For those against the death penalty: - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

pan6467 · 11-27-2007, 07:36 AM

What would you do to these animals?

Quote:

Mother of 'Baby Grace' Told Police She Tortured, Beat Daughter to Death, Court Documents Show

Tuesday , November 27, 2007

Authorities are trying to determine if the 2-year-old dubbed "Baby Grace" after her body was found in Galveston Bay was repeatedly abused by her mother and stepfather, an investigator said Tuesday.

A woman believed to be the mother of the girl told police she and the girl's stepfather beat and tortured the child to death, court documents show. The girl, believed to be Riley Ann Sawyers, was found by a fisherman in a plastic box Oct. 29, but her identity was unknown for weeks.

The mother told authorities how the girl died "of her own volition," sheriff's Maj. Ray Tuttoilmondo said Tuesday on CBS' "The Early Show." One of the things authorities are looking at is whether or not there was a pattern of abuse against the girl, he said.

"In a little over 20 years of doing this, I've seen a lot ... of heartbreaking cases," he said. "I think this one certainly still remains in our hearts and always will."

Investigators are awaiting DNA test results, but said Monday they are fairly confident of the girl's identity. Her mother, Kimberly Dawn Trenor, and stepfather, Royce Clyde Zeigler II, were arrested early Saturday and are in custody on charges of hurting the girl.

The details in an arrest affidavit paint a chilling picture of the girl's last days. In a statement to police included in the affidavit, Trenor, 19, said she and Zeigler, 24, killed Riley July 24.

The girl was beaten with leather belts, had her head held underwater in a bathtub and then was thrown across a room, her head slamming into a tile floor, the mother said in the document. She said they kept the body in a storage shed for one to two months before they put it in a plastic bin and dumped it into Galveston Bay.

An autopsy revealed that Riley suffered three skull fractures, but the cause of death has not been determined.

Zeigler attempted suicide last week and wrote a note saying, "My wife is innocent of the sins that I committed," according to the court documents.

Trenor said in the document that after her daughter was killed, Zeigler had her forge a document that the Ohio Department of Children's Services had taken Riley away because of allegations of sexual abuse.

Tuttoilmondo said Trenor had told relatives that someone claiming to be a social worker from Ohio, where Riley's father lives, took the girl in July. Riley's paternal grandmother, Sheryl Sawyers, hadn't seen her granddaughter in months when she saw a police sketch of "Baby Grace." Thinking it might be Riley, she called authorities in Texas.

In Mentor, Ohio, on Monday, Sawyers wiped away tears at a news conference and held up the Elmo doll she had already bought Riley for Christmas.

"It's hard to think that I'll never see her again," she said.

Trenor's attorney, Tom Stickler, said she has cooperated with authorities. He declined to comment about her statement to investigators.

"But from what she said, there is no doubt that the girl found is Riley Sawyers," Stickler said.

Trenor and Zeigler were charged with injury to a child and tampering with evidence, Tuttoilmondo said. Bail was set at $350,000 each. The couple's next court appearance was expected to be scheduled on Tuesday.

Trenor and Zeigler met a couple of years ago playing an online game, World of Warcraft, and she moved with her daughter from suburban Cleveland to Spring in June, Stickler said.

Wendell Odom, Zeigler's attorney, declined to comment on the case except to say Zeigler grew up in Spring, about 75 miles north of Galveston, and works as an instrument technician in the oil industry.

The Sawyers family's attorney, Laura DePledge, said they take comfort in knowing that the girl is "resting peacefully and is no longer subject to abuse."

Or a more detailed version:

Quote:

Police: Mentor mother admitted role in murder of Baby Riley
GALVESTON, TX -- Court documents show toddler formerly from Mentor was beaten with belts, held under water before final blow. The grim details of the murder of the innocent two year old, Riley Ann Sawyers, were released Monday afternoon. In court documents, Kimberly Trenor and her boyfriend, Royce Zeigler, admitted their guilt.

The former Mentor woman told investigators that the morning of July 24th, she and Zeigler beat Riley with two leather belts, and then held her head under water in the bathtub. Zeigler then tossed the little girl across the room causing her head to slam into the tile floor.

Trenor then claims that Zeigler tried to give the injured child some pain medication moments before the little girl died.

The pair then concealed the body in a blue plastic Sterilite container hidden in their storage shed for almost two months.

The blue box was then tossed into Galveston Bay near the Galveston Causeway where it was later found by a fisherman.

Kimberly Trenor says that her boyfriend, Royce Zeigler, attempted suicide last weekend by taking a large amount of blood pressure medication and anti-depressants. Zeigler left a note that said, "My wife is innocent of the sins that I committed."

Zeigler's suicide attempt failed. He and his wife, Kimberly, could face the death penalty if convicted of first degree murder in Texas.

I know people hate me playing with sizes and colors.... but this needed to be.

HOW the Hell can you allow those 2 animals to live? A 2 year old defenseless baby and you would have them live? WTF?

These 2 people deserve to be beaten mercilessly, and then just as they are dying, stop let them get a little air then do it over again. But, I have a feeling, finding someone that sick and without mercy would be almost impossible to find. I may have rage towards them but I would give them a fast and as painless as possible death... solely because my faith and beliefs tell me that is the most humane way to handle it.

IT WAS A FUCKING 2 year old..... how can anyone defend these people from not getting the death penalty.

When you say you don't believe in the death penalty think of this.

I'm not saying the death penalty or torture in anyway is acceptable in all cases but there are those that are extreme, like this, that torture and death should be allowed.

host · 11-27-2007, 07:45 AM

pan, you're advocating for the death penalty, in Texas, of all places. I have to stand against it because it is not administered equally and justly, and it cannot be taken back, if new relevant knowledge about the case surfaces after the execution.

We have to show that we are better than the killers, and better than these guys:

Texas is already an effing mess, when it comes to equal justice:

Quote:

http://www.cjcj.org/pubs/texas/texas.html

Texas Tough?: An Analysis of Incarceration and Crime Trends in The Lone Star State

Introduction
The United States holds the dubious distinction of having the largest incarcerated population in the world, with 2 million people behind bars as of year-end 1999.2 With only 5% of the world's population, the U.S. holds a quarter of the world's prisoners.3 In the 1990s alone, more persons were added to prisons and jails than in any other decade on record.4 While all states have increased their prison populations over the last two decades, the Justice Policy Institute (JPI) has conducted a series of studies analyzing the incarceration records of individual states to put the national numbers into context. Our reports have highlighted state-specific prison growth, the disproportionate impact incarceration policies have had on African American and Latino communities and youth, and have analyzed the role prison growth may have played on the changing crime rate. Some of JPI's recent findings include:

* In the state of California, nearly four in ten African American men in their twenties are under some form of criminal justice control. While African Americans make up 7% of California's population, and constitute 20% of felony arrests, 31% of the prison population and 43% of third "strike" defendants sent to state prison.5
* From 1992 to 1994, the Florida Department of Corrections received a $450 million increase in funding. That is more than the state's university system received in the previous ten years.6
* Florida prosecutors are sending as many children into the adult prison and jail system as judges do in the entire rest of the United States.7
* In New York State more than 90% of people doing time for a drug offense are African American or Latino. There are more blacks and Hispanics locked up in prisons than there are attending the state university system.8
* The District of Columbia literally has more prison and jail inmates than D.C. residents enrolled in its one public university. D.C.'s correction system experienced a 312% increase in funding from 1977 to 1993, compared to an 82% increase in university funding during that 16 year period.9
* While African Americans represent one out of every four (25%) Maryland residents, they represent over three out of four (77%) of the state's prisoners. Since 1990, 9 out of every 10 new inmates imprisoned in Maryland have been black.10 ......

...Tough on Whom?: Disparate Impact Upon Communities of Color
While Texas' punitive criminal justice policies have affected all communities within the state, the African American community has disproportionately born the brunt of the state's high incarceration policies:

* While one out of every 20 Texas adults is under some form of criminal justice control, one out of 3 young black men (29% of the black male population between 21 and 29) are in prison, jail, parole or probation on any given day.22
* One out of every four adult black men in Texas is under some form of criminal justice supervision.23
* Blacks in Texas are incarcerated at a rate seven times greater than whites. While there are 555 whites behind bars for every 100,000 in the Texas population, there are an astonishing 3862 African Americans behind bars for every 100,000 in the state. This is nearly 63% higher than the national incarceration rate for blacks of 2366 per 100,000.
* If Texas' black incarceration rate was applied to the United States, the number of blacks behind bars on a national level would increase by half a million. There are currently an estimated 824,900 African Americans in prison and jail in the U.S. The new figure, 1,346,370, would increase the number of African Americans incarcerated in the U.S. by 63%. ...

