Death Penalty - More than just an excellent idea!

[TheJenn88]

How nice and Christian of this woman, and how disloyal to her husbands memory. NOT TO MENTION the message this is sending to other would be murders...

Why is this man loose, he should be in jail???

 

He served in jail. This is after he got out.

 

But I don't think you or myself are one to judge how this serves her husband's memory. I'd like to believe that she knows best of what her husband would want.

 

And she didn't seem like a Jesus believer to me.

[Lethalfind]

He served in jail. This is after he got out.

 

But I don't think you or myself are one to judge how this serves her husband's memory. I'd like to believe that she knows best of what her husband would want.

 

And she didn't seem like a Jesus believer to me.

 

I see you didn't mention the example this makes to other people who are watching, thinking "look, its not so bad, you go to jail for a little while and then you get out, and get all kinds of attention for your trouble AND you get to hang with the woman whose husband you killed"

I see a big problem with that message.

[TheJenn88]

I see you didn't mention the example this makes to other people who are watching, thinking "look, its not so bad, you go to jail for a little while and then you get out, and get all kinds of attention for your trouble AND you get to hang with the woman whose husband you killed"

I see a big problem with that message.

 

I didn't omit that detail on purpose. I forgot. Ooops.

[hugo]

Your missing the whole point Hugo. I'm not trying to plead a case for this individual case alone. I used it along with other articles to show reason for stricter limitations on what evidence can earn the death penalty. There are alot of crimes that should be considered eligible for the death penalty.

 

Let me quote you.

 

Here is a case in which junk science and emotion killed an in(n)ocent man.

 

You did not claim he was not guilty, you claimed he was innocent. My original claim was that there is not one proven case of an innocent executed post Furman. My claim stands.

[builder]

http://www.justicedenied.org/innocent.htm

 

Oh, there's more than one.

[Jhony5]

Let me quote you.

 

 

 

You did not claim he was not guilty, you claimed he was innocent. My original claim was that there is not one proven case of an innocent executed post Furman. My claim stands.

 

 

My statement that you qouted was my opinion. I never once stated that it was a proven fact. Your claim, that there is not one proven case of wrongful execution is flawed. If you cannot look at all the evidence that I and others have provided and acknowledge that innocent people are executed, then fine, your a moron. The reason why you can say "not one case has been proven" is because to prove it there would have to be an official inquiry, or hearing on the matter. That doesn't happen because such matters would be political suicide for those responsible for the faulty verdicts.

Just admit that people are indeed murdered by the government that you want to give even more power to. Do it. Do it. Do it.

[hugo]

http://www.justicedenied.org/innocent.htm

 

Oh, there's more than one.

 

They were all guilty as hell.

[builder]

They were all guilty as hell.

 

Because they were on trial? Or because you sided with the prosecution case?

[hugo]

My statement that you qouted was my opinion. I never once stated that it was a proven fact. Your claim, that there is not one proven case of wrongful execution is flawed. If you cannot look at all the evidence that I and others have provided and acknowledge that innocent people are executed, then fine, your a moron. The reason why you can say "not one case has been proven" is because to prove it there would have to be an official inquiry, or hearing on the matter. That doesn't happen because such matters would be political suicide for those responsible for the faulty verdicts.

Just admit that people are indeed murdered by the government that you want to give even more power to. Do it. Do it. Do it.

 

You stated an innocent man was killed. I am glad you have confessed it was merely your opinion. There are plenty of death penalty opponents looking for the poster boy for innocents executed. They ain't found one. An innocent being executed must be very rare or non-existant.

[hugo]

Because they were on trial? Or because you sided with the prosecution case?

 

Let us take the Gary Graham case. From http://www.prodeathpenalty.com

 

FALSE CLAIM 1

 

Bobby Lambert was shot in a dimly lit parking lot.

