Mohammed_Rots_In_Hell
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2004
NOt really, many lifers continue to commit crimes even while incarcerated.DizzyME said:
The Death Penalty
- Thread starter angie
- Start date
Mohammed_Rots_In_Hell said:
So does the average guy who is only incarcerated for a short time. It really doesn't matter, the point is, the death penalty does not deter criminals on the outside from committing crime. THAT is what is meant when people try to say it is a detterant.
TerroristHater
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2005
tizz said:
No, it doesn't. Killing a killer does not bring thier victim back.
TerroristHater
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2005
angie said:
I agree with that but try getting that point across to the people in Texas. They are far too blood thirsty. The law of Moses went out with the old testiment. I just can't help but wonder how Texas missed the memo announcing that.
TerroristHater
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2005
DizzyME said:
Don't try to explain anything to MRIH. He is not intelligent enough to understand what you are saying.
TerroristHater
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2005
tizz said:
I'm sorry, but what your suggesting IS cruel and unusual. I seriously hope that you realize that performing experiments on people is NOT normal.
The nazis did that and look where it got them.
TerroristHater
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2005
Hugo
You dumb ****. There are more then a dozen such cases.
To prove you stupidity I have the following:
Some Twentieth Century Erroneous Executions
Adams, James (black). 1974. Florida. Adams was convicted
of first-degree murder, sentenced to death, and executed in 1984.
Witnesses located Adams' car at the time of the crime at the home
of the victim, a white rancher. Some of the victim's jewelry was
found in the car trunk. Adams maintained his innocence, claiming
that he had loaned the car to his girlfriend. A witness
identified Adams as driving the car away from the victim's home
shortly after the crime. This witness, however, was driving a
large truck in the direction opposite to that of Adams' car, and
probably could not have had a good look at the driver. It was
later discovered that this witness was angry with Adams for
allegedly dating his wife. A second witness heard a voice inside
the victim's home at the time of the crime and saw someone
fleeing. He stated this voice was a woman's; the day after the
crime he stated that the fleeing person was positively not Adams.
More importantly, a hair sample found clutched in the victim's
hand, which in all likelihood had come from the assailant, did
not mach Adams' hair. Much of this exculpatory information was
not discovered until the case was examined by a skilled
investigator a month before Adams' execution. Governor Graham,
however, refused to grant even a short stay so that these
questions could be resolved.
Anderson, William Henry (black). 1945. Florida. Anderson
was convicted of the rape of a white woman, sentenced to death,
and executed in 1945 without an appeal having been made. The
execution took place only five months after Anderson's arrest,
perhaps in part because the sheriff wrote to the governor, "I
would appreciate special attention in this case before some sym-
pathizing organization gets hold of it." The victim had not
resisted, screamed, or used an available pistol to resist
Anderson's advances. Anderson's sister and one of his co-workers
presented affidavits to the governor claiming that Anderson and
the victim had been consensually intimate for several months
before rape charges were filed. Anderson's attorney also wrote
to the governor that "There exists well founded belief . . . that
William Henry Anderson and the prosecutrix were intimate since
August 1944. This belief is widespread among Negroes, but white
people have been heard to express opinions likewise."
Appelgate, Everett (white). 1936. New York. Appelgate
was convicted, with Frances Q. Creighton, of the murder of
Appelgate's wife; both were sentenced to death in 1936. The
conviction was affirmed on appeal. Creighton had been tried and
acquitted on two separate occasions for similar murders a dozen
years before she met Appelgate. In this case, she testified that
she killed the victim (by arsenic poisoning) at Appelgate's
instigation. During the investigation of the case, she also
confessed to one of the previous murders. "Virtually no evidence
against Appelgate existed beyond Mrs. Creighton's unsupported
word." Appelgate had no previous criminal record, and
Creighton's version of the crime changed somewhat during the
investigation. Appelgate admitted having had sexual relations
with Creighton's 15-year-old daughter; that fact did not earn him
any sympathy from the jury. Governor Herbert Lehman, who had
doubts about Appelgate's guilt, requested the prosecutor's
support for clemency for Appelgate; it was not forthcoming, and
clemency was denied. Appelgate was executed (as was Creighton)
in 1936. A few weeks after the execution all investigation of
Appelgate's innocence ended.
Bambrick, Thomas (white). 1915. New York. Bambrick was
convicted of murder, and sentenced to death. The conviction was
affirmed on appeal. Evidence was later discovered that convinced
Warden Thomas Mott Osborne and the prison chaplain that another
man had committed the crime. Osborne knew who that man was.
