Well, the insanity plea was always inevitable. I do not know whether Holmes is mentally ill or not but honestly I don't care. How tiny is the percentage of mentally ill individuals who plot and carry out mass murder the way Holmes did? How can you be not guilty by reason of insanity when you spent months plotting your crime? I think mental illness is too often pointed to as an excuse. This man deserves the death penalty.
"Prosecutors say Holmes spent months buying weapons, ammunition and materials for explosives and scouted the theater in advance. He donned police-style body armor, tossed a gas canister into the seats and opened fire, they say."
Agree, falling back on insanity defense when this guy was very rational in his plans is a crock. But rather than kill him.....lock him up....and study him (if he voluntarily agrees) to find out what made him tick and maybe we can learn from him and prevent some of this type of crime.
To you, it may not be healthy to seek vengeance... but to 'others' it is. To some, it is not healthy to attend parole hearings every two years to protest the potential release of the scumbag who raped and murdered your child.
It's easy to philosophize when it wasn't your child under the knife.
May be healthy for those that have been directly affected by the violent act. But I don't feel that people that stand on the sidelines and want bloody revenge is a healthy position. It sucks when someone is killed but to light the torches and march to the prison to hang em......not so much.
Well, the insanity plea was always inevitable. I do not know whether Holmes is mentally ill or not but honestly I don't care. How tiny is the percentage of mentally ill individuals who plot and carry out mass murder the way Holmes did? How can you be not guilty by reason of insanity when you spent months plotting your crime? I think mental illness is too often pointed to as an excuse. This man deserves the death penalty.
"Prosecutors say Holmes spent months buying weapons, ammunition and materials for explosives and scouted the theater in advance. He donned police-style body armor, tossed a gas canister into the seats and opened fire, they say."
Agree, falling back on insanity defense when this guy was very rational in his plans is a crock. But rather than kill him.....lock him up....and study him (if he voluntarily agrees) to find out what made him tick and maybe we can learn from him and prevent some of this type of crime.
It would be interesting to know what could be learned, but I would not want the courts to barter favors with him in order to get his cooperation. He doesn't deserve a special cell, extra privileges, more visitation...whatever they would need to give him in order to get his voluntary agreement.
To you, it may not be healthy to seek vengeance... but to 'others' it is. To some, it is not healthy to attend parole hearings every two years to protest the potential release of the scumbag who raped and murdered your child.
It's easy to philosophize when it wasn't your child under the knife.
May be healthy for those that have been directly affected by the violent act. But I don't feel that people that stand on the sidelines and want bloody revenge is a healthy position. It sucks when someone is killed but to light the torches and march to the prison to hang em......not so much.
It's not so much that they are eager for blood as it is they share some of the pain the survivors feel.
There have been cases that have bothered me to the core of my soul. Standing on the outside and bothered as much as I have been disturbed, I can only imagine the pain grieving parents must feel after losing the most precious thing in their life in the manner in which they have.
For these people, I will line the streets to show my support for them as well as my disgust for the crime.
It was the movie 'Dead Man Walking' that got me into Pearl Jam, with the song 'Long Road' on the soundtrack album. Was never a big fan of them until I heard Vedder sing that song.
The Catholic nun who changed the US debate on the death penalty forever
Sister Helen Prejean's Dead Man Walking shook American attitudes on capital punishment. And 20 years on, it still inspires
Amy Goodman
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 20 June 2013
Sister Helen Prejean, campaigner for death row prisoners as well as families of murder victims, on 4 February 2013. Photograph: Graeme Robertson
Thirty years ago, a Catholic nun working in a poor neighborhood of New Orleans was asked if she would be a penpal to a death row prisoner. Sister Helen Prejean agreed, forever changing her life, as well as the debate on capital punishment in the US.
Her experiences inspired her first book, "Dead Man Walking: An Eyewitness Account of the Death Penalty in the United States," which has just been republished on its 20th anniversary. She was a penpal with Patrick Sonnier, a convicted murderer on death row in Louisiana's notorious Angola prison. In her distinctive southern accent, she told me of her first visit to Sonnier:
"It was scary as all get-out. I had never been in a prison before … I was scared to meet him personally. When I saw his face, it was so human, it blew me away. I got a realization then, no matter what he had done … he is worth more than the worst thing he ever did. And the journey began from there."
Sister Helen became Sonnier's spiritual adviser, conversing with him as his execution approached. She spent his final hours with him, and witnessed his execution on 5 April 1984. She also was a spiritual adviser to another Angola death row prisoner Robert Lee Willie, who was executed the same year. The book was made into a film, directed by Tim Robbins and starring Susan Sarandon as Prejean and Sean Penn as the character Matthew Poncelet, an amalgam of Sonnier and Williams. Sarandon won the Oscar for best actress, and the film's success further intensified the national debate on the death penalty.
The United States is the only industrialized country in the world still using the death penalty. There are currently 3,125 people on death row in the US, although death penalty opponents continue to make progress. Maryland is the most recent state to abolish capital punishment. After passage of the law, Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley wrote:
"Evidence shows that the death penalty is not a deterrent, it cannot be administered without racial bias, and it costs three times as much as life in prison without parole. What's more, there is no way to reverse a mistake if an innocent person is put to death."