 

False. Bernadine Skillern, the unwavering eyewitness had no problem identifying Graham. Stated Skillern, "You can see very clearly." Other witnesses and three policemen testified that there was adequate lighting to make an identification. Wilma Amos testified that the lighting "was good." (Trial Testimony.) Furthermore, GGC often state that there were only two lights in the entire parking lot. Half-Truth, Misleading. What GGC doesn't say is that there were at least two light posts with a total of four lights and that all four lights were close to the murder scene. Two of the lights were within two parking spaces of the murder and thereby directly illuminated the murder scene (crime scene photos). Furthermore, Ms. Skillern's car was facing the murder scene from 26-37 feet away and her car's headlights further illuminated the murder scene and Graham's face. Graham, then walked within 10 feet of Ms. Skillern. (Crime scene evidence and trial testimony.)

 

FALSE CLAIMS 2, 3, 4 & 5

 

Graham was convicted and sentenced (2) to death by the questionable (3) identification of a single witness who saw the suspect for a "split second" (4) from a distance of approximately 35-44 feet. False 5. In her second viewing of mug shots (Graham's picture wasn't part of the first photo spread.) Ms. Skillern immediately picked out Graham, noting that his features, with the exception of skin tone, were the same. The shade of the skin in the photograph wouldn't allow her to make a positive identification and she stated she would need to see a live "line-up". She made an immediate, unequivocal, positive identification of Graham at the line up(F3). (Police and Trial Testimony.) Ms. Skillern testified that she saw the killer "full-face" three times, for 2 to 3 seconds, and had observed him for 60 to 90 seconds(F4), at distances ranging from a car length (10 feet) to 33 to 44 feet(F5). Graham was found guilty on the testimony of Ms. Skillern, but was sentenced to death because of the testimony of ten (10) additional Graham victims, other witnesses and the careful consideration of 12 jurors who felt that Gary Graham was a vicious killer who posed a continuing threat to society(F2). (Trial testimony and jurors statements.)

 

"For the people to say I'm tragically mistaken is an insult because I saw that man (Graham) and nothing will ever change that. He knows that I saw him (kill Bobby Grant Lambert) and I know that I saw him, and the Lord knows. I am not responsible for Mr. Graham's fate. He is." (Bernadine Skillern, Houston Post, August 15, 1993.)

 

Obviously, the jury agreed. The multi-racial jury voted 12-0, on the first ballot, for guilt in the guilt/innocence stage. The vote was 12-0 for death, on the second ballot, in the punishment phase. (10-2 on the first ballot.) All ballots were secret. (Juror Statements and Trial Records.)

 

FALSE CLAIMS 6, 7, 8 & 9

 

