View Full Version : What Death Penalty?

01-11-03, 11:58 PM
The Governor of Illinois just rescinded the death sentences of 167 murderers on death row.

Incredibly, they spent an average of 12 years EACH on death row, AFTER they were convictd and sentenced to death.

What death penalty? There were probably more who died of old age on death row then were executed.

This is NOT my vote, for or against a death penalty. I don't vote for or against the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, or Rudolph the Red Nosed Raindeer either, and for the same reason.

In the not too distant future, I can see a resurgience of vigilantism. Why not, if the bad guy is bad enough, the "good guy" will be sentenced to a few years at the local country club hotel and serve out his time with other big name white collar "criminals".

A total of 2,000 jurors felt that these murderers were guilty and deserved the death penalty. One man stands up and says they were ALL wrong.

Perhaps I should reconsider my position on the tooth fairy and the easter bunny. Rudolph is another story.

01-12-03, 12:18 AM
Seems more than a couple of those guys who were convicted were later cleared through DNA evidence. A few of those folks Illinois executed the last few years there, were later proven to be innocent...

01-12-03, 12:51 AM
No system is perfect.

But, I'd make the D.A. pull the trigger as soon as sentence was pronounced.

It would give him something to think about while he was putting his case together.

Too many D.A.'s, and judges, cop out by thinking that if they are wrong, it will be determined on appeal. But they look good at the time in the press.

Black and white. I don't think it should be a game.
I started this response by saying that no system was perfect.

If we look back, some as recent as yesterday, we will see scenes where we felt that our situation should have been handled differently. We could make a case that we were right, because ....

But when the policy is explained, and the reasons for it make sense, we can accept the inconvenience and support the policy.

"No personal checks accepted". But, John, you know ME, I've been drinking here for six years."

"Yes, you owe $12.00, but it costs me $25.00 for a bounced check. Sorry friend, no personal checks accepted."

Most of us can accept that. I can. I'd hate for my friend to change his policy and risk the loss of $25.00 per customer. It would put him out of business and I'd have to find another place to drink

Fortunately, I haven't been executed YET. And that just might make a difference in accepting a policy which, for the moment, ruled against me.

01-12-03, 04:35 AM
Anyone see that story this week (?) - about the cop on the East Coast wrongly convicted of murder? He did 6.5 years on circumstantial evidence- BEFORE the real perpetrator fessed up to the crime.

Upon release, the Former Officer said... (not a direct quote)" it isn't a Justice system - it is a Judicial system. There isn't much justice available - we are fully capable of locking people away in short order. Our problem arises when someone is wrongly convited, and we need to work on that portion of the system, and fast'.

Something to think about isn't it. I think that is the onus of Gov Ryan's pardons. He just cannot be certain that the system works as designed.
And, I can say from my experience working in the prison system in this state - in some instances it doesn't work. (of course every convict will tell you they are not guilty)

Semper FI

01-12-03, 09:01 AM
I agree. It's not a justice system, it's a judicial sysem, and justice has NOTHING to do with it.

The other side of the coin, from barndog's post, are the times a judge, sometimes with tears in his eyes, had to release a defendent who DID the thing, and who used the judicial system.

Can we count the number of defendents who confessed and led the investigators to the body, and the judicial system found them "not guilty"?

I will NEVER forget a classic case in California. They were selling heroin to junior high school students. The police were informed of a major "buy". They set up survalience, and video taped the passage of a kilo of "h" to the buyers and payment to the sellers.

They moved in, and arrested both parties. The buyers consented to search. The kilo was found in the diaper of the six month old she was carrying. They walked, because the six month old had not consented to the search.

If I'm lying, I'm dying.

For EVERY story someone can come up with that shows an unjust conviction, I will show TEN where the guy who did it was found "not guilty" by the judicial system.

If I remember right, I posted a piece here on my views of "non-admissable" evidence.

If anyone is interested, I'll sound off again.