz.html)</p>

36

<p>More reason to substitute life without parole for the death penalty:
"There has been no DNA case in Illinois more shocking than the Ford Heights Four in which two men were sentenced to death and two others to virtual life in prison for a gang rape and double murder.</p>

<p>They spent up to 18 years behind bars before DNA tests exonerated them in 1996. At that time, three other men confessed to the crime. The Ford Heights Four recently won a $36 million settlement from the county.</p>

<p>None of this would have happened without David Protess, a Northwestern journalism professor, and some of his students, whose investigation led the state’s chief witness to change his story.</p>

<p>In the wake of the case, Illinois passed a law giving death row inmates a right to DNA testing in cases where identity is an issue and test results could potentially prove innocence. Its sponsor was Ed Petka, a state senator and former prosecutor who put seven men on death row.</p>

<p>“It’s an idea whose time has come,” he says. “I can’t see anyone who should be objecting.”</p>

<p>But only New York and Illinois have such laws. In 33 states, new evidence can’t be introduced in a criminal case more than six months after the final judgment in state court, says Barry Scheck, co-director of the Innocence Project at the Cardozo School of Law in New York…"
[CNN</a> - Death row exonerations inspire debate over death penalty - August 15, 1999](<a href=“http://www.cnn.com/US/9908/15/death.row/index.html]CNN”>http://www.cnn.com/US/9908/15/death.row/index.html)</p>

<p>And consider these cases:
"onsider the pitiful case of Cesar Fierro, who has been on death row since 1980 for the murder and robbery of El Paso taxi driver Nicholas Castanon. Fierro, who was not considered a suspect until months after the February 1979 murder, was convicted on the basis of two things: the shaky testimony of an alleged co-conspirator and his own confession, which many now conclude was coerced. Fierro, whose landlord testified the accused was home on the night of the killing, confessed to the crime because he was told his mother and stepfather would be tortured by the police in a jail in Ciudad Ju</p>

37

<p>barrons, while I sympathize highly with the plight of the family that is the subject of that website, I don’t think their experience means in any way that we should be listening more to their message of vengeance and retribution. Sorry.</p>

38

<p>I have no philosophical qualms with the death penalty, but I don’t support it because of the possibility of killing the wrongly convicted/the inequalities within the system. I also don’t have any philosophical opposition to executing a mentally competent 16 year old…but I think that 16 year olds should be given the vote, as well. </p>

<p>In an imaginary world where not even one innocent life would be wrongly taken via the death penalty, I would get behind it.</p>

39

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree with this, basically.</p>

40

<p>Forget for a moment that it’s plain old unfair to convict or execute an innocent person. Forget that that innocent person could really, truly be yourself or a loved one. As disturbing as the execution of innocents is, so is its converse: the freedom of the guilty. So while we’re talking about the importance of justice being served, remember that for every innocent who’s arrested, an investigation is closed and a true criminal remains unsentenced, free to commit other crimes. Execution makes that closure absolute. </p>

<p>@Northstarmom: The Cameron Todd Willingham case is an especially interesting one, as it highlights the tragic finality of capital punishment. At the time of Willingham’s conviction, there was evidence that suggested arson. Subsequent developments in fire investigation rendered most of that evidence unreliable, though. You mention Gerald Hurst, according to whom, “most of the conclusions reached by the fire marshal would be considered invalid in light of current knowledge.”</p>