The Death Penalty

Thirty Bills Unpaid · August 2013

Byrnzie wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Byrnzie...

Thanks for links.

I read through three of them. Well, two of them- one was in Japanese.

I noticed that, but thought it might have just been my p.c fucking about, or being fucked with.

Obama

Hugh Freaking Dillon · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Byrnzie...

Thanks for links.

I read through three of them. Well, two of them- one was in Japanese.

I noticed that, but thought it might have just been my p.c fucking about, or being fucked with.

Obama

Byrnzie · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Byrnzie...

Thanks for links.

I read through three of them. Well, two of them- one was in Japanese.

I noticed that, but thought it might have just been my p.c fucking about, or being fucked with.

Obama

He's a thorn in my side.

ajedigecko · August 2013

Christian woman in Pakistan sentenced to death-for drinking from muslim well.

Where are the moderate muslim voices...cair?

Bob Beckel said it good today.

"Speak up or join the extremist".

PJ_Soul · August 2013

ajedigecko wrote:

Christian woman in Pakistan sentenced to death-for drinking from muslim well.

Where are the moderate muslim voices...cair?

Bob Beckel said it good today.

"Speak up or join the extremist".

Totally agree with that statement.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · August 2013

PJ_Soul wrote:

ajedigecko wrote:

Christian woman in Pakistan sentenced to death-for drinking from muslim well.

Where are the moderate muslim voices...cair?

Bob Beckel said it good today.

"Speak up or join the extremist".

Totally agree with that statement.

As do I.

Completely outrageous.

Here's a telling excerpt: Embarrassed by Bibi’s case but still refusing to release her because of angry protests by extremists, the Pakistan government has transferred her to a more remote prison, hoping the 42-year-old dies quietly behind bars, perhaps poisoned by another inmate. Already two government officials who have spoken out on her behalf have been murdered, including Minister for Minorities Shahbaz Bhatti, who was killed by the Taliban.

Sometimes you have to pick your fights. In this case... at least two people have and paid for their lives. Where is the 'outpouring' of support though? If it is true that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are peaceful people poorly characterized by the extremists and they are affected by things such as this... then maybe it's time to do something about it.

It's tough to defend such a faith in light of such incidents. One can't expect to be immune from some form of criticism when they permit such atrocities to occur with deafening silence.

Link:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/op ... DzasfQxkKK

Hugh Freaking Dillon · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

As do I.

Completely outrageous.

Here's a telling excerpt: Embarrassed by Bibi’s case but still refusing to release her because of angry protests by extremists, the Pakistan government has transferred her to a more remote prison, hoping the 42-year-old dies quietly behind bars, perhaps poisoned by another inmate. Already two government officials who have spoken out on her behalf have been murdered, including Minister for Minorities Shahbaz Bhatti, who was killed by the Taliban.

Sometimes you have to pick your fights. In this case... at least two people have and paid for their lives. Where is the 'outpouring' of support though? If it is true that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are peaceful people poorly characterized by the extremists and they are affected by things such as this... then maybe it's time to do something about it.

It's tough to defend such a faith in light of such incidents. One can't expect to be immune from some form of criticism when they permit such atrocities to occur with deafening silence.

Link:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/op ... DzasfQxkKK

dude, that last sentence is a damn slippery slope you're climbing.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · August 2013

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

As do I.

Completely outrageous.

Here's a telling excerpt: Embarrassed by Bibi’s case but still refusing to release her because of angry protests by extremists, the Pakistan government has transferred her to a more remote prison, hoping the 42-year-old dies quietly behind bars, perhaps poisoned by another inmate. Already two government officials who have spoken out on her behalf have been murdered, including Minister for Minorities Shahbaz Bhatti, who was killed by the Taliban.

Sometimes you have to pick your fights. In this case... at least two people have and paid for their lives. Where is the 'outpouring' of support though? If it is true that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are peaceful people poorly characterized by the extremists and they are affected by things such as this... then maybe it's time to do something about it.

It's tough to defend such a faith in light of such incidents. One can't expect to be immune from some form of criticism when they permit such atrocities to occur with deafening silence.

Link:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/op ... DzasfQxkKK

dude, that last sentence is a damn slippery slope you're climbing.

Just recently, in America, Americans took to the streets in droves for opposing their country's war efforts overseas and whites stood with blacks to fight oppression in the south.

