The Innocence project

[Modbert]

Then what do you propose to do with the people that *belong* on death row? Just leave them in jail sucking off the system, and needlessly eating up resources that could be used for more important things like rehabilitating people that actually stand a *chance* of that rehab working?

All that for a couple hundred people (in the entire US) out of the *thousands and thousands* that were properly convicted?

You know not what you speak.

Who belongs and doesn't belong on death row is subjective. As for sucking off the system, it costs more money to kill someone using the death penalty then it does to keep them in prison for life.

We shouldn’t waste tax dollars keeping murderers alive in prison

The death penalty is not cheaper justice than life in prison. Many states have compared the costs, and found that keeping prisoners on death row is far more expensive than putting them away for life. In "The Case Against the Death Penalty," Hugo Adam Bedau writes:

"A 1982 study showed that were the death penalty to be reintroduced in New York, the cost of the capital trial alone would be more than double the cost of a life term in prison. (1) In Maryland, a comparison of capital trial costs with and without the death penalty for the years 1979-1984 concluded that a death penalty case costs "approximately 42 percent more than a case resulting in a non-death sentence." (2) In 1988 and 1989 the Kansas legislature voted against reinstating the death penalty after it was informed that reintroduction would involve a first-year cost of "more than $11 million." (3) Florida, with one of the nation's largest death rows, has estimated that the true cost of each execution is approximately $3.2 million, or approximately six times the cost of a life-imprisonment sentence." (4)

The Stanford Law Review has published a famous study documenting 350 cases this century where a person sentenced to death was later proven clearly innocent. Seventy-five of those cases occurred recently, between 1970 and 1985.

I would suggest an entire revamping of the Prison system. I agree resources should be used for important things like rehabilitating people which is why I think crimes for possession of drugs such as marijuana should be made legal because it does not address the root problem.

Drugs are actually easier to get in prison then it is on the street. This is true in many other countries as well. For example:

The truth about drugs in prisons | Max Chambers | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

Policy Exchange has recently conducted one of the largest independent surveys of prisoners ever undertaken in England and Wales. The results should cause the Prison Service to change their view about the reliability of MDT. We discovered that up to 30,000 prisoners (35% of the total population) at any one time could be taking drugs, with 85% of prisoners confirming that they could get hold of illicit substances. A staggering 20% of respondents reported using heroin in jail and more than half claimed that the easy availability of drugs was preventing people from getting clean and rebuilding their lives.

It is irresponsible to have a system that is flawed to the point where countless innocent lives are taken such as with the death penalty today.

The United States is the only western nation that still uses capital punishment. United States and Japan are the only developed nations I believe who still use it.

Five myths about the death penalty

It is only in the past 30 years that a gap has opened up, with Europeans abolishing the institution and Americans retaining it in an attenuated form.

Of those sentenced, 66 percent have their death sentences overturned on appeal or post-conviction review. (According to the Death Penalty Information Center, a smaller number -- 139 -- have been exonerated in the past 30 years, about a dozen on the basis of DNA evidence.) The few offenders who are executed wait an average of more than 12 years, some for as long as 30 years. None of this makes for swift or sure deterrence. It also does not give rise to effective retributive punishment. Prolonged delays defer and dilute any satisfaction or "closure" that the punishment might bring.

An Indiana study last month showed that capital sentences cost 10 times more than life in prison without parole. And the current system ensures neither deterrence nor punishment.

So if you are worried about resources, then clearly you should be against the Death Penalty.

 

[Modbert]

1 innocent person by a state sanctioned action is one too many.

Throw them in prison for life. On balance, it's actually cheaper to the justice system/state on the whole if you want to talk about resources.

Agreed. See my last post before this for more evidence.

Even one innocent life lost due to the death penalty is too many.

 

[Modbert]

Hey, you had to have done something really wrong at some point in your life to get pulled into that lineup in the first place. They don't just pluck random people off the street and haul them in.

And Modberts answer is to totally get rid of the death penalty, and just house/clothe/feed murderers forever.

That work for you?

The Death Penalty issue boils down to a single question:

Are you willing to have a system that may kill guilty murderers in exchange for the death of innocent people?

My answer is no. It's not a matter of trying to protect murderers. It's a matter of making sure that we have a justice system and not a revenge system as well.

 

[Valerie]

Another factor is the relatively new DNA technology hopefully keeps this from happening going forward...These old cases are being turned over based on evidence that was not available at the time.




DNA restores man's freedom
"I filed writs, I wrote numerous letters, to people all over the state trying to prove my point, prove my case," Dupree said.

One of those letters got to the Innocence Project, and the process of clearing Dupree's name began.

 

[Dis]

Hey, you had to have done something really wrong at some point in your life to get pulled into that lineup in the first place. They don't just pluck random people off the street and haul them in.

And Modberts answer is to totally get rid of the death penalty, and just house/clothe/feed murderers forever.