Studies of the racial bias abound. The Death Penalty Information Center, citing a recent Louisiana Law Review study, reports that in Louisiana, the odds of a death sentence were 97% higher for crimes in which the victim was white than those where the victim was African-American. Nationally, 75% of the cases that resulted in an execution had white victims.
Although Colorado is not one of the states to abolish the death penalty, Governor John Hickenlooper used his executive authority to grant a temporary reprieve to one of the three death row prisoners there, saying:
"It is a legitimate question whether we as a state should be taking lives."
This week, Indiana released a former death row prisoner. Paula Cooper was convicted for the 1985 murder of Ruth Pelke. Cooper was sentenced to death at the age of 16, and was, at the time, the youngest person on death row in this country. Pelke's grandson, Bill Pelke, actively campaigned for clemency for her:
"I became convinced, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that my grandmother would have been appalled by the fact that this girl was on death row and there was so much hate and anger towards her … When Paula was taken off of death row in the fall of 1989, I thought, 'Well, that's it. She's off of death row. My mission has been accomplished.'"
Nevertheless, Pelke joined a march from Florida's death row prison to Atlanta, on which he met Sister Helen Prejean:
"After 17 days of walking down the highways with this nun, you get a real education about the death penalty. It was on that march with Sister Helen Prejean where I dedicated my life to the abolition of the death penalty. As long as there's any state in this world that's killing their own citizens, I'm going to stand up and say that it's wrong."
Prejean said one of her greatest regrets was that she failed to reach out to the families of the murder victims while she was spiritual adviser to Sonnier and Willie. She went on to found Survive, an organization to support families of murder victims like Ruth Pelke. She wrapped up our conversation this week by saying:
"I've accompanied six human beings and watched them be killed. I have a dedication to them to do this; I can't walk away from this. I'm going to be doing this until I die."
"Evidence shows that the death penalty is not a deterrent, it cannot be administered without racial bias, and it costs three times as much as life in prison without parole. What's more, there is no way to reverse a mistake if an innocent person is put to death."
/thread.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
"Evidence shows that the death penalty is not a deterrent, it cannot be administered without racial bias, and it costs three times as much as life in prison without parole. What's more, there is no way to reverse a mistake if an innocent person is put to death."
/thread.
Except the only 'real' reason to pause on the Death Penalty is the last reason you quoted (executing an innocent man).
There is contradictory evidence that shows the Death Penalty is indeed a deterrent:
Using a panel data set of over 3,000 counties from 1977 to 1996, Professors Hashem Dezhbakhsh, Paul R. Rubin, and Joanna M. Shepherd of Emory University found that each execution, on average, results in 18 fewer murders.[17] Using state-level panel data from 1960 to 2000, Professors Dezhbakhsh and Shepherd were able to compare the relationship between executions and murder incidents before, during, and after the U.S. Supreme Court's death penalty moratorium.[18] They found that executions had a highly significant negative relationship with murder incidents. Additionally, the implementation of state moratoria is associated with the increased incidence of murders.
Separately, Professor Shepherd's analysis of monthly data from 1977 to 1999 found three important findings.[19]
First, each execution, on average, is associated with three fewer murders. The deterred murders included both crimes of passion and murders by intimates.
Second, executions deter the murder of whites and African-Americans. Each execution prevents the murder of one white person, 1.5 African-Americans, and 0.5 persons of other races.
Third, shorter waits on death row are associated with increased deterrence. For each additional 2.75-year reduction in the death row wait until execution, one murder is deterred.
Professors H. Naci Mocan and R. Kaj Gittings of the University of Colorado at Denver have published two studies confirming the deterrent effect of capital punishment. The first study used state-level data from 1977 to 1997 to analyze the influence of executions, commutations, and removals from death row on the incidence of murder.[20] For each additional execution, on average, about five murders were deterred. Alternatively, for each additional commutation, on average, five additional murders resulted. A removal from death row by either state courts or the U.S. Supreme Court is associated with an increase of one additional murder. Addressing criticism of their work,[21] Professors Mocan and Gittings conducted additional analyses and found that their original findings provided robust support for the deterrent effect of capital punishment.[22]
Two studies by Paul R. Zimmerman, a Federal Communications Commission economist, also support the deterrent effect of capital punishment. Using state-level data from 1978 to 1997, Zimmerman found that each additional execution, on average, results in 14 fewer murders.[23] Zimmerman's second study, using similar data, found that executions conducted by electrocution are the most effective at providing deterrence.[24]
Using a small state-level data set from 1995 to 1999, Professor Robert B. Ekelund of Auburn University and his colleagues analyzed the effect that executions have on single incidents of murder and multiple incidents of murder.[25] They found that executions reduced single murder rates, while there was no effect on multiple murder rates.