You cannot sit idle when brutality is the norm.

Byrnzie · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

It's tough to defend such a faith in light of such incidents. One can't expect to be immune from some form of criticism when they permit such atrocities to occur with deafening silence.

Because murder only occurs in Muslim countries? :?

Byrnzie · August 2013

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... conviction

Capital punishment is murder – especially for the wrongfully accused

There's no way to calculate how many prisoners were executed for crimes they didn't commit. I met a man who almost was

Lindsey Bever
theguardian.com, Tuesday 27 August 2013

So far this year, 23 death row inmates have been executed in the US. One was killed by electrocution, the others by lethal injection. A 24th committed suicide. Among these prisoners, they served a total of 335 years as they were waiting to die. And there are 14 more Americans slated for execution by their government before the end of the year.

We're told to believe they were guilty – of murder. What if they weren't? In fact, what if they were the victims – of prejudice, racism, corruption?

In 1976, Shujaa Graham was one of them – wrongly sentenced to die and shipped to San Quentin prison in California.

Recently, the 62-year-old death row exoneree invited me into the sunroom in the back of his Takoma Park, Maryland, home. It's a space only slightly larger than the prison cell in which he spent more than a decade, but he said he feels oddly at home there. That's where he opened up about his own death sentence – one meant to be carried out in a gas chamber.

I visited Graham to film a short documentary about his childhood in the racially segregated South, his adolescence in gangs in South Central Los Angeles – and in juvenile detention – and, ultimately, his young adulthood on San Quentin's death row where he served three years until a jury exonerated him in the murder of white California prison guard Jerry Sanders. Graham said he still dwells on it 40 years later. But despite his troubled past – or perhaps in spite of it – he has maintained character and appreciation for his life.

I saw it almost immediately – when he shot me a wry smile, winked and gave his demand: "You're at PawPaw's house. Either make yourself at home or keep that camera in its bag."

I felt like family the rest of that afternoon, listening to his stories of political outrage. And in that moment, I thought about how unfair life would have been if this man's wrongful conviction hadn't been overturned and his life had ended there.

It's chilling to think how many innocents may have lost their lives at the hands of the US criminal justice system since 1976 – when capital punishment was reinstated. Worse, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, there's no way to calculate how many were executed for crimes they didn't commit since courts typically won't consider claims of innocence when a defendant is dead. But with more than 250 death row inmates exonerated with DNA evidence, it's impossible to not think about the others who fell through the cracks – especially when looking at a man who almost did.

In many ways, Graham's life mirrors America's civil rights movement. Graham grew up on a Southern plantation where his family worked as sharecroppers. In 1961, they moved to South Central Los Angeles to establish a better life and "that's where my trouble began", he said. As a teenager, Graham got caught up in gangs. He committed minor crimes. He spent much of his adolescence in juvenile institutions. And when he was 18, he went to Soledad Prison on a minor robbery charge.

Graham turned away from the gang life when he became influenced by the Black Panther Party in prison and he took a leadership position in the black prison movement, working for prisoners' rights. Because of his leadership, he said, he was framed in the 1973 murder of a prison guard while serving out his sentence at the Deul Vocational Institute in Stockton, California.

During Graham's second trial in 1976, he and his co-defendant, Eugene Allen, also an African-American, were charged with murder and sent to San Quentin's death house. It would take two more (all-white) trials and five more years before Graham would be freed, he said.

That was the story I expected to hear – one of a defunct criminal justice system, political corruption and racial bias. But ironically, Graham's story reveals his progressive attitudes against stereotypical 1970s America. Pacing back and forth in his sunroom, he clutched a picture of those who worked on his defense committee around the time of his third trial in 1979. Among his supporters was 30-year-old Phyllis Prentice – who stuck around.

Prentice, now 64, was a nurse in the county jail where Graham was being held while he awaited trial. "I thought she was a cop", he said, "because she was so nice to me – and white." But, on the heels of desegregation, Prentice, a political activist, and Graham, an African-American political prisoner, became friends. She quit her job and joined his defense committee. And when Graham was finally exonerated and released in 1981, they started a life together.

Now, their home is filled with photographs of their three children and four grandchildren – perhaps another testament to Graham's willingness to break social and political barriers.