...Within the criminal justice population in Texas, blacks are underrepresented within the ranks of those receiving less punitive sentences.

* Although blacks represent 12% of the Texas population, they comprise 44% of the total prison and jail population. While whites comprise 58% of Texas' population, they represent only 30% of the prison and jail population.
* Probation is often given in lieu of incarceration as a less severe form of punishment. The percentage of blacks on probation falls to 20.6% of the total probation caseload, as compared to a 44.9% representation by whites.24
* Blacks form only 26.7% of the Substance Abuse and Felony Prevention Program (SAFP), a drug treatment program that can be court mandated by judges for convicted felons instead of prison. Whites represent 43.1% of the SAFP population.25 ...

.......Tough, but not smart, on Crime?: The Impact on Crime Rates
Despite the simplistic connection drawn by some that harsher crime policies lead to safer communities, there is little evidence that Texas' severe correctional system is responsible for the drop in crime. In 1980, when Texas had a prison population of 30,000, the state's crime rate was 10% above the national average. Eighteen-years, and 130,000 prisoners later, the Lone Star State's crime rate was 11% above the national average. So, after 18 years, and a monumental growth in imprisonment, Texas' crime rate is not just higher, but increasingly higher, than the national average. While crime has dropped in Texas in recent years, as it has done all over the country, a state-by-state comparison shows the Lone Star State to be lagging behind other jurisdictions which have not increased their prison systems as dramatically. Between 1995 and 1998 -- the last year for which data is available -- the percentage drop in the overall number of index crimes in Texas was half the percentage drop in the number of index crimes nationally, and the lowest of the five largest states (See Graph 4). The Texas crime rate also experienced a slightly lower percentage decline than the national average and was again lowest among the five states (California - 25.5%; New York - 21.3%; National - 11.7%; Illinois - 10.7%; Florida - 10.6%; Texas - 10.1%).

....The comparison between Texas and New York is particularly noteworthy, as their state populations are relatively matched. While Texas had the fastest growing prison system in the country during the 1990s, New York had the third slowest growing prison population in the U.S.(26) During the 1990s, Texas added more prisoners to its prison system (+98,081) than New York's entire prison population (73,233) by some 24,848 prisoners. This means that the number of prisoners that Texas added during the 1990s was 34% higher than New York's entire prison population. Throughout the 1990s, Texas added five times as many prisoners as New York did (18,001). Nevertheless, the Lone Star State's crime drops were much less impressive than what occurred in the Empire State. Since 1995, the percentage decline in overall crime in New York was four times greater than the drop experienced in Texas, and New York's crime rate dropped twice as much as Texas. Even if you go back further, from 1990 to 1998--the decline in the crime rate in New York was 26% greater than the drop in crime in Texas....

Texas has been forced to temporarily stop executing people:

Quote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/03/us...hp&oref=slogin
Texas Ruling Signals Halt to Executions Indefinitely
By RALPH BLUMENTHAL
Published: October 3, 2007

.....On Thursday, the Supreme Court stepped in to halt a planned execution in Texas at the last minute, and though many legal experts interpreted that as a signal for all states to wait for a final ruling on lethal injection before any further executions, Texas officials said they planned to move ahead with more.

As a result, Tuesday’s ruling by the Texas court was seen as a sign that judges in the nation’s leading death penalty state were taking guidance from the Supreme Court and putting off imminent executions.

The Texas court order gave state authorities up to 30 days to explain in legal papers why the execution of the inmate, Heliberto Chi, should proceed. With responses then certain from defense lawyers, the effect of the order was to put off the execution for months, lawyers said.

Mr. Chi was convicted of killing the manager of a men’s store in Arlington in 2001.

Other executions, including four more scheduled in the next five months, were also likely to be stayed, said David R. Dow of the Texas Defender Service, a nonprofit law clinic that worked on Mr. Chi’s appeal.

“Until the Court of Criminal Appeals addresses the questions raised in this case there will be no more executions in Texas,” predicted Mr. Dow, a law professor at the University of Houston.

Acting less than a week after it rejected another inmate’s appeal 5 to 4, the appeals court justices provided no breakdown of the vote and did not give any reasoning for their decision. But they directed the state’s director of criminal justice, Nathaniel Quarterman, not to execute Mr. Chi and gave Mr. Quarterman and Tim Curry, the district attorney of Tarrant County, where the crime had been committed, up to 30 days to respond to claims by Mr. Chi’s lawyers that the formulation and administration of chemicals used for lethal injections did not quickly and painlessly kill but paralyzed the condemned inmates while they painfully suffocated.

Earlier Tuesday, the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles voted 4 to 3 against recommending a stay for Mr. Chi. A request for a 30-day reprieve was also pending with Gov. Rick Perry.

Had the appeals court not halted the execution, Mr. Chi’s lawyers would have taken the case to the United States Supreme Court, which last Thursday stayed the execution for another Texas inmate, Carlton Turner Jr.

Bryan Stevenson, director of the Equal Justice Initiative in Montgomery, Ala., and a law professor at New York University, said the Supreme Court’s ruling was a sign that while it was reviewing the legality of lethal injection in a Kentucky case, “it was at least unseemly for states to be carrying out executions.”....

aberkok · 11-27-2007, 07:56 AM

I never thought arguments for the death penalty should be advanced over individual examples. We can't say the death penalty is right for an individual, we have to decide on whether it is right for everyone. That's what makes it a law.

Even if I was for it, one single case wouldn't help my position.

pan6467 · 11-27-2007, 08:00 AM

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST Host..... I like ya man. But how the HELL can you compare this or turn this incident into a crusade against Texas.

I don't care if it happened there, Ohio, Cali... England, Sweden etc. There is no "we must prove ourselves better than the animals that tortured a 2 yr old."

We prove that by giving them a quick painless death, something they did not do to this 2 year old.

I am not (and I even stated this in the OP) advocating the death penalty in all cases... but this case and cases like it, blind justice and hate take over.

A 2 year old...... a fucking 2 year old and they did that and people would have those animals live?..... wtf is wrong with people?

I'm sorry but this is just wow........ I'll step away until I can become less emotional and can think more clearly.

telekinetic · 11-27-2007, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aberkok

I never thought arguments for the death penalty should be advanced over individual examples. We can't say the death penalty is right for an individual, we have to decide on whether it is right for everyone.

Wait, what?

No you don't. All you have to do is make it available for cases like this. Making it legal lets courts use it in situations like this. Maybe this would be the only case they use it on this year, that's fine, but it needs to be legal for it to be an option.

I'm very confident that noone believes that the death penalty is 'right for everyone.'

host · 11-27-2007, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pan6467

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST Host..... I like ya man. But how the HELL can you compare this or turn this incident into a crusade against Texas.

I don't care if it happened there, Ohio, Cali... England, Sweden etc. There is no "we must prove ourselves better than the animals that tortured a 2 yr old."

We prove that by giving them a quick painless death, something they did not do to this 2 year old.

I am not (and I even stated this in the OP) advocating the death penalty in all cases... but this case and cases like it, blind justice and hate take over.

A 2 year old...... a fucking 2 year old and they did that and people would have those animals live?..... wtf is wrong with people?

I'm sorry but this is just wow........ I'll step away until I can become less emotional and can think more clearly.

I know that you are angry, pan, but you are advocating the granting, BY THE PEOPLE, the continuation of authority to execute, to deficient, corrupt authority, and that is more grievous a consequence of the murderous, torturous actions of the depraved animals who you are rightly railing against, because it has broader implications and continues the risk of unequal justice, which is no justice, and of the execution of the innocent, with such pathetically lacking checks and balances, and such pathetically lacking concern by "responsible authority".

Quote:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...=&pagewanted=2
The Process
Smoother Path To Death Chamber

In the 23 years since the Supreme Court allowed reinstatement of capital punishment, states have executed 598 people, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. Texas, which uses lethal injection, has accounted for 199. Virginia is next with 73 and then Florida with 44.

The rate of executions in Texas has increased since Mr. Bush took office, for several reasons. A handful of Supreme Court rulings began to curb appeals and break the backlog on death row. In 1996, President Clinton signed a federal law further streamlining the appeals process while a year earlier, Mr. Bush signed a similar state law, which some lawmakers described as the ''speed up the juice'' law. This law did require the state, for the first time, to pay for lawyers appealing convictions of indigent people in capital cases.

Texas' governor, unlike those in some other states, is limited in granting clemency. The 18-member Board of Pardons and Paroles approves or denies all clemency applications, and the governor can grant clemency only if the board recommends it. Otherwise, he must either approve the execution or grant a 30-day stay. But the governor does appoint the parole board and set a tone.

