Death Penalty & Wrongful Convictions »
Posted by: Spadecaller 7 months, 1 week ago158 Comments Report this Story
Perspectives of the death penalty and wrongful convictions remain a perplexing issue in America. Here are three videos that offer a closer look at the current policies. Included in the article is a poll; cast your vote.
Read Full Story at freewebs.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 158
-
0%
Spadecaller7 months, 1 week ago
"There are no millionaires on death row nor will there ever be. Almost everyone on death row is poor. And do you really think that no millionaire ever committed a capital crime? I'm saying that there are certain people that we are willing to offer up, and not others, and they're the people who have no power."
Thomas Cahill
Only the poor and disadvantaged are convicted of crimes that they are innocent of; only the poor and disadvanted receive the death penalty. And who ever appeals the death of a convicted murderer wrongfully charged?
Reply-
-
0%
Mdiar7 months, 1 week ago
Grrrr my last comment on this wasn't posted, sorry if you end up with a double post here. Anyway what I said in the one I'm not seeing here is a sort of philosophical question, of sorts. Are we more right now to have it possible, if not likely, for a wealthy person to be convicted? Or were we more right when we were honest and just had the rich person pay a restitution to the poor person, which I believe was allowed in Hammurabi's Code? Just something to sort of think on.
Reply
-
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.21 Replies
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.3 Replies
-
0%
namecritic7 months, 1 week ago
Hi spadecaller.
My opinion on the death penalty is simply if the people of that state vote to have the death penalty then they should have it.
If the voters say they do not want it, they should not have it.
But the voters of each state should make the decision.
That's democracy.
Our justice system favors the people who can hire the best lawyers. It should not be that way, but it is.
Maybe that should be a factor in whether or not a person votes for or against the death penalty.
If you would not personally go kill that person on death row, then you likely should be against the death penalty altogether. Having someone else do what you would not personally do is just hypocritical.
Reply
-
-
0%
greenmac7 months, 1 week ago
I don't think I could ever forgive those that locked me up for a crime I didn't commit. Think about what it must be like for those that sit in prison for years knowing they are innocent.
Reply -
0%
Radiofreeeuropa7 months, 1 week ago
Fortunately at least here in NJ it has been abolished.
A society can be judged by how it treats the least among them.
Reply -
0%
Spadecaller7 months, 1 week ago
"In our understandable desire to be fair and to protect the rights of offenders in our criminal justice system, let us never ignore or minimize the rights of their victims. The death penalty is a necessary tool that reaffirms the sanctity of human life while assuring that convicted killers will never again prey upon others."
Ventura County's former District Attorney, Michael D. Bradbury
I don't agree with Bradbury, but it his view is widely held.
Reply-
0%
Candida7 months, 1 week ago
I don't agree with it either. I could never understand how killing an additional person "reaffirms the sanctity of human life." If anything, it reaffirms that human life is not sacred.
There is no doubt that society must be protected but, in my view, it is sufficiently protected if the penalty is life in prison.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
gamahuche7 months, 1 week ago
Unfortunately its silent time in my home now and I can't watch them.
But I'm not inhibited from stating my point of view, held for over 50 years that the death penalty is ALWAYS wrong with no possibility of exception.
The first political activity I was involved with was the abolition if the death penalty in England. Now in Europe
I wouldn't even bother to get into a discussion about it.
Of course if someone kills its wrong and they may need to be kept in circumstances where they can never repeat such an offence again.
Of course if someone killed one of my nearest and dearest I would wish that they be struck by a thunderbolt or suffer the torments of the damned but NO I do not believe that it is ever right to take away a life in any circumstance.
And I can completely accept and understand that others feel differently.
Reply-
0%
gamahuche7 months, 1 week ago
The UN voted for a worldwide moratorium on the death penalty last month:
The UN adopted the idea by a vote of 104-54 on December 18, bolstered countries that favour ending the death penalty, who argued that capital punishment "undermines human dignity" and that a moratorium "contributes to the enhancement and progressive development of human rights." "There is no conclusive evidence of the death penalty's deterrence value and that any miscarriage or failure of justice in the death penalty's implementation is irreversible and irreparable," the proponents said in the resolution adopted by the 192-nation assembly. There were 29 abstentions. The resolution submitted by more than 90 countries, including most European nations, voiced concern about the continued use of the death penalty and demanded that the UN "establish a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty."
