Texas Judge's Decison To Close On Time Lead to Immediate Exe

[Rexer25]

Can the death penalty ever be a reasoned response to crime?

In my opinion, no. One of the main forces behind the push for executions appears to be the "need for closure" so many victims families crave (which is part of the grieving process, in my opinion). I can see the loved ones of the victim feeling a real, earnest desire to even the score, but it bothers me when the government prevents it, and then becomes the instrument of vengeance. I know too many lives have been lost to people with bad intentions, but to have our representatives do the same thing to the perpetrators, only with good intentions, doesn't make things right.

Also, there are too many documented cases of innocent people being put on death row to put my trust in "Ol Sparky", as they used to call the electric chair in Texas. Putting any personal involvement aside, we need to ask ourselves if "It is better that 100 guilty men go free, than for 1 innocent man to be punished."

[TheCalvinator24]

Fortunately, DNA evidence has helped exonerate some men (and provided much greater evidence of guilt with regard to others).

That is why the article I saw last week about how the funds for this project are going unused was so disturbing.

Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord. I don't think he needs our help.

Of course, He doesn't, but He did, in fact, establish the Death Penalty Himself.

[BackInTex]

Also, there are too many documented cases of innocent people being put on death row to put my trust in "Ol Sparky", as they used to call the electric chair in Texas. Putting any personal involvement aside, we need to ask ourselves if "It is better that 100 guilty men go free, than for 1 innocent man to be punished."

Not too many innocent men have been put to death, if any.

More innocent men/women/children have been killed by people who should have been executed previously.

But why keep score?

[Rexer25]

Not too many innocent men have been put to death, if any.

I have no doubt you believe this sincerely. But, have you seen how many people the Death Row Project has freed? Not just changed their sentence, but freed from prison entirely because it was proved they were not guilty of the crimes for which they have been convicted? The numbers, for someone who believes in the judicial system in this country, are staggering and frightening.

And if this is the case for the few years the Project has been operating, is there any doubt that many more have been sent to death row, and executed, long before this Project started?

[Bob78164]

[H]ave you seen how many people the Death Row Project has freed? Not just changed their sentence, but freed from prison entirely because it was proved they were not guilty of the crimes for which they have been convicted? The numbers, for someone who believes in the judicial system in this country, are staggering and frightening.

Would you mind providing a link? Thanks. --Bob

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

One of the main forces behind the push for executions appears to be the "need for closure" so many victims families crave (which is part of the grieving process, in my opinion)

I can't say I've ever heard that as an argument for imposing the death penalty, although I have heard it in connection with frustration with multiple appeals and the length of the process.

[Rexer25]

Would you mind providing a link? Thanks. --Bob

What, my word's not good enough?

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/351.php

I had the project name wrong, because they look for the truth in more than just capital cases.

[BackInTex]

I have no doubt you believe this sincerely. But, have you seen how many people the Death Row Project has freed? Not just changed their sentence, but freed from prison entirely because it was proved they were not guilty of the crimes for which they have been convicted? The numbers, for someone who believes in the judicial system in this country, are staggering and frightening.

And if this is the case for the few years the Project has been operating, is there any doubt that many more have been sent to death row, and executed, long before this Project started?

208

208 out of how many convictions? They don't say. Why?

On a percentage basis our courts are very accurate. The checks and balances work. Not perfecty, but darn well. Of course if you are the one wrongly convicted, you'll see it differently. But then you have to evaluate your life and why you might have been a suspect in the first place. Every action has a reaction, even if it is unfair.

Have we ever executed a perfectly innocent person? Just once.

[TheCalvinator24]

I have no doubt you believe this sincerely. But, have you seen how many people the Death Row Project has freed? Not just changed their sentence, but freed from prison entirely because it was proved they were not guilty of the crimes for which they have been convicted? The numbers, for someone who believes in the judicial system in this country, are staggering and frightening.

And if this is the case for the few years the Project has been operating, is there any doubt that many more have been sent to death row, and executed, long before this Project started?

208

208 out of how many convictions? They don't say. Why?

On a percentage basis our courts are very accurate. The checks and balances work. Not perfecty, but darn well. Of course if you are the one wrongly convicted, you'll see it differently. But then you have to evaluate your life and why you might have been a suspect in the first place. Every action has a reaction, even if it is unfair.