''Bush has maintained a relatively removed posture,'' said Jim Mattox, a former attorney general of Texas and a Democrat. ''The paroles board stands between him and the process, but there's no doubt if the governor tells the paroles board what he wants done, they do it.''

Mr. Bush's first general counsel, Al Gonzales, said his legal staff assessed each death penalty case to brief the governor. Then, as now, Mr. Bush had two criteria for considering clemency: Is there any doubt about guilt? Has the inmate had full access to the courts?

Some inmates did not seek clemency, and their briefings might take only 15 minutes. Usually, Mr. Gonzales said, they took half an hour. Mr. Bush has been out of state for 16 executions over the past five years, and the highest-ranking state official presided, with the governor's approval.

''It's difficult to say those kinds of things were routine, but we had become quite efficient,'' said Mr. Gonzales, now a State Supreme Court justice. ''Many of them were pretty cut and dried.''

Mr. Bush campaigned as a law-and-order conservative, and he has called the death penalty a deterrent to crime. He has often said the rights of the victims should also be remembered, and his stance has brought him praise from the relatives of many victims.

The governor's first year in office ended with a record 19 executions, more than a third of the national total. The number dropped to 3 in 1996 because of a lawsuit challenging the Texas system. In 1997, after the challenge failed, the death chamber in Huntsville established the current yearly record of 37. Executions became so common that the public and much of the news media ceased to pay much attention.....

Your're hot with rage, pan, and your understandably affected by one horrible
case of torture/murder against the most innocent....young chidren.

However, you know that the criminals detailed in the preceding NY Times article, and their cronies still running Texas politics are no more qualified to be the "checks and balances" of Texas "justice", anymore than you, at this moment, would be qualified to be the defense attorney for the murderers of the two innocent little girls....

It comes down to who is qualified to decide who lives and who dies, in our society. It isn't politicians, or the people who they appoint.

Quote:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...=&pagewanted=4
....The Dallas Morning News, the state's leading newspaper, noted that the clemency process was shrouded in secrecy. The 18-member paroles board did not meet to discuss applications. Instead, members reviewed cases separately and faxed in their votes from across the state. The board operated without guidelines and offered no explanation for its decisions.

Early last year, Judge Sam Sparks of Federal District Court in Austin found that the Texas clemency system met the ''minimal procedural safeguards'' required by the United States Supreme Court. But in his opinion, Judge Sparks criticized the process, writing:

''It is abundantly clear the Texas clemency procedure is extremely poor and certainly minimal. Legislatively, there is a dearth of meaningful procedure. Administratively, the goal is more to protect the secrecy and autonomy of the system rather than carrying out an efficient legally sound system. The board would not have to sacrifice its conservative ideology to carry out its duties in a more fair and accurate fashion.''

Before the 1999 legislative session, State Representative Elliott Naishstat, an Austin Democrat, filed two bills that would have required the paroles board to consider clemency appeals in public meetings and to consider issues like rehabilitation.

In an interview with The Austin American-Statesman, however, Mr. Bush said, ''It's going to have to take an awfully compelling argument for me to support the change.''

Public clemency meetings, he warned, might create ''a chance for people to rant and rail, a chance for people to emotionalize the process beyond the questions that need to be asked.''

Both Naishstat bills died in the legislative session. ''The governor's office did not want the clemency procedure in Texas changed,'' Mr. Naishstat said in a recent interview. ....

.....Unlike some other states, Texas does not have a statewide public defender system; normally, elected judges in each county appoint lawyers, including campaign contributors, to represent poor defendants.

Mr. Bush vetoed the Ellis bill. He said that it would not improve legal counsel for the poor and that the 20-day limit could allow someone to be released from jail improperly .

A few months later, a Houston Chronicle investigation found that defendants with appointed lawyers in Harris County, which includes Houston, were twice as likely to go to jail as those who could afford to hire lawyers.

Harris County also has more inmates on death row than any other Texas county.

In October, a federal district judge set aside a death sentence against Calvin Jerold Burdine because his lawyer slept throughout much of the trial, in Harris County. ....

mixedmedia · 11-27-2007, 08:22 AM

I've read lots of ugly stories, pan, lots and lots and lots of them. But not once have I reconsidered my own stance against the death penalty. Is it so difficult to conceive that people can have convictions that are not swayed by more ephemeral phenomena...like emotion? Ever consider how much atrocity and injustice in the world is the product of fear, hatred, revenge? From racism to the death penalty to the 'war on terror' to the 'war on illegal immigration.' It's all tied together by people relying on their emotional responses to shape their convictions and their worldview. And it paves the pathway to even more injustice and atrocity. It's a strange, fucked-up, inside-out self-fulfilling prophecy that I think we were supposed to learn from at some point.

If you want to be for the death penalty then be for it. Don't try and convince people like myself that we need to be for it because a two year was viciously killed. Either you are for it or you aren't.

I'm with aberkok and host on this one.

That was a very insightful way of addressing the question, aberkok.

Quote:

Originally Posted by twistedmosaic

Wait, what?

No you don't. All you have to do is make it available for cases like this. Making it legal lets courts use it in situations like this. Maybe this would be the only case they use it on this year, that's fine, but it needs to be legal for it to be an option.

I'm very confident that noone believes that the death penalty is 'right for everyone.'

I think it's pretty obvious what he was saying.

Using specific examples of extreme brutality to wonder aloud why people don't support the death penalty is grandstanding.

albania · 11-27-2007, 08:27 AM

Is large red text supposed to make your point better; personally I find it rather annoying. Since, I didn’t particularly want to read most of the articles you quoted see sentence above for reason I’ll stick to general points. I know you wanted people who were against the death penalty to comment but I couldn’t keep myself from typing.

Personally, I like to split the issue into two arenas. First do you think the government has the right to kill people who break the law? I believe that a government does have that right in so far as, again by my estimation, they are only required to protect the rights(however, you define rights I think life would have to be one of them) of citizens who obey the law. The trouble here is obvious in that philosophical speaking by my definitions a government has the right to kill you for pretty much anything, including sneezing if it was outlawed. That’s where the second consideration comes in. For what if any crime should the government exact capital punishment? This is a personal matter really, but I believe that if I killed an individual in cold blood then I forfeit my right to live. In such a case if my death benefits the community even in as little as temporary relief to the people affected by the crime then the highest punishment fitting the crime should be exacted.

ubertuber · 11-27-2007, 08:35 AM

Pan -- the nature of my opposition to the death penalty is principle.

I'm sorry to tell you, but even this example doesn't make me reconsider for even a fraction of a second. I just don't think we ought to be institutionalizing ways to kill individuals when there are other options. In court, there is always another option.

No death penalty. Not at all, not ever, not for anyone, not in any case.

ShaniFaye · 11-27-2007, 08:44 AM

so wait....our tax money is supposed to go to support people like this for the rest of their natural lives?

If there is no death penalty for people like this, just what ARE other options?

ubertuber · 11-27-2007, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShaniFaye

so wait....our tax money is supposed to go to support people like this for the rest of their natural lives?

If there is no death penalty for people like this, just what ARE other options?

Yes.

Treatment and confinement are two of our other options. With all of the frivolous shit we spend money on in this country, it seems callous to me to say that cost effectiveness is a good reason to support institutionalized killing.

Besides, it's not like killing people is cheap either. By the time we pay for their confinement and pay for court fees throughout their many appeals, killing ain't exactly a bargain. If you think that we ought to disallow due process as well in the name of savings... Well, we're probably too far apart from each other to have much of a productive conversation.

ShaniFaye · 11-27-2007, 08:58 AM

I would think supporting the death penalty for any reason would put us too far apart to have a productive conversation.

sorry but my heart doesnt bleed for child murders

roachboy · 11-27-2007, 09:20 AM

i was going to post something to this earlier, but while i was out, host, aberkok, albania, ms. media and ubertuber said what i had in mind to say better than i would have said it.

anecdotal evidence is not the way to think about the death penalty, which is a social issue, a social problem.
no-one is asking "your heart to bleed" for anyone or anything, shani.
nor does the use of red letters matter terribly because the problem does not lie there.

but what anecdotal evidence and responses to it DOES reveal is an underlying problem with support for the death penalty--that it is predicated on revenge and amounts to a state act of premeditated murder.

but even that is not terribly relevant.

in addition to the questions raised in the posts above:
think class stratification.
think uneven access to counsel.
think about who ends up on death row and who does not.
think about what the overwhelming class composition of those who end up being convicted of capital crimes makes the death penalty into.
then maybe you'll understand something of the reasons why i personally oppose it, for whatever that's worth.

highthief · 11-27-2007, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aberkok

I never thought arguments for the death penalty should be advanced over individual examples. We can't say the death penalty is right for an individual, we have to decide on whether it is right for everyone. That's what makes it a law.