In summary, the recent studies using panel data techniques have confirmed what we learned decades ago: Capital punishment does, in fact, save lives. Each additional execution appears to deter between three and 18 murders. While opponents of capital punishment allege that it is unfairly used against African-Americans, each additional execution deters the murder of 1.5 African-Americans. Further moratoria, commuted sentences, and death row removals appear to increase the incidence of murder.
The strength of these findings has caused some legal scholars, originally opposed to the death penalty on moral grounds, to rethink their case. In particular, Professor Cass R. Sunstein of the University of Chicago has commented:
If the recent evidence of deterrence is shown to be correct, then opponents of capital punishment will face an uphill struggle on moral grounds. If each execution is saving lives, the harms of capital punishment would have to be very great to justify its abolition, far greater than most critics have heretofore alleged.[26]
Further... racial bias is not as much in play as face value might suggest:
Under a competitive grant process, the National Institute of Justice awarded the RAND Corporation a grant to determine whether racial disparities exist in the federal death penalty system. The resulting 2006 RAND study set out to determine what factors, including the defendant's race, victim's race, and crime characteristics, affect the decision to seek a death penalty case.[3] Three independent teams of researchers were tasked with developing their own methodologies to analyze the data. Only after each team independently drew their own conclusions did they share their findings with each other.
When first looking at the raw data without controlling for case characteristics, RAND found that large race effects with the decision to seek the death penalty are more likely to occur when the defendants are white and when the victims are white.[4] However, these disparities disappeared in each of the three studies when the heinousness of the crimes was taken into account.[5] The RAND study concludes that the findings support the view that decisions to seek the death penalty are driven by characteristics of crimes rather than by race. RAND's findings are very compelling because three independent research teams, using the same data but different methodologies, reached the same conclusions.
While there is little evidence that the federal capital punishment system treats minorities unfairly, some may argue that the death penalty systems in certain states may be discriminatory. One such state is Maryland. In May 2001, then-Governor Parris Glendening instituted a moratorium on the use of capital punishment in Maryland in light of concerns that it may be unevenly applied to minorities, especially African-Americans. In 2000, Governor Glendening commissioned University of Maryland Professor of Criminology Ray Paternoster to study the possibility of racial discrimination in the application of the death penalty in Maryland. The results of Professor Paternoster's study found that black defendants who murder white victims are substantially more likely to be charged with a capital crime and sentenced to death.[6]
In 2003, Governor Robert L. Ehrlich wisely lifted the moratorium. His decision was justified. In 2005, a careful review of the study by Professor of Statistics and Sociology Richard Berk of the University of California, Los Angeles, and his coauthors found that the results of Professor Paternoster's study do not stand up to statistical scrutiny.[7] According to Professor Berk's re-analysis, "For both capital charges and death sentences, race either played no role or a small role that is very difficult to specify. In short, it is very difficult to find convincing evidence for racial effects in the Maryland data and if there are any, they may not be additive."[8] Further, race may have a small influence because "cases with a black defendant and white victim or 'other' racial combination are less likely to have a death sentence."[9]
The costs associated with the Death Penalty are only due to the process we could most certainly streamline if we so desired; however, costs have little to do with whether or not the Death Penalty is right or wrong.
While statistics might differ and one may choose to support whichever statistic works for their belief system... the bottom line is that we are dealing with people who have acted very badly. They have murdered someone and often in very gruesome fashion. You don't wish to be executed? Don't go kill someone. Leave other people's children alone.
Statistics are funny things: they can be manipulated to show just about anything. Regardless of whatever statistics one might choose to support... how does one quantify the pain surviving parents might feel and the need they might have to see the murderer of their child pay for his demonic crime in appropriate fashion?
It's just my opinion, but we sure seem to go out of our way to make sure devilish, sick, and demented freaks get the full measure of our compassion and mercy when maybe... our efforts should be about compensating those that need it. Again... it's easy to be sympathetic towards a foul creep who might have raped and mutilated a child when that child isn't ours; but try living in those shoes knowing the murderer is alive and well in a prison somewhere with hot meals, cable television, and pen pals and nuns that tell them they love them and forgive them.
Each execution prevents the murder of one white person, 1.5 African-Americans, and 0.5 persons of other races.
Third, shorter waits on death row are associated with increased deterrence. For each additional 2.75-year reduction in the death row wait until execution, one murder is deterred.
Sorry, but I really find it hard to take this one seriously.
80% of the Worlds top criminologists have stated that the death penalty does not act as a deterrent.
Each execution prevents the murder of one white person, 1.5 African-Americans, and 0.5 persons of other races.
Third, shorter waits on death row are associated with increased deterrence. For each additional 2.75-year reduction in the death row wait until execution, one murder is deterred.
Sorry, but I really find it hard to take this one seriously.
80% of the Worlds top criminologists have stated that the death penalty does not act as a deterrent.
That statistic was offered by one of the several studies noted in the passage that said the same thing: the death penalty does act as a deterrent. They are in contrast to statistics provided by others that say the opposite thing. Believe what you wish, but my point for offering the piece was to highlight what I already stated and what I am sure you already know or can at least gather given what is on the table right now: that statistics can be manipulated to support almost anything one wishes to say.
