J
JoeyWarren
Guest
That I don’t know.
- Status
D
DreadVandal
Guest
That would be the pertinent thing to find out. If it can be substantiated (by reputable sources and evidence) that a significant number of innocent people have been executed in the last 30 years, then I would, very much, rethink my current position to some extent. If there are a significant number of
innocent folks being executed, then there is something really
wrong with the system and there should be a moratorium on the death penalty until the problems are cleared up. But I haven’t seen any hard evidence of this.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
There is no smoking-gun proof that Williams is innocent. But the case against him is based on scant physical evidence, the testimony of crime-prone jailhouse informants and his fearsome reputation as street thug, doper and the co-founder of the notorious Crips gang. The evidence was shaky enough that two California Supreme Court justices and a handful of dissenting judges on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals voted for a second look at his conviction.
Williams is hardly the first case in which doubts have been raised about whether a possibly innocent person has been executed. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and a scattering of federal appeals judges have voiced those doubts about whether some innocent persons have been executed since capital punishment was reinstated in 1976. A team of university researchers have fingered more than two-dozen cases in which men have been executed who may have been innocent.
All these cases show deeply troubling similarities. The Innocence Project has noted that overzealous and untruthful prosecutors have suppressed, fabricated and destroyed evidence, and employed lying jailhouse snitches and other unreliable witnesses. Many of the cases have been riddled with racial bias. The condemned killer was black or Latino and their alleged victim was white; the jury, oftentimes, is not racially diverse. When defense attorneys appeal these tainted convictions, the courts almost always dismiss their appeals on the grounds that the prosecutor committed “harmless errors” that didn’t affect the outcome of the case.
The Texas execution of Ruben Cantu in 1993 for a murder he allegedly committed as a teen-ager was a near-textbook example of how a possibly innocent man can be put to death. The case had all the slipshod legal ingredients – a jailhouse informant’s testimony, a dubious witness, a threadbare defense and sloppy police investigation. It took a decade to get more of the truth out, but Cantu is now viewed as probably innocent. The surviving victim recanted his identification and an inmate involved in the killing signed a confession that Cantu did not commit the crime.
In Cantu’s case and in the cases of the other possibly innocent condemned men who were executed, state and federal appeals courts routinely rejected their appeals. But some judges publicly and privately had questions – not about the actual guilt or innocence of the men, but whether prosecutors and courts followed proper legal procedures and if the defendants got a fair trial. Their doubts were not enough for them to overturn their convictions or stay the executions. In every doubtful case, prosecutors hotly denied that any of the men executed were innocent.
Despite the questionable executions, no prosecutor or government official has ever officially said that an innocent prisoner has been executed. But some officials and judges have strongly hinted and warned that it could happen. In 1997, the chair of the House Judiciary Committee praised the system of legal checks and balances in place to insure the rights of condemned killers, but admitted that there was no ironclad guarantee that an innocent person could not be put to death.
In 2000, Boston federal appeals court Judge Mark L. Wolf, in a case involving a Massachusetts man charged with multiple murders, sent a shockwave through the federal judiciary when he flatly said that there was strong evidence that some innocent persons may have been executed. He did not mention the names of those he thought may been innocent, but pointed to the dozens of men who have been freed from death row based on DNA tests, the recanting of damning testimony by witness and jailhouse informants and other evidence. The Justice Department, however, stuck to its guns and insisted that it went strictly by the legal book to insure the fair and consistent application of the death penalty. It denied that an innocent man could or had been executed, at least by the feds.
The frank admission by Britain, Russia and other countries that innocents have been legally killed, and the persistent denial by prosecutors in the United States that innocents could or have been executed here will likely have no bearing on Tookie Williams’ fate. Following Williams’ execution by lethal injection, official records will say that courts and prosecutors fully followed all legal and constitutional procedures. But doubts about his guilt or innocence will linger on. They have for at least two-dozen others who have been executed and who were possibly innocent.
Williams is hardly the first case in which doubts have been raised about whether a possibly innocent person has been executed. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and a scattering of federal appeals judges have voiced those doubts about whether some innocent persons have been executed since capital punishment was reinstated in 1976. A team of university researchers have fingered more than two-dozen cases in which men have been executed who may have been innocent.
All these cases show deeply troubling similarities. The Innocence Project has noted that overzealous and untruthful prosecutors have suppressed, fabricated and destroyed evidence, and employed lying jailhouse snitches and other unreliable witnesses. Many of the cases have been riddled with racial bias. The condemned killer was black or Latino and their alleged victim was white; the jury, oftentimes, is not racially diverse. When defense attorneys appeal these tainted convictions, the courts almost always dismiss their appeals on the grounds that the prosecutor committed “harmless errors” that didn’t affect the outcome of the case.
The Texas execution of Ruben Cantu in 1993 for a murder he allegedly committed as a teen-ager was a near-textbook example of how a possibly innocent man can be put to death. The case had all the slipshod legal ingredients – a jailhouse informant’s testimony, a dubious witness, a threadbare defense and sloppy police investigation. It took a decade to get more of the truth out, but Cantu is now viewed as probably innocent. The surviving victim recanted his identification and an inmate involved in the killing signed a confession that Cantu did not commit the crime.