Prentice is still a nurse – a palliative care nurse. Graham has a landscaping business. But listening to their story, it's clear their passion still lies in the political work they started back in the 1970s. They are both on the board of Witness to Innocence, an organization dedicated to empowering exonerated death row survivors like Graham, who is vice chair. Graham still travels and speaks out against issues of capital punishment, wrongful convictions and inhumane prison conditions, much like the ones he has lived through.

Graham's experience will forever be part of his history but, after I met him, I realized that his real story lies within the life he built because of – or maybe even in spite of – his past.

I sat in the sunroom staring at Graham through a camera lens. That's when he said something I'll never forget:

"I know why you're here. Perhaps if I'd never been on death row, you wouldn't be here today talking to me. That reminds me I should be looking at this as a great thing – and it is – to get the chance to pass on my experience and hope that you'll take it to another level. I promised the prisoners I would fight until the day I die."

Thirty Bills Unpaid · August 2013

Byrnzie wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

It's tough to defend such a faith in light of such incidents. One can't expect to be immune from some form of criticism when they permit such atrocities to occur with deafening silence.

Because murder only occurs in Muslim countries? :?

Any country exercising such brutality is open to criticism. For example, I don't disagree with much of what you say regarding some very questionable behaviours on the part of the US. Just don't stop your criticisms there though.

Are you justifying the execution of this woman because she drank water from a well? Or can we agree that such a response is utterly ridiculous and the fact that a society would stand behind it and allow it to happen leaves plenty to be desired. Criticism in this case is more than warranted.

Before this begins to sound like a racist rant, hats off to the two Muslims who did stand up for her and paid with their lives though- they have my complete respect.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · August 2013

But with more than 250 death row inmates exonerated with DNA evidence, it's impossible to not think about the others who fell through the cracks – especially when looking at a man who almost did.

The innocent people incarcerated or executed when innocent is tragic. Nobody can argue this.

The improvements in forensic science have been useful to say the least. These same improvements also diminish the potential for a wrongful conviction in future cases.

Video footage that the murderers often take themselves, being caught red-handed as they are running from the crime scene (such as the Cheshire murders), and sound forensics science and DNA testing do not leave as much room for error as the crude methodology employed in the past.

Ethical viewpoints aside, as much as these improvements have led to overturning wrongful convictions... they also somewhat diminish the argument against capital punishment that insists we cannot execute people for fear of executing the wrong person.

pdalowsky · August 2013

Byrnzie wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

It's tough to defend such a faith in light of such incidents. One can't expect to be immune from some form of criticism when they permit such atrocities to occur with deafening silence.

Because murder only occurs in Muslim countries? :?

I don't think the statement you are quoting even slightly suggests that was the case, far from it, but more so that if such a nonsensical case was really happening in the states, there would be an outcry, people would be aghast.

the deafening silence was the key part. and a truly appalling part.

lets not forget people are also executed there for adultery, or for having sex with a married man.

Heinous crimes. Perhaps they should be allowed to live how they wish and we shouldn't interfere. But im not sure any of us can really be that callously cold hearted as to not think that what was going on there was insanely wrong.

ajedigecko · August 2013

Byrnzie wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

It's tough to defend such a faith in light of such incidents. One can't expect to be immune from some form of criticism when they permit such atrocities to occur with deafening silence.

Because murder only occurs in Muslim countries? :?

I will say it.

Yes only in todays muslim countries will the government allow a person to be imprisoned for violating segregation laws.

And then sentence them to death.

God put a smile - bluegrass

callen · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

But with more than 250 death row inmates exonerated with DNA evidence, it's impossible to not think about the others who fell through the cracks – especially when looking at a man who almost did.

The innocent people incarcerated or executed when innocent is tragic. Nobody can argue this.

The improvements in forensic science have been useful to say the least. These same improvements also diminish the potential for a wrongful conviction in future cases.

Video footage that the murderers often take themselves, being caught red-handed as they are running from the crime scene (such as the Cheshire murders), and sound forensics science and DNA testing do not leave as much room for error as the crude methodology employed in the past.

Ethical viewpoints aside, as much as these improvements have led to overturning wrongful convictions... they also somewhat diminish the argument against capital punishment that insists we cannot execute people for fear of executing the wrong person.

Regardless of how good the technology gets there will be innocents put to death. Are you okay with a few getting wrongfully killed so you get your vengeance? And if so what percentage is acceptable? 2%. 1%. .05%? If your for the death penalty your for a few innocents to be thrown in the mix.