Although Bambrick also knew the man's identity, he refused to
"squeal" on him. Osborne commented, "It is almost as certain
that Bambrick is innocent as that the sun will rise tomorrow."
Bambrick was executed in 1916.
Becker, Charles, and Frank ("Dago") Cirofici (both white).
1912. New York. Becker and Cirofici were convicted of murder;
Cirofici was executed in 1914 and Becker in 1915. The victim,
Rosenthal, was a gambling-house owner. Shortly before the
homicide, Rosenthal had implicated Becker, a police lieutenant,
in gambling activities. Becker had earlier made the gambling
world angry because of his vigorous work in suppressing their
activities. He was convicted largely on the testimony of
gamblers and ex-convicts in the glare of extensive newspaper
publicity about police corruption. These witnesses, allegedly
middlemen hired by Becker, were given immunity for their
testimony by an ambitious district attorney. The alleged motive
was graft, although no evidence was produced to support the
theory.
Less is known about Cirofici, one of four gunmen put to
death for the crime. The then warden of Sing Sing prison, James
Clancy, allegedly believed that two of the executed gunmen were
innocent. Another former Sing Sing warden, Thomas Mott Osborne,
who knew the closest friends of the gunmen, stated that these
friends all agreed Cirofici had nothing to do with the murder and
was not even present when it occurred. Warden Osborne also
believed that Becker was not guilty.
Collins, Roosevelt (black). 1937. Alabama. Collins was
convicted of rape, sentenced to death, and executed in 1937. The
conviction was affirmed on appeal. Collins testified that the
"victim" (white) had consented, which caused a near-riot in the
courtroom and led the woman's husband to pull out a gun and fire
it at Collins. Collins was almost lynched and received only a
perfunctory defense. The all-white jury deliberated for only
four minutes. Subsequent interviews with several jurors revealed
that although they believed the act was consensual, they also
thought that Wilson deserved death simply for "messin' around"
with a white woman. Even the judge, off the record, admitted his
belief that Collins was telling the truth. "An innocent man went
to his death."
Dawson, Sie (black). 1960. Florida. Dawson was convicted
of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. The victim was
the two-year-old son of a white woman for whom Dawson worked.
(Although the boy's mother was also murdered, Dawson was not
tried for that offense.) The conviction by an all-white male
jury was based on a confession obtained from Dawson after he had
spent more than a week in custody without the assistance of
counsel and on an accusation by the victim's husband. Dawson had
an I.Q. of 64. At trial, Dawson repudiated his confession,
claiming it was given only because "the white officers told him
to say he killed Mrs. Clayton or they'd give him to 'the mob'
outside." On appeal, the conviction was affirmed on a 4-3 vote.
Dawson was executed in 1964. Years later, newspaper stories
revived doubts that had surrounded the conviction from the
beginning. Dawson had claimed that the victim's husband had
committed the murders. There were no eyewitnesses and the
circumstantial evidence was slight and inconclusive.
Garner, Vance, and Will Johnson (both black). 1905.
Alabama. With Jack Hunter, Garner and Johnson were convicted of
murder and sentenced to death, despite their claims of innocence.
No appeals were undertaken. In 1905, Garner and Hunter were
hanged. From the gallows Garner maintained his complete
innocence, while Hunter admitted his own guilt and absolved both
Garner and Johnson. In 1906, Johnson's sentence was commuted to
life. A fourth man, Bunk Richardson, who was charged with
perjuring himself in Garner's behalf, was lynched three nights
after Johnson's death sentence was commuted.
Grzechowiak, Stephen, and Max Rybarczyk (both white). 1929.
New York. Grzechowiak and Rybarczyk were both convicted of
felony murder and sentenced to death. Co-defendant Alexander
Bogdanoff insisted that neither Grzechowiak nor Rybarczyk had
been involved in the crime, and that each had been mistakenly
identified by the eyewitnesses. He refused, however, to reveal
the names of his true accomplices. Grzechowiak and Rybarczyk
executed in 1930, after their convictions were affirmed on
appeal. In their final words, they maintained their innocence,
and Bogdanoff again declared that the two were innocent.
Hauptmann, Bruno Richard (white). 1935. New Jersey.
