China Death Row Interviews; 2013

Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by Jade Falcon, Mar 11, 2014.


  1. IMHO one of the biggest problems with the entire criminal justice system is it is so lopsided and only one side has "skin in the game".

    The state (and all it people prosecuting) have unlimited funds to prosecute someone, have every reason politically to prosecute, and if they get it wrong have no skin in the game. In fact, as you can see from above posts it is nothing more than game to those involved. Essentially as long as the odds are low and it shows govts power to be able kill, its worth it to the prosecution side.

    What prosecution doesnt understand is that they arent playing a game. They ruin defendants lives when they get it wrong. Even when a defendant is acquitted, many time the defendant has been financially ruined and spent time in jail for being innocent.

    If the prosecuting side were held PERSONALLY criminally and civilly responsible where a false prosecution or an acquittal occurred, they would be much more careful with prosecutions.

    But in general, I think that qualified immunity is one of the reason we have a run-away government.
     

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. Not often we agree, but I think you're correct here.
     

  3. I'm far from left wing, but nice ad hominem attack. I too have taken part in the system, and I have seen its flaws up close and personal. I have been in the judges chambers when she admits that the law favors the defendant for suppression, but she'd advise I withdraw the motion if my client knows what's good for them. I have stood beside a child who has been raped in foster care, only to see a Child Services worker try to take them out of the home a second time. But what could I know, I was just a sleazy defense attorney that tried to keep your type within the bounds of the constitution and good sense.

    And as a guy whose friends probably vote 90% republican (for what that's worth) the death penalty is one place where I disagree with many of them, and have challenged them. I have a family member and several friends that currently work in for a prison. Mostly they want to think that a not guilty person could never be sent there. It is the easiest way to avoid painful doubt and go about the job, as a part of the system.

    Like I said, on the one hand, I respect the honesty you showed early in this thread, but was more than a little shocked by your later statements, as were other members. Knowing that you are a member of the bar and influential in law enforcement makes this thought process more than a personal viewpoint of some random internet poster.


    By your own acknowledgment, killing an innocent man to put a fear in others only works well if all believe that he was guilty. But I think in this thread, you have helped to pull the curtain back on the machine we call justice.
     
  4. Where in this thread did I say we should not lock certain people up for life? Where did I say we shouldn't use detention to keep society safe?

    Stay classy, my friend!
     
  5. G26S239

    G26S239 NRA Patron

    What you have done in this thread is allude to the dreaded R word with the post quoted below.
    Opposition to death penalty? Check.
    Citing racially motivated injustice? Check.

    You state very directly that you are opposed to the death penalty and allude to society at large as targeting blacks, hispanics and poor people with it.

    So apparently you do believe that blacks, hispanics and poor people are considered less valuable and are therefore more likely to end up wrongly convicted on death row.

    Taking that and inferring from that you also believe that blacks, hispanics and poor people are more likely to be wrongly imprisoned in non capital cases does not seem like much of a reach.

    I have heard that routine before and not just in the PRK either. While I was attending Weber State College, now WSU, in 1987 Dale Selby Pierre's number was finally coming up 13 years after the Hi Fi Shop murders and a young black lady in the Student Union was complaining about how they just wanna kill ******s. Sure. :upeyes: That was it. It had nothing to do with 5 people being tortured, a pen kicked in a guy's ear, a girl repeatedly raped, all forced to drink Drano and 3 of them being murdered. It was because he was black.

    Same with children's storybook author Tookie Williams. He was killed because he was black not for committing 4 murders in 2 separate robberies. I wonder if Tookie's fan club ever considered why Beverly Cleary, Dr Suess or Maurice Sendak weren't also executed after writing children's books?
     
  6. What about the situations where a guilty person is found not guilty. If it is later determined that the not guilty verdict was erroneous, should the prosecution receive the sentence which should have been imposed?


    Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
     
  7. Except how you show that that a person that is found not guilty was guilty. The only way to show the "not guilty" were "guilty" is to have a second trial.

    You know that old 5th Amendment thing gets in the way...

    "nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb"
     
  8. Nice Strawman, but let's look at your arguments:

    Every reputable study ever performed showed that the death penalty is applied in a racially disparate manner. All said and done, when 100 white men and 100 black men commit the same type of murder 1, more of the blacks will be put to death.

    The does not mean that every black man put on death row was innocent. It does mean that the death penalty isn't racially fair. If the roles were reversed and 30 out of 100 white people charged with murder were put on death row compared to 15 out of 100 blacks or hispanics, how would you feel? What if evidence shows that between 1% and 2% were not guilty?

    We want all members of society to have respect for the rule of law. How do you achieve that when evidence shows the law and the courts themselves are not impartial?

    At the end of the day, when you strip out the emotion, it comes down to whether you think that the death penalty is enough of a deterrent to future crime to justify killing a few innocent people. I don't. Some people obviously do.
     
  9. G26S239

    G26S239 NRA Patron

    Actually Blacks commit a grossly disproportionate number of murders and numerically more murders than whites http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3


    While more whites have been executed since the death penalty was restored in 1976. In fact whites had the honor of donating the first candidate to be executed in the entire nation after the death penalty was restored in the wake of Furman vs Georgia. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/race-death-row-inmates-executed-1976#defend
    Not to whites apparently.
    More whites are executed. Spin that.
    What if frogs had wings and didn't bump their ass so often?
    What laws are you referring to? The New York 7 round limit for magazines? The CA Safe Handgun List? The DOMA? I distinctly recall the defense team for Robert Alton Harris pulling a claim of fetal alcohol syndrome out of their keister in 1992. That claim had no credibility and only convinced me even more how insincere these claims are. Of course since they see it as lying for a good cause it is worth it, right?
    I see deliberately releasing the likes of Edmund Kemper, Kenneth McDuff, Richard Davis, Lawrence Singleton, Arthur Shawcross et al to prey on even more victims as a gross injustice.

    Had McDuff been executed either of the two times he was sent to the electric chair instead of receiving stays his total number of murder victims would have been 3.
    As a result of his death sentence being vacated by Furman vs Georgia in 1972 Kenneth McDuff was alive and therefore able to be released in 1989 after serving 23 years in prison. He murdered 11 more people. In his specific case because he was not executed prior to having his sentence vacated by the Supreme Court he was still alive to be paroled and was therefore able to murder 11 more victims bringing his total from 3 to 14. Your side won that round big time with the Furman versus Georgia decision. A similar decision* in CA the same year got Charles Manson, Tex Watson et al off death row. Another victory for your side.

    *CA v Anderson was decided a few months prior to Furman v Georgia. Manson et al would have been covered either way.

    Correction to above. Gary Gilmore was the first execution after restoration. John Spenkelink was the 2nd, he was the first executed after restoration who had appealed his case. Gilmore had actively sought execution.
     
    #89 G26S239, Mar 16, 2014
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2014
  10. Rizzo

    Rizzo Garbage Day!

    4,643
    150
    1,913
  11. Revenge is good, it doesn't solve the problem, but if someone killed my loved one, I would feel better after killing that person. Depending on the circumstances of course. I would like to have the option.
     
  12. Haldor

    Haldor Retired EE

    Yah, but is it Breaking News.
     
  13. Peace Warrior

    Peace Warrior Am Yisrael Chai
    CLM

    Do yourself a favor and stop, I mean STOP NOW, with the hanging around and listening to the DA in your area. Please........
     
  14. Peace Warrior

    Peace Warrior Am Yisrael Chai
    CLM

    :faint:
     
  15. Peace Warrior

    Peace Warrior Am Yisrael Chai
    CLM

    Sometimes I get p*ssed off when you're right, but not this time.
     

Share This Page