Utah killer executed

[Dietrich]

I wonder what percentage of the people who lobby and protest against the death penalty have had loved ones murdered. Likewise, I wonder what percentage of the people who support the death penalty have not had loved ones murdered.

I wonder what percentage of people in other countries/cultures lobby and protest against the death penalty (if such is practiced in their region).

[Stalins Organ]

I suspect no-one in this debate has had any close relative murdered - I certainly hope not!

I haven't.

[JonS]

Notsoserious: Maybe not a close relative, but I understand Emrys was - and still is! - a tad upset about what happened to his girlfriend Joan.

Serious: That is a bad assumption to make, SO.

[dieseltaylor]

A Braddock man on Tuesday called a judge an "idiot" and mocked the system for failing to give him the death penalty for the sexual assault and murder of his toddler daughter.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_687146.html

I wonder how strong the evidence was.

According to Wikipedia the French population was in favour of capital punishment when it was abolished. I think the general rule is that politicians generally live better lives than the vast majority of the population so being seen as enlightened comes with little cost to them. The only seamy side of life they see is influence peddling.

[Michael Emrys]

Notsoserious: Maybe not a close relative, but I understand Emrys was - and still is! - a tad upset about what happened to his girlfriend Joan.

Eh? I've never had a girlfriend named Joan. There was a Joan I picked up on the beach years ago, but that went so quickly that you could hardly dignify the relationship as girlfriend. Or are you thinking of a different Emrys?

Michael

[gunnergoz]

I suspect no-one in this debate has had any close relative murdered - I certainly hope not!

I haven't.

Does Sharon Tate count? Remember the Manson Family murders? She was a school chum of mine. Admittedly no relative, but her passing hit my family pretty hard nonetheless.

And yes, as I stated, for years I was a staunch supporter of the death penalty. Now, given the sad state of our legal and judiciary, I have more doubts and less certainty of its correctness - even were I close to the victim, I'd have doubts. I spent a lifetime working probation and corrections so it is not a moot point with me either. I've met my share of murderers and rapists. And revenge is sweet, believe me, I know that. But I fear the system's ability to carry out death sentences with any degree of validity any longer, given the large number of innocents that we now know have been unjustly jailed over the years.

[Kanonier Reichmann]

Originally Posted by JonS

Notsoserious: Maybe not a close relative, but I understand Emrys was - and still is! - a tad upset about what happened to his girlfriend Joan.

Eh? I've never had a girlfriend named Joan. There was a Joan I picked up on the beach years ago, but that went so quickly that you could hardly dignify the relationship as girlfriend. Or are you thinking of a different Emrys?

Michael

I assume Jon meant Joan of Arc!

Regards

KR

[Michael Emrys]

I assume Jon meant Joan of Arc!

I make the same assumption. But since it was a lame joke to begin with, I decided to point to that fact by playing it straight. Now I think we've managed to let out all of whatever air it might have contained, perhaps we should just let it lie there gasping its last.

Michael

[Stalins Organ]

GunnerOz - yes anyone counts, and my belated condolonces.

But paradoxically, the fact that we can now show so many people to be innocent - and bring so many to justice when they ahve excaped it for long periods of time - is why I think the system is more reliable and therefore ther is much less chance of the death penalty being applied incorrectly.

and I expect that trend to continue to improve to a point where we can reasonably say that no innocent person will be executed - and when we can say that I think that one of the strongest (if not THE strongest) argument against capital punishment ceases to exist.

[gunnergoz]

SO - My point is that I would not wish it upon my conscience to find out that even 1/10,000 of the people put to death by the state were later found out to innocent. It has to be a "fail safe" system and I am not convinced that such is possible given the realities of the day and the foibles of human nature. Juries make mistakes, witnesses are often unreliable, judges and prosecutors can be biased and evidence can be lost or hidden. My career's proximity to the system in action led me to see its flaws close up and personal. It ain't pretty.

The days when I was absolutely confident that the system was working perfectly are long gone and replaced by an appreciation that a truly humane society values one innocent life more than the revenge it may exact upon countless guilty ones.

[dieseltaylor]

In a celebrity-driven culture, newsmaking murderers get the most mail. Van der Sloot's would-be baby-mamas "want to share his celebrity status and become celebrities with him. They want their fifteen minutes," Aamodt says. That's why "Night Stalker" Richard Ramirez, who killed 13 in a 1985 reign of terror that included rape, torture and the gouging out of eyes, still receives bags full of mail 21 years after entering San Quentin's death row — and 13 years after marrying someone who wrote him 75 letters. A friend of mine who works with the prison system says she watched Ramirez being "mobbed" with applications from women wanting to visit him. Wife-killer Scott Peterson got a marriage proposal during his first hour on death row.