Even if I was for it, one single case wouldn't help my position.

Well said - I understand people's visceral reaction, and wanting vengeance and severe punishment - in this case more than most, as I have a 3 year old little girl so this one hits home.

But it doesn't change anything - the death penalty is applied disportionately, and there have been too many people sitting on death row who turned out to be innocent of the crime they were sentenced to die for.

People who murder should go to jail for the rest of their lives.

Jinn · 11-27-2007, 09:22 AM

I've always been pro-death. Whether it's fetuses or criminals.

Or gays. Hah! Just kidding. Glad you were reading.

Actually, though, I agree with host for once. While I support the death penalty, I think there are very SERIOUS problems with who we're giving the power to, particularly in Texas.

highthief · 11-27-2007, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albania

Is large red text supposed to make your point better; personally I find it rather annoying.

yeah! Ban him!

mixedmedia · 11-27-2007, 09:25 AM

Uber is correct. The death penalty is not cost effective. There have been studies done in several states that support this...I have posted them here at TFP before.

The only reasonable support for the death penalty can come from a sense that it is an acceptable form of dispensing justice and either you support it as a means of such or you don't. The system doesn't allow for much hair-splitting on an individual basis and it would be unreasonable to expect it to in a way that will make everyone comfortable. In other words, you would have to support it for the people who maliciously killed a 2-year-old and you would have to support it for the 18-year-old gangbanger who got involved in circumstances that spiraled out of his control and landed him on death row.

ShaniFaye · 11-27-2007, 09:31 AM

I dont split hairs over it. Im 100% for it in cases where its proven without a doubt that someone deliberately murdered another human.

Willravel · 11-27-2007, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pan6467

What would you do to these animals?

The persons in question are almost certainly mentally ill and probably should be under the care of mental health professionals. Justice would be helping them to break free of sociopathy and allowing them to feel shame and regret for what they did. Killing them is an act of vengeance and is a reaction based on emotion instead of reason.

Would you really kill someone because they suffered from mental illness? If so, I hope you're never on jury duty in a case that has any emotional impact on you.

host · 11-27-2007, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShaniFaye

I dont split hairs over it. Im 100% for it in cases where its proven without a doubt that someone deliberately murdered another human.

Shani, this former police officer was found guilty of murder "beyond reasonable doubt", on the basis of scientific findings by the FBI crime laboratory:

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...ail/components
SILENT INJUSTICE A Twist to the Left
A Murder Conviction Torn Apart by a Bullet
In a 1995 Maryland Case, Key Testimony and the Science Behind It Have Been Discredited

By John Solomon
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, November 19, 2007; Page A01

Former Baltimore police sergeant James A. Kulbicki stared silently from the defense table as the prosecutor held up his off-duty .38-caliber revolver and assured jurors that science proved the gun had been used to kill Kulbicki's mistress.

"I wonder what it felt like, Mr. Kulbicki, to have taken this gun, pressed it to the skull of that young woman and pulled the trigger, that cold steel," the prosecutor said during closing arguments.

Prosecutors had linked the weapon to Kulbicki through forensic science. Maryland's top firearms expert said that the gun had been cleaned and that its bullets were consistent in size with the one that killed the victim. The state expert could not match the markings on the bullets to Kulbicki's gun. But an FBI expert took the stand to say that a science that matches bullets by their lead content had linked the fatal bullet to Kulbicki.

The jurors were convinced, and in 1995 Kulbicki was convicted of first-degree murder in the death of his 22-year-old girlfriend. He was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

For a dozen years, Kulbicki sat in state prison, saddled with the image of the calculating killer portrayed in the 1996 made-for-TV movie "Double Jeopardy."

Then the scientific evidence unraveled. .....

...."If this could happen to my client, who was a cop who worked within this justice system, what does it say about defendants who know far less about the process and may have far fewer resources to uncover evidence of their innocence that may have been withheld by the prosecution or their scientific experts?" said Suzanne K. Drouet, a former Justice Department lawyer who took on Kulbicki's case as a public defender.......

...and, back to Texas....again. Have people been executed wrongly because of this abuse of authority, BS? Who "TF" knows?

Quote:

http://www.khou.com/crimelab/stories...w.3f93831.html
FBI audit: Problems at HPD crime lab known before it reopened

10:55 PM CST on Wednesday, November 14, 2007

By Jeremy Desel / 11 News

In our ongoing investigation into the Houston Police Department’s crime lab, 11 News has uncovered new evidence showing there were problems at the new crime lab -- before it ever reopened.

Why should you care?

Because a mistake at this lab could send you to jail or it could let a killer walk free.

In the lab, evidence is supposed to be protected.

We have protected the identity of a crime lab analyst currently working in the lab.

That’s because the analyst is afraid to be fired for speaking out and claims that at the Houston Crime Lab, problems are to be protected too.

“They are interested in keeping it quiet. They are not interested in fixing it,” the analyst told 11 News.

There are also allegations of cheating and evidence custody tampering inside the new lab. Questions raised in an official affidavit to internal affairs investigators.

An affidavit obtained by 11 News.

“We do respect that it has in common DNA, but it is a far different situation that what occurred in the past,” said Houston Mayor Bill White said when 11 News questioned him on the latest problems uncovered.

Maybe, but the trouble has been brewing right from the lab’s rebirth in November 2005.

Trouble uncovered in a March 2006 FBI audit of that new HPD Crime Lab.

It was buried in a box filled with thousands of pages of documents we asked for from HPD.

Inside that audit? Standard questions:

“Has each examiner/analyst successfully completed a qualifying test before beginning independent casework responsibilities?”

Troubling answer to that one: “No.”

“Does the laboratory use methods and procedures for forensic DNA analysis that have been validated prior to casework implementation?”

Again, the answer was “No.”

“Does the laboratory maintain a chain of custody for all evidence?”

Yet another “No,” answer.

All questions now being revisited in the ongoing HPD internal affairs investigation into the lab.

What is especially disturbing now to some, is that the test question where cheating is alleged was related to finding sperm in a sample.

“They did not want to draw attention to that issue again on the proficiency test,” said the analyst whose identity 11 News is protecting.

Because it is one of the specific problems in the old lab that led to the release of Ronnie Taylor just last month. He was wrongfully convicted of a rape he did not commit.

All because the old crime lab covered up its mistakes.......

...and here is the conduct and reputation of the "authority" doing the auditing in Houston....the FBI:

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...111501575.html
Monday, Nov. 19, at noon ET
Silent Injustice
Bullet-matching Science Debunked

John Solomon
Staff Writer, The Washington Post
Monday, November 19, 2007; 12:00 PM

At noon ET on Monday, Nov. 19 Washington Post staff writer John Solomon responded to reader questions and comments about "Silent Injustice" his 6-month investigation with 60 MINUTES correspondent Steve Kroft into a flawed science used in the convictions of thousands of defendants, scores of whom may be innocent.

....John Solomon: Absolutely. I had written extensively on FBI lab problems in the 1990s and earlier this decade. And I had worked for the last several years with some groups to pursue Freedom of Information Act requests seeking documents about how the FBI was handling the end of its bullet lead science. When the bureau announced the end of the science, it had claimed publicly that it remained confident in the "scientific foundation" of its past work. But when we started to get internal emails and documents under FOIA and from sources, we realized the bureau was aware that large numbers of its scientists had given testimony that was inaccurate and not supported by science. And that is what got us started. We began by reviewing trial transcripts and finding cases where the now-discredited bullet lead science had been a crucial piece of the prosecution's evidence. As for 60 Minutes, I had been talking with producers there for about a year about possible collaborations and this project just made sense. It had strong visual elements and characters to go along with a compelling issue of justice and fairness.

Washington, D.C.: Do you think that laboratories are resistant to change that would help weed out bad science, such as more oversight, blind testing, or redundant independent testing?
ad_icon
Click here!