In Cantu’s case and in the cases of the other possibly innocent condemned men who were executed, state and federal appeals courts routinely rejected their appeals. But some judges publicly and privately had questions – not about the actual guilt or innocence of the men, but whether prosecutors and courts followed proper legal procedures and if the defendants got a fair trial. Their doubts were not enough for them to overturn their convictions or stay the executions. In every doubtful case, prosecutors hotly denied that any of the men executed were innocent.
Despite the questionable executions, no prosecutor or government official has ever officially said that an innocent prisoner has been executed. But some officials and judges have strongly hinted and warned that it could happen. In 1997, the chair of the House Judiciary Committee praised the system of legal checks and balances in place to insure the rights of condemned killers, but admitted that there was no ironclad guarantee that an innocent person could not be put to death.
In 2000, Boston federal appeals court Judge Mark L. Wolf, in a case involving a Massachusetts man charged with multiple murders, sent a shockwave through the federal judiciary when he flatly said that there was strong evidence that some innocent persons may have been executed. He did not mention the names of those he thought may been innocent, but pointed to the dozens of men who have been freed from death row based on DNA tests, the recanting of damning testimony by witness and jailhouse informants and other evidence. The Justice Department, however, stuck to its guns and insisted that it went strictly by the legal book to insure the fair and consistent application of the death penalty. It denied that an innocent man could or had been executed, at least by the feds.
The frank admission by Britain, Russia and other countries that innocents have been legally killed, and the persistent denial by prosecutors in the United States that innocents could or have been executed here will likely have no bearing on Tookie Williams’ fate. Following Williams’ execution by lethal injection, official records will say that courts and prosecutors fully followed all legal and constitutional procedures. But doubts about his guilt or innocence will linger on. They have for at least two-dozen others who have been executed and who were possibly innocent.
D
DreadVandal
Guest
I see lots of “perhaps” and “maybe” and “possibly” and as many as “two dozen.” I would say first that there isn’t substantial evidence showing that one innocent person was executed. Also, that there maybe 15-20 questionable cases suggests to me that the numbers aren’t high at all, since I’m willing to bet that most of those questionable cases will check out just fine.
As far as Tookie boy goes, its pretty clear that he did it. But even if didn’t, he’s committed a lot of other murders that he didn’t get prosecuted for.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
True.
Here is someone that has done some good homework, but then again,it’s their Ambition in life to do so: justicedenied.org
and in particular this article that gives some case studies: justicedenied.org/executed.htm
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
Deadly Statistics
Of the 3,517 inmates on death row as of October, 53 percent were people of color – 42 percent were black, 8 percent Hispanic, 3 percent “other.”
In 83 percent of capital cases, the victims were white, although nationally only 50 percent of murder victims are white.
There are now 70 death row inmates who were sentenced as juveniles. Since 1976, 12 men have been executed for crimes they committed as juveniles.
As of Oct. 1, 1998, there were 48 women on death row. Three have been executed since 1976.
To date, 33 mentally retarded offenders have been executed.
Twelve states forbid execution of the mentally retarded.
A recent survey of criminologists found that 84 percent rejected the idea of the death penalty as a deterrent to murder. A 1995 Hart Research poll of police chiefs around the country also put the death penalty last on a list of ways to reduce violent crime.
Despite the fact that the South accounts for more than 80 percent of the executions in this country, it is the only region to experience a rise in serious crime according to the October 1997 FBI Uniform Crime Report.
Since 1970, 74 people have been released from death row based on evidence of their actual innocence. (Staff report, House Judiciary Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights, Oct. 1993, updates by the Death Penalty Information Center.)
Some statitiscts also say that 23 innocents have been executed.
Of the 3,517 inmates on death row as of October, 53 percent were people of color – 42 percent were black, 8 percent Hispanic, 3 percent “other.”
In 83 percent of capital cases, the victims were white, although nationally only 50 percent of murder victims are white.
There are now 70 death row inmates who were sentenced as juveniles. Since 1976, 12 men have been executed for crimes they committed as juveniles.
As of Oct. 1, 1998, there were 48 women on death row. Three have been executed since 1976.
To date, 33 mentally retarded offenders have been executed.
Twelve states forbid execution of the mentally retarded.
A recent survey of criminologists found that 84 percent rejected the idea of the death penalty as a deterrent to murder. A 1995 Hart Research poll of police chiefs around the country also put the death penalty last on a list of ways to reduce violent crime.
Despite the fact that the South accounts for more than 80 percent of the executions in this country, it is the only region to experience a rise in serious crime according to the October 1997 FBI Uniform Crime Report.
Since 1970, 74 people have been released from death row based on evidence of their actual innocence. (Staff report, House Judiciary Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights, Oct. 1993, updates by the Death Penalty Information Center.)