Four other crime scene witnesses did not identify Graham as the gunman and stated that the gunman was approximately 5'5" tall. False 6. Four out of the original five witnesses described the killer as a young, thin black male, from medium height to tall. Graham, a 17 year old black male, was 5'9", slim, 140-150 lb. Skillern stated he was 5'9" to 6', slender, 145 to 150 lbs. Dan Grady said he was tall and slim. Ron Hubbard said he was 5'5" to 5'6". Leodis Wilkerson described the killer as shorter than Lambert. Lambert was 5'9". According to GGC flyers, the killer must have been 5'8". Wilma Amos told police he was of medium height but that she couldn't remember how the killer looked. Incredibly, twelve years later, in April 1993, after speaking to The Texas Resource Center, Amos says it wasn't Graham and that the killer was 5'5". In videotaped testimony, aired at a mock(ery) trial in August, 1993, orchestrated by The Texas Resource Center, Ms. Amos stated that, "He (the killer) was no taller than me." Amos is 5'2". (The Texas Resource Center Videotape.) False 7 (see previous police statement). Amos also stated that, "...when I saw him standing there with that gun, I just closed my eyes." "...he just stopped for a second not far from the back of my car and then he took off..." (Trial and Videotape.) Amos (or Etuk) told defense investigator, Mervin West, "She thought he (Graham) had a similar build to the guy who did the shooting." (West's Affidavit) The newest witness discovery by The Texas Resource Center is Sherian Etuk who was working at the supermarket at the time of the killing. It is claimed that as of July, 1993, Etuk has looked at photographs of Graham, taken at the time of the murder, and is sure Graham was not the killer. Only one catch. At the time of the murder, Etuk's statement False 8. to police reveals that she never saw the man's face or the murder. The witnesses who could not identify Graham either did not see the killer's face, couldn't remember it, only saw a black man (the killer, an accomplice, anyone, who knows?) running through the parking lot or didn't see a gunman because they didn't see the crime. It is important to note that all of the witnesses describing the killer as of medium height to tall saw the killer standing. The other witnesses, including Hubbard, saw a black man of 5'5" to 5'7" running through the parking lot. A 5'9" running man would lose at least 4" in height due to bent ankles, knees, back and neck, which is the posture of a person in the act of running. (Trial, etc.) Hubbard originally told police he possibly could I.D. the killer. Later, at the live line-up, he told police and Graham's attorney's that he never saw the killer's face and couldn't I.D. anyone. (Police File, via GGC.) Leodis Wilkerson, who was 12 years old at the time of the shooting, witnessed Lambert's murder. His account of the crime scene, and that of two of his friends, in the car with him, was relayed to police by an adult relative. The statement was that they had seen a man running in the parking lot who they thought looked like Curley Scott, the boyfriend of Mrs. Brown's daughter. Scott, a 5'11", thin black male, was cleared of any involvement. (Graham's Legal Defense Committee Report, Winter, 1994). Half Truth, False 9 Dan Grady was unable to identify Gary. Grady couldn't identify anyone. He stated he could, maybe, I.D. the gun, but not the killer's face. (Trial). Bobby Lambert was wrongfully listed at 5'6" by the coroner. His height was correctly established at 5'9" in March 1994.

 

 

Guilty as hell.

[hugo]

A bit more.

 

FALSE CLAIM 11

 

Almost all the witnesses who have evidence and testimony that prove Gary Graham's claim of innocence have never been heard in a court of law or in impartial hearings. Totally false. None of those witnesses prove Graham's claims of innocence. Furthermore:

 

A. (1) Alibi-Witnesses: The affidavits of four purported alibi witnesses were presented in Graham's writ of habeas corpus (ineffective assistance of counsel claim) in 1987, six years after the original trial. Mr. Doug O'Brien,

 

Graham's appellate attorney, presented two of the four witnesses at the writ hearing in 1988, where District Judge Don Shipley deemed them not credible. Their hearing testimony was truly incredible. In order not to injure Graham's case any more, O'Brien chose not to present the two other purported alibi-witnesses, one being Loraine Johnson. Furthermore, the judge determined that no one ever came forward, prior to the original trial date, as an alibi witness, and that Graham never submitted alibi witnesses to Ron Mock or Chester Thornton, co-counsels for Graham's defense, with the exception of a girlfriend that Graham said he was with the night of the murder, a girlfriend whose name, face and address he couldn't remember. (Hearing Record and False Claims 12 & 22 and pages 8-9, Paragraph A.2.b.) Funny that Graham couldn't remember his girlfriend, Mary Brown, who later became his wife. Maybe Graham is lying? Funny that Ms. Brown didn't come forward in 1981, but later came forward in 1986 as an alibi witness. Maybe it was another girlfriend? Funny that Graham said he was alone with a girlfriend the night of the murder and now we have four (five?) people who say they were with him. Funny we have two completely different stories from Graham and the alleged alibi-witnesses.

 

(2) Polygraph tests orchestrated by The Texas Resource Center are daily trumpeted by Graham's backers as proof that the four alibi witnesses are telling the truth. However, the head polygrapher for Texas' Department of Public Safety and Eric Holden, President of the American Polygraph Association, both conclude that the tests are not valid and are worthless. (Houston Chronicle, July 4, 1993.)

