No Wonder Libs Are Upset - The Surge Is Working

[maineman]

I thought that, all issues considered in detail, I was a moderate moderate – very close to the socio-political middle. Yet, based on reading posts from different people, I think that I may be a moderate Democrat thanks to your intellectual honesty and sensible responses.

Unfortunately, I still trust Rudi more than I trust Hillary to be a good sensible president. Oh well. I guess that I am not perfect. At least Rudi is not an ultra-Right wing Republican.

thank you again for the compliment.

If, in 2008, America's choices are between a pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-gun control moderate from New York, and a pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-gun control moderate from New York, I would suggest that the republican party's conservative revolution had officially flat-lined.

 

[chrsimage]

eye witness accounts? do you have any idea how many death row inmates convicted on eyewitness testimony have been exonerated by DNA?

Every single death row inmate was convicted on what District Attorneys felt stongly was "solid evidence". Can you imagine asking a jury to sentence someone to death on anything other than "solid evidence"? Can you imagine sitting on a jury and voting for the death penalty on anything other than "solid evidence"? Yet the proof is there that lots and lots of men were sentenced to death on what was certainly "solid evidence" who were, in fact, innocent.

More importantly, do YOU know how many people have been convicted on eyewitness testimony and been exonerated by DNA? Show me the overwhelming statistics before making information up, please.

 

[chrsimage]

Thank you for that link. I hope that the "surge" works as much as anyone, but there is no way of telling this soon, especially when the last of the additional troops havent even arrived yet. Even as a supporter for the war, I am extremely disappointed and frustrated as to the handling of the aftermath.

 

[Gunny]

Are you supporting a law that says only those criminals with DNA evidence proving their guilt should be executed?

I support a law that says there has to be overwhelming evidence of guilt that leaves no doubt before anyone should be sentenced to death. It migh tput more people in prison and less on death row, but it virtually rules out accidental execution of the innocent.

You can free an innocent man. You cannot bring him back to life.

So, I agree with the death penalty. I do not agree with how it is currently applied in this country.

 

[maineman]

More importantly, do YOU know how many people have been convicted on eyewitness testimony and been exonerated by DNA? Show me the overwhelming statistics before making information up, please.

excuse me: please show me where I ever suggested that there were "overwhelming statistics" before putting words in my mouth. Are you suggesting that there have not been convicts sentenced to death on the basis of eye-witness testimony? Are you suggesting that none of the twenty-some death row inmates whose sentences were commuted en masse by the governor of Illinois were on the basis of eye-witness testimony?

 

[chrsimage]

excuse me: please show me where I ever suggested that there were "overwhelming statistics" before putting words in my mouth. Are you suggesting that there have not been convicts sentenced to death on the basis of eye-witness testimony? Are you suggesting that none of the twenty-some death row inmates whose sentences were commuted en masse by the governor of Illinois were on the basis of eye-witness testimony?

You asked a rhetorical question without answering it. You are suggesting that there are a large amounts of people put to death based on eye-witness testimony alone, yet base it on nothing. I would like to know how many people have been put to death and later exonerated since you use it in your argument you should know how many...even a ballpark figure would be acceptable, citing a reliable source, of course. Please link the source for the twenty-something death row inmates whose sentences were communted. It sounds very interesting.

 

[maineman]

http://www.caught.net/cases/eyewit.htm

http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Accuracy-of-Eye-Witness-Testimony-and-Its-Flaws&id=328261

http://digg.com/politics/DNA_Shows_Courts_Right_To_Suspect_Eyewitness_Testimony_Wrong_77_Of_Time

http://www.law.northwestern.edu/depts/clinic/wrongful/documents/eyewitness_attachA.pdf

http://www.capitalpunishmentincontext.org/issues/innocence

do I need to go on? Was this really necessary?

 

[maineman]

You asked a rhetorical question without answering it. You are suggesting that there are a large amounts of people put to death based on eye-witness testimony alone, yet base it on nothing. I would like to know how many people have been put to death and later exonerated since you use it in your argument you should know how many...even a ballpark figure would be acceptable, citing a reliable source, of course. Please link the source for the twenty-something death row inmates whose sentences were communted. It sounds very interesting.

bullshit. Don't fucking put words in MY mouth, asshole.

 

[maineman]

:: crickets chirping::

 

[chrsimage]

:: crickets chirping::

sorry i was posting on another thread and am now reading what you posted...quite contentious arent you? i will deal with you and your confrontational attitude later, after I have read your news articles.

 

[chrsimage]

eye witness accounts? do you have any idea how many death row inmates convicted on eyewitness testimony have been exonerated by DNA?.

That's your quote...you said nothing other then eye witness account. i am not putting words in your mouth. If you mean say something else then say it. Looks like you are the asshole.

 

[maineman]

sorry i was posting on another thread and am now reading what you posted...quite contentious arent you? i will deal with you and your confrontational attitude later, after I have read your news articles.

I do not idly allow anyone to put words in my mouth.

If that translates to "contentious" in your world, I guess I can understand that when suggesting aht death row inmates have convicted on eyewitness testimony somehow equates to suggesting that there are a large amounts of people put to death based on eye-witness testimony alone. I guess, in that case, I am one contentious motherfucker.

 

[maineman]

crickets redux

 

[maineman]

the title of the article in my fourth link:

Summaries of 46 Cases in Which Mistaken or Perjured
Eyewitness Testimony Put Innocent Persons on Death Row

 

[maineman]

You will excuse my tone...it was all predicated on your understanding the difference between "sentenced to death" and "put to death". If that was an incorrect assumption, I apologize.

 

[chrsimage]

1st article says that 553 people have been executed since 1973 and 80 people have been exonerated, it does not say how many innocents people were executed.

2nd article does not give any numbers as to how many innocent people have been executed.

did you even read the 3rd article? It has nothing to do with the death penalty or related convictions. Mostly about rape.

4th article - 46 people wrongly convicted since 1977! Thats not too bad. Still no evidence that innocent people were put to death and only a few were exonerated by DNA.

5th article starts out with justification by anecdote, which proves nothing, ever, and does not give statistics on how many innocent people were put to death.

Ok, so you have no actual evidence that innocent people have been put to death. Its funny. You are surmising and suggesting that innocent people are put to death yet you have no proof. I don't doubt that innocent people have been put to death. I do believe that in the last 10 years, since DNA testing has become increasingly used The percentage is very UNDERWHELMING. So make your argument contemporary. Very, very few innocent people, if any have been put to death in recent years.

 

[maineman]

in light of your last post, I do apologize. You really are too fucking stupid to understand the difference between being sentenced to death and being put to death. I really have no business losing my temper at a retarded man.

 

[chrsimage]

You will excuse my tone...it was all predicated on your understanding the difference between "sentenced to death" and "put to death". If that was an incorrect assumption, I apologize.

My assumption was incorrect. I apologize. I look forward to debating you on many issues. I am sure we disagree on the war and politics in general. Although I am new to the forum, I assure you I am not under informed and my presence will make you a better debater.

 

[chrsimage]

in light of your last post, I do apologize. You really are too fucking stupid to understand the difference between being sentenced to death and being put to death. I really have no business losing my temper at a retarded man.

Wow, i am being punished for lack of speed in my posts.

 

[maineman]

My assumption was incorrect. I apologize. I look forward to debating you on many issues. I am sure we disagree on the war and politics in general. Although I am new to the forum, I assure you I am not under informed and my presence will make you a better debater.

apology accepted. please accept mine.