Some statitiscts also say that 23 innocents have been executed.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
A “Sanctity of Life” definition from
Dictionary of Christian Ethics,
"The Christian’s belief in the sanctity of life
is derived from his doctrine of God as
Creator. God has made man in his image
with power to reason and the capacity to
choose. Each individual is precious to him
and made for eternal destiny. Thus the
Christian attitude toward human life can
only be one of reverence enjoined by the
whole of the Decalogue (not only by the
Sixth Commandment) and confirmed by
the incarnation - which is extended to
every individual from the moment of his
conception to extreme old age.
Note the bold part. An Execution would make this definition a ccc(Crock of Cow ****).
Dictionary of Christian Ethics,
"The Christian’s belief in the sanctity of life
is derived from his doctrine of God as
Creator. God has made man in his image
with power to reason and the capacity to
choose. Each individual is precious to him
and made for eternal destiny. Thus the
Christian attitude toward human life can
only be one of reverence enjoined by the
whole of the Decalogue (not only by the
Sixth Commandment) and confirmed by
the incarnation - which is extended to
every individual from the moment of his
conception to extreme old age.
Note the bold part. An Execution would make this definition a ccc(Crock of Cow ****).
P
pnewton
Guest
Then how can the execution of innocents be used as an anti-death penalty arguement. Every decade, due to technological advances, it becomes increasingly less likely that an innocent person will be put to death.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
Are you sure. I could kill someone without leaving a trace of evidence. And then go accuse a person I did not like and then go get some witnesses to colaborate my claim. Does Technology prevent this from happening? Unless everyone gets the chip implant that will be used to track everyone at all times?
Z
Zerith
Guest
Just one question? Why must they be killed? How is life (name removed by moderator)risonment, and I mean their entire life, as is in America, not sufficient? That prevents them from murdering, no? So, why take yet another life? Is that life less significant? What if they repent? What if they want to, and are not given the chance?
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
Lets look at the first Murder.
Cain killed Abel.
Did God execute Cain?
No!
God exiled him.
Exile is a form of Imprisonment.
As God created us in his Image, we assume he created us to with some degree of his intelligence. One day we may reached an Intelligence level that would tell us to be benevolent like God was originally.
You may argue that God instituted the Death Penalty in the Torah. But you could also say that was based on the Times.
We are in New Times now. We are more intelligent than we were during the times of Christ. Our intelligence is evolving into something God originally intended us to be so that we may reach that state of perfection with Christ. That state of perfection is a state without any of the vices that plague most of us today.
An example of that State. Just look toward your nearest Convent. And look at the peace on the face of a Cloistered Nun. And then ask a Cloistered Nun about the Death Penalty.
good day.
Cain killed Abel.
Did God execute Cain?
No!
God exiled him.
Exile is a form of Imprisonment.
As God created us in his Image, we assume he created us to with some degree of his intelligence. One day we may reached an Intelligence level that would tell us to be benevolent like God was originally.
You may argue that God instituted the Death Penalty in the Torah. But you could also say that was based on the Times.
We are in New Times now. We are more intelligent than we were during the times of Christ. Our intelligence is evolving into something God originally intended us to be so that we may reach that state of perfection with Christ. That state of perfection is a state without any of the vices that plague most of us today.
An example of that State. Just look toward your nearest Convent. And look at the peace on the face of a Cloistered Nun. And then ask a Cloistered Nun about the Death Penalty.
good day.
M
mike182d
Guest
Then why did he wait for the world to populate and kill everyone but Noah and his family with a flood?
P
pnewton
Guest
Your post has nothing to do with what I said. I said “less likely”. Trying to make absolutes out of what I said is dishonest.
M
mike182d
Guest
Are you saying that if we could know 100% without a doubt that someone was guilty of murder that it would be ok to use Capital Punishment?
If not, this argument is a pointless distraction from the issue at hand.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
Yes why? Did God kill everyone for just killing each other, or did God kill everyone for sins of all types? But then again that is God’s perogative not mine and not yours. And then God was very remorseful about doing it and put a sign in the heavens to let us know that it was bad and he would never do it again.
M
mike182d
Guest
Joey,
In essence, you’ve made the argument that there is no justifiable reason for killing *anyone *at *anytime. *If a man tried to defend his family from an intruder who was going to kill them by shooting him, he would still have committed grave sin under your position.
You’re position is *far *to extreme and would essentially erase things like Just War theory and self-defense from Catholic teaching.
Are you claiming to know more about the nature of life than some of the worlds’ greatest theologians?
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
Not even then would it be ok in the person of our Lord Jesus Christ.
M
mike182d
Guest
You’re melting several different arguments into one. Let’s stick with one argument at a time.
The argument I was addressing was your claim that since God did not kill Cain for his crimes, we are forbidden to kill others for their murders. I pointed out that clearly within the OT God kills people for their crimes, rendering your initial argument as moot.
Pick an argument and stick with it. Don’t combine 10 different arguments into one.
M
mike182d
Guest
Then stop arguing from uncertainty as it is irrelevant to the discussion.
M
mike182d
Guest
So, its not ok to kill someone for committing murder, but it is ok for us to kill someone for worshipping another God?
- Status