Have we ever executed a perfectly innocent person? Just once.

That's not the right question to ask.

If we execute someone for a crime he did not commit, that is a travesty.

[TheCalvinator24]

They do have one vague stat:

15 of the 208 people exonerated through DNA served time on death row.

This implies that they have been able to overturn 15 Death sentences, but read carefully. That isn't what it is actually saying. [/quote]

[Appa23]

BackinTexas said

Have we ever executed a perfectly innocent person? Just once.

Well, it isn't like Texas is not trying it darndest to accomplish the feat. Earlier in this thread, I gave you the name of one man who has been on death row for 27 years, and it has been known that he was innocent of the crime for half of that time. Even the DA who prosecuted the case has stated that he never should have been tried for a murder where there is no evidence of his guilt.

http://www.cesarfierro.info/index.html


To answer your direct question, there have been men who were executed before evidence arose that put their guilt into serious doubt. I will get you the cites when I have the time.

[Appa23]

As I am a man of my word, here are four cases (three from BiT's state of Texas) where a man has been executed, despite being innocent of the crime. This is according to a new report by the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (NCADP).

Ruben Cantu, a 26-year-old Latino man from San Antonio, was executed in August 1993 for a robbery-murder committed in 1985 when he was 17. The Houston Chronicle in November 2005 published an investigative series in which it reported that another defendant, who pleaded guilty to participating in the crime but did not testify at Cantu’s trial, has signed an affidavit swearing that Cantu was not with him that night and had no role in the murder. The only witness who did testify – a second victim, who was shot nine times but survived – now says that police pressured him to identify Cantu as the shooter, and that he did so even though Cantu was innocent.

Carlos De Luna, a young Latino man from Corpus Christi, Texas, was executed in December 1989 for stabbing a convenience store clerk to death in 1983. De Luna, who was convicted on the basis of a quick on-the-scene witness identification, claimed that the killer was a man named Carlos Hernandez. In June 2006, an investigative series published by the Chicago Tribune revealed that Hernandez had a long history of knife attacks similar to the convenience store killing and repeatedly confessed to friends and relatives that he committed the murder for which De Luna was executed. Although a prosecutor at De Luna’s trial denied the existence of Hernandez, calling him a “phantom,” the newspaper revealed that police and prosecutors knew who Hernandez was and had heard from their own informants that Hernandez was the killer. (Hernandez died in prison in 1999.)

Larry Griffin, a 40-year-old black man from St. Louis, was executed in Missouri in June 1995 for the drive-by shooting of a drug dealer in 1980. The only evidence against him was a witness who claimed to have seen Griffin at the crime scene. This witness was a white career criminal with several felony charges pending against him. In July 2005, the St. Louis Post Dispatch reported that the first police officer on the scene and the victim's sister both agreed that this supposed witness -- who would have stood out in the all-black neighborhood -- wasn't there when the shooting occurred. A second victim injured in the shooting knew Griffin and says that Griffin was not in the car from which the shots were fired, but he was not called to testify at Griffin's trial.

Cameron Todd Willingham, a 36-year-old white father of three from Corsicana, Texas, was executed in February 2004 for murder by arson. In December 2004, the Chicago Tribune reported that new scientific knowledge proves that the testimony by arson experts at Willingham’s trial was worthless, and that there is no evidence that the fire was caused by arson. A panel of the nation’s leading arson experts confirmed that conclusion in the spring of 2006.

[BackInTex]

You are quick to call the men innocent. Much quicker than they were proved guilty beyond reasonable doubt by a jury of their peers.

They may be technically not guilty due to resonable doubt, but nothing you have proves anything.

The 'evidence' given in your citations is no better, in fact worse because it is not sworn to be the truth in a court of law, than the evidence given at these mens' trials.

Cantu: You have a guy now saying he is a liar. O.K. but which statement of his do we believe?

De Luna: How did he supposedly know who the killer was? Sure, he will say it was someone else.

Griffin: The ONLY evidence was a witness' statement? I doubt that. The trial would have lasted 2 hours then.