Hauptmann was convicted of felony-murder-burglary, sentenced to
death, and executed in 1936. He was infamous as the ransom-
kidnapper of the Lindbergh baby. Hauptmann's is a classic case
of conviction based on an intricate web of circumstantial
evidence, perjury, prosecutorial suppression of evidence, a
grossly incompetent defense attorney, and a trial in an
atmosphere of near-hysteria. The trial followed a 2-year
nationwide hunt for the kidnappers of the baby boy of "Lindy,"
the nation's favorite hero, whose wife was the daughter of the
wealthy and socially prominent Morrow family. Hauptmann was the
victim of over-zealous prosecutors, intent on solving the most
notorious crime of the decade. Although Governor Hoffman
believed that Hauptmann was framed, he chose not to halt the
execution. There is no doubt that the conviction rested in part
on corrupt prosecutorial practices, suppression of evidence,
intimidation of witnesses, perjured testimony, and Hauptmann's
prior record. In 1986, his aging widow brought suit against the
prosecuting attorney and a dozen other defendants in a civil
action.
As usual, Hugo's wanton stupidity is exposed.... this time by a man with ADHD.
SO **** YOU AND YOUR WHOLE FAGGOT FAMILY, HUGO. YOU ****ING SCIENTOLOGIST ****SUCKER SON OF BITCH!
You dumb ****. There are more then a dozen such cases.
To prove you stupidity I have the following:
Some Twentieth Century Erroneous Executions
Adams, James (black). 1974. Florida. Adams was convicted
of first-degree murder, sentenced to death, and executed in 1984.
Witnesses located Adams' car at the time of the crime at the home
of the victim, a white rancher. Some of the victim's jewelry was
found in the car trunk. Adams maintained his innocence, claiming
that he had loaned the car to his girlfriend. A witness
identified Adams as driving the car away from the victim's home
shortly after the crime. This witness, however, was driving a
large truck in the direction opposite to that of Adams' car, and
probably could not have had a good look at the driver. It was
later discovered that this witness was angry with Adams for
allegedly dating his wife. A second witness heard a voice inside
the victim's home at the time of the crime and saw someone
fleeing. He stated this voice was a woman's; the day after the
crime he stated that the fleeing person was positively not Adams.
More importantly, a hair sample found clutched in the victim's
hand, which in all likelihood had come from the assailant, did
not mach Adams' hair. Much of this exculpatory information was
not discovered until the case was examined by a skilled
investigator a month before Adams' execution. Governor Graham,
however, refused to grant even a short stay so that these
questions could be resolved.
Anderson, William Henry (black). 1945. Florida. Anderson
was convicted of the rape of a white woman, sentenced to death,
and executed in 1945 without an appeal having been made. The
execution took place only five months after Anderson's arrest,
perhaps in part because the sheriff wrote to the governor, "I
would appreciate special attention in this case before some sym-
pathizing organization gets hold of it." The victim had not
resisted, screamed, or used an available pistol to resist
Anderson's advances. Anderson's sister and one of his co-workers
presented affidavits to the governor claiming that Anderson and
the victim had been consensually intimate for several months
before rape charges were filed. Anderson's attorney also wrote
to the governor that "There exists well founded belief . . . that
William Henry Anderson and the prosecutrix were intimate since
August 1944. This belief is widespread among Negroes, but white
people have been heard to express opinions likewise."
Appelgate, Everett (white). 1936. New York. Appelgate
was convicted, with Frances Q. Creighton, of the murder of
Appelgate's wife; both were sentenced to death in 1936. The
conviction was affirmed on appeal. Creighton had been tried and
acquitted on two separate occasions for similar murders a dozen
years before she met Appelgate. In this case, she testified that
she killed the victim (by arsenic poisoning) at Appelgate's
instigation. During the investigation of the case, she also
confessed to one of the previous murders. "Virtually no evidence
against Appelgate existed beyond Mrs. Creighton's unsupported
word." Appelgate had no previous criminal record, and
Creighton's version of the crime changed somewhat during the
investigation. Appelgate admitted having had sexual relations
with Creighton's 15-year-old daughter; that fact did not earn him
any sympathy from the jury. Governor Herbert Lehman, who had
doubts about Appelgate's guilt, requested the prosecutor's
support for clemency for Appelgate; it was not forthcoming, and
clemency was denied. Appelgate was executed (as was Creighton)
in 1936. A few weeks after the execution all investigation of
Appelgate's innocence ended.
Bambrick, Thomas (white). 1915. New York. Bambrick was
convicted of murder, and sentenced to death. The conviction was
affirmed on appeal. Evidence was later discovered that convinced
Warden Thomas Mott Osborne and the prison chaplain that another
man had committed the crime. Osborne knew who that man was.
Although Bambrick also knew the man's identity, he refused to
"squeal" on him. Osborne commented, "It is almost as certain
that Bambrick is innocent as that the sun will rise tomorrow."
Bambrick was executed in 1916.
Becker, Charles, and Frank ("Dago") Cirofici (both white).