That work for you?

The Death Penalty issue boils down to a single question:

Are you willing to have a system that may kill guilty murderers in exchange for the death of innocent people?

My answer is no. It's not a matter of trying to protect murderers. It's a matter of making sure that we have a justice system and not a revenge system as well.

If someone you're close to ever turns out to be the victim of someone on Death Row, you'll feel differently.

 

[Valerie]

The first DNA-based conviction in the United States occurred in 1987 when the Circuit Court in Orange County, Florida, convicted Tommy Lee Andrews of rape after DNA tests matched his DNA from a blood sample with that of semen traces found in a rape victim.1 The first state high court to rule in favor of admitting DNA evidence came two years later in West Virginia.2

Evolution of DNA Evidence for Crime Solving - A Judicial and Legislative History | Forensic Magazine

The fact that 41 cases in Texas have been overturned since 1991 is actually good news when you look at it that way...

 

[Modbert]

If someone you're close to ever turns out to be the victim of someone on Death Row, you'll feel differently.

Except that isn't a valid argument to be honest. It's one that has a basis on emotion, something that can make the justice system very sticky. Do I like the fact people get murdered? No. However, let me throw the opposing argument back at you.

If someone you're close to ever turns out to be the victim of a broken death penalty system where they are innocent but were killed, you'll feel differently. See? It works both ways.

 

[Dis]

If someone you're close to ever turns out to be the victim of someone on Death Row, you'll feel differently.

Except that isn't a valid argument to be honest. It's one that has a basis on emotion, something that can make the justice system very sticky. Do I like the fact people get murdered? No. However, let me throw the opposing argument back at you.

If someone you're close to ever turns out to be the victim of a broken death penalty system where they are innocent but were killed, you'll feel differently. See? It works both ways.

No, actually I won't. I don't believe in letting thousands off just on the off chance you'll save one.

 

[Valerie]

If someone you're close to ever turns out to be the victim of someone on Death Row, you'll feel differently.

Except that isn't a valid argument to be honest. It's one that has a basis on emotion, something that can make the justice system very sticky. Do I like the fact people get murdered? No. However, let me throw the opposing argument back at you.

If someone you're close to ever turns out to be the victim of a broken death penalty system where they are innocent but were killed, you'll feel differently. See? It works both ways.

The threshold just needs to be upheld by concrete DNA evidence.

 

[RadiomanATL]

If someone you're close to ever turns out to be the victim of someone on Death Row, you'll feel differently.

Except that isn't a valid argument to be honest. It's one that has a basis on emotion, something that can make the justice system very sticky. Do I like the fact people get murdered? No. However, let me throw the opposing argument back at you.

If someone you're close to ever turns out to be the victim of a broken death penalty system where they are innocent but were killed, you'll feel differently. See? It works both ways.

No, actually I won't. I don't believe in letting thousands off just on the off chance you'll save one.

Not executing does not equal letting them off.

 

[Dis]

Except that isn't a valid argument to be honest. It's one that has a basis on emotion, something that can make the justice system very sticky. Do I like the fact people get murdered? No. However, let me throw the opposing argument back at you.

If someone you're close to ever turns out to be the victim of a broken death penalty system where they are innocent but were killed, you'll feel differently. See? It works both ways.

No, actually I won't. I don't believe in letting thousands off just on the off chance you'll save one.

Not executing does not equal letting them off.

Allowing someone to live that murdered another human being just makes room for the off chance they'll get out and be able to do it again under some technicality.

 

[Modbert]

No, actually I won't. I don't believe in letting thousands off just on the off chance you'll save one.

You seem to think that by getting rid of the death penalty, we're "letting thousands off". That's your own opinion, and a subjective one. This is about the facts. You're worried about resources, except I've posted tons of evidence that show life in prison is by far cheaper than death row.

 

[RadiomanATL]

No, actually I won't. I don't believe in letting thousands off just on the off chance you'll save one.

Not executing does not equal letting them off.

Allowing someone to live that murdered another human being just makes room for the off chance they'll get out and be able to do it again under some technicality.

The technicality would exist no matter if they were sentenced to be executed, or sentenced to life without parole.

A technical mistake in the original investigation or trial doesn't have anything to do with the sentence given.

IOW, they're just as likely to get off on a technicality in either circumstance. A capital sentence does not lessen the chances that they will be released on a technicality.

 

[Modbert]

Allowing someone to live that murdered another human being just makes room for the off chance they'll get out and be able to do it again under some technicality.

There's also the off chance they could fall, hit their head on the sink, and die. If you want to play the what if game, be my guest, but you have no statistics to back up the arguments you're trying to make.

 

[syrenn]

Every time I hear about one of these cases I get pissed off...do we owe these people something, as a society?

