Posted on 11/19/2005 4:20:16 PM PST by Ninian Dryhope
then work to change the system not try to get rid of the solution. like i said you complain about the penalty when the problem is a corrupt system. I know of 1 man that was robbing crack houses in Missouri and Kansas. The states did not want to prosecute him because he would make them look bad because he was putting crack houses out of business. The feds arrested him but couldnt try him for robbery as there is no crime of robbery in federal law. They charged him for interfering with interstate commerce because the electricity to the houses came from texas and the gas came from oklahoma. He got 2 life sentences. The people that were sent to prison because of a corrupt system is the problem. If they want you they can get you.
10/2003 - Ohio
Prison Inmate Gets Death Sentence In Strangling
An Ohio prisoner convicted of strangling his cellmate will be executed. The prisoner, Timothy Hancock, 33, initially got a life sentence for the November 2000 slaying. However, Warren County prosecutors appealed to demand stiffer punishment, and a new sentencing was ordered. Hancock's death sentence will be automatically appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court, which is required in capital cases. Hancock was convicted two years ago of killing Jason Wagner, 25,of Lancaster. They shared a cell at Warren Correctional Institution near Lebanon. Hancock was serving a life term for a 1990 murder.
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/repeat_murder.htm
Texas executed a man based on the testimony of these two men.
If it turns out these two men LIED, then the state didn't wrongfully execute an innocent man.
His death was caused because both of these men were to COWARDLY to tell the truth.
Perjury at the very least. The phrases accessory to murder and manslaughter come to mind as well.
or bullets
Good, so how often such cases happen? Are they more frequent than false convictions?
The system should not reward testimonies against and should not punish testimonies in defense. It is silly to expect heroic sacrifice from the prison cell-mates or criminals.
Circumstantial (or physical) evidence is far better than "eyewitness" testimony. Not that this is the obverse of the OJ case; that case had no eyewitness testimony and this case had no physical evidence. Most people like eyewitness testimony but dislike circumstantial evidence. This is backwards from the actual reliability of evidence.
The 12 countries with the most executions in 2004:
You've got that right!
Sounds like the guy was innocent. The guy who gave the false ID should go to jail for life.
They got it right.
Even with due process - mistakes do occur. And even due process comes into question in some cases. There are time-limit laws in place in many states where new evidence is not allowed after x amount of time after the trial. Evidence that clearly exonerates the convicted is not allowed to even be introduced to the courts for consideration.
As I've said before, the argument revolves around whether people find it acceptable for innocent people to be put to death for the greater good'.
I don't think it is an unreasoned position to say that, as a society, we are willing to accept this. I happen to strongly disagree with this position.
I said Texas, not USA. How Texas compares per capita?
As a Texan, I find your comment hilarious. You must not travel very much
Normally those are fighting words but, such appalling ignorance is a valid excuse.
Let me get this straight - your argument is that the state is actually doing wrongly convicted individuals a favor by executing them instead of having them spend years in prison trying to regain there freedom???
You said Texas is the execution capital of the world. That is incorrect.
Well, lets hope so. We're watching you Arnold.
The question would be 'is this guy guilty of this crime'? I don't think they presented evidence to the contrary. Was he "innocent"? Not by a long shot.
You didn't answer the question, you obfuscated around it.
Nor did you answer this question: "... what would you say to your child if mommy (or daddy) though innocent, was sentenced to death?" 112
What obfuscating rationalization would you put forth in a futile attempt to deny the reality that it's impossible to correct the injustice of an innocent person put to death?
What would you say to your child if mommy (or daddy) though innocent, was sentenced to death?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.