Willingham: Just the name alone should prove his innocence, I'll admit that. Besided, just because there is no evidence (questionable) that now proved the fire was arson, doesn't equate to the fire NOT being arson. The guy still may have done it. Though I find it hard to imagine a Willingham doing such a thing.

[Appa23]

BiT, I do not know how much you have looked at capital cases, but I get the feeling that you think that they are like the high-profile ones that you see in the news or see dramatized on telvision. Many of these cases boil down to the only evidence being an eyewitness or a coreced confession, with no physical evidence or anything else linking the defendant to the crime. However, it is not hard to get a jury to convict, despite the lack of evidence, based on the severity of the murder. "Someboyd should die for this, and this is the guy in front of us."

You should look at Cantu's case. The prosecution's entire case was based on the testimony of a surviving eyewitness of the robbery/murder, Juan Moreno. There was nothing else linking Cantu to the crime. He was known to Moreno, as Cantu lived across the street from the housing construction where the murder took place. Twice, police put a photo array in front of Moreno that included Cantu, and Moreno never indicated that Cantu was one of the two teens who shot him. Over four months after the event, Cantu got into a shooting altercation at a bar with an off-duty cop (who pulled a gun on Cantu and then was shot). According to Moreno, after this event, police again picked him up and iquestioned him about Cantu being involved in the murder/robbery. There also may have been some discussion of Moreno status as an illegal alien. Moreno fingered Cantu, as he felt pressured to do by the cops. Years later, Moreno recanted his testimony.

Sam Millsap, who was the District Attorney presiding over the Cantu case, reversed his lifelong support for the death penalty because of the evidence that Cantu was not there the night of the murder. In a December 2005 interview with the San Antonio Express-News, Millsap expressed that, "It is troubling to me personally. No decision is more frightening than seeking the death penalty. We owe ourselves certainty on it." He went on to say that if Cantu was innocent, that means the person who committed the murder remains free and that "the misconduct by police officers could be addressed today."

Of course, the current Bexar County (San Antonio) District Attorney, Susan Reed, sees no reason to look into the polcie misconduct. Rather, she wants to pin the blame for killing an innocent man on Juan Moreno. In the Houston Chronicle expose on how the State of Texas killed an inocent man, Reed indicated that she may bring homicide charges against Juan Moreno, prosecuting him for murder by perjury. Interestingly, Reed formerly was the judge who rejected Cantu's appeal in 1988, and also set his execution date in 1993. Needless to say, there have been some questions regaridng how motivated she is to have a full investigation into the innocence of Cantu.

[BackInTex]

"Over four months after the event, Cantu got into a shooting altercation at a bar .."

"the Houston Chronicle expose on how the State of Texas killed an inocent man..."

Cantu was not 'innocent'. See the first sentence. Someone else, likely a truly innocent person may have been spared being shot by Cantu as he was not a good, nor innocent man.

No tears here.

[starfish1113]

Like many people, I suspect, I am conflicted about the death penalty. I think I'm generally for it, as it seems to me to be a legitimate punishment (thought not a deterrant) to particularly abhorrent crimes.

However, when I read something like this, I find myself more aligned with those who don't believe in the death penalty. I don't care whether somebody has been on death row for one day or three decades, those who are trying to save this individual's life should be afforded every legal opportunity to do so. To be told that they missed a last opportunity to file something because the office closes at five and the judge won't reconsider is crass at best and a complete injustice at worst.

As for a person put to death later found innocent of the crime having nobody to blame but himself for being in that predicament (not exactly what was said, but very similar), it sounds a lot like blaming a rape victim because she invited the guy up to her place or went to a bar with a bunch of drunken hooligans.

This thread has tilted me every so slightly leftward on this topic. And that's pretty hard to do!

[MarleysGh0st]

This thread has tilted me every so slightly leftward on this topic. And that's pretty hard to do!

Beast better record this in his notebooks: Someone's opinion was actually changed by a political thread!

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

One of my favorites show of the new season is LIFE. about a wrongfully convicted cop, who returns to the force after being exonerated. He adopts Zen while in prison as a way of coping

[mrkelley23]

Like many people, I suspect, I am conflicted about the death penalty. I think I'm generally for it, as it seems to me to be a legitimate punishment (thought not a deterrant) to particularly abhorrent crimes.