Regardless of the deterrent variable... I don't argue for the Death Penalty so it might serve us as a deterrent. As nice as this might be, I argue the DP so that, for some, closure to a horrific event might be facilitated. It's not right that we stand on the sidelines, pat people on the head, and tell them we know what's best with regards to what justice should look like because they are emotionally attached to the event and cannot think straight. The grieving parents that wish for the death of the murderer that rape and kill their child should get that. And so should the memory of the deceased.
I would just as soon have nobody kill anybody and then we wouldn't have to worry about what to do with people after the fact; but the bottom line is some people commit very, very grievous offences. Because they have forced our hands with their homicidal capacity... they need to be dealt with in a manner befitting of their crime.
You will never get anywhere telling me that after raping a 6 month old, murdering the infant in the process, that death is too harsh for Steven Smith (executed in Ohio). You might get somewhere arguing that we might execute the wrong person.
"Evidence shows that the death penalty is not a deterrent, it cannot be administered without racial bias, and it costs three times as much as life in prison without parole. What's more, there is no way to reverse a mistake if an innocent person is put to death."
/thread.
Except the only 'real' reason to pause on the Death Penalty is the last reason you quoted (executing an innocent man).
the only "real" reason in your eyes I suppose, is the only reason I need. But I also, even as a non-theist, believe it is not up to any man to determine the ultimate demise of another. But because it cannot be administered without racial bias is pretty huge to me as well.
to me, the "playing god" reason is even more important than the "executing an innocent person" reason.
BESIDES BEING CAUGHT ON TAPE, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY. YOU CANNOT DISPUTE THAT.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
It bothers the hell out of me. What bothers me more is some people's indifference to the intrusion. I'd like to know how we went from a system of checks and balances being necessary to the security of our people to the government being able to do whatever they see fit with no recourse...........and that the majority of people don't seem to give a shit.
Rant aside, I think that capital punishment is antiquated and panders to the lowest common denominator of rational thinking. In matters of life and death the "Fuck it. He did it first" mentality is a poor fit, at best.
Our government is working hard to ensure that everything is caught on tape.
that doesn't bother me. you wanna see me on the toilet? I'll hold up the damn dirty paper for you.
Governmental erosion of civil liberties was also tolerated by the majority of Germans in the 1930's. Most of them knew they wouldn't be effected. Unfortunately though, a lot of other people were effected.
You seriously wouldn't mind living in a mass surveillance, police state?
the only "real" reason in your eyes I suppose, is the only reason I need. But I also, even as a non-theist, believe it is not up to any man to determine the ultimate demise of another. But because it cannot be administered without racial bias is pretty huge to me as well.
to me, the "playing god" reason is even more important than the "executing an innocent person" reason.
BESIDES BEING CAUGHT ON TAPE, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY. YOU CANNOT DISPUTE THAT.
One can doubt anything if they believe hard enough. Look how idiots bought OJ's can't fit my hand into this glove spectacle.
Multiple pieces of evidence can assure us of guilt. Blood, semen, other DNA, witnesses, testimony, confessions and other various pieces of evidence such as text messages, emails, and phone calls can add up to absolute certainty without video footage. I mean... are you doubting Steven Smith's guilt? Look into that case if you have the fortitude. And, after you're done... tell me you feel the death penalty was too harsh.
We are not deciding the fate of guys like Clifford Olson. He decided his own fate when he kidnapped, raped, and mutilated multiple children. "Gee, Clifford. We really wish you never killed all those kids, but seeing as you did... it's time to go to sleep. It didn't have to end this way you know."
Of course, fate for Clifford was far better than he deserved. In my mind, we're not better for sparing his life- we were weak and the parents of his victims were tortured with knowledge of his prison cell antics, sex dolls, cash for bodies, pension plan on behalf of taxpayers' money and just the simple fact that he lived while their most precious commodities had to be dug out of the ground in pieces. These people deserved much better and frankly, Olson deserved death.
Rant aside, I think that capital punishment is antiquated and panders to the lowest common denominator of rational thinking. In matters of life and death the "Fuck it. He did it first" mentality is a poor fit, at best.
Well, I guess this one settles it then.
What an over-simplification that shows little to no regard for the murdered and the survivors. What are you saying to these people? "Hey. Get over it already. Fuk's sakes, man. What's your problem? Just chill!"
If it's at the lowest common denominator of rational thinking... that is because some homicidal bastard dragged us there. It's not like anybody wants to be there- we're forced to be there.
What an over-simplification that shows little to no regard for the murdered and the survivors. What are you saying to these people? "Hey. Get over it already. Fuk's sakes, man. What's your problem? Just chill!"
If it's at the lowest common denominator of rational thinking... that is because some homicidal bastard dragged us there. It's not like anybody wants to be there- we're forced to be there.
What an over-simplification that shows little to no regard for the murdered and the survivors. What are you saying to these people? "Hey. Get over it already. Fuk's sakes, man. What's your problem? Just chill!"
If it's at the lowest common denominator of rational thinking... that is because some homicidal bastard dragged us there. It's not like anybody wants to be there- we're forced to be there.
Don't skim over this part: Family members of Olson's victims had been complaining that killers like Olson could have a hearing every two years, each time requiring them to relive the original ordeal. They had been calling for changes to the law, "so that the families don't have to go through this grief and aggravation every two years," Michael Massing, whose daughter was murdered by Olson, said at the time.
Yeah. Really fucking cool. Let's pat our indifferent selves on the back while we leave those families to just get over it already.
Yeah. Really fucking cool. Let's pat our indifferent selves on the back while we leave those families to just get over it already.
Who's indifferent? And who's telling the victims families to 'just get over it already'? Nobody is.
Nobody is directly saying it (other than Dudeman who came about as close as you can), but by placing the families through these types of ordeals and ignoring their pleas for a more definitive measure of justice... we act indifferently towards their needs and are essentially telling them they need to move on.
You cannot advocate for a sick mutant and the grieving survivors at the same time.
I know this makes no difference to you, but to be sure you know what my position is... I do not advocate for wide sweeping death sentences. I wish for it in the extreme cases- ones involving children, confinement and torture, pre-planned, mass or serial style, etc. In short... the nature of the crime should reflect our sentiments towards the murderer and dictate the level of punishment.
The guy who comes home from his second job to see his diva wife in bed with the neighbour, gets in a fight and kills someone (or both) in a fit of rage should not receive the death penalty- prison suits me just fine for such an individual who momentarily lost their mind and went out of control. The guy who pounds nails into children's heads after he rapes them needs to die.
Our government is working hard to ensure that everything is caught on tape.
that doesn't bother me. you wanna see me on the toilet? I'll hold up the damn dirty paper for you.
Governmental erosion of civil liberties was also tolerated by the majority of Germans in the 1930's. Most of them knew they wouldn't be effected. Unfortunately though, a lot of other people were effected.
You seriously wouldn't mind living in a mass surveillance, police state?
I guess I just don't see it getting the point that you do. I personally think what the brits have done having surveillance cameras on every street corner is a good start in fighting crime and making people safer.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I never told anyone to "Get over it". In fact, I am a member of such a family. The loss of a loved one at the hand of a murderer is something that one never gets over.
If hope can grow from dirt like me, it can be done. - EV
I never told anyone to "Get over it". In fact, I am a member of such a family. The loss of a loved one at the hand of a murderer is something that one never gets over.
Governmental erosion of civil liberties was also tolerated by the majority of Germans in the 1930's. Most of them knew they wouldn't be effected. Unfortunately though, a lot of other people were effected.
You seriously wouldn't mind living in a mass surveillance, police state?
I guess I just don't see it getting the point that you do. I personally think what the brits have done having surveillance cameras on every street corner is a good start in fighting crime and making people safer.
I never told anyone to "Get over it". In fact, I am a member of such a family. The loss of a loved one at the hand of a murderer is something that one never gets over.
I am sorry to hear this, Dudeman.
Thank you.
If hope can grow from dirt like me, it can be done. - EV
Governmental erosion of civil liberties was also tolerated by the majority of Germans in the 1930's. Most of them knew they wouldn't be effected. Unfortunately though, a lot of other people were effected.
You seriously wouldn't mind living in a mass surveillance, police state?
I guess I just don't see it getting the point that you do. I personally think what the brits have done having surveillance cameras on every street corner is a good start in fighting crime and making people safer.
Call me naïve, but I feel the same.
If hope can grow from dirt like me, it can be done. - EV
Comments
just wanted to let you know there was a term for it is all ...
I know! All good.
It would be interesting to know what could be learned, but I would not want the courts to barter favors with him in order to get his cooperation. He doesn't deserve a special cell, extra privileges, more visitation...whatever they would need to give him in order to get his voluntary agreement.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
It's not so much that they are eager for blood as it is they share some of the pain the survivors feel.
There have been cases that have bothered me to the core of my soul. Standing on the outside and bothered as much as I have been disturbed, I can only imagine the pain grieving parents must feel after losing the most precious thing in their life in the manner in which they have.
For these people, I will line the streets to show my support for them as well as my disgust for the crime.
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
Appreciate this, Chadwick! Have a great weekend.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... punishment
The Catholic nun who changed the US debate on the death penalty forever
Sister Helen Prejean's Dead Man Walking shook American attitudes on capital punishment. And 20 years on, it still inspires
Amy Goodman
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 20 June 2013
Sister Helen Prejean, campaigner for death row prisoners as well as families of murder victims, on 4 February 2013. Photograph: Graeme Robertson
Thirty years ago, a Catholic nun working in a poor neighborhood of New Orleans was asked if she would be a penpal to a death row prisoner. Sister Helen Prejean agreed, forever changing her life, as well as the debate on capital punishment in the US.
Her experiences inspired her first book, "Dead Man Walking: An Eyewitness Account of the Death Penalty in the United States," which has just been republished on its 20th anniversary. She was a penpal with Patrick Sonnier, a convicted murderer on death row in Louisiana's notorious Angola prison. In her distinctive southern accent, she told me of her first visit to Sonnier:
"It was scary as all get-out. I had never been in a prison before … I was scared to meet him personally. When I saw his face, it was so human, it blew me away. I got a realization then, no matter what he had done … he is worth more than the worst thing he ever did. And the journey began from there."