 

(3) Isn't anybody curious as to why none of these alibi witnesses came forward in 1981, knowing that Graham's life was on the line. They have all stated that none of them came forward on their own, that it was Graham's grandmother that got them together so they could give alibi statements to say Graham was with them. Defense attorney Thornton tried to get Graham's family members and friends to come forward to testify on Graham's behalf in 1981! Graham's family knew Thornton because he was also Graham's juvenile attorney (KPFT, 90.1 FM, Houston). Funny, no alibi-witnesses came forward then. Three of the four alibi witnesses are Graham's relatives and when asked why they did not come forward in 1981, they say "No one asked me." One of the alibi witnesses was Graham's girlfriend, Mary Brown, who later became his wife. If a relative (or lover and future spouse) of yours was on trial for murder, and you knew that they were with you the night in question, would you wait 5 years until someone asked you to come forward? (See page 9., 2.b.)

 

B. Crime Scene Witnesses: Virtually all of the crime scene witnesses offered prosecution, not defense, testimony, in 1981, if they offered any thing at all. Even Doug O'Brien, Graham's 1986-88 appellate attorney, intentionally did not present any crime scene witnesses at the 1988 court hearings. He didn't call them because they had nothing to offer for the defense. Only 12 and 13 years after the murder, has some of their testimony changed enough to be of use to the defense. (See False Claims 1-10 and page 8, Paragraph A.2.a.)

 

"In every case they (the witnesses supporting Graham) are changing their stories, often fairly abruptly, from what they said or testified to twelve years ago..... New witnesses have materialized out of thin air....." My prediction is that as the case goes on, thrill seekers like this will continue to appear." (Gregory Curtis, Editor, Texas Monthly, October 1993.)

 

c. On April 26, 1993 after a thorough review of the "new evidence" the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles voted: (Houston Post, August 13, 1993.)

 

12-5 Against a hearing on new evidence.

 

12-1 Against recommending commutation of Graham's sentence to life.

 

10-7 Against a stay of execution.

 

13-0 Against a conditional pardon.

 

The Board found that there is "no credibility to any of the alleged new information". (Houston Post, August 14, 1993.)

 

d. The Houston Post agrees that the new evidence is not credible. (Houston Post, August 13, 1993.)

 

 

 

FALSE CLAIM 12

 

Mervin West, a former police officer and private investigator for Gary Graham's defense lawyers in a sworn affidavit (dated 1993) swears "...we assumed Gary was guilty from the start, we did not give his case the same attention we would routinely give a case. Gary Graham gave Ron Mock a list of alibi witnesses. I did not talk to any of Gary's alibi witnesses." Half Truth and Contrary to the Evidence. The same affidavit states that West, "Recently found the 'lead sheet' from Gary's case. It had only two individuals on it." These two individuals were crime scene witnesses. There were no alibi witness names in the file. The "lead sheet" is where West kept the names of witnesses in his case investigations. "The black female was helpful even though she could not identify Gary as the shooter. She thought he (Gary) had a similar build to the guy who did the shooting." In a later affidavit, April 22, 1993, West stated, in recalling events twelve years ago, that his memory "could be faulty as hell due " to being "without oxygen for a long, long, time, resulting in some brain cell destruction and significant memory loss." "I am totally aware of the fact that I have before recalled an event one way when it in fact occurred an entirely different way, and that there are holes in my memory." (April 22, 1993 Affidavit.) West's own file notes, revealed in the first affidavit, support the prosecutor's case. West's recollections, in the first affidavit, are not only contradicted by the hard evidence in his file, but are made void by his second affidavit. Furthermore, defense attorneys Mock and Thornton both met extensively with Graham prior to the 1981 trial. They have both stated that Graham never mentioned alibi witnesses, with the exception of a girlfriend whose name, face and address Graham could not remember. (See False Claim 11 and Paragraph A.2., pages 8-9)

 

FALSE CLAIMS 13, 14 & 15

 