However, when I read something like this, I find myself more aligned with those who don't believe in the death penalty. I don't care whether somebody has been on death row for one day or three decades, those who are trying to save this individual's life should be afforded every legal opportunity to do so. To be told that they missed a last opportunity to file something because the office closes at five and the judge won't reconsider is crass at best and a complete injustice at worst.

As for a person put to death later found innocent of the crime having nobody to blame but himself for being in that predicament (not exactly what was said, but very similar), it sounds a lot like blaming a rape victim because she invited the guy up to her place or went to a bar with a bunch of drunken hooligans.

This thread has tilted me every so slightly leftward on this topic. And that's pretty hard to do!

I'm nont sure the notion of the death penalty has a "right" and "left." As noted before here, HoltDad , excuse me, Appa, and I generally agree on this topic (notable since it seems to be one of the very few we do agree on ). And in a recent thread, SirG noted (I think) that he is generally against the death penalty as currently administered. Sprots, Pea, and Ear are also on record (Again, I think) as being against the death penalty.

THe tide is turning, again. Now if we could just find a truly suitabl Botany Bay to ship the horrendoes to, we could get on with life.

[starfish1113]

I'm nont sure the notion of the death penalty has a "right" and "left."

Agreed, but I think you can say that about almost every political topic. I'm sure that there are some (not many) Democrats who believe that the President did the right thing in Iraq and there are some (not many) Republicans that believe that increased taxes is the way to solve the country's deficit issue.

That said, I do believe that the death penalty has more proponents on the left and detractors on the right than most issues have those outliers.

[Appa23]

BiT stated

"Cantu was not 'innocent'. See the first sentence. Someone else, likely a truly innocent person may have been spared being shot by Cantu as he was not a good, nor innocent man. "

Now, I am confused. I could have sworn that BiT was a staunch gun rights advocate. Here, we have a situation where a person is threatened with a gun. In response, arguably fearing for his life and safety, he shoots the aggressor first, before he is shot. Yet, BiT wants to blame him for taking such action.

Anyway, the fact is that there is an overwhelming belief that Cantu is innocent of the charges that led to Texas killing him -- i.e. he was killed for a crime that he did not commit. I am hoping that you do not think that Cantiu still deserved to die because "he was a bad person".

BTW, how do you determine who is good and bad? I have to tell you that there have been (still are?) lots of bad people in various law enforcement agencies.

[Appa23]

Fishie, if you want to be pushed farther on this topic of the death penalty, I suggest that you look at the Cesar Fierro website that I linked.

If you have not already guessed (or as I may have mentioned some time on the old Bored), as a 3rd Year law student, I worked with a Creighton law professor as part of the team looking into Fierro's case. I assisted with drafting some legal arguments and briefs prior to graduation.

I was shocked when I read the facts of his case. The linked website does not go into all of the facts, but it is a good primer. It is a case of amazing Constitutional violations, international law violations, and human rights violations.

[BackInTex]

Now, I am confused. I could have sworn that BiT was a staunch gun rights advocate. Here, we have a situation where a person is threatened with a gun. In response, arguably fearing for his life and safety, he shoots the aggressor first, before he is shot. Yet, BiT wants to blame him for taking such action.

I gather from most of your posts you are in that state a lot.

One, Cantu had a gun in a bar. Illegal, and I do not support the right to bear guns in bars.

Two, the person who he shot was a cop.

Here is a quote from a sympathetic blog.."To be sure, Cantu was no boy scout. He was involved with drugs and car thefts and even in shooting an off-duty police officer for which no crime was charged because of the murky circumstances. :


Like I said, no tears.

Should he have been executed. Probably not. Should we repeal the death penalty because of it? No.

Unless we can ship them all to an island as MrK suggested. I'd be for that.

[earendel]

Sprots, Pea, and Ear are also on record (Again, I think) as being against the death penalty.

Lest there be any doubt, I am opposed to the death penalty.

[mrkelley23]

Unless we can ship them all to an island as MrK suggested. I'd be for that.

If only it wasn't so dadblamed expensive, I'd vote for the Moon, a la Heinlein. Then you wouldn't need guards or anything.