This has been the longest wrongful conviction in Texas history. It was an exciting day for Dupree and his new wife, Selma, but the couple admits, the day is bittersweet.
"It is a wonderful thing to have him home. One of the things that we all have to understand is that this could happen to anyone," said Selma Perkins Dupree. She said changes in the law need to be made, but for right now, she wants to focus on her future.
"I just thank God for this day and that we can move on with our lives," she said.
District Attorney Craig Watkins says he plans to take all the exoneration cases to lawmakers in Austin, TX. He said lawmakers need to see that mistakes are being made, and they need to be addressed quickly.
Forty-one people in Texas have been exonerated since 2001.

DNA restores man's freedom - WMBFNews.com | Myrtle Beach/Florence, SC | News, Weather, Sports

This is one reason i feel that DNA samples should be mandatory for all people within the prison system.

Now see how that goes over.

 

[westwall]

I used to be a big advocate of the death penalty but as I have gotten older and a little wiser I have modified my viewpoint a tad. I believe it is terribly wrong for someone to lose their life based on purely circumstantial evidence. There are too many times where evidence gets screwed up or lost, "modified" etc. On the other hand, in cases like Dahmer or Gary Ridgway I feel there should be the trial. One week later there is a single appeal. After the results of the appeal are heard there is a sentencing hearing where any possible mitigating circumstances are heard and sentence is passed. If the sentence is death then you have a week to set your affairs in order then the sentence is carried out.

There is far too much time between trial and the final act.

 

[westwall]

Every time I hear about one of these cases I get pissed off...do we owe these people something, as a society?

This has been the longest wrongful conviction in Texas history. It was an exciting day for Dupree and his new wife, Selma, but the couple admits, the day is bittersweet.
"It is a wonderful thing to have him home. One of the things that we all have to understand is that this could happen to anyone," said Selma Perkins Dupree. She said changes in the law need to be made, but for right now, she wants to focus on her future.
"I just thank God for this day and that we can move on with our lives," she said.
District Attorney Craig Watkins says he plans to take all the exoneration cases to lawmakers in Austin, TX. He said lawmakers need to see that mistakes are being made, and they need to be addressed quickly.
Forty-one people in Texas have been exonerated since 2001.

DNA restores man's freedom - WMBFNews.com | Myrtle Beach/Florence, SC | News, Weather, Sports

This is one reason i feel that DNA samples should be mandatory for all people within the prison system.

Now see how that goes over.

I agree 100%

 

[syrenn]

I used to be a big advocate of the death penalty but as I have gotten older and a little wiser I have modified my viewpoint a tad. I believe it is terribly wrong for someone to lose their life based on purely circumstantial evidence. There are too many times where evidence gets screwed up or lost, "modified" etc. On the other hand, in cases like Dahmer or Gary Ridgway I feel there should be the trial. One week later there is a single appeal. After the results of the appeal are heard there is a sentencing hearing where any possible mitigating circumstances are heard and sentence is passed. If the sentence is death then you have a week to set your affairs in order then the sentence is carried out.

There is far too much time between trial and the final act.

I agree, but i would give the appeals process only one year.

 

[westwall]

I used to be a big advocate of the death penalty but as I have gotten older and a little wiser I have modified my viewpoint a tad. I believe it is terribly wrong for someone to lose their life based on purely circumstantial evidence. There are too many times where evidence gets screwed up or lost, "modified" etc. On the other hand, in cases like Dahmer or Gary Ridgway I feel there should be the trial. One week later there is a single appeal. After the results of the appeal are heard there is a sentencing hearing where any possible mitigating circumstances are heard and sentence is passed. If the sentence is death then you have a week to set your affairs in order then the sentence is carried out.

There is far too much time between trial and the final act.

I agree, but i would give the appeals process only one year.

Oh they only get a week Syrenn, only a week!

 

[Ravi]

Every time I hear about one of these cases I get pissed off...do we owe these people something, as a society?

This has been the longest wrongful conviction in Texas history. It was an exciting day for Dupree and his new wife, Selma, but the couple admits, the day is bittersweet.
"It is a wonderful thing to have him home. One of the things that we all have to understand is that this could happen to anyone," said Selma Perkins Dupree. She said changes in the law need to be made, but for right now, she wants to focus on her future.
"I just thank God for this day and that we can move on with our lives," she said.
District Attorney Craig Watkins says he plans to take all the exoneration cases to lawmakers in Austin, TX. He said lawmakers need to see that mistakes are being made, and they need to be addressed quickly.
Forty-one people in Texas have been exonerated since 2001.

DNA restores man's freedom - WMBFNews.com | Myrtle Beach/Florence, SC | News, Weather, Sports

No, society as a whole doesn't owe them anything. The particular DA or judicial department I would think does however. The problem is how do you repay someone for the loss of a significant part of their lives? I would certainly rate it on a sliding scale with a completely innocent person who had never been in trouble with the law getting a considerable amount over some person who was constantly in trouble with the law.

Interesting...why?