1912. New York. Becker and Cirofici were convicted of murder;
Cirofici was executed in 1914 and Becker in 1915. The victim,
Rosenthal, was a gambling-house owner. Shortly before the
homicide, Rosenthal had implicated Becker, a police lieutenant,
in gambling activities. Becker had earlier made the gambling
world angry because of his vigorous work in suppressing their
activities. He was convicted largely on the testimony of
gamblers and ex-convicts in the glare of extensive newspaper
publicity about police corruption. These witnesses, allegedly
middlemen hired by Becker, were given immunity for their
testimony by an ambitious district attorney. The alleged motive
was graft, although no evidence was produced to support the
theory.
Less is known about Cirofici, one of four gunmen put to
death for the crime. The then warden of Sing Sing prison, James
Clancy, allegedly believed that two of the executed gunmen were
innocent. Another former Sing Sing warden, Thomas Mott Osborne,
who knew the closest friends of the gunmen, stated that these
friends all agreed Cirofici had nothing to do with the murder and
was not even present when it occurred. Warden Osborne also
believed that Becker was not guilty.
Collins, Roosevelt (black). 1937. Alabama. Collins was
convicted of rape, sentenced to death, and executed in 1937. The
conviction was affirmed on appeal. Collins testified that the
"victim" (white) had consented, which caused a near-riot in the
courtroom and led the woman's husband to pull out a gun and fire
it at Collins. Collins was almost lynched and received only a
perfunctory defense. The all-white jury deliberated for only
four minutes. Subsequent interviews with several jurors revealed
that although they believed the act was consensual, they also
thought that Wilson deserved death simply for "messin' around"
with a white woman. Even the judge, off the record, admitted his
belief that Collins was telling the truth. "An innocent man went
to his death."
Dawson, Sie (black). 1960. Florida. Dawson was convicted
of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. The victim was
the two-year-old son of a white woman for whom Dawson worked.
(Although the boy's mother was also murdered, Dawson was not
tried for that offense.) The conviction by an all-white male
jury was based on a confession obtained from Dawson after he had
spent more than a week in custody without the assistance of
counsel and on an accusation by the victim's husband. Dawson had
an I.Q. of 64. At trial, Dawson repudiated his confession,
claiming it was given only because "the white officers told him
to say he killed Mrs. Clayton or they'd give him to 'the mob'
outside." On appeal, the conviction was affirmed on a 4-3 vote.
Dawson was executed in 1964. Years later, newspaper stories
revived doubts that had surrounded the conviction from the
beginning. Dawson had claimed that the victim's husband had
committed the murders. There were no eyewitnesses and the
circumstantial evidence was slight and inconclusive.
Garner, Vance, and Will Johnson (both black). 1905.
Alabama. With Jack Hunter, Garner and Johnson were convicted of
murder and sentenced to death, despite their claims of innocence.
No appeals were undertaken. In 1905, Garner and Hunter were
hanged. From the gallows Garner maintained his complete
innocence, while Hunter admitted his own guilt and absolved both
Garner and Johnson. In 1906, Johnson's sentence was commuted to
life. A fourth man, Bunk Richardson, who was charged with
perjuring himself in Garner's behalf, was lynched three nights
after Johnson's death sentence was commuted.
Grzechowiak, Stephen, and Max Rybarczyk (both white). 1929.
New York. Grzechowiak and Rybarczyk were both convicted of
felony murder and sentenced to death. Co-defendant Alexander
Bogdanoff insisted that neither Grzechowiak nor Rybarczyk had
been involved in the crime, and that each had been mistakenly
identified by the eyewitnesses. He refused, however, to reveal
the names of his true accomplices. Grzechowiak and Rybarczyk
executed in 1930, after their convictions were affirmed on
appeal. In their final words, they maintained their innocence,
and Bogdanoff again declared that the two were innocent.
Hauptmann, Bruno Richard (white). 1935. New Jersey.
Hauptmann was convicted of felony-murder-burglary, sentenced to
death, and executed in 1936. He was infamous as the ransom-
kidnapper of the Lindbergh baby. Hauptmann's is a classic case
of conviction based on an intricate web of circumstantial
evidence, perjury, prosecutorial suppression of evidence, a
grossly incompetent defense attorney, and a trial in an
atmosphere of near-hysteria. The trial followed a 2-year
nationwide hunt for the kidnappers of the baby boy of "Lindy,"
the nation's favorite hero, whose wife was the daughter of the
wealthy and socially prominent Morrow family. Hauptmann was the
victim of over-zealous prosecutors, intent on solving the most
notorious crime of the decade. Although Governor Hoffman
believed that Hauptmann was framed, he chose not to halt the
execution. There is no doubt that the conviction rested in part
on corrupt prosecutorial practices, suppression of evidence,
intimidation of witnesses, perjured testimony, and Hauptmann's
prior record. In 1986, his aging widow brought suit against the
prosecuting attorney and a dozen other defendants in a civil
action.