John Solomon: This is a good question, which is resonating in courts around the country as defense lawyers begin to identify flaws in many local crime labs work. While it is hard to make sweeping conclusions, the internal FBI documents we obtained provided some fascinating insight into why the FBI was so slow to end the science in the face of questions. As early as 1991, the FBI lab had done a study that raised questions about some of the assumptions being made about lead bullet matches. <h3>But rather than seeing the red flags, the scientists dismissed them as coincidences. In 2002 when one of the FBI's own retired metallurgist questioned the science, the FBI sought to drown out his concerns by flooding the forensic science journals with articles praising the bullet lead science.</h3> And even after the National Academy of Sciences concluded the science was flawed in both its statistics and testimony, many in the lab fought to continue its use or at least to minimize the problems when informing the public. When asked why, FBI officials told us that it was hard for scientists who practiced a particular science for decades in good faith to admit they were wrong. What should not have been so hard, the FBI officials said, was for the lab to do the right thing and to review all cases were misleading testimony was given. That didn't happen back in 2005. But now that these are issues are public, the FBi has belatedly agreed to do that......

C'mon, Shani, and pan....we musn't let emotion turn us into...<h3>if we ignore the lack of integrity of the folks in charge of determining who the guilty are...</h3>what amounts to a revenge seeking lynch mob!

They are supposed to be impartially gathering and evaluating the evidence, while protecting the rights of the accused, and time after time, we find that they just don't effing care about the rights of the accused:

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...701681_pf.html
FBI's Forensic Test Full of Holes
Lee Wayne Hunt is one of hundreds of defendants whose convictions are in question now that FBI forensic evidence has been discredited.

By John Solomon
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 18, 2007; A01

Hundreds of defendants sitting in prisons nationwide have been convicted with the help of an FBI forensic tool that was discarded more than two years ago. But the FBI lab has yet to take steps to alert the affected defendants or courts, even as the window for appealing convictions is closing, a joint investigation by The Washington Post and "60 Minutes" has found.

The science, known as comparative bullet-lead analysis, was first used after President John F. Kennedy's assassination in 1963. The technique used chemistry to link crime-scene bullets to ones possessed by suspects on the theory that each batch of lead had a unique elemental makeup.

In 2004, however, the nation's most prestigious scientific body concluded that variations in the manufacturing process rendered the FBI's testimony about the science "unreliable and potentially misleading." Specifically, the National Academy of Sciences said that decades of FBI statements to jurors linking a particular bullet to those found in a suspect's gun or cartridge box were so overstated that such testimony should be considered "misleading under federal rules of evidence."

A year later, the bureau abandoned the analysis.

But the FBI lab has never gone back to determine how many times its scientists misled jurors. Internal memos show that the bureau's managers were aware by 2004 that testimony had been overstated in a large number of trials. In a smaller number of cases, the experts had made false matches based on a faulty statistical analysis of the elements contained in different lead samples, documents show.

"We cannot afford to be misleading to a jury," the lab director wrote to FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III in late summer 2005 in a memo outlining why the bureau was abandoning the science. "We plan to discourage prosecutors from using our previous results in future prosecutions."

Despite those private concerns, the bureau told defense lawyers in a general letter dated Sept. 1, 2005, that although it was ending the technique, it "still firmly supports the scientific foundation of bullet lead analysis." And in at least two cases, the bureau has tried to help state prosecutors defend past convictions by using court filings that experts say are still misleading. The government has fought releasing the list of the estimated 2,500 cases over three decades in which it performed the analysis.

<h3>For the majority of affected prisoners, the typical two-to-four-year window to appeal their convictions based on new scientific evidence is closing.</h3>

...so please, stop. No more eagerness and advocacy for giving more authority to thugs who take revenge on other thugs, IN THE NAME OF THE LAW!

The "justice daddy", just as the "War president"....righteous protectors and defenders of "good" against "evil", do not exist, even here in the United States of jesusland.

The "system" is too imperfect to advocate for penalties that cannot be mitigated in the event that the rights of the accused are found to be compromised. Abandon that core principle, and you abandon even that pretense that what you are seeking is justice, because if you allow an imperfect system the authority to determine who to execute, it is not justice that will be meted out.

Sun Tzu · 11-27-2007, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

The persons in question are almost certainly mentally ill and probably should be under the care of mental health professionals. Justice would be helping them to break free of sociopathy and allowing them to feel shame and regret for what they did. Killing them is an act of vengeance and is a reaction based on emotion instead of reason.

Would you really kill someone because they suffered from mental illness? If so, I hope you're never on jury duty in a case that has any emotional impact on you.

State sponsored service may vary from state to state, but I have had enough experience in forensic behavioral health to have concluded this is unfortunately in the extreme minority. What I have seen are allot of criminals who have done very bad things, and know how to work the system. The result is rapists and murderers that have been either found not competent enough to stand trial , or have been found guilty but, insane. Both will keep them out of prison. They spend 5 to 10 years receiving psych meds, having daily groups on how to get in touch with themselves, doing arts and crafts, and being rude and entitled to the medical staff.

After they have spent enough time being “rehabilitated” can you guess what some of them do? They go out and kill or rape again.

Perhaps in an utopian society people would not have to worry about their children disappearing, going to the store and have a sniper shoot them, being raped, and similar acts.

A couple decades ago when the level of forensics was only a fraction of where it is today, my view would be different. I don’t deny that there are truly mentally ill people out there. There are allot of Charles Mansions out there- that will never be rehabilitated.

Maybe the answer is to get more specific about cases verse a general law. Scott Peterson: is there anyone here that doubts he killed his wife and unborn son? Circumstantial evidence convicted him. If a person is found guilty by a panel of their peers of a deliberate and heinous crime, I would personally rather my taxes go into education than supporting that piece of shit.

I don’t mean this question to be passive aggressive, and if this applies to anyone here and they choose not to answer I understand.. I’m asking this with a perspective of sincere interest . Is there anyone here that has had something terrible happen to someone they love by a criminal and does not support the death penalty?

pig · 11-27-2007, 10:31 AM

i do not want the government to have the power to kill human beings, in a sense of domestic crime prevention. human error, tendency towards corruption, moral qualms about institutionalized ethenasia...etc. the rest of this is revenge and anger. these are not solid places from which to build policy.

so no, it doesn't make me rethink my views on the death penalty, at all.

host · 11-27-2007, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu

....I don’t mean this question to be passive aggressive, and if this applies to anyone here and they choose not to answer I understand.. I’m asking this with a perspective of sincere interest . Is there anyone here that has had something terrible happen to someone they love by a criminal and does not support the death penalty?

Why is your question even relevant, if we're talking about justice in the context of a system of law? The abuses of the system are there. For every question designed to conjure up emotion based arguments, there is the reality of the unfairness and abuse of the justice system's responsibility for investigating, prosecuting and bringing justice to the guilty:

Quote:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/01/11/il...row/index.html

'Blanket commutation' empties Illinois death row
Incoming governor criticizes decision

From Jeff Flock
CNN
Monday, January 13, 2003 Posted: 1:54 AM EST (0654 GMT)
....Prosecutor: 'They've had their years in court'

Friday's pardons, coupled with early word that the governor was planning to issue commutations, sparked outrage from prosecutors and family members of victims. ....

....."I believe that he is wiping his muddy shoes on the face of victims, using them as the doormat as he leaves his office," said Peoria County State's Attorney Kevin Lyons on CNN's NewsNight. "It says much more about George Ryan than it does about the death penalty."

Ollie Dodds, whose daughter died in the fire Hobley was convicted of setting and remains convinced he is responsible, said, "This brings back memories just like it happened."

Lyons accused Ryan of arrogantly substituting his own judgment for those of juries and courts that have imposed and upheld the death sentences, assuming that "none of us get it but him."

"Everybody has had not their day in court, they've had their years in court," Lyons said. "It's shameful that the victims of this state, in fact, have to not fear the courts, not the defense lawyers, not the defendants, but they have to fear their very own governor."

Ryan said he decided to pardon the four men rather than commute their sentences to life because he is convinced they did not commit the crimes that sent them to death row. All four men say they were tortured by police....

Later, it turned out that former Illinois Gov. Ryan was found guilty of charges of corruption and has now <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=ryan+illinois+reports+prison&btnG=Search">reported to prison to begin serving his own sentence.</a> What is easier to take, a governor later convicted of corruption who commuted all death sentences in response to his determination that justice was not equally and fairly served, or a former governor in a state known for injustice and questionable prosecution, and a poorly structured clemency board, who signs a record number of death warrants as governor, more than all other states combined in the same time period, with the help of a close legal counsel who later is revealed as a corrupt and rabidly partisan US atty. general, while the former governor goes on to act like a war criminal POTUS, and an advocate and authorizer of torture......

I prefer the jailed ex-gov. Ryan, how about you?

Here is a Texas woman initially convicted of killing her five children. Are her crimes any less an offense to our sensibilities than the ones described in this thread's OP....three more killings...young innocent lives snuffed out by a parent....or does the torture killings of two, trump the drowning of five? Is it even relevant? Should the killer of five be treated with less deference, in the same state, as the killers described in the thread OP? Why?