Reply
-
-
0%
gamahuche7 months, 1 week ago
According to Amnesty International's report for 2005, over 2,100 people were executed worldwide and 5,186 people were sentenced to death in 53 countries in 2005. The vast majority of all known executions occurred in China (at least 1,770 executions). Iran had the second highest number with at least 94 executions, followed by Saudi Arabia with at least 86 and the USA with 60.
Reply -
-
-
0%
Spadecaller7 months, 1 week ago
gam:
NOT a clue. If I had to guess, I would predict they will establish a moratorium or abolish lethal injection until an established procedure guarantees proper anesthesia. If it was the same Supreme Court before GWB was in office, I would be pretty sure their decision would abolish it entirely.
Reply
-
-
0%
namecritic7 months, 1 week ago
is it cruel and unusual punishment in light of say, someone torturing their victim to death slowly over a period of days?
I'm not saying I am for the death penalty. What I am saying is that some of these killers whose lawyers are saying that lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment did much worse to their victims.
Reply-
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: User banned.
-
0%
Spadecaller7 months, 1 week ago
The purpose of capitol punishement is not supposed to be revenge.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
Mdiar7 months, 1 week ago
Hmmmm. The death penalty is something that has been around as long as laws have existed and the concept of the rich being able to buy there way out almost as long. I don't disagree that there is something wrong in the system. But at the same time I know people who have been assaulted in horrible ways, some by people in there own family, who would truly relish the ability to just kill them. I can't truly blame them. But, considering that death is quite irreversible (unless we all wish to pursue the path of Dr. Frankenstein, that is) then perhaps it should be abolished. I don't necessarily find it cruel and unusual or unsettling to the stomach considering what these people have done. But at the same time mistakes have been made in the past and will be made again and mistakes can never be reversed if the person is dead. Then again the people in the vids aren't going to get all those years of there life back either, so reversed isn't the right term. I'll have to ponder this a bit... cont.
Reply-
0%
Mdiar7 months, 1 week ago
Thanks for the heads up on this btw Spade. Overall I'd say that I agree that the death penalty should at least be given more consideration, I for one know that in my own more emotional moments I'd not consider the consequences of my actions, perhaps I'm unusual in this. It seems to me that unless you are a sociopath of sorts that anything that requires the death penalty at the moment would be done during a time of extreme emotion. Therefore, by that logic it is not really very good at suppressing that act. I know in this state there have been propositions to expand what crimes fall under the death penalty, but only under the evidence of DNA in said crimes. I support this as DNA doesn't lie, and the crimes, while not lethal in nature, ruins the lives of young girls and boys. Even after years of therapy they'll never be quite past it. But when it comes to crimes not involving DNA evidence, I'd have to say that the death penalty is wrong. Even with it... I'm still unsure.
Reply-
0%
namecritic7 months, 1 week ago
I like what Carool O'Conner said in an episode of In The Heat Of The Night.
He said, "If you want to execute someone and have it not be cruel and unusual punishment, then tell them you forgive them for everything they did and you are letting them go free. Then when they turn to get their things, shoot them in the back of the head."
Reply
-
-
-
0%
flyonthewallzz7 months, 1 week ago
Hello Spadecaller:
I also have limitations in terms of being able to view media on my Idiot box.
Forgive me if my name does not come up as a vote (Silly personal rules).
As a pragmatic thought about the death penalty,
Disregarding the failures of the justice system,
Why destroy the key information about threats to our society for simple vengeance?
Would it not be wise to know our enemy?
Are there patterns that could be studied?
Sociologists rush in and come up with theories about bedwetting and childhood abuse, but the folks that step out side of humanity are destroyed before comprehensive questions can be asked.
Reply-
0%
Mdiar7 months, 1 week ago
I hadn't completely considered the study of these people. To be honest with you I think that crimes which tend to give the death penalty fall into two general groups: Crimes of passion (emotions are so high and tuned up they aren't thinking, whether it be anger or hate) and crimes that stem from a mental illness of some kind. For the former I'd be willing to say we can all understand that, if not to that extreme. We will never be able to change our own nature about that and would we really want to? That extreme of emotion can give good as well as bad... look at our greatest works of art and literature. However, the latter should be studied. I have my doubts we will ever truly understand those who lack a conscience, but there is no harm in trying to do so. Perhaps people on death row should be sentenced to scientific study. But that causes the problem of false info from those wrongly convicted. Just some food for thought I suppose.