As usual, Hugo's wanton stupidity is exposed.... this time by a man with ADHD.
SO **** YOU AND YOUR WHOLE FAGGOT FAMILY, HUGO. YOU ****ING SCIENTOLOGIST ****SUCKER SON OF BITCH!
TerroristHater
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2005
The following reasons illustrate why the death penalty is wrong:
The Death Penalty is Unfair
1)The death penalty is unfair.
The death penalty has never been applied fairly across race, class, and gender lines. Who is sentenced to die often depends on the attitudes of prosecutors, where one lives, the prejudices of judges and juries, and the skills of defense lawyers.
2) The death penalty risks killing innocent people.
As of April 2005, 119 prisoners convicted of capital crimes and sentenced to death have been released from death row because of innocence, since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. DNA tests play a major role in proving innocence.
Wrongful convictions often result from: false confessions, which are frequently coerced from juveniles and mentally retarded people; mistaken eyewitness evidence; jail house snitches; white-coat fraud and junk science; and prosecutorial abuse.
3) The death penalty punishes the poor.
Most defendants are poor must rely on publicly appointed attorneys who are sometimes unqualified, inexperienced or incompetent. Some lawyers have slept or appeared drunk during trials.
4) The death penalty is racially biased.
Many jurisdictions, which have studied their death penalty systems including Maryland, Georgia, Philadelphia, Indiana, and North Carolina, have found that people who kill white people are far more likely to get the death penalty than those who kill black people.
5) The death penalty costs more than life in prison.
Prosecuting a death penalty case is extremely expensive for a state and drains money that could be used for education and social programs. It costs more than sentencing a prisoner to life without parole.
The most comprehensive death penalty study in the country found that the death penalty costs North Carolina $2.16 million more per execution than a non-death penalty murder case with a sentence of life imprisonment (Duke University, May 1993). In its review of death penalty expenses, the State of Kansas concluded that capital cases are 70% more expensive than comparable non-death penalty cases.
6) The death penalty is opposed by a growing number of murdered victims' families.
Groups such as Murdered Victims Families for Reconciliation and Journey of Hope from Violence to Healing oppose the death penalty.
7) The death penalty is not a deterrent to crime.
Since the death penalty was reinstated, over 80% of all executions have occurred in the South, the region with the highest murder rate. The Northeast, the region with the lowest murder rate, has accounted for less than 1% of the executions.
8) The death penalty is not used in most countries around the world.
118 countries in the world have abolished the death penalty in either law or practice.
Supreme Court Cases That Highlight
Flaws of the Death Penalty
Arbitrary--Furman v. Georgia, 1972: The Supreme Court declared the death penalty unconstitutional, as cruel and unusual punishment because the death penalty was arbitrarily and discriminatorily carried out against certain groups, particularly African-Americans. The Court held that the Eighth Amendment required the death penalty to be imposed consistently and fairly. States responded to the landmark decision by amending their statutes to create a bi-furcated trial with separate guilt stage and penalty phase trials.
A Broken System--Gregg v. Georgia, 1976: This case defines the beginning of the modern era of the death penalty with the Supreme Court upholding newly revised statutes in Georgia, Florida, and Texas. In effect, the Court declared that all the problems that it had recognized four years earlier had been resolved through implementation of the new procedures contained in the statutes of these three states. Almost three decades later, the Gregg ruling has not lived up to its promise. Defendants continue to be convicted and sentenced to death after being represented by inadequate counsel. Racial disparity in sentencing continues. The fact that well over 100 people have been released from death rows in recent years because they were wrongfully convicted is powerful evidence that the system is still broken.
Racial Bias (victim's race)--Coker vs. Georgia, 1977: The Supreme Court ruled that use of the death penalty in rape cases is unconstitutional because the sentence is disproportionate to the crime. The Coker case resulted in the removal from death row of 20 inmates - three whites and 17 blacks - awaiting execution.
Racial Bias (jury selection)--Batson v. Kentucky, 1986: The Supreme Court ruled that excluding jurors based solely on race was unconstitutional. In this case, Batson, a black man, was convicted of burglary and receipt of stolen goods after the prosecution dismissed all four black potential jurors. The Supreme Court ruled that this violated his right to a fair jury trial and to equal protection of the law in violation of the 6th and 14th Amendments. Potential jurors may not be struck from the jury solely because of their race.
