quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

If the blood-lustful could insure us no-one gets executed in error.....they might have a moral standing.... 

I've often thought about this, not so much in death penalty cases, but in cases where people have been wrongly convicted and spent years in prison for crimes they didn't commit. It just astonishes me that a system which prides itself on a suspect being "innocent until proven guilty" can somehow "prove" people guilty when they are, in fact, innocent. The implication here is that people are being declared guilty without adequate proof, which is a violation of the principle of "innocent until proven guilty."

I have the perfect solution, however: In any cases where someone is wrongly convicted, the judge and the prosecuting attorney(s) should be held accountable and made to serve the sentence that the wrongly convicted person would have gotten. That would be a little added incentive for them to make doubly sure that they have the right guy.

You might be interested in the following:

Ken Anderson, a former district attorney from Texas for 17 years will soon go before a Texas court of Inquiry for prosecutorial misconduct over the Morton case (Morton was convicted of murdering his wife; prosecuters did not admit a bloodied bandanna into evidence; post-conviction prosecutors tried to block DNA testing of the bandanna; as one might guess, eventually the DNA testing revealed the true killer's identity; Morton was released in 2011 after 25 years in prison - thank goodness he wasn't executed.)

The group who pushed for the DNA testing is called the Innocence Project. I encourage people who care about these types of issues to make a donation to this, or other groups who fight prosecutorial injustice. It happens, and it happens with greater frequency than we like to think, and it destroys people's lives. One other fact to consider - Morton had a 3 year old son. So Morton wrongly ends up in jail for killing his wife and this poor child ends up growing up without either parent. Heartbreaking. An entire family destroyed twice - once by the actual murder, and then again by prosecutorial misconduct.

I also point out the story of Sam Millsap, a former Texas prosector. He once prosecuted a man based on a single eyewitness report - and that man was executed. Later it was discovered that the eye witness was wrong. Sam Millsap now crusades against the death penalty. Bless him for at least being willing to admit he made a mistake, and to try to spend part of his life trying to effect positive change.

Those of you who think you would NEVER be in such a position (either wrongly accused, or making a mistake as a witness, etc.) need to seriously think twice. These protections are there for all of us should we ever end up wrongly accused. And being found "guilty" is not the same as actually being guilty of a crime. Mistakes are made. The process is a human one, and humans are not infallible. Those of you who believe in a god might want to leave the severest part of the punishment to god. I think life sentences are enough. It at least gives the small chance that in a case like Morton's, he might be exonerated. Sort of pointless if was already dead.

How many of you think you are so perfect that you never make a mistake?

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

Preston Hughes never committed a crime. He has no previous

Is this true?

From the Houston Chronicle:

Hughes, on probation for a 1985 conviction for aggravated sexual assault of child, was charged with capital murder and held without bond.

If so i would say that a "no previous " is wrong

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

It seems most here are saying facts are being ignored... yet those very same people are ignoring facts or refusing to comment on them to suit a preconceived notion... at least in my book.

I am not saying there are not inconsistencies but lets at least get some facts straight and stop believing this so called investigator out of hand.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElChupa

I'm sure he's a fine upstanding character. I think he ought to live with the leftists who want to save his sorry ass. One thing I learned even as a child is that leftists ALWAYS want to rule over others but exempt themselves from their silly ideas.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

Larson has a sense of humour, though. He'd probably be quite offended by that comparison.

quote:

What are those reasons

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElChupa

I'm sure he's a fine upstanding character. I think he ought to live with the leftists who want to save his sorry ass. One thing I learned even as a child is that leftists ALWAYS want to rule over others but exempt themselves from their silly ideas.

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u
princess,I read the same article this morning...what I found real interesting about it was that the man linked to the bandanna,subsequently to this case,murdered another young woman.
So lets think about this...if due diligence had been done during the first case,if proper police procedures had been followed,if some lazy ass cops hadn't convinced themselves that this poor man did it....perhaps,just perhaps they might have arrested the right motherfucker and thereby saved another young lady from the same fate as the first woman !
So remember every time we,as a society ,convict the wrong person fro some heinous crime it allows the guilty party to walk....and those capable of heinous acts are often predisposed to repeat them.
Especially once emboldened by getting away with it in the past.

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

It sounds like he should have gotten a new lawyer a while ago. But he is in Texas so I am not sure how much good it would have done. I doubt Obama will get involved or he already would have.

quote:

only say this because many conservatives who support the death penalty think it's cheaper, when, in fact, it's not. They go on and on about how they don't want their tax dollars spent keeping some low life in jail all their life, but they fail to take into consideration all the tax dollars spent on the death penalty legal process. And yes, while the process drags on, we are still paying for their imprisonment also. Again, add the death penalty to the growing list of things that conservatives are completely illogical on......

Add the death penalty to the growing list of things that bigots seem to think only happens on one side of the fence. I guess anything you can get to fuel that hate of the right is all good right?


Now all we need is 59 chiming in with those "awful cons" and the thread will be complete.