PJ_Soul · August 2013

callen wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

But with more than 250 death row inmates exonerated with DNA evidence, it's impossible to not think about the others who fell through the cracks – especially when looking at a man who almost did.

The innocent people incarcerated or executed when innocent is tragic. Nobody can argue this.

The improvements in forensic science have been useful to say the least. These same improvements also diminish the potential for a wrongful conviction in future cases.

Video footage that the murderers often take themselves, being caught red-handed as they are running from the crime scene (such as the Cheshire murders), and sound forensics science and DNA testing do not leave as much room for error as the crude methodology employed in the past.

Ethical viewpoints aside, as much as these improvements have led to overturning wrongful convictions... they also somewhat diminish the argument against capital punishment that insists we cannot execute people for fear of executing the wrong person.

Regardless of how good the technology gets there will be innocents put to death. Are you okay with a few getting wrongfully killed so you get your vengeance? And if so what percentage is acceptable? 2%. 1%. .05%? If your for the death penalty your for a few innocents to be thrown in the mix.

I'm not. Unless the justice system is completely infallible and completely free of corruption, capital punishment shouldn't happen.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · August 2013

callen wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

But with more than 250 death row inmates exonerated with DNA evidence, it's impossible to not think about the others who fell through the cracks – especially when looking at a man who almost did.

The innocent people incarcerated or executed when innocent is tragic. Nobody can argue this.

The improvements in forensic science have been useful to say the least. These same improvements also diminish the potential for a wrongful conviction in future cases.

Video footage that the murderers often take themselves, being caught red-handed as they are running from the crime scene (such as the Cheshire murders), and sound forensics science and DNA testing do not leave as much room for error as the crude methodology employed in the past.

Ethical viewpoints aside, as much as these improvements have led to overturning wrongful convictions... they also somewhat diminish the argument against capital punishment that insists we cannot execute people for fear of executing the wrong person.

Regardless of how good the technology gets there will be innocents put to death. Are you okay with a few getting wrongfully killed so you get your vengeance? And if so what percentage is acceptable? 2%. 1%. .05%? If your for the death penalty your for a few innocents to be thrown in the mix.

No. You are wrong. You cannot definitively say that with the advancements in forensics science: regardless of how good the technology gets there will be innocents put to death. This might be true, but given the developments that have resulted in overturning some sentences and convicting others... it's looking like we are progressing to a point where we can feel very comfortable convicting murderers for their offences.

No percentage is acceptable and this is why I have always said the evidence must be conclusive before sentencing people to death. For example, the Cheshire murderers running from the house, gleefully grinning, high fiving each other after raping the 11 year old and mother before dousing them with gasoline and setting them on fire would qualify. There is no doubt at all about their guilt.

And as for your last general and oversimplified statement... this is like saying if you are opposed to the Death Penalty... you feel more for the murderer than the murdered.

PJ_Soul · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

callen wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

But with more than 250 death row inmates exonerated with DNA evidence, it's impossible to not think about the others who fell through the cracks – especially when looking at a man who almost did.

The innocent people incarcerated or executed when innocent is tragic. Nobody can argue this.

The improvements in forensic science have been useful to say the least. These same improvements also diminish the potential for a wrongful conviction in future cases.

Video footage that the murderers often take themselves, being caught red-handed as they are running from the crime scene (such as the Cheshire murders), and sound forensics science and DNA testing do not leave as much room for error as the crude methodology employed in the past.

Ethical viewpoints aside, as much as these improvements have led to overturning wrongful convictions... they also somewhat diminish the argument against capital punishment that insists we cannot execute people for fear of executing the wrong person.

Regardless of how good the technology gets there will be innocents put to death. Are you okay with a few getting wrongfully killed so you get your vengeance? And if so what percentage is acceptable? 2%. 1%. .05%? If your for the death penalty your for a few innocents to be thrown in the mix.

No. You are wrong. You cannot definitively say that with the advancements in forensics science: regardless of how good the technology gets there will be innocents put to death. This might be true, but given the developments that have resulted in overturning some sentences and convicting others... it's looking like we are progressing to a point where we can feel very comfortable convicting murderers for their offences.

No percentage is acceptable and this is why I have always said the evidence must be conclusive before sentencing people to death. For example, the Cheshire murderers running from the house, gleefully grinning, high fiving each other after raping the 11 year old and mother before dousing them with gasoline and setting them on fire would qualify. There is no doubt at all about their guilt.

And as for your last general and oversimplified statement... this is like saying if you are opposed to the Death Penalty... you feel more for the murderer than the murdered.

Sometimes conclusive evidence can be false evidence. Again, unless the justice system is infallible and free of corruption, there is always a risk of innocent people being murdered.

Not to mention the fact that punishing people for murder with murder is a dubious and sinister thing to do.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · August 2013

PJ_Soul wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

No. You are wrong. You cannot definitively say that with the advancements in forensics science: regardless of how good the technology gets there will be innocents put to death. This might be true, but given the developments that have resulted in overturning some sentences and convicting others... it's looking like we are progressing to a point where we can feel very comfortable convicting murderers for their offences.

No percentage is acceptable and this is why I have always said the evidence must be conclusive before sentencing people to death. For example, the Cheshire murderers running from the house, gleefully grinning, high fiving each other after raping the 11 year old and mother before dousing them with gasoline and setting them on fire would qualify. There is no doubt at all about their guilt.

And as for your last general and oversimplified statement... this is like saying if you are opposed to the Death Penalty... you feel more for the murderer than the murdered.

Sometimes conclusive evidence can be false evidence. Again, unless the justice system is infallible and free of corruption, there is always a risk of innocent people being murdered.

Not to mention the fact that punishing people for murder with murder is a dubious and sinister thing to do.

Explain to me how the actual scenario I presented as 'conclusive evidence' could be considered 'false evidence'.

Dubious and sinister? Check the definitions for these terms. Then compare them with the definition of justice.

If you feel good about housing Clifford Olson for all those years: paying him cash so he would tell where the bodies of the children rested after he tortured, raped and murdered them; providing him sex dolls; ensuring he received the greatest cancer treatments possible; and other such 'nice' things... then that is your value system. Don't paint me as 'evil' for my value system which seeks an appropriate punishment that meets the crime and I won't paint you as a tissue soft, bleeding heart weakling.

PJ_Soul · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

No. You are wrong. You cannot definitively say that with the advancements in forensics science: regardless of how good the technology gets there will be innocents put to death. This might be true, but given the developments that have resulted in overturning some sentences and convicting others... it's looking like we are progressing to a point where we can feel very comfortable convicting murderers for their offences.

No percentage is acceptable and this is why I have always said the evidence must be conclusive before sentencing people to death. For example, the Cheshire murderers running from the house, gleefully grinning, high fiving each other after raping the 11 year old and mother before dousing them with gasoline and setting them on fire would qualify. There is no doubt at all about their guilt.

And as for your last general and oversimplified statement... this is like saying if you are opposed to the Death Penalty... you feel more for the murderer than the murdered.

Sometimes conclusive evidence can be false evidence. Again, unless the justice system is infallible and free of corruption, there is always a risk of innocent people being murdered.

Not to mention the fact that punishing people for murder with murder is a dubious and sinister thing to do.

Explain to me how the actual scenario I presented as 'conclusive evidence' could be considered 'false evidence'.

Dubious and sinister? Check the definitions for these terms. Then compare them with the definition of justice.

If you feel good about housing Clifford Olson for all those years: paying him cash so he would tell where the bodies of the children rested after he tortured, raped and murdered them; providing him sex dolls; ensuring he received the greatest cancer treatments possible; and other such 'nice' things... then that is your value system. Don't paint me as 'evil' for my value system which seeks an appropriate punishment that meets the crime and I won't paint you as a tissue soft, bleeding heart weakling.

That particular scenario doesn't apply to what I said, but there are plenty of other cases that could. When the system is 100% perfect, then at least those who support government sponsored murder would have a case.

I do feel good about keeping killers in prison for life. Absolutely. It's even cheaper than the whole appeals process for death penalty cases, so it saves us money too. I don't give a fuck how they're treated in prison. They're still in prison. My concern is not revenge. It's making sure that these people can't hurt anyone else. The death penalty seems like pure revenge to me, and I don't think our governments should be vengeful. They should be concerned with keeping the population safe, and not murdering people, whoever they may be.

Yes, dubious and sinister. I meant exactly what I said.

The Death Penalty

Comments

Categories