(Regarding the gun and ballistics report) the Prosecutors gave jurors a false impression that Gary Graham was guilty. False 13. The gun was not introduced until after Graham had been found guilty. A medical examiner testified at the trial that the victim, Bobby Lambert, was killed by a .22 caliber bullet. Later, a Houston Police officer testified that a .22 caliber pistol was recovered from Graham at the time of his arrest. Half-Truth, Misleading. The police officer did not testify until the punishment phase, after Graham had been found guilty. Yet the D.A. had in its possession a ballistics report (withheld from the defense) that concluded that the fatal bullet was not fired by Mr. Graham's gun. False 14 & 15. The defense also had a copy of the ballistics report, but did not challenge the gun issue. Had defense counsel brought it up, that would have opened the door to Graham's nine (9) other weapons and their attendant crimes and 27 additional victims, none of which or whom was introduced in the guilt/innocence stage of the trial. (Trial Testimony and Houston Chronicle, August 19, 1993.) JUSTICE FOR ALL contends the bullet was fired by Graham's gun, just not one of the 10 in his possession.

 

FALSE CLAIM 16

 

Ashanti Chimurenga, Amnesty International lawyer, has repeatedly stated that Graham victim Greg Jones (attempted murder, aggravated robbery) told Gary Graham's son, Gary, Jr., that he (Greg) wanted his father (Gary) dead. (1590 AM, Houston, Rev. Boney's radio show) Cruel, Slanderous and False. This encounter was witnessed by a dozen people and was reported in the press as follows: Greg Jones said to Gary Jr., "I don't have any ill will towards you and hope that you have a good life." Stated Jones, "(Graham's children) are just fighting for their father's life and I think they should do that." (Houston Chronicle, Oct. 2, 1993). Greg Jones personally called Rev. Boney, the Houston leader for Graham's Coalitions, and asked him to correct these false and slanderous statements. No correction was aired. Ms. Chimurenga persists. The Houston Chronicle called that brief meeting between Jones and Gary, Jr. "a gesture of peace." Note: Ms. Chimurenga has spoken to many groups on behalf of Amnesty International and GGC. Her speeches reflect much of the FALSE material from GGC and some of those speeches have been filmed.

 

Guilty as hell.

[builder]

The short answer was, "Yes, I side with the prosecution case. "

[skategreen]

I will never forget my extreme amount of admiration for her, and if given the choice, I hope to choose her path, and not one of vengeance. I hope.

 

Well Jenn, on this overcast Thursday morn, I shan't challenge nor knock your ideals. However........

 

When you lie in a hospital bed, cuddling your first born - drinking in that magical newborn scent...bewitched with the delicate softness of skin...levelled beyond all possible expectation, lost forever in an inconceivable love .......unparalleled ......... I would then empty my pockets and raid the piggy bank. I'd place every cent I had on a change of viewpoint.

 

When it's yours

When it's real

It's

 

Different.

 

And in that difference, lies truth.

[Jhony5]

You stated an innocent man was killed. I am glad you have confessed it was merely your opinion. There are plenty of death penalty opponents looking for the poster boy for innocents executed. They ain't found one. An innocent being executed must be very rare or non-existant.

 

 

Fuck, your completely missing the point retard. First off, i'm not a death penalty opponent. I oppose handing the government so much power that they can kill you based on opinion and circumstancial evidence. In one of the cases I gave as an example, the conviction was handed down based on junk science and guesswork. Get over your tunnel vision and look at the whole picture.

Secondly, you can't "find" an innocent executed unless there was a formal hearing on it and he was declared innocent by the same government that found him guilty and murdered him. Which ain't gonna happen. These crooked fucks who work the justice system aren't exactly knocking each other over to overturn executions that they handed out. Which is exactly the whole point. YOU CAN'T overturn an execution that has been handed down.

 

Your arguement is weak like a little girl.

[hugo]

Fuck, your completely missing the point retard. First off, i'm not a death penalty opponent. I oppose handing the government so much power that they can kill you based on opinion and circumstancial evidence. In one of the cases I gave as an example, the conviction was handed down based on junk science and guesswork. Get over your tunnel vision and look at the whole picture.

