Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Emptying of death row in Illinois stirs outrage
The Knox News Sentinel ^ | 1/12/03 | Don Babwin/AP

Posted on 01/12/2003 7:06:53 AM PST by GailA

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-108 next last
To: Dialup Llama
I'm not sure there is a logical solution. I just have a problem with an acceptable error rate. What rate do you consider reasonible for executing innocent men?
21 posted on 01/12/2003 8:24:35 AM PST by steve50
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Xthe17th
And if we're gonna execute people, let's do it right - BY PUBLIC HANGING!

The Saudis believe that beheading is more humane.

Maybe they've done studies.

22 posted on 01/12/2003 8:25:32 AM PST by Six Bells
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GailA
The usual standard of justice in America, i.e. guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, is clearly not good enough for capital punishment. You can't unhang somebody; the criteria for capital punishment has to be guilty beyond any doubt whatsoever. In particular, I get the impression that too many black people have been convicted of crimes by eye-witness testimony from people who couldn't tell two black people apart if one was male and the other female or one alive and the other dead.
23 posted on 01/12/2003 8:34:03 AM PST by merak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Xthe17th
I agree. If the death sentence for serious crimes is to have its intended detering effect, the executions should be carried out in public, not in secret. The executions should be performed on the grounds of the county courthouse in the county where the crime was committed. Hanging, firing squad, beheading or other similar methods could be used. The electric chair could be used if it were mounted on a pedestal so that all could see. The executions should be performed on Saturday afternoons so that most people would have an opportunity to attend and since the children would be out of school.
24 posted on 01/12/2003 8:40:23 AM PST by Edmund Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Comment #25 Removed by Moderator

To: steve50
The way to handle this, if you truly thought that innocent people had been executed, was a CASE BY CASE review. Anything else is just grandstanding.
26 posted on 01/12/2003 8:58:18 AM PST by Republic of Texas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: GailA
Another candidate for some 'unintended consequences'.
27 posted on 01/12/2003 9:01:59 AM PST by Noumenon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GailA
One must wonder how many victims' family members will take the law into their own hands since the system has collapsed to such an extent...............??
28 posted on 01/12/2003 9:03:14 AM PST by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #29 Removed by Moderator

To: Xthe17th
I like your Public Hanging policy. In the old days, you could count on a public hanging drawing out 15 to 20 thousand spectators. That's twice the number of people that show up for a Montreal Expos game.

THERE'S AN IDEA! Maybe Montreal could save their Expos if they held a Public Hanging at every game!!!

It'd sure give new meaning to the "7th Inning Stretch".

30 posted on 01/12/2003 9:18:19 AM PST by Wondervixen (Ask for her by name--Accept no substitutes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Notforprophet
He's proof positive that even the Republicans can have a bad apple in the bin every once in a while. I'm guessing he was more RINO than true conservative?
31 posted on 01/12/2003 9:21:30 AM PST by Wondervixen (Ask for her by name--Accept no substitutes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Republic of Texas
According to Ryan he made the efforts to allow the system to reform itself, it refused. I guess he made the decision he couldn't live with the error rate.
You don't execute an innocent man, you murder him. Some can't accept that.


32 posted on 01/12/2003 9:25:49 AM PST by steve50
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: steve50
I guess the question here is steeped in reality vs fiction. Was his decision based on a really strong set of facts or was Ryan exaggerating the biggest part of this?
33 posted on 01/12/2003 9:28:45 AM PST by Wondervixen (Ask for her by name--Accept no substitutes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Republic of Texas
The governor could have set a good example by establishing a case by case review by outside agencies...but he didn't even want to try that. I would guess that the state will attempt to take 'pardon' capability away from the governorship and establish some 3-man commission that have authority over that. As for the Republicans...my guess is that it will be a major charged up issue in two years and that the democrats are destined to take the state.
34 posted on 01/12/2003 9:30:10 AM PST by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Notforprophet
George Ryan had already singlehandedly destroyed the GOP in Illinois for years to come. The scandals surrounding him and his cronies cost the Republicans the Governor's mansion, and every other statewide office except Treasurer. Now he does this, in a vain and desperate attempt at some sort of legacy. What an A-hole.

Couldn't agree more. I was a resident of Illinois for the first 39 years of my life; have lived elsewhere for the last ten, but have followed my home state's politics. George Ryan may well be the worst governor not only in my lifetime, but maybe in Illinois history. The embarrassing thing is, he's supposed to be a Republican.

35 posted on 01/12/2003 9:37:32 AM PST by Charles Henrickson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: steve50
Although I consider the actions of Illinois' top suspected felon to be unspeakably cruel to the victims' families, I respect your thoughts on why he did what he did.

Consider this: As a proponent of the death penalty (both as punishment and, to a lesser extent, as a deterrent), I will acknowledge the possibility that a person innocent of capital murder could be executed. On the other hand, opponents of the death penalty (or those, such as yourself, who want certainty in its application) must acknowledge that without the death penalty, more innocent people will be murdered.

36 posted on 01/12/2003 9:46:31 AM PST by glennaro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

Comment #37 Removed by Moderator

Comment #38 Removed by Moderator

To: pilgrims
This was certainly true for the GOP primary where Lyin' Ryan was the RINO candidate versus a conservative, but in the general election you had a choice between a known Clinton supporter and a corrupt RINO who in the past had been somewhat controlled by fear of conservative constituencies.

What changed the calculus was Lyin' Ryan's realization that conservatives would not support him in the next primary because the vastness of his corruption had been revealed.

I voted for Poshard in 1998. I can't understand why any conservative who was paying any attention at all wouldn't have done, since Ryan ran to the left of Poshard on every single issue. Had Poshard won, we would have a mandate for concealed-carry in Illinois. Instead, we got King George who forced a statute through the Illinois state legislature to make public possession of any firearm which was either uncased or loaded a felony [by forced, I mean he repeatedly called the legislature into special session and told them they couldn't go home for Christmas until they gave him the legislation he wanted]. I'll admit my knowledge of bad governors is limited, but I have a hard time imagining anyone being any worse than King George.

39 posted on 01/12/2003 11:14:37 AM PST by supercat (TAG--you're it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: steve50
What rate do you consider reasonible for executing innocent men?

There would be no wrongful deaths if we abolished the death penalty.

There would be no shootings if we abolished guns.

There would be no drunkenness if we abolished alcohol.

There would be no car accidents if we abolished cars.

Get a clue.


40 posted on 01/12/2003 11:30:16 AM PST by Barnacle (Navigating the treacherous waters of a liberal culture.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-108 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson