Beyond DNA
Justice Stevens comes out against the death penalty -- because of exonerating DNA evidence and more:
He said the jury selection process and the fact that many trial judges are elected work against accused murderers. He also said that jurors might be improperly swayed by victim-impact statements.Stevens was speaking in Illinois, his home state and a place that has been roiled by controversy over the death penalty. In 2000, wrongful convictions led then-Gov. George Ryan to halt all executions.
It also came just a day after a Virginia jury decided against the inmate whose case led to a 2002 Supreme Court ban on executing the mentally retarded. The jury said Daryl Atkins was mentally competent and could be put to death.
Stevens wrote that 2002 Atkins decision, which was joined by O'Connor. One of the three dissenters was Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, who hired Roberts as a law clerk in 1980.
A year later, as a Justice Department lawyer, Roberts wrote in a memo that the availability of federal court appeals, "particularly for state prisoners, goes far to making a mockery of the entire criminal justice system."
Stevens, however, laid out the case for close review of appeals, pointing to "special risks of unfairness" in capital punishment.
According to the anti-capital punishment Death Penalty Information Center, more than three dozen death row inmates have been exonerated since 2000.
Said Scheidegger, "I wouldn't say that 20 or 30 cases out of 8,000 constitutes a broken system."
Um, I would say so if you're one of the 20 or 30. And, surely, more. Sorry, but I'm an atheist, and I don't think we have a right to take away another person's life. Lock them in prison for life, sure. But, it's interesting how the so-called "pro-life" are also the most pro-death -- even when they know they can't always be sure they're killing a guilty person. Well, that's messy, complicated thinking, huh? Let's just assume they're guilty and pull the switch!
Also when the state executes an innocent person, it gets away with it scot-free. They should put the judge, prosecuter and jury on trial for murder in such cases.
Todd Fletcher at August 8, 2005 10:53 AM
Imagine being prosecuted for doing your civic duty!
The other side of this coin is being debated right now here in Kootenai County, Idaho, where we recently had a triple murder, the kidnap of two young children, the subsequent rape, torure and murder of one of those children. The perpetrator of this crime (a convicted sexual predator) videotaped himself committing much of the crime, was caught with the daughter of the woman he bludgeoned to death with a hammer, etc etc... in other words, there is not even a hint of doubt he committed these unspeakable crimes. Now he is implicated in at least 1 other murder of a child in California.
It will doubtless be the most expensive trial in Idaho history, with a projected cost of over $2million just for the kidnapping charges, since they will most likely try him in Federal Court for the murders. It is a foregone conclusion he will be executed if he doesn't die first. A decade will go by tying up the courts, when a single bullet to the back of his head would bring closure to the community.
I am all for fixing the system, but some folks just need killin.
eric at August 8, 2005 2:14 PM
It's definitely a gray area in many respects: they've proven that serial killers (and pedophiliacs) cannot be rehabilitated in any meaningful manner, so do we pay for their natural lifetimes in prison, or pay for expensive trials and the many appeals before the death penalty is finally applied?
Dmac at August 8, 2005 2:51 PM
Hmm. What, now, is gained by giving the heinous three hots and a cot for decades? Imprisoning someone for life is merely the abdication of responsibility. It may be difficult to realize that Hannibal Lecter really lives, but allowing him the chance to get out of jail and commit another atrocity is something Old Sparky just does not do. The real crime the State commits is when it allows the criminal to prey on more people.
I declare that if you have the evidence to put someone away for life, you should realize that the cage becomes home - that it is no longer a penalty once the prisoner acclimates - that you have given a home, though not a pretty one, to a savage who is alive while his maimed victims fear his release.
Gee. Can I even use the word "prisoner"? Look at how soft we are, calling captives "detainees"...
Radwaste at August 8, 2005 4:01 PM
"detainees" refers to those being held without trial.
LYT at August 8, 2005 8:26 PM
Another side of the coin.... excellent point.
eric at August 8, 2005 9:07 PM
None of you have addressed the issue of executing innocents.
Todd Fletcher at August 9, 2005 10:49 AM
Todd -
Perhaps with more sophisticated DNA procedures, we can be more definitive that the innocent will be exonerated. Here in Il, there was a moratorium enacted on all death row cases, because of repeated bungling by the Public Defender's office. So if the accused has received slipshod defense work, and the DNA samples are inconclusive, then I'd err on the side of safety and give life sentences without parole.
But in the case of confirmed serial killers, where witnesses come forward and the evidence is incontrovertible, then I cannot justify any type of incarceration, barring proof of extreme mental defect.
Dmac at August 9, 2005 2:48 PM
Todd, if you want something perfect, you're going to have to engage in fantasy. I'm not about to say that the "justice" system is perfect - but far more people DIE from the "justice" system releasing criminals who prey again than innocents are executed - or even jailed!
Killing an innocent in capital punishment is bad. Releasing a felon to kill again is worse, for the simple reason that the felon kills repeatedly.
Radwaste at August 10, 2005 5:39 PM
Sorry, but I'm an atheist, and I don't think we have a right to take away another person's life.
So - what is your stance on self-defense? Would you tell police to stop using deadly force on an attacker caught in the act?
Radwaste at August 10, 2005 5:50 PM
Apparently not, huh?
Enjoy your double standard!
Radwaste at June 10, 2011 9:38 PM
Leave a comment