Secondly, you can't "find" an innocent executed unless there was a formal hearing on it and he was declared innocent by the same government that found him guilty and murdered him. Which ain't gonna happen. These crooked fucks who work the justice system aren't exactly knocking each other over to overturn executions that they handed out. Which is exactly the whole point. YOU CAN'T overturn an execution that has been handed down.

 

Your arguement is weak like a little girl.

 

Insults are the product of a weak mind or someone on the losing side of the debate. The anti-death penalty advocates have plenty of resources, yet cannot come up with one case, where there is convincing evidence, of an executed innocent. This indicates, my point, that executions of innocents must be very rare.

[Jhony5]

Insults are the product of a weak mind or someone on the losing side of the debate. The anti-death penalty advocates have plenty of resources, yet cannot come up with one case, where there is convincing evidence, of an executed innocent. This indicates, my point, that executions of innocents must be very rare.

 

If you can't handle insults your on the wrong web site.

To me, executing 1 innocent out of 10,000 is to many.

[TheJenn88]

If you can't handle insults your on the wrong web site.

 

He can't handle them, or he doesn't like them?

[Jhony5]

He can't handle them, or he doesn't like them?

 

 

He wants the truth, but he can't handle the truth.

[TheJenn88]

He wants the truth, but he can't handle the truth.

 

I thought you were talking about insults before, not truth. They can be quite different, or one in the same.

[hugo]

He wants the truth, but he can't handle the truth.

 

The truyh is that the death penalty has deterred at least 10,000 murders for each wrongful application. The truth morons, like Jhony, can't handle.

[Jhony5]

The truyh is that the death penalty has deterred at least 10,000 murders for each wrongful application. The truth morons, like Jhony, can't handle.

 

 

You will have as hard a time proving that as I have had proving that innocents are executed. I don't see the deterrent working in that manner. To me executions are more about doing whats right and removing them from our society for good.

[angie]

I don't really see how you can claim that the death penalty is a deterrent. I have yet to find proof of that. Here are some interesting statistics on murder rates. Interpret them how you choose, but I feel that it proves that the death penalty does little, if nothing, to prevent people from murdering.

Source for Murder Rates: FBI Uniform Crime Statistics for 2004 (Published October, 2005)

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/state/

 

Murder Rates in States Where the Death Penalty Has Been Abolished (per 100,000)

Alaska: 5.6

Hawaii: 2.6

Iowa: 1.6

Maine: 1.4

Michigan: 6.4

North Dakota: 1.4

Rhode Island: 2.4

Vermont: 2.6

West Virginia: 3.7

D.C.: 35.8

 

Murder Rates in States with Death Penalty (not all, but several)

Texas: 6.1

Tennessee: 5.9

Nevada: 7.4

Virginia: 5.2

 

Average Murder Rate for State w/o Death Penalty (including DC): 5.7

Average Murder Rate for State WITH Death Penalty: 5.2

In my humble opinion, I don't see enough of a difference between the two to say that the Death Penalty is a deterrent.

Now, for shits and giggles, you take DC out of the equation because those numbers are so skewed and DC isn't actually a state. That puts the murder rate for abolished states at 2.3. Signifigantly LOWER.

I don't claim these numbers to be conclusive. A study would have to be done on international crime rates. But I think it is enough to make people second guess the theory that the death penalty is much of a deterrent.

[Jhony5]

The people that commit crimes eligible for capitol punishment aren't exactly the types to weigh the concequences of their actions. Its common knowledge that the penalty for murder is going to be severe, whether its life in prison or death, so when one takes that step they are doing so thinking that they will not get caught.

The issue of deterrence is mute. Maybe its the excuse that many use for its existence, but we all know what its really about. Retribution.

[hugo]

I don't really see how you can claim that the death penalty is a deterrent. I have yet to find proof of that. Here are some interesting statistics on murder rates. Interpret them how you choose, but I feel that it proves that the death penalty does little, if nothing, to prevent people from murdering.