Mentally Ill--Ford v. Wainwright, 1986: The Supreme Court prohibited the execution of the mentally insane and required an adversarial process for determining mental competency. However, insanity has proven to be an extremely difficult standard to meet and over the years numerous defendants exhibiting obvious signs of mental illness have been executed.
Racial Bias (victim's race)--McClesky v. Kemp, 1987: In this Supreme Court case, counsel on behalf of death row prisoner Warren McClesky argued that death penalty sentences in Georgia were racially biased because defendants who killed white victims were significantly more likely to be sentenced to death than those who killed black victims. The court ruled that although McClesky had proven statistically that racial discrimination was occurring, it did not violate his constitutional right to "equal protection of the law." McClesky was executed by electrocution in 1991.
Due Process--Ring vs. Arizona, 2002: The Supreme Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial requires that juries, not judges, determine whether aggravating factors exist to warrant the death penalty. The decision does not apply retroactively to cases.
Mentally Retarded--Atkins v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 2003: The Supreme Court found that executing mentally retarded offenders is cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution.
Juveniles--Simmons v. Roper, 2003: The Missouri Supreme Court set aside Christopher Simmons' death sentence, ruling that the execution of those who committed crimes before the age of 18 violates evolving standards of decency as defined by the Court in Atkins. The Supreme Court held that the execution of juveniles violates the Constitution's 'cruel and unusual punishment' clause (according to Atkins' evolving standards of decency).
The Death Penalty is Unfair
1)The death penalty is unfair.
The death penalty has never been applied fairly across race, class, and gender lines. Who is sentenced to die often depends on the attitudes of prosecutors, where one lives, the prejudices of judges and juries, and the skills of defense lawyers.
2) The death penalty risks killing innocent people.
As of April 2005, 119 prisoners convicted of capital crimes and sentenced to death have been released from death row because of innocence, since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. DNA tests play a major role in proving innocence.
Wrongful convictions often result from: false confessions, which are frequently coerced from juveniles and mentally retarded people; mistaken eyewitness evidence; jail house snitches; white-coat fraud and junk science; and prosecutorial abuse.
3) The death penalty punishes the poor.
Most defendants are poor must rely on publicly appointed attorneys who are sometimes unqualified, inexperienced or incompetent. Some lawyers have slept or appeared drunk during trials.
4) The death penalty is racially biased.
Many jurisdictions, which have studied their death penalty systems including Maryland, Georgia, Philadelphia, Indiana, and North Carolina, have found that people who kill white people are far more likely to get the death penalty than those who kill black people.
5) The death penalty costs more than life in prison.
Prosecuting a death penalty case is extremely expensive for a state and drains money that could be used for education and social programs. It costs more than sentencing a prisoner to life without parole.
The most comprehensive death penalty study in the country found that the death penalty costs North Carolina $2.16 million more per execution than a non-death penalty murder case with a sentence of life imprisonment (Duke University, May 1993). In its review of death penalty expenses, the State of Kansas concluded that capital cases are 70% more expensive than comparable non-death penalty cases.
6) The death penalty is opposed by a growing number of murdered victims' families.
Groups such as Murdered Victims Families for Reconciliation and Journey of Hope from Violence to Healing oppose the death penalty.
7) The death penalty is not a deterrent to crime.
Since the death penalty was reinstated, over 80% of all executions have occurred in the South, the region with the highest murder rate. The Northeast, the region with the lowest murder rate, has accounted for less than 1% of the executions.
8) The death penalty is not used in most countries around the world.
118 countries in the world have abolished the death penalty in either law or practice.
Supreme Court Cases That Highlight
Flaws of the Death Penalty
Arbitrary--Furman v. Georgia, 1972: The Supreme Court declared the death penalty unconstitutional, as cruel and unusual punishment because the death penalty was arbitrarily and discriminatorily carried out against certain groups, particularly African-Americans. The Court held that the Eighth Amendment required the death penalty to be imposed consistently and fairly. States responded to the landmark decision by amending their statutes to create a bi-furcated trial with separate guilt stage and penalty phase trials.
A Broken System--Gregg v. Georgia, 1976: This case defines the beginning of the modern era of the death penalty with the Supreme Court upholding newly revised statutes in Georgia, Florida, and Texas. In effect, the Court declared that all the problems that it had recognized four years earlier had been resolved through implementation of the new procedures contained in the statutes of these three states. Almost three decades later, the Gregg ruling has not lived up to its promise. Defendants continue to be convicted and sentenced to death after being represented by inadequate counsel. Racial disparity in sentencing continues. The fact that well over 100 people have been released from death rows in recent years because they were wrongfully convicted is powerful evidence that the system is still broken.