Reply -
0%
Silverghost7 months, 1 week ago
FOTW: I also had trouble watching the videos & I think that I've tweaked my old box as far as it will go for flicks. I think that 3 You Tubes on one site is too heavy for me.
Yet I patiently worked my system, drinking Sprite & reading mail while the video fully loaded before I viewed them, being careful not to scroll down to activate the next one. On the 3rd try I was able to see all 3. -Rev. S
Reply -
0%
Silverghost7 months, 1 week ago
FOTW: Spade has a good point about justice not being served to the poor, which is against what the Scripture requires: "Ye shall not have respect of persons in judgment, but ye shall hear the small, as well as the great."
While you have a neat point for research & evaluation, the matter of justice still begs an answer.
Certainly, any sane person would not want to see an innocent person executed, nor even incarcerated. 2 of 3 cases on video were not capital cases. But the fault is not with capital punishment being an appropriate penalty for heinous crimes, rather right justice in finding guilt.
With our system bogged down with tort cases being tried for greedy folks, it is hard to have proper justice heard & a speedy trial honored. If we reformed torts alone, it would relieve the case loads. The simple rule in other countries is that the person suing has to pay for costs, if he loses. Cont'd>>
Reply-
0%
Silverghost7 months, 1 week ago
Cont'd: With that reform, it should clear the courts for the more important cases.
Now I think that Spade is on to something. The Innocence Project ensures right justice. If we were to make available an independent examination, by such law students, of capital cases properly screened for merit of review, it would alleviate the burden of injustice & ensure justice for society.
The problem with not having justice performed is that violent criminals have been paroled & have killed innocent folk. It would be interesting to discover how many innocent civilians have been killed in the 16 years of the Innocence Project, where 210 were found not guilty.
I applaud the project, but know violence has also been prevalent. 13 per yr. have been set free, yet I alone have heard of many cases of convicts getting out & taking lives.
We have a good justice system, but it needs reform for today's society. Cont'd>>
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
lvrofwolves7 months, 1 week ago
A big reason I'm against it might not be the best reason, but here goes- I couldn't live with myself if I convicted someone who was innocent. I can't imagine the horror of being put to death or even put in prison for something I didn't do. those who have been wrongfully convicted, I feel SO sad for, their lives are basically destroyed. I even hate being on jury duty-what if I'm wrong?
Other reasons are I could not personally put someone to death unless it was an act of extreme (at that very moment) vengence, like if I saw them just kill my child or something like that..and I'd have to do it right then.
As far as an actual crimminal-might be some who accept their fate and feel they deserve to die.
I guess once in awhile I feel like leathal injection is just punishment-but since I could not personally hand that punishment out, I have to be against it.
Reply
-
-
0%
Beeboppin717 months, 1 week ago
I actually cried tears of joy for these men while watching these videos. I couldn't be happier that they are now free. I can't imagine the suffering they had to endure while being incarcerated. I am, and have always been against the death penalty. There are no sub-clauses, no additional articles to God's law - Thou shall not kill. His law is not up for debate. This article and these videos clearly illustrate why.
Reply-
0%
Spadecaller7 months, 1 week ago
beeboppin71
Me too. I was so moved by their stories that I felt compelled to submit this.
Sometimes when dicussing topics like these, we can be removed from the personal insight and experiences of real people, who are like you and me -- with feelings, loved ones, and hopes too. How does one really understand this subject without looking into the eyes of its victims and survivors?
Reply-
0%
Silverghost7 months, 1 week ago
SC: I'm glad you did submit this & invited me to check it out. You have some very good points, yet I believe such reforms as I mention above are disparately needed, if we are going to have true justice. What you have brought out has stirred me to thinking, about a system that's long overdue for reform. -Rev. S
Reply
-
-
0%
Silverghost7 months, 1 week ago
Beeboppin: Did you realize that God instituted capital punishment in the next chapter after he gave the 10 Commandments, including the 6th Commandment of "Thou shalt not Kill"?
There is a good answer to what is seen as a dilemma. -Rev. S
Reply-
0%
Spadecaller7 months, 1 week ago
One of the problems within the legal system is political pressure and and unprincipled ambition (greed).
Many attorneys will openly admit that they do not want to know the truth about the defendant's guilt or innocense, as they do not want anything to affect their motivation to win the case. This applies to both the prosecution and the defense. Winning a case for most attorneys has nothing to do with a just outcome.
Reply
-
-