Source for Murder Rates: FBI Uniform Crime Statistics for 2004 (Published October, 2005)

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/state/

 

Murder Rates in States Where the Death Penalty Has Been Abolished (per 100,000)

Alaska: 5.6

Hawaii: 2.6

Iowa: 1.6

Maine: 1.4

Michigan: 6.4

North Dakota: 1.4

Rhode Island: 2.4

Vermont: 2.6

West Virginia: 3.7

D.C.: 35.8

 

Murder Rates in States with Death Penalty (not all, but several)

Texas: 6.1

Tennessee: 5.9

Nevada: 7.4

Virginia: 5.2

 

Average Murder Rate for State w/o Death Penalty (including DC): 5.7

Average Murder Rate for State WITH Death Penalty: 5.2

In my humble opinion, I don't see enough of a difference between the two to say that the Death Penalty is a deterrent.

Now, for shits and giggles, you take DC out of the equation because those numbers are so skewed and DC isn't actually a state. That puts the murder rate for abolished states at 2.3. Signifigantly LOWER.

I don't claim these numbers to be conclusive. A study would have to be done on international crime rates. But I think it is enough to make people second guess the theory that the death penalty is much of a deterrent.

 

These are the stupid stats that anti-death penalty proponents use. Did you ever think there just might be a causal relationship between high murder rates and the use of the death penalty? Econometric studies show that the death penalty does deter murders. Which is what any rational person would expect. Our whole criminal justice system is based on the common sense theory that harsher punishments act as a deterrent to crime. International crime rates have no bearing on the issue.

 

I think the percentage of blacks in the population largely explains the reason for D.C.'s high homicide rate and ND's low rate.

[hugo]

The people that commit crimes eligible for capitol punishment aren't exactly the types to weigh the concequences of their actions. Its common knowledge that the penalty for murder is going to be severe, whether its life in prison or death, so when one takes that step they are doing so thinking that they will not get caught.

The issue of deterrence is mute. Maybe its the excuse that many use for its existence, but we all know what its really about. Retribution.

 

Excerpts from:

 

DEATH PENALTY AND SENTENCING INFORMATION

In the United States 10/1/97

By Dudley Sharp

 

The death penalty debate in the U.S. is dominated by the fraudulent voice of the anti-death penalty movement. The culture of lies and deceit so dominates that movement that many of the falsehoods are now wrongly accepted as fact, by both advocates and opponents of capital punishment. The following report presents the true facts of the death penalty in America. If you are even casually aware of this public debate, you will note that every category contradicts the well-worn frauds presented by the anti-death penalty movement. The anti-death penalty movement specializes in the abolition of truth.

 

 

 

 

B. THE INCAPACITATION AND THE DETERRENT EFFECTS

 

SUMMARY - The incapacitation effect saves lives - that is, that by executing murderers you prevent them from murdering again and do, thereby, save innocent life (B.1-4, 7, 9, 10 & 15). The evidence of this is conclusive and incontrovertible. Furthermore, the individual deterrent effect also proves that executions save innocent life (B.7-9 & 11-18). This effect represents those potential murderers who did not murder under specific circumstances because of their fear of execution. There are many, perhaps thousands, of such documented cases, representing many innocent lives saved by the fear of execution. Circumstances dictate that the majority of these cases will never be documented and that the number of innocent lives saved by individual deterrence will be, and has been, much greater than we will ever be able to calculate. Finally, there are more than 30 years of respected academic studies which reveal a general, or systemic, deterrent effect, meaning that there is statistical proof that executions produce fewer murders (B. 7-9 & 11-18).

 

3) Death penalty opponents spend millions of dollars and countless man hours fighting the legal execution of, at most, 56 of our worst human rights violators per year, when they do nothing to fight for the end of those inhumane parole and probation release policies which result in the needless injury and slaughter of the innocent. "The U.S. Department of Justice estimates that convicted criminals free on parole and probation . . . commit