peppercorn Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 That's scarcely the point. What Obama did or didn't do is not the real story here. The real story is that Davis may well have been innocent. Having just read all seventeen pages of the New York Times piece on Cameron Todd Willingham I am atterly convinced that a totally innocent man was put to death. I agree, BUT.. Obama needs to stop sitting on his back side and start pulling his neck out where important things like this are concerned because if he fails to do this then more innocent people are going to be killed incorrectly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted September 22, 2011 Author Share Posted September 22, 2011 He is the president of the united states of course he had the power That's a side issue. The real issue is that man has been executed on the basis of no forensic evidence of, seven out of nine witnesses recanting their testimony and two witnesses who say that someone else was the killer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 Exactly why the death penalty can't come back in England. I can understand the benefit of the deterrent effects of it, but if there's any doubt WHATSOEVER about someone's guilt (which unless it was witnessed by many and captured on camera, is most cases) then you can't take someone's life, there's no putting right the wrong if they are found innocent later. We only have the info available from the linked article, but if he was denied a lie detector 3 times in a row, including the supreme court deniying him the chance, there is no hope for the US justice system. EDIT: If someone put my son to death for a crime there's even the remotist chance that he was innocent, then sanity, rationality and rules go out the window and I could imagine myself (at least attempting) killing those responsible for the horrendous atrocity of "justice". I know that's not nice or right, but it's how I feel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I've just read this. It took me three quarters of an hour, but I'm almost speechless. An open challenge to anyone in favour of the death penalty ( Conrod, that means you too) - I defy you to read the New Yorker article in full and not change your views. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann I've just read it again. Written reporting at its finest. It really is a must read. Even if it was fiction it would be gripping, the fact that it actually details real life events, leading up to the state sanctioned murder of an innocent man, is sickening. Under Gov. Rick Perry, now a presidential candidate, Texas has executed more than 230 death row inmates. At the Reagan Library presidential debate, Perry was asked if he had ever lost sleep over the possibility that just one of them might have been innocent. "Not even a wink" was his reply. Not even a wink! That's the problem right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I've just read this. It took me three quarters of an hour, but I'm almost speechless. An open challenge to anyone in favour of the death penalty ( Conrod, that means you too) - I defy you to read the New Yorker article in full and not change your views. A dead criminal is not worth 3/4 of an hour of my time I'm afraid, time is money. Even if there were to be doubt over his guilt, he'd just be one isolated case - no system is perfect and we can't expect it to be. Perhaps you should be more concerned about the many thousands who get away with crime than the one who might be wrongfully convicted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan Tamudo Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 RIP Troy Davis - murdered by the State of Georgia. A painful reminder of the barbarity and injustice of the death penalty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted September 22, 2011 Author Share Posted September 22, 2011 A dead criminal is not worth 3/4 of an hour of my time I'm afraid, time is money. Even if there were to be doubt over his guilt, he'd just be one isolated case - no system is perfect and we can't expect it to be. No, you're absolutely wrong that this was an isolated case - since 1976 more than a hundred and thirty people on death row have been exonerated. If the idea that a man who may be innocent is put to death doesn't trouble you then you're morally defective frankly and lacking in decency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mumkin Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 Exactly why the death penalty can't come back in England. I can understand the benefit of the deterrent effects of it, but if there's any doubt WHATSOEVER about someone's guilt (which unless it was witnessed by many and captured on camera, is most cases) then you can't take someone's life, there's no putting right the wrong if they are found innocent later. We only have the info available from the linked article, but if he was denied a lie detector 3 times in a row, including the supreme court deniying him the chance, there is no hope for the US justice system. EDIT: If someone put my son to death for a crime there's even the remotist chance that he was innocent, then sanity, rationality and rules go out the window and I could imagine myself (at least attempting) killing those responsible for the horrendous atrocity of "justice". I know that's not nice or right, but it's how I feel. (my bold) Seems a bit contradictory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 No, you're absolutely wrong that this was an isolated case - since 1976 more than a hundred and thirty people on death row have been exonerated. If the idea that a man who may be innocent is put to death doesn't trouble you then you're morally defective frankly and lacking in decency. Lots of people go to court without being convicted or are exonerated from Death Row. It doesn't mean that they are not guilty of their crimes, just that the burden of proof and procedural requirements work in the favour of criminals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salsafan Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 No, you're absolutely wrong that this was an isolated case - since 1976 more than a hundred and thirty people on death row have been exonerated. If the idea that a man who may be innocent is put to death doesn't trouble you then you're morally defective frankly and lacking in decency. I used to think that I was empathetic, but heck, all these rationalising just knocks you out and winds you up to be more and more evil like those who do not have empathy. Morally defective is not the choice of term I would use. I know I have also lost my sense of moral self too. Hey, what can you do, eh ? Join them ! Let them be at home sitting at the comfort of their own chair paying less tax, and moaning and complaining about all ills in the world while innocent people are sentenced to death. Not that it is a reflection of who they are or anything, you know. Cos I mean, they may not know the guy. Which is a valid point. May the guy RIP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.