From this rather saddening piece

http://www.alternet.org/story/147340/why_do_murderers_get_mailbags_full_of_love_letters_and_marriage_proposals?page=entire

Gunnergoz - surely your view is coloured because of the US justice system which seems insanely poor from where I am. ANd I do reas a lot on America. My point is only incontrovertibles haed to the chair.

[Kanonier Reichmann]

Here's a very recent example of the 'infallibility' of DNA evidence, ensuring a conviction despite the complete lack of any other evidence to back up the verdict. Imagine if this was a murder case and a conviction was achieved in similar circumstances!

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/legal-affairs/how-the-csi-effect-sent-an-innocent-man-to-prison/story-e6frg97x-1225866316936

Regards

KR

[gunnergoz]

The human race is, on the whole, a rather sorry lot but it is all I have to work with. Still, short of wartime or self-defense, I'd rather not see killing made into a tax-funded public circus supervised by elected officials of dubious moral fiber. I'd like to think we can do a bit better than that as a species. (Normally I'd use the word "civilization" over "species" but I don't think we're there yet.)

(Present company excepted, of course - we're all very civilized here in the forum.)

[Michael Emrys]

The human race is, on the whole, a rather sorry lot...

"Got taken out of the oven a bit too soon," is how I describe it.

Michael

[dieseltaylor]

An indictment on the Victorian forensic department - I look forward to someone getting done for it. Also the defending lawyer is going to look very stupid, very stupid.

However it would hardly fit my incontrovertible standard would it for capital punishment.

[JonS]

However it would hardly fit my incontrovertible standard would it for capital punishment.

Maybe not yours but it happily fits inside SO's, and his belief in the latest uber technology.

[Stalins Organ]

Are you deliberately stupid Jon, or is here a charitable explaination for yuuor continued lack of comprehension?

I'll state my position again, just for your benefit because everyone else seems to get it, even if they disagree.

I am in favour of the death penalty where there is no doubt as to guilt for what the American call "1st degree murder" - ie it is premeditated and all those other bad things.

It does not take "uber technology" - is there any doubt about Manson's guilt? or McVeigh's?

DNA evidence is good - much better than what we used to have....but I've never said that it is infallible.

Diesel you have to understand that Jon makes a practice of misquoting people who he disagrees with. I think it is probably genetic and perhaps how he gets his jollies so there's not much can be done about it.

[JonS]

*ahem*

But paradoxically, the fact that we can now show so many people to be innocent - and bring so many to justice when they ahve excaped it for long periods of time - is why I think the system is more reliable and therefore ther is much less chance of the death penalty being applied incorrectly.

and I expect that trend to continue to improve to a point where we can reasonably say that no innocent person will be executed - and when we can say that I think that one of the strongest (if not THE strongest) argument against capital punishment ceases to exist.

This quote is about technology. You believe that it will continue to get better to the point where "we can reasonably say that no innocent person will be executed."

Leaving aside the problematic definition of "reasonable" when it comes to killing innocent people, technology isn't - and never really has been - the problem.

Justice is a human system, and humans are inherently fallible. Bad day, bribes, ambition, confusion, etc - they're all human issues, not technology issues. A hypothetical perfect evidentiary technology cannot overcome that.

[Stalins Organ]

Yes John - I expect it to "continue to the point..." - ie I do not think we are there yet, and hence your comment about "SO's...belief in the latest uber technology" is something that does not yet exist - it is something I hope for.

If ther is something I believe in it is the progress of technology. If ther eis something I _expect_ it is that it will enable many more cases to be determined with certainty. But that is an expectation - a hope - I do not claim to predict the future - merely have some belief in where it is going - as I believe we all do.

And as I mentioned there is plenty of room for absolute guilt to be known with or without technology in many cases - why do you have no comment about that? Perhaps because it does not fit you simple pigeon holing of an idea you don't like?

[JonS]

Yes John - I expect it to "continue to the point..." - ie I do not think we are there yet' date=' and hence your comment about "SO's...belief in the latest uber technology" is something that does not yet exist - it is something I hope for.[/quote']

Then your comment is, as usual, worthless. Over the last couple of hundred years there have been any number of 'perfect' technologies, from dunking, to fingerprints, to polygraphs, to DNA. But the technology you are after will never arrive, because the problem is fundamentally not technological in nature.

[JonS]

And as I mentioned there is plenty of room for absolute guilt to be known with or without technology in many cases - why do you have no comment about that? Perhaps because it does not fit you simple pigeon holing of an idea you don't like?

Do try not to be retarded all the time, m'kay?

[gunnergoz]

"Got taken out of the oven a bit too soon," is how I describe it.

Michael

Definitely explains why so many people have "half baked" ideas.

[dieseltaylor]

Only you whities, bro!

: )

[Stalins Organ]

Thanks for your rational input Jon.

[JonS]

You're welcome. If you go ahead and actually read it, you'll probably find it twice as useful.