Quote:

http://dying.about.com/od/suddendeath/a/yates.htm
Postpartum Psychosis Defense Works in 2006
In her second trial in 2006 Andrea Yates was found not guilty by reason of insanity of systematically drowning her 5 children in 2001. This acquittal means that instead of spending life in prison for the 5 murders, Yates will be committed to a state mental hospital.

In 2002 she was tried and convicted of murdering her 5 children, but the charges were overturned last year due to erroneous testimony.

Before announcing the verdict, this jury observed 10 minutes of silence, 2 minutes for each child. Foreman Todd Frank told "Good Morning America,"

"I honestly feel so peaceful right now that we made the right decision.We understand that she knew it was legally wrong. But in her delusional mind, in her severely mentally ill mind, we believe that she thought what she did was right."

Susan Dowd Stone, MSW, LCSW, President of Postpartum Support International, was encouraged by the verdict as "the appropriate recognition and characterization of postpartum psychosis." Postpartum Support International (PSI) is the world's largest organization offering support, referrals, education, training and resources to health care providers, women and their families coping with perinatal mood disorders.

Postpartum Psychosis Defense
In this trial Yates' attorneys never disputed that......

matthew330 · 11-27-2007, 10:46 AM

It's not so much these instances, but the ones where killers are let loose after so many years, and go on to murder more innocent people - that make me think "if he'd have been put to death the first time....."

I think the government has a responsibility to make sure that this doesn't happen again when they capture someone who's proving themselves capable of committing this type of crime, there's one sure-fire way of protecting the public. Social injustices and institutionalized racism be damned.

If it helps at all, wouldn't punishing this young white couple help even things out a bit.....off with their heads.

Willravel · 11-27-2007, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu

State sponsored service may vary from state to state, but I have had enough experience in forensic behavioral health to have concluded this is unfortunately in the extreme minority.

Ah, but if you compare the success rate of rehabilitation under psychiatric care to the success rate of rehabilitation in an electric chair, things become clear. The criminal justice system is about justice. Killing people because we don't necessarily think that they can be treated doesn't really make sense. Incarcerating them does, that way we can revisit it if it's deemed possible later (psychology is an evolving science, after all). I realize that in the case above, despite not having access to any specific information on the mental health of the presumed guilty parties, full rehabilitation isn't likely, but somehow I don't see murdering them as a constructive response by a rational populace.

So, to summarize, I agree rehabilitation isn't likely but that doesn't mean we should murder them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu

What I have seen are allot of criminals who have done very bad things, and know how to work the system. The result is rapists and murderers that have been either found not competent enough to stand trial , or have been found guilty but, insane. Both will keep them out of prison. They spend 5 to 10 years receiving psych meds, having daily groups on how to get in touch with themselves, doing arts and crafts, and being rude and entitled to the medical staff.

That's a serious failing of the psychiatric rehabilitation industry, and I recognize that, but again is this a worse option that murder? If someone is deemed to be "currently untreatable", why shouldn't they be shipped off to a prison for a time? I'll admit I'm not fully aware of procedure when it comes to this as my education was more about history and systems of the mind and such, but it would seem that if a trained professional deemed that a patient was hostile and actively avoiding rehabilitation, they should be sent to prison.

I'll bet John Watson wouldn't have let convicts be rude to his staff.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu

After they have spent enough time being “rehabilitated” can you guess what some of them do? They go out and kill or rape again.

It's a massive failing in the system to release people who aren't rehabilitated (which is becoming the word of the day).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu

Perhaps in an utopian society people would not have to worry about their children disappearing, going to the store and have a sniper shoot them, being raped, and similar acts.

A couple decades ago when the level of forensics was only a fraction of where it is today, my view would be different. I don’t deny that there are truly mentally ill people out there. There are allot of Charles Mansions out there- that will never be rehabilitated.

I'm not the only person with psychology training that believes that Manson isn't beyond rehabilitation, but that's beside the point. This is about viable solutions. Manson has life in prison, for example.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu

Maybe the answer is to get more specific about cases verse a general law. Scott Peterson: is there anyone here that doubts he killed his wife and unborn son? Circumstantial evidence convicted him. If a person is found guilty by a panel of their peers of a deliberate and heinous crime, I would personally rather my taxes go into education than supporting that piece of shit.

The answer is prevention, and the fact you use "piece of shit" suggests emotional content in your decision making process when it comes to this. If you want to stop this, then the only option is prevention. Prison trains criminals instead of rehabilitating them. It's in prevention, programs like Second Step, that we could actually see crime rates drop off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu

I don’t mean this question to be passive aggressive, and if this applies to anyone here and they choose not to answer I understand.. I’m asking this with a perspective of sincere interest . Is there anyone here that has had something terrible happen to someone they love by a criminal and does not support the death penalty?

I was shot in the leg. My grandfather was exposed to agent orange. A close friend of the family had his leg blown off by an insurgent. Would I sentence any of the guilty parties to death? Absolutely not. The idiot who shot my leg was just an idiot. He served time and was released. McNamera and the rest of those responsible deserved to be in prison, but not killed. Bush is responsible for every injury and death in Iraq, and I'd like to sentence him to prison, but I'd absolutely never support the death penalty.

mixedmedia · 11-27-2007, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu

Is there anyone here that has had something terrible happen to someone they love by a criminal and does not support the death penalty?

I have had something terrible happen to two of my daughters.

My sister was raped by a man who forced himself into her apartment and he attempted to kill her. She doesn't support the death penalty, either.

Do you realize that often the trauma of losing loved ones to violence has the opposite affect that most people who are only imagining it expect it to?

Sometimes, yes, people experience anger and want to exact revenge. While sometimes people feel even more keenly what it means to take a life and reject the idea of more death as being justice.

Plan9 · 11-27-2007, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

Ah, but if you compare the success rate of rehabilitation under psychiatric care to the success rate of rehabilitation in an electric chair, things become clear.

Death penalty IS about justice. Yeah. No repeat offenders treated by the electric chair.

Death Penalty: When you care enough to go all the way.

dksuddeth · 11-27-2007, 11:00 AM

I fully support the death penalty, however, I believe that the preponderance of evidence should be so overwhelmingly obvious, that guilt can't even be questioned as a hypothetical. video evidence would be great, otherwise, forensics should have to conclude that not even 1 in 1,000,000,000,000 chance that someone else committed that particular crime.

That being said, the sentencing phase of a trial should be done by a seperate jury than the one who decided guilt or acquittal. In most criminal trials, a jury of 12 of your peers listens to the evidence and decides whether or not you committed the crime. A sentencing jury should have 15 people on it and a death sentence MUST be decided by 2/3rds or more.

As in all death sentences, an appeal is automatic. This appeal should no longer be done by just a courtroom judge or bench. As all too often happens, a black robed tyrant inevitably fucks up the system by implementing his own ideology over the laws and we end up with murderers released on technicalities or innocent people still on death row. A death sentence appeal should be handled by yet another jury of peers, 15 again, and either the confirmation of said death sentence or commutation to life should be decided by 4/5ths of the peer jury.

Unfortunately, I don't see this happening because not enough people would care about the justice system as it pertains to criminals to actually want to be involved.....but if they were somehow caught up in it as a defendant, I wonder if that would change their mind?

Willravel · 11-27-2007, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crompsin

Death penalty IS about justice. Yeah. No repeat offenders treated by the electric chair.

There's an inherent contradiction in that idea, though. Historically, executions don't bring closure or healing to victims. Even pushing aside the fact that 2/3 of all death sentences are overturned on appeal because of serious errors, the victims aren't made better. Even pushing aside the insanity of fighting murder with murder, the victims aren't made better. Even considering that all current death penalty methods are torture, the victims aren't made better. Even considering that it's not an effective deterrent, the victims aren't made better.

There are a million reasons not to have the death penalty. The only one that matters is that it doesn't help the victims.

host · 11-27-2007, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crompsin

Death penalty IS about justice. Yeah. No repeat offenders treated by the electric chair.

Death Penalty: When you care enough to go all the way.

okay....who do you execute? Would you "do" this former cop?

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...ail/components
SILENT INJUSTICE A Twist to the Left
A Murder Conviction Torn Apart by a Bullet
In a 1995 Maryland Case, Key Testimony and the Science Behind It Have Been Discredited

By John Solomon
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, November 19, 2007; Page A01

Former Baltimore police sergeant James A. Kulbicki stared silently from the defense table as the prosecutor held up his off-duty .38-caliber revolver and assured jurors that science proved the gun had been used to kill Kulbicki's mistress.