For someone constantly bemoaning the injection of the left/right paradigm you sure bring it up a lot.
In addition to being a one trick pony on this count,you add hypocrisy.
Must suck to be you

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Well I for one like to jump around a bit...I do not have a "form" post,one in which I consistently point out the flaws in one sides pov,while ignoring the fact that my side does the same thing.
See I will comment on most anything,I will deliver snark and derision ,as I see fit,on most subjects.....In short I am not a "one trick pony"
Alas,you are...and your trick,along with your act,is getting tired and old,real fast.


Oh,and the other difference,I deliver my unique brand of commentary with a certain style....you,not so much.
So while my stuff is read and enjoyed,yours is mostly just passed over .
Now you have no reason to take my word for any of this,but you asked and I answered.
Should you,for some unfathomable reason,doubt my word you could start a poll.....but do yourself a favor,find someone else to start it for you....if you want folks to click in

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoundSlave4Life

I'm against the death penalty in cases where there's a decent enough level a doubt to cause people to question the case.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Well I for one like to jump around a bit...I do not have a "form" post,one in which I consistently point out the flaws in one sides pov,while ignoring the fact that my side does the same thing.
See I will comment on most anything,I will deliver snark and derision ,as I see fit,on most subjects.....In short I am not a "one trick pony"
Alas,you are...and your trick,along with your act,is getting tired and old,real fast.


Oh,and the other difference,I deliver my unique brand of commentary with a certain style....you,not so much.
So while my stuff is read and enjoyed,yours is mostly just passed over .
Now you have no reason to take my word for any of this,but you asked and I answered.
Should you,for some unfathomable reason,doubt my word you could start a poll.....but do yourself a favor,find someone else to start it for you....if you want folks to click in

Of course you go after the bigots on both sides, but since my memory is so bad, perhaps you can link one of the ones where you slammed someone on the left.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

quote:

ORIGINAL: SadistDave

Due process is decided by law, not The Constitution. If due process is deemed to have been met by the law then any punishment that is not cruel and unusual is Constitutional. If the law were to state that a person could be found guilty because 3 people took witness against him/her, and that law was equally applied to all citizens, then due process clauses of The Constitution would have been met.

Again, you are interpreting something into The Constitution that does not exist. There is no mention of endless appeals in either the 5th or the 14th Amendments, which are the Amendments governing due process. So, show me where it states in The Constitution that any criminal is "entitled to exhaust all possible appeals regardless of how long those appeals might take." Please provide the exact text of The Constitution to which you are referring.

-SD-

This is the current interpretation of the Constitution. Changing that would require a Constitutional amendment. How else would you "change" the law. The law in question is NOT a statute. The law in question is the SCOTUS interpretation of "due process". And the the only way to change that is a Constitutional amendment.

How exactly are you proposing to change how "due process" is understood in this country? Armed revolution?

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

What are those reasons

I posted a few in the first four posts...maybe you missed them.
Let me know if you do not think them viable.

You may have also missed where I posted I did not believe in the death penalty in this case.... Not because I think him innocent but because there was no overwhelming eye witness testimony. I believe a life sentence would be appropriate however.

Unlike you with the evidence presented I think him guilty. New trial I agree....new lawyer I agree...but to say he is innocent just because an amateur decides to be a detective is not wise.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: SadistDave
By this idiotic argument, Obamacare is illegal and un-Constitutional. Up until Obamacare was approved by this SCOTUS, it was considered un-Constitutional under the Commerce Clause for the government to force Americans to buy any product or service. That was the common application of the Constitution based on the rulings of previous Supremes.

However, there was no Constitutional Amendment to make Obamacare legal was there? It wasn't even a popular law when it was forced through Congress. But it is now the law of the land. A law was written and passed, and that law was upheld because the Supreme Court applied their interpretations of the Constitution rather than upholding a previous interpretation.

That is how the laws change. There is no need for a Constitutional Amendment to change 99.999% of the laws in this country. All that is required to pass or change a law is to pass the law, and if it is challenged, prove that the law is Constitutional. It doesn't matter if it's a good law or a bad law. Obamacare proved to us that it didn't even have to be a law that anyone had actually read before it was passed to be deemed Constitutional by this SCOTUS.

-SD-

quote:

This is where I have the problem, because if the confessions are as valid and truthful as the police want us to believe then where are the photos and the crime scene evidence of multiple stab wounds indicative of someone 'wildly stabbing' the victims?

quote:

guilt nor innocence has been clearly established

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Every point you listed in your first post is either wrong or explainable. I am not against another appeal with a new lawyer and I am certainly against the execution but calling him innocent does not match this case or the facts.

quote:

So you believe that someone with a cut or punctured carotid artery is capable of remaining conscious and speaking for approximately quarter of an hour

quote:

And you also believe that somehow all the forensic evidence is accurate and truthful when it comes from a lab which has been investigated for malpractice?

quote:

Read the court transcripts and documents submitted to the court. Generally these tend to give more reliable information than articles published in a newspaper.