Sister Helen became Sonnier's spiritual adviser, conversing with him as his execution approached. She spent his final hours with him, and witnessed his execution on 5 April 1984. She also was a spiritual adviser to another Angola death row prisoner Robert Lee Willie, who was executed the same year. The book was made into a film, directed by Tim Robbins and starring Susan Sarandon as Prejean and Sean Penn as the character Matthew Poncelet, an amalgam of Sonnier and Williams. Sarandon won the Oscar for best actress, and the film's success further intensified the national debate on the death penalty.
The United States is the only industrialized country in the world still using the death penalty. There are currently 3,125 people on death row in the US, although death penalty opponents continue to make progress. Maryland is the most recent state to abolish capital punishment. After passage of the law, Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley wrote:
"Evidence shows that the death penalty is not a deterrent, it cannot be administered without racial bias, and it costs three times as much as life in prison without parole. What's more, there is no way to reverse a mistake if an innocent person is put to death."
Studies of the racial bias abound. The Death Penalty Information Center, citing a recent Louisiana Law Review study, reports that in Louisiana, the odds of a death sentence were 97% higher for crimes in which the victim was white than those where the victim was African-American. Nationally, 75% of the cases that resulted in an execution had white victims.
Although Colorado is not one of the states to abolish the death penalty, Governor John Hickenlooper used his executive authority to grant a temporary reprieve to one of the three death row prisoners there, saying:
"It is a legitimate question whether we as a state should be taking lives."
This week, Indiana released a former death row prisoner. Paula Cooper was convicted for the 1985 murder of Ruth Pelke. Cooper was sentenced to death at the age of 16, and was, at the time, the youngest person on death row in this country. Pelke's grandson, Bill Pelke, actively campaigned for clemency for her:
"I became convinced, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that my grandmother would have been appalled by the fact that this girl was on death row and there was so much hate and anger towards her … When Paula was taken off of death row in the fall of 1989, I thought, 'Well, that's it. She's off of death row. My mission has been accomplished.'"
Nevertheless, Pelke joined a march from Florida's death row prison to Atlanta, on which he met Sister Helen Prejean:
"After 17 days of walking down the highways with this nun, you get a real education about the death penalty. It was on that march with Sister Helen Prejean where I dedicated my life to the abolition of the death penalty. As long as there's any state in this world that's killing their own citizens, I'm going to stand up and say that it's wrong."
Prejean said one of her greatest regrets was that she failed to reach out to the families of the murder victims while she was spiritual adviser to Sonnier and Willie. She went on to found Survive, an organization to support families of murder victims like Ruth Pelke. She wrapped up our conversation this week by saying:
"I've accompanied six human beings and watched them be killed. I have a dedication to them to do this; I can't walk away from this. I'm going to be doing this until I die."
/thread.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Except the only 'real' reason to pause on the Death Penalty is the last reason you quoted (executing an innocent man).
There is contradictory evidence that shows the Death Penalty is indeed a deterrent:
Using a panel data set of over 3,000 counties from 1977 to 1996, Professors Hashem Dezhbakhsh, Paul R. Rubin, and Joanna M. Shepherd of Emory University found that each execution, on average, results in 18 fewer murders.[17] Using state-level panel data from 1960 to 2000, Professors Dezhbakhsh and Shepherd were able to compare the relationship between executions and murder incidents before, during, and after the U.S. Supreme Court's death penalty moratorium.[18] They found that executions had a highly significant negative relationship with murder incidents. Additionally, the implementation of state moratoria is associated with the increased incidence of murders.
Separately, Professor Shepherd's analysis of monthly data from 1977 to 1999 found three important findings.[19]
First, each execution, on average, is associated with three fewer murders. The deterred murders included both crimes of passion and murders by intimates.
Second, executions deter the murder of whites and African-Americans. Each execution prevents the murder of one white person, 1.5 African-Americans, and 0.5 persons of other races.
Third, shorter waits on death row are associated with increased deterrence. For each additional 2.75-year reduction in the death row wait until execution, one murder is deterred.
Professors H. Naci Mocan and R. Kaj Gittings of the University of Colorado at Denver have published two studies confirming the deterrent effect of capital punishment. The first study used state-level data from 1977 to 1997 to analyze the influence of executions, commutations, and removals from death row on the incidence of murder.[20] For each additional execution, on average, about five murders were deterred. Alternatively, for each additional commutation, on average, five additional murders resulted. A removal from death row by either state courts or the U.S. Supreme Court is associated with an increase of one additional murder. Addressing criticism of their work,[21] Professors Mocan and Gittings conducted additional analyses and found that their original findings provided robust support for the deterrent effect of capital punishment.[22]
Two studies by Paul R. Zimmerman, a Federal Communications Commission economist, also support the deterrent effect of capital punishment. Using state-level data from 1978 to 1997, Zimmerman found that each additional execution, on average, results in 14 fewer murders.[23] Zimmerman's second study, using similar data, found that executions conducted by electrocution are the most effective at providing deterrence.[24]
Using a small state-level data set from 1995 to 1999, Professor Robert B. Ekelund of Auburn University and his colleagues analyzed the effect that executions have on single incidents of murder and multiple incidents of murder.[25] They found that executions reduced single murder rates, while there was no effect on multiple murder rates.
In summary, the recent studies using panel data techniques have confirmed what we learned decades ago: Capital punishment does, in fact, save lives. Each additional execution appears to deter between three and 18 murders. While opponents of capital punishment allege that it is unfairly used against African-Americans, each additional execution deters the murder of 1.5 African-Americans. Further moratoria, commuted sentences, and death row removals appear to increase the incidence of murder.
The strength of these findings has caused some legal scholars, originally opposed to the death penalty on moral grounds, to rethink their case. In particular, Professor Cass R. Sunstein of the University of Chicago has commented:
If the recent evidence of deterrence is shown to be correct, then opponents of capital punishment will face an uphill struggle on moral grounds. If each execution is saving lives, the harms of capital punishment would have to be very great to justify its abolition, far greater than most critics have heretofore alleged.[26]
Further... racial bias is not as much in play as face value might suggest:
Under a competitive grant process, the National Institute of Justice awarded the RAND Corporation a grant to determine whether racial disparities exist in the federal death penalty system. The resulting 2006 RAND study set out to determine what factors, including the defendant's race, victim's race, and crime characteristics, affect the decision to seek a death penalty case.[3] Three independent teams of researchers were tasked with developing their own methodologies to analyze the data. Only after each team independently drew their own conclusions did they share their findings with each other.
When first looking at the raw data without controlling for case characteristics, RAND found that large race effects with the decision to seek the death penalty are more likely to occur when the defendants are white and when the victims are white.[4] However, these disparities disappeared in each of the three studies when the heinousness of the crimes was taken into account.[5] The RAND study concludes that the findings support the view that decisions to seek the death penalty are driven by characteristics of crimes rather than by race. RAND's findings are very compelling because three independent research teams, using the same data but different methodologies, reached the same conclusions.
While there is little evidence that the federal capital punishment system treats minorities unfairly, some may argue that the death penalty systems in certain states may be discriminatory. One such state is Maryland. In May 2001, then-Governor Parris Glendening instituted a moratorium on the use of capital punishment in Maryland in light of concerns that it may be unevenly applied to minorities, especially African-Americans. In 2000, Governor Glendening commissioned University of Maryland Professor of Criminology Ray Paternoster to study the possibility of racial discrimination in the application of the death penalty in Maryland. The results of Professor Paternoster's study found that black defendants who murder white victims are substantially more likely to be charged with a capital crime and sentenced to death.[6]
In 2003, Governor Robert L. Ehrlich wisely lifted the moratorium. His decision was justified. In 2005, a careful review of the study by Professor of Statistics and Sociology Richard Berk of the University of California, Los Angeles, and his coauthors found that the results of Professor Paternoster's study do not stand up to statistical scrutiny.[7] According to Professor Berk's re-analysis, "For both capital charges and death sentences, race either played no role or a small role that is very difficult to specify. In short, it is very difficult to find convincing evidence for racial effects in the Maryland data and if there are any, they may not be additive."[8] Further, race may have a small influence because "cases with a black defendant and white victim or 'other' racial combination are less likely to have a death sentence."[9]
The costs associated with the Death Penalty are only due to the process we could most certainly streamline if we so desired; however, costs have little to do with whether or not the Death Penalty is right or wrong.
While statistics might differ and one may choose to support whichever statistic works for their belief system... the bottom line is that we are dealing with people who have acted very badly. They have murdered someone and often in very gruesome fashion. You don't wish to be executed? Don't go kill someone. Leave other people's children alone.
Statistics are funny things: they can be manipulated to show just about anything. Regardless of whatever statistics one might choose to support... how does one quantify the pain surviving parents might feel and the need they might have to see the murderer of their child pay for his demonic crime in appropriate fashion?
It's just my opinion, but we sure seem to go out of our way to make sure devilish, sick, and demented freaks get the full measure of our compassion and mercy when maybe... our efforts should be about compensating those that need it. Again... it's easy to be sympathetic towards a foul creep who might have raped and mutilated a child when that child isn't ours; but try living in those shoes knowing the murderer is alive and well in a prison somewhere with hot meals, cable television, and pen pals and nuns that tell them they love them and forgive them.
Source: http://www.heritage.org/research/testim ... aves-lives
Sorry, but I really find it hard to take this one seriously.
80% of the Worlds top criminologists have stated that the death penalty does not act as a deterrent.
That statistic was offered by one of the several studies noted in the passage that said the same thing: the death penalty does act as a deterrent. They are in contrast to statistics provided by others that say the opposite thing. Believe what you wish, but my point for offering the piece was to highlight what I already stated and what I am sure you already know or can at least gather given what is on the table right now: that statistics can be manipulated to support almost anything one wishes to say.