"I wonder what it felt like, Mr. Kulbicki, to have taken this gun, pressed it to the skull of that young woman and pulled the trigger, that cold steel," the prosecutor said during closing arguments.

Prosecutors had linked the weapon to Kulbicki through forensic science. Maryland's top firearms expert said that the gun had been cleaned and that its bullets were consistent in size with the one that killed the victim. The state expert could not match the markings on the bullets to Kulbicki's gun. But an FBI expert took the stand to say that a science that matches bullets by their lead content had linked the fatal bullet to Kulbicki.

The jurors were convinced, and in 1995 Kulbicki was convicted of first-degree murder in the death of his 22-year-old girlfriend......

...and do you execute cops and prosecutors who are convicted of knowingly falsifying evidence that is key to a death penatly conviction and sentence, or who deliberately sit on potentially exonerating evidence in capital crime cases?

I read you're short and absolute comments and they don't seem to be thoroughly thought through, odd in a discussion of whether the people should grant the authority to kill, to authority, don't you agree?

Quote:

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

I fully support the death penalty, however, I believe that the preponderance of evidence should be so overwhelmingly obvious, that guilt can't even be questioned as a hypothetical. video evidence would be great, otherwise, forensics should have to conclude that not even 1 in 1,000,000,000,000 chance that someone else committed that particular crime.

That being said, the sentencing phase of a trial should be done by a seperate jury than the one who decided guilt or acquittal. In most criminal trials, a jury of 12 of your peers listens to the evidence and decides whether or not you committed the crime. A sentencing jury should have 15 people on it and a death sentence MUST be decided by 2/3rds or more.

As in all death sentences, an appeal is automatic. This appeal should no longer be done by just a courtroom judge or bench. As all too often happens, a black robed tyrant inevitably fucks up the system by implementing his own ideology over the laws and we end up with murderers released on technicalities or innocent people still on death row. A death sentence appeal should be handled by yet another jury of peers, 15 again, and either the confirmation of said death sentence or commutation to life should be decided by 4/5ths of the peer jury.

Unfortunately, I don't see this happening because not enough people would care about the justice system as it pertains to criminals to actually want to be involved.....but if they were somehow caught up in it as a defendant, I wonder if that would change their mind?

So...are you saying that enough examples of a flawed system, unequal in the way the accused are represented, investigated, prosecuted, and evaluated for possible clemency, along with the finally admitted flaws in it's forensic science by the FBI, and what was revealed about the FBI's and prosecutors' (lack of) commitment to protecting the rights of the accused, an even bigger shortcoming than the abandoning of it's long love affair with "bullet science"...are enough to convince you that it's just about impossible to fairly...with 100 percent certainty...apply the death penalty?

dksuddeth · 11-27-2007, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

So...are you saying that enough examples of a flawed system, unequal in the way the accused are represented, investigated, prosecuted, and evaluated for possible clemency, along with the finally admitted flaws in it's forensic science by the FBI, and what was revealed about the FBI's and prosecutors' (lack of) commitment to protecting the rights of the accused, an even bigger shortcoming than the abandoning of it's long love affair with "bullet science"...are enough to convince you that it's just about impossible to fairly...with 100 percent certainty...apply the death penalty?

no, thats not what i'm saying. I knew the death penalty system was flawed and applied unfairly long before I was ever a member on this board. I still support it. I would just like to see the system changed, i.e. the process that I explained.

host · 11-27-2007, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

no, thats not what i'm saying. I knew the death penalty system was flawed and applied unfairly long before I was ever a member on this board. I still support it. I would just like to see the system changed, i.e. the process that I explained.

Aren't you the most skeptical poster here on the issue of trusting authority to constitutionally uphold the "right of the people to bear arms"?

Yet you would yield the authority to determine who is "guilty enough" to deserve to be executed, to that same distrusted authority? That doesn't sound like the dksuddeth who I have come to know and respect for his wisdom, depth, and grasp of politics...although it does fit with what I know of your unwillingness to be "framed", "labelled", or stereotyped.

I'm discussing this in a "due process" environment. In a legally justified martial law situation...say, during efforts to repel an invasion of a foreign aggressor from our shores, I could see the need arise, in the eyes of military authority, for ordering executions....

ShaniFaye · 11-27-2007, 11:28 AM

Im curious to know from those that oppose the death penalty.....do you think no one should ever be executed? ever? for any reason? or is it just against the american death penalty?

For example....should Saddam Hussein have been hung?

Willravel · 11-27-2007, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

video evidence would be great, otherwise, forensics should have to conclude that not even 1 in 1,000,000,000,000 chance that someone else committed that particular crime.

This is an interesting idea, but is there really such a thing as certainty? I'm sure that those on death row were considered guilty and there was no reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors (unless all 12 of them were emotional vengeance bags, which does happen), so how much unreasonable doubt can there be before we decide that someone is permanently killed? There aren't appeals after death, after all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShaniFaye

Im curious to know from those that oppose the death penalty.....do you think no one should ever be executed? ever? for any reason? or is it just against the american death penalty?

For example....should Saddam Hissein have been hung?

Saddam Hussein should not have been killed. He was guilty of multiple murders, and should have been in prison, but not killed.

This is my stance: Illness, old age, self sacrifice or accident. Outside of these, something has gone terribly wrong.

Bill O'Rights · 11-27-2007, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShaniFaye

I dont split hairs over it. Im 100% for it in cases where its proven without a doubt that someone deliberately murdered another human.

Up untill about 4 or 5 years ago, I was right up there with Shani. 100% pro capital punishment. Nothing could sway my opinion. Except...there was a Time magazine article that spotlighted the corruption in the judicial system. Forensic labs that intentionally manipulated the evidence to favor the prosecution. Prosecutors that knew the evidence pointed elsewhere, pushing through to get a conviction, and another notch on their belts. Investigators that picked a suspect, and only looked at evidence that could help convict that suspect.

By the time that I had finished reading that article, my views on the death penalty had changed 180 degrees. So long as there is any chance, that an innocent person is sent to their death, on my behalf, I am opposed to the death penalty.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu

Scott Peterson: is there anyone here that doubts he killed his wife and unborn son? Circumstantial evidence convicted him. If a person is found guilty by a panel of their peers of a deliberate and heinous crime, I would personally rather my taxes go into education than supporting that piece of shit.

A panel of his peers (not experts), convicted him on circumstantial evidence.
Look. I'm 99.999% positive that Scott Peterson did exactly what he was accused and convicted of. But there is that .001% that leaves that liiiittle bit of doubt. I wasn't there. I don't know that he did it. A man should be sent to his death because everything looks like he did it?

roachboy · 11-27-2007, 11:48 AM

Quote:

should Saddam Hissein have been hung?

this one's easy.
the trial--if you want to call it that--was a travesty.
there was not even the pretense of "justice".
it was a stalin-worthy show trial, a joke, a hamfisted matter of political expediency.
all this and i dont doubt that hussein was a brutal dictator--with full american support so long as he was convenient of course.
so this would be one of the worst possible examples to support your position, shani.

and any single instance is simply going to function to avoid the problems that have been raised repeatedly in the thread about the system-wide implementation of the death penalty in the states.

maybe try justifying the simple fact that it is OVERWHELMINGLY poor folk who are on death row in the states--or address bor's post above this one.

ShaniFaye · 11-27-2007, 11:55 AM

so Im guessing, Hitler shouldnt have been executed if we'd had the chance either?

mixedmedia · 11-27-2007, 12:00 PM

Um, no, I don't think Saddam Hussein should have been hung.

And I would oppose the death penalty even if the system were not flawed and corrupt (ie, human). I oppose it on principle.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShaniFaye

so Im guessing, Hitler shouldnt have been executed if we'd had the chance either?

I would not have supported the execution of Hitler. I do not support state-sanctioned killing or any other form of institutionalized murder.

roachboy · 11-27-2007, 12:07 PM

you're right shani: kill em all and let god sort em out.

why not questions that are addressed to you instead of trying to "prove" your point by way of ridiculous examples, particularly given that most of the objections to the death penalty in this thread include objections to arguing from individual example, even when they are not ridiculous?

ShaniFaye · 11-27-2007, 12:13 PM

sorry? I dont see where anyone asked me a specific question? I on the other hand did and so far the only person that I see that answered it was MM

Quote:

And I would oppose the death penalty even if the system were not flawed and corrupt (ie, human). I oppose it on principle.

since we all know im ignorant of anything political, please state the question to me clearly and concisely and I will "try" to answer it

11-27-2007, 07:56 AM	#3 (permalink)
aberkok “Wrong is right.” Location: toronto	I never thought arguments for the death penalty should be advanced over individual examples. We can't say the death penalty is right for an individual, we have to decide on whether it is right for everyone. That's what makes it a law. Even if I was for it, one single case wouldn't help my position. __________________ !check out my new blog! http://arkanamusic.wordpress.com Warden Gentiles: "It? Perfectly innocent. But I can see how, if our roles were reversed, I might have you beaten with a pillowcase full of batteries."