Racial Bias (victim's race)--Coker vs. Georgia, 1977: The Supreme Court ruled that use of the death penalty in rape cases is unconstitutional because the sentence is disproportionate to the crime. The Coker case resulted in the removal from death row of 20 inmates - three whites and 17 blacks - awaiting execution.
Racial Bias (jury selection)--Batson v. Kentucky, 1986: The Supreme Court ruled that excluding jurors based solely on race was unconstitutional. In this case, Batson, a black man, was convicted of burglary and receipt of stolen goods after the prosecution dismissed all four black potential jurors. The Supreme Court ruled that this violated his right to a fair jury trial and to equal protection of the law in violation of the 6th and 14th Amendments. Potential jurors may not be struck from the jury solely because of their race.
Mentally Ill--Ford v. Wainwright, 1986: The Supreme Court prohibited the execution of the mentally insane and required an adversarial process for determining mental competency. However, insanity has proven to be an extremely difficult standard to meet and over the years numerous defendants exhibiting obvious signs of mental illness have been executed.
Racial Bias (victim's race)--McClesky v. Kemp, 1987: In this Supreme Court case, counsel on behalf of death row prisoner Warren McClesky argued that death penalty sentences in Georgia were racially biased because defendants who killed white victims were significantly more likely to be sentenced to death than those who killed black victims. The court ruled that although McClesky had proven statistically that racial discrimination was occurring, it did not violate his constitutional right to "equal protection of the law." McClesky was executed by electrocution in 1991.
Due Process--Ring vs. Arizona, 2002: The Supreme Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial requires that juries, not judges, determine whether aggravating factors exist to warrant the death penalty. The decision does not apply retroactively to cases.
Mentally Retarded--Atkins v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 2003: The Supreme Court found that executing mentally retarded offenders is cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution.
Juveniles--Simmons v. Roper, 2003: The Missouri Supreme Court set aside Christopher Simmons' death sentence, ruling that the execution of those who committed crimes before the age of 18 violates evolving standards of decency as defined by the Court in Atkins. The Supreme Court held that the execution of juveniles violates the Constitution's 'cruel and unusual punishment' clause (according to Atkins' evolving standards of decency).
Cogito Ergo Sum
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
TERRORIST-HATER said:
Executing a convicted murderer (which is the language I choose as it is far more accurate) was never intended to bring the victim back. It's sole intention and purpose is to punish the convicted criminal, and relieve society of any further burden of this worthless individual. I believe so strongly in it and its purpose that I would be an unpaid state executioner without even so much as a slight hesitation. I would be serving the public good. Dead murderes commit NO further crimes EVER.
Expulsion from the tribe and the cave is a little outdated, even though death was eminent in that punishment as well. Modern execution is just a simple extension of that tribal custom, and a very good one at that.
skategreen
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
TERRORIST-HATER said:
Hugo's a Scientologist? Cooooool. All the more reason to like him and continue to be disgusted by you.
I'm pretty sick of your yelling - d'ya have a hearing problem, is this why you yell so much? Ignored as a child? Got a bee in yer ear? Quiet down, will ya? Other people are having conversations here. We don't need your huge yelling font. REALLY.
What's with all the bigotry? You seem to like to rank on folks for their origin of birth, religion, color of skin... how is that debating? It's name calling. Save that for the piss pot hey? A bit of GOOD name calling here and there - fine! I've seen some wickedly good slams - but yours are just schoolyard.
Or do you just fancy yourself to be a Darn Good Mud Slinger? Look again. It's not wit. Does anyone post rep for you, awed by your ability to use large font and shout? I doubt it muchly.
You need to prove yourself by screaming? ... what does that say about you? I bet YOU'VE got some dirty little secrets, now don'tcha? What are you hiding? Beat your spouse? Children? Hurt little animals? Got some nasty little habits that wouldn't bear the light of day.....? yeah.
That's my take. You're one sick puppy, here to vent your evil petty bigoted wrath, hiding your pathetic little secrets that gnaw at the craw of your yellow belly.
Your manner of expression reveals your character, and it is found wanting.
Writhe in it.
Gray~Gal
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2005
This is what i have to say about the death penalty. I am posting this w/o reading others post first because i feel strongly about this.