Regardless of the deterrent variable... I don't argue for the Death Penalty so it might serve us as a deterrent. As nice as this might be, I argue the DP so that, for some, closure to a horrific event might be facilitated. It's not right that we stand on the sidelines, pat people on the head, and tell them we know what's best with regards to what justice should look like because they are emotionally attached to the event and cannot think straight. The grieving parents that wish for the death of the murderer that rape and kill their child should get that. And so should the memory of the deceased.
I would just as soon have nobody kill anybody and then we wouldn't have to worry about what to do with people after the fact; but the bottom line is some people commit very, very grievous offences. Because they have forced our hands with their homicidal capacity... they need to be dealt with in a manner befitting of their crime.
You will never get anywhere telling me that after raping a 6 month old, murdering the infant in the process, that death is too harsh for Steven Smith (executed in Ohio). You might get somewhere arguing that we might execute the wrong person.
the only "real" reason in your eyes I suppose, is the only reason I need. But I also, even as a non-theist, believe it is not up to any man to determine the ultimate demise of another. But because it cannot be administered without racial bias is pretty huge to me as well.
to me, the "playing god" reason is even more important than the "executing an innocent person" reason.
BESIDES BEING CAUGHT ON TAPE, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY. YOU CANNOT DISPUTE THAT.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
that doesn't bother me. you wanna see me on the toilet? I'll hold up the damn dirty paper for you.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Rant aside, I think that capital punishment is antiquated and panders to the lowest common denominator of rational thinking. In matters of life and death the "Fuck it. He did it first" mentality is a poor fit, at best.
Governmental erosion of civil liberties was also tolerated by the majority of Germans in the 1930's. Most of them knew they wouldn't be effected. Unfortunately though, a lot of other people were effected.
You seriously wouldn't mind living in a mass surveillance, police state?
One can doubt anything if they believe hard enough. Look how idiots bought OJ's can't fit my hand into this glove spectacle.
Multiple pieces of evidence can assure us of guilt. Blood, semen, other DNA, witnesses, testimony, confessions and other various pieces of evidence such as text messages, emails, and phone calls can add up to absolute certainty without video footage. I mean... are you doubting Steven Smith's guilt? Look into that case if you have the fortitude. And, after you're done... tell me you feel the death penalty was too harsh.
We are not deciding the fate of guys like Clifford Olson. He decided his own fate when he kidnapped, raped, and mutilated multiple children. "Gee, Clifford. We really wish you never killed all those kids, but seeing as you did... it's time to go to sleep. It didn't have to end this way you know."
Of course, fate for Clifford was far better than he deserved. In my mind, we're not better for sparing his life- we were weak and the parents of his victims were tortured with knowledge of his prison cell antics, sex dolls, cash for bodies, pension plan on behalf of taxpayers' money and just the simple fact that he lived while their most precious commodities had to be dug out of the ground in pieces. These people deserved much better and frankly, Olson deserved death.
Well, I guess this one settles it then.
What an over-simplification that shows little to no regard for the murdered and the survivors. What are you saying to these people? "Hey. Get over it already. Fuk's sakes, man. What's your problem? Just chill!"
If it's at the lowest common denominator of rational thinking... that is because some homicidal bastard dragged us there. It's not like anybody wants to be there- we're forced to be there.
This just presumes that a life behind bars is a trivial punishment, which it isn't: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=171029&start=675#p5084774
Well, in some cases it is. Read a bit on Clifford Olson (The Butcher of BC) and his life of luxury:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/201 ... death.html
Don't skim over this part: Family members of Olson's victims had been complaining that killers like Olson could have a hearing every two years, each time requiring them to relive the original ordeal. They had been calling for changes to the law, "so that the families don't have to go through this grief and aggravation every two years," Michael Massing, whose daughter was murdered by Olson, said at the time.
Yeah. Really fucking cool. Let's pat our indifferent selves on the back while we leave those families to just get over it already.
Who's indifferent? And who's telling the victims families to 'just get over it already'? Nobody is.
Nobody is directly saying it (other than Dudeman who came about as close as you can), but by placing the families through these types of ordeals and ignoring their pleas for a more definitive measure of justice... we act indifferently towards their needs and are essentially telling them they need to move on.
You cannot advocate for a sick mutant and the grieving survivors at the same time.
I know this makes no difference to you, but to be sure you know what my position is... I do not advocate for wide sweeping death sentences. I wish for it in the extreme cases- ones involving children, confinement and torture, pre-planned, mass or serial style, etc. In short... the nature of the crime should reflect our sentiments towards the murderer and dictate the level of punishment.
The guy who comes home from his second job to see his diva wife in bed with the neighbour, gets in a fight and kills someone (or both) in a fit of rage should not receive the death penalty- prison suits me just fine for such an individual who momentarily lost their mind and went out of control. The guy who pounds nails into children's heads after he rapes them needs to die.
I guess I just don't see it getting the point that you do. I personally think what the brits have done having surveillance cameras on every street corner is a good start in fighting crime and making people safer.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I am sorry to hear this, Dudeman.
Call me naïve, but I feel the same.
Thank you.