11-27-2007, 08:00 AM	#4 (permalink)
pan6467 Lennonite Priest Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA	JESUS FUCKING CHRIST Host..... I like ya man. But how the HELL can you compare this or turn this incident into a crusade against Texas. I don't care if it happened there, Ohio, Cali... England, Sweden etc. There is no "we must prove ourselves better than the animals that tortured a 2 yr old." We prove that by giving them a quick painless death, something they did not do to this 2 year old. I am not (and I even stated this in the OP) advocating the death penalty in all cases... but this case and cases like it, blind justice and hate take over. A 2 year old...... a fucking 2 year old and they did that and people would have those animals live?..... wtf is wrong with people? I'm sorry but this is just wow........ I'll step away until I can become less emotional and can think more clearly. __________________ I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?" Last edited by pan6467; 11-27-2007 at 08:02 AM..

11-27-2007, 08:35 AM	#9 (permalink)
ubertuber spudly Location: Ellay	Pan -- the nature of my opposition to the death penalty is principle. I'm sorry to tell you, but even this example doesn't make me reconsider for even a fraction of a second. I just don't think we ought to be institutionalizing ways to kill individuals when there are other options. In court, there is always another option. No death penalty. Not at all, not ever, not for anyone, not in any case. __________________ Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

11-27-2007, 08:44 AM	#10 (permalink)
ShaniFaye Submit to me, you know you want to Location: Lilburn, Ga	so wait....our tax money is supposed to go to support people like this for the rest of their natural lives? If there is no death penalty for people like this, just what ARE other options? __________________ *I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!*

11-27-2007, 08:58 AM	#12 (permalink)
ShaniFaye Submit to me, you know you want to Location: Lilburn, Ga	I would think supporting the death penalty for any reason would put us too far apart to have a productive conversation. sorry but my heart doesnt bleed for child murders __________________ *I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!*

11-27-2007, 08:27 AM	#8 (permalink)
albania Psycho	Is large red text supposed to make your point better; personally I find it rather annoying. Since, I didn’t particularly want to read most of the articles you quoted see sentence above for reason I’ll stick to general points. I know you wanted people who were against the death penalty to comment but I couldn’t keep myself from typing. Personally, I like to split the issue into two arenas. First do you think the government has the right to kill people who break the law? I believe that a government does have that right in so far as, again by my estimation, they are only required to protect the rights(however, you define rights I think life would have to be one of them) of citizens who obey the law. The trouble here is obvious in that philosophical speaking by my definitions a government has the right to kill you for pretty much anything, including sneezing if it was outlawed. That’s where the second consideration comes in. For what if any crime should the government exact capital punishment? This is a personal matter really, but I believe that if I killed an individual in cold blood then I forfeit my right to live. In such a case if my death benefits the community even in as little as temporary relief to the people affected by the crime then the highest punishment fitting the crime should be exacted.

11-27-2007, 09:20 AM	#13 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i was going to post something to this earlier, but while i was out, host, aberkok, albania, ms. media and ubertuber said what i had in mind to say better than i would have said it. anecdotal evidence is not the way to think about the death penalty, which is a social issue, a social problem. no-one is asking "your heart to bleed" for anyone or anything, shani. nor does the use of red letters matter terribly because the problem does not lie there. but what anecdotal evidence and responses to it DOES reveal is an underlying problem with support for the death penalty--that it is predicated on revenge and amounts to a state act of premeditated murder. but even that is not terribly relevant. in addition to the questions raised in the posts above: think class stratification. think uneven access to counsel. think about who ends up on death row and who does not. think about what the overwhelming class composition of those who end up being convicted of capital crimes makes the death penalty into. then maybe you'll understand something of the reasons why i personally oppose it, for whatever that's worth. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 11-27-2007 at 09:22 AM..

11-27-2007, 09:22 AM	#15 (permalink)
Jinn Lover - Protector - Teacher Location: Seattle, WA	I've always been pro-death. Whether it's fetuses or criminals. Or gays. Hah! Just kidding. Glad you were reading. Actually, though, I agree with host for once. While I support the death penalty, I think there are very SERIOUS problems with who we're giving the power to, particularly in Texas. __________________ "I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

11-27-2007, 09:25 AM	#17 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	Uber is correct. The death penalty is not cost effective. There have been studies done in several states that support this...I have posted them here at TFP before. The only reasonable support for the death penalty can come from a sense that it is an acceptable form of dispensing justice and either you support it as a means of such or you don't. The system doesn't allow for much hair-splitting on an individual basis and it would be unreasonable to expect it to in a way that will make everyone comfortable. In other words, you would have to support it for the people who maliciously killed a 2-year-old and you would have to support it for the 18-year-old gangbanger who got involved in circumstances that spiraled out of his control and landed him on death row. __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

11-27-2007, 09:31 AM	#18 (permalink)
ShaniFaye Submit to me, you know you want to Location: Lilburn, Ga	I dont split hairs over it. Im 100% for it in cases where its proven without a doubt that someone deliberately murdered another human. __________________ *I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!*

11-27-2007, 10:31 AM	#22 (permalink)
pig pigglet pigglet Location: Locash	i do not want the government to have the power to kill human beings, in a sense of domestic crime prevention. human error, tendency towards corruption, moral qualms about institutionalized ethenasia...etc. the rest of this is revenge and anger. these are not solid places from which to build policy. so no, it doesn't make me rethink my views on the death penalty, at all. __________________ You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

11-27-2007, 10:46 AM	#24 (permalink)
matthew330 Banned	It's not so much these instances, but the ones where killers are let loose after so many years, and go on to murder more innocent people - that make me think "if he'd have been put to death the first time....." I think the government has a responsibility to make sure that this doesn't happen again when they capture someone who's proving themselves capable of committing this type of crime, there's one sure-fire way of protecting the public. Social injustices and institutionalized racism be damned. If it helps at all, wouldn't punishing this young white couple help even things out a bit.....off with their heads. Last edited by matthew330; 11-27-2007 at 10:49 AM..

11-27-2007, 11:00 AM	#28 (permalink)
dksuddeth Junkie Location: bedford, tx	I fully support the death penalty, however, I believe that the preponderance of evidence should be so overwhelmingly obvious, that guilt can't even be questioned as a hypothetical. video evidence would be great, otherwise, forensics should have to conclude that not even 1 in 1,000,000,000,000 chance that someone else committed that particular crime. That being said, the sentencing phase of a trial should be done by a seperate jury than the one who decided guilt or acquittal. In most criminal trials, a jury of 12 of your peers listens to the evidence and decides whether or not you committed the crime. A sentencing jury should have 15 people on it and a death sentence MUST be decided by 2/3rds or more. As in all death sentences, an appeal is automatic. This appeal should no longer be done by just a courtroom judge or bench. As all too often happens, a black robed tyrant inevitably fucks up the system by implementing his own ideology over the laws and we end up with murderers released on technicalities or innocent people still on death row. A death sentence appeal should be handled by yet another jury of peers, 15 again, and either the confirmation of said death sentence or commutation to life should be decided by 4/5ths of the peer jury. Unfortunately, I don't see this happening because not enough people would care about the justice system as it pertains to criminals to actually want to be involved.....but if they were somehow caught up in it as a defendant, I wonder if that would change their mind? __________________ "no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

11-27-2007, 11:28 AM	#33 (permalink)
ShaniFaye Submit to me, you know you want to Location: Lilburn, Ga	Im curious to know from those that oppose the death penalty.....do you think no one should ever be executed? ever? for any reason? or is it just against the american death penalty? For example....should Saddam Hussein have been hung? __________________ *I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!* Last edited by ShaniFaye; 11-27-2007 at 01:11 PM.. Reason: cant type today

11-27-2007, 11:55 AM	#37 (permalink)
ShaniFaye Submit to me, you know you want to Location: Lilburn, Ga	so Im guessing, Hitler shouldnt have been executed if we'd had the chance either? __________________ *I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!*

11-27-2007, 12:07 PM	#39 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	you're right shani: kill em all and let god sort em out. why not questions that are addressed to you instead of trying to "prove" your point by way of ridiculous examples, particularly given that most of the objections to the death penalty in this thread include objections to arguing from individual example, even when they are not ridiculous? __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite