Death Penalty In Us?

From the same source ...

One of the greatest dangers of capital punishment is the risk of executing the innocent. According to a 1987 study some 350 of the people convicted in the USA of a capital crime between 1900 and 1985 were innocent. 23 of these people were actually executed. Since 1973, 99 people have been released from Death Row after their innocence has been proven. The US state of Illinois declared a moratorium on executions in January 2000, following the exoneration of the 13th death row prisoner found to have been wrongfully convicted in the state since the USA reinstated the death penalty in 1977. During the same period, 12 other Illinois prisoners had been executed.


:huh:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@9 October 2003 - 10:28
What worries me J2 is the fact that people being found innocent now, is down mainly to DNA evidence.  This is a fairly new phenomenom, are you claiming that innocents being wrongly convicted is also new, about the same as DNA proof maybe?

---

Not at all; just that the appeals process is so exhaustive (and exhausting) that the likelihood of someone being wrongfully executed is statistically unmeasurable (DNA evidence aside, admittedly).

We can assume that any and all executions (historically) have been thoroughly vetted by the anti-death-penalty lobby.

Likewise, with the advent of DNA testing, you can be sure no one currently on death row will be executed absent an applicable DNA test.

I think if you want to debate the execution of "underage" individuals, you might start another thread, another time. ;)


My participation in this thread will be "spotty", as I have a rather large "honey-do" list today.

Edit: attendance excuse

Just a point of view .... not mine. (necessarily)

* After the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976 the number of executions increased dramatically from one in 1977, peaking at 98 executions in 1999. The execution rate has since fallen, with only 66 executions in 2001 and 71 in 2002. But there is mounting evidence that this system is failing. Between 1973 and 2003, 111 death row inmates in 25 states were found to be innocent and released from death row, more than a third of them in the last seven years.

For more information on Innocence, click here
For information on DNA testing, click here

There is also irrefutable evidence that the way in which the death penalty is applied is unfair and unjustifiable:

* There is a double standard for rich and poor. The quality of legal representation is a better predictor of whether or not someone will be sentenced to death than the facts of the crime. The quality of legal representation depends on whether or not you can hire a lawyer. Almost all people on death row could not afford to hire a qualified attorney.

To read more about Inadequate Represenation, click here

* Where a death sentence is sought determines whether a defendant is sentenced to death, more than the circumstances of the crime.

To read more about Geographic Bias, click here

* The race of the victim is often a decisive factor in capital sentencing decisions. Almost all death sentences in this country – 81 percent – involve white victims. 178 black people have been executed for killing a white person, but only 12 white people have been executed for killing a black person.

To read more about Racial Bias, click here

* On June 20, 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3, in Atkins v Virginia, that executing the mentally retarded was a violation of the 6th Amendment ruling such an execution a "cruel and unusual punishment."

To read more about Mental Retardation, click here



Source: American Civil Liberties Union


:)

Re the main point of the thread, I do not agree with capital punishment. I think it is wrong. However I do think that there are situations when life sentence should mean just that.

Re the cushy prisons thing. There are of course different category of prison. In the UK, A to C I think. For people who would even be considered for the death penalty the crime would be a Cat A offence. I would invite you to spend a couple of days in Peterhead Prison before you decide that prison is some sort of cushy option.

For someone who has been convicted of a "white collar" crime, say tax fraud, would you really suggest that they should be punished in a Dickensian Gaol. Surely there must be degrees here.

Hi,

I will state my views again, the death penalty should be for people who cause death to another human being. If someone kills somebody then they should lose their own life, simple as that. Why have life sentences for these people wasting space and money in the prision system?

For the "White Collar" crimes they do not need to get the death penalty, I will be willing to pay taxes for their asses to be in jail. Other violenet crimes that do not result in death should not be fried, so if someone shoots somebody and that person lives, then bam that person who shot the person gets life in prision, he escapes the death penalty.

And, if a person gets convicted of murder, then they should get excuted in 1 year, they have 2 appeals to save their asses, if they fail both apeeals, they should of hired OJ's lawyer,

Millions and Millions of dollars are being wasted to house these people who have life sentences for murder.

So it's OK for you (through the state) to take a life.

Quote:Billy_Dean (in black type)

Just a point of view .... not mine. (necessarily)

* After the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976 the number of executions increased dramatically from one in 1977, peaking at 98 executions in 1999. The execution rate has since fallen, with only 66 executions in 2001 and 71 in 2002. But there is mounting evidence that this system is failing. Between 1973 and 2003, 111 death row inmates in 25 states were found to be innocent and released from death row, more than a third of them in the last seven years.

Key: RELEASED FROM DEATH ROW--the appeals system works; no "innocents" were executed.

There is also irrefutable evidence that the way in which the death penalty is applied is unfair and unjustifiable:

* There is a double standard for rich and poor. The quality of legal representation is a better predictor of whether or not someone will be sentenced to death than the facts of the crime. The quality of legal representation depends on whether or not you can hire a lawyer. Almost all people on death row could not afford to hire a qualified attorney.

This is indeed an unfortunate fact of life; while it would be slanderous to term ANY attorney "unqualified", it only stands to reason more money buys more/better representation. In any case, those who are deemed "under-represented" avail themselves of the appeals process to address this issue, and routinely win new trials, which either vindicate or re-convict the the complainant.


* Where a death sentence is sought determines whether a defendant is sentenced to death, more than the circumstances of the crime.

This is not clear; is this a question of individual circumstance and locale, or continental geography? A clarification is required.

* The race of the victim is often a decisive factor in capital sentencing decisions. Almost all death sentences in this country – 81 percent – involve white victims. 178 black people have been executed for killing a white person, but only 12 white people have been executed for killing a black person.

The fact is, blacks commit many more crimes in general, and murders in particular, than whites do. The numbers support the perceived "bias" in application of the death-penalty. All legitimate regular crime reporting, the F.B.I.'s UCR (Uniform Crime Report), NIBRS (National Incident-Based Reporting System), and the Bureau of Justice's NCVS (National Crime Victimization Survey) indicate that the crime rate among blacks is several times that of whites.

The reasons for this, be they cultural, societal, economic, or geographic, are subjects for another thread.


* On June 20, 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3, in Atkins v Virginia, that executing the mentally retarded was a violation of the 6th Amendment ruling such an execution a "cruel and unusual punishment."

This is all well and good; however, the line at which someone is defined as mentally retarded (as a "pure" definition) cannot be said to coincide with the line at which a mentally-deficient person might legitimately be counted upon to correctly discern between right and wrong; finding THAT line, as opposed to a blanket assignation of the status of mental-retardation, might be more useful.

More to the point, if someone is not the "sharpest knife in the drawer", but knows right from wrong, should that person be spared the death penalty if all other "death-penalty" conditions are met?

[j2k4] RELEASED FROM DEATH ROW--the appeals system works; no "innocents" were executed.

[ACLU] According to a 1987 study some 350 of the people convicted in the USA of a capital crime between 1900 and 1985 were innocent. 23 of these people were actually executed

[Billy=cool] A bit of selective copy\paste there j2?

[ACLU] Where a death sentence is sought determines whether a defendant is sentenced to death, more than the circumstances of the crime.

[j2k4] This is not clear; is this a question of individual circumstance and locale, or continental geography? A clarification is required.

[Info] See here... the answer to your query.

[Billy=cool] I find it hard to believe that you can claim that NO innocent person has been executed.


:)

Would any of you be willing to throw the switch yourself and watch a man struggle and die?

No, I would not! Just because a death is deemed 'legal' doesn't change the fact that it is taking a life. Besides, which, as I said earlier, killing them (convicted murderers) is letting them off easily. A life sentence should be a life sentence, it certainly isn't in Australia unless it was a particularly hideous crime, (or a crime against police, why is that?) but then any murder is hideous to my way of thinking.