I think we should have the death penatly. Old saying eye for eye...well i believe it! I think any person who is a pedifile (sp) who has been proven to have raped/killed a minor 16 and under (17 is another story) or has sexually hurt them they should be sent to prison for life w. no chance of parole or death. I think they should be put to sleep just like a mad dog. I think if a person kills another and it can be proven with 100% forensic evidence and some sort of witness....straight to the chair. I think if a person can take a life w/o remorse such as BTK i think he should go straight to death row. I dont think those are even people anymore, they are bodies that have no soul.
I cant STAND that people who can kill kids and hurt people for NO ****ing reason are even left alive to breathe even if it is in a Prison. A lot of people say let them suffer for what they did...**** THAT enough people are gonna suffer who give a **** about the killer. I think Peterson got what was coming to him for what he did to his baby and wife. What scum....that is not human that is barbaric.
Thats what i think:
I think we should have the death penatly. Old saying eye for eye...well i believe it! I think any person who is a pedifile (sp) who has been proven to have raped/killed a minor 16 and under (17 is another story) or has sexually hurt them they should be sent to prison for life w. no chance of parole or death. I think they should be put to sleep just like a mad dog. I think if a person kills another and it can be proven with 100% forensic evidence and some sort of witness....straight to the chair. I think if a person can take a life w/o remorse such as BTK i think he should go straight to death row. I dont think those are even people anymore, they are bodies that have no soul.
I cant STAND that people who can kill kids and hurt people for NO ****ing reason are even left alive to breathe even if it is in a Prison. A lot of people say let them suffer for what they did...**** THAT enough people are gonna suffer who give a **** about the killer. I think Peterson got what was coming to him for what he did to his baby and wife. What scum....that is not human that is barbaric.
Thats what i think:
hugo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2005
wRONG,dIZZY. gOOGLE EMORY UNIVERSITY DEATH PENALTY DETERRENT. aLL NON BIASED ECONOMETRIC STUDIES HAVE FOUND THE DEATH PENALTY is a deterrent. Sorry, cap lock was on.DizzyME said:
Nevermind, the death penalty has never been shown to be a detterent, it has been shown to be a deterrent.
Dizzy, watch what they teach you in the modern liberal colleges. The only good thing about college is the good ones do teach you to think. Maybe ADHD boy should try some education beyond a GED.
hugo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2005
TERRORIST-HATER said:I agree with that but try getting that point across to the people in Texas. They are far too blood thirsty. The law of Moses went out with the old testiment. I just can't help but wonder how Texas missed the memo announcing that.
The ignorance of ADHD boy never ceases to amaze me. The law of Moses is contained in the Old Testament, you could have an argument that the law of Moses went out with the New Testament, of course for certain that would not be true if you are Jewish. I guess us Texan's missed that memo that only a moron would believe.
TerroristHater
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2005
hugo said:
My sources were ACLU and an anti-death penalty page. Both of these are perfectly legitimate. I am sorry you're a barbaric asshole who never developed beyond the intellect of a neaderthol.
The death penalty does not deter anything. It simply provides a very big reason to do anything to avoid capture, including, killing law enforcement officials and innocent civilians.
You are just a useless republican ****head who should be banned from breathing.
Other then that, you're just an ASSHOLE.
TerroristHater
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2005
hugo said:
You texas scumbags have never been able to comprehend that violence is not the answer. You ****s had to be federally barred from executing mentally retarded people.
You are all a bunch of blood thirsty ****suckers who do not deserve to be called Americans.
You should all kill yourselves and get it overwith.
TerroristHater
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2005
Cogito Ergo Sum said:
The death penalty is barbaric. It tends to happen to the poor minorities more then others.
How many innocent people need to be executed before retarded states like Texas pull thier heads out of thier asses and realize that killing a killer isn't an acceptable way of dispensing justice. It makes us as barbaric as those arab ****s from Iran.
TerroristHater
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2005
tizz said:
Actually, the prison system was originally designed to rehabilitate offenders into useful members of society. The name gives that away... "The Department of CORRECTIONS".
Unfortunately, the prison system is not doing what it was intended to do. Some people leave more violent then when they got put in. Others never leave.
It's a sick system.
Cogito Ergo Sum
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
TERRORIST-HATER said:
Oh how I wish for the good old days...
The last public execution in America was that of Rainey Bethea in Owensboro, Kentucky, on August 14, 1936. It was the last death sentence in the nation at which the general public was permitted to attend without any legally-imposed restrictions, and some 20,000 men, women, and children witnessed it without restriction--no enclosures, no walls, and no sheriffs' passes.
If you think for even one moment that those 20,000 people were not deterred from crime as a result of witnessing this execution, then you are truly daft and gullible.