Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Mano

So, what do you think of the death penalty?

Do you favor the death penalty?  

39 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you favor the death penalty?



Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, SJSUMFA2013 said:

Yeah what @halfmanhalfbronco said. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence, I don’t think the state can kill someone based on the “reasonable doubt” standard. Even an unreasonable doubt is still doubt.

I disagree, unreasonable doubt, is unreasonable.  

110926run_defense710.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of my fears would be to sit on a jury in a death penalty case, particular where there was some uncertainty.  

Just curious, would any of you be opposed to Scott Peterson's execution?

110926run_defense710.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm against killing someone who's no longer a threat, it doesn't accomplish anything.

 

That said the Boston Bomber did give me a bit of pause. The guy is only a month older than me and truth be told if I was facing spending the next 50 or so years in a super max prison with zero chance of ever getting out just kinda waiting to die, I think the death penalty would start to sound appealing. I'd be kind of okay with allowing people serving life to opt into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, modestobulldog said:

One of my fears would be to sit on a jury in a death penalty case, particular where there was some uncertainty.  

Just curious, would any of you be opposed to Scott Peterson's execution?

I’m opposed to the conviction.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, mysfit said:

Richard Allen Davis gives me pause but even then I say no.

 

I also agree with whomever it was that was surprised by the vote.

I think 5-10 years ago, it would have been closer to 50/50 with a slight advantage to those in favor.

110926run_defense710.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, modestobulldog said:

One of my fears would be to sit on a jury in a death penalty case, particular where there was some uncertainty.  

Just curious, would any of you be opposed to Scott Peterson's execution?

I was called to sit on a jury in a murder case. I was excused because I read news papers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, jackmormon said:

I was called to sit on a jury in a murder case. I was excused because I read news papers.

With declining subscription, I would be inclined to wager that you committed purgery, who reads the newspaper anymore with the plethora of awesome internet"news" sources.  

B)

Then again, there is a remote possibly I would lose my wager.

 

 

110926run_defense710.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, modestobulldog said:

With declining subscription, I would be inclined to wager that you committed purgery, who reads the newspaper anymore with the plethora of awesome internet"news" sources.  

B)

Then again, there is a remote possibly I would lose my wager.

 

 

You would lose your wager for sure. I still enjoy reading an actual newspaper while drinking coffee or with a meal.

The guy made a deal to plead to manslaughter, then withdrew his guilty plea. I knew about it and that’s why I was excused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

I think he did it. I just don’t think the state had any evidence to prove it.

Correct, no direct evidence, only circumstantial.

https://www.thoughtco.com/circumstantial-evidence-the-scott-peterson-trial-971080

110926run_defense710.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jackmormon said:

You would lose your wager for sure. I still enjoy reading an actual newspaper while drinking coffee or with a meal.

The guy made a deal to plead to manslaughter, then withdrew his guilty plea. I knew about it and that’s why I was excused.

Ok, I would be hard pressed to remember the last time I saw a physical newspaper.  I guess they would inquire about online versions.  I was just kidding, I subscribe to the online version of The Modesto Bee ?

110926run_defense710.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

Is the doc any good?

Yeah, it was pretty good. It showed a lot of flaws in the evidence, and parts of the defense case that were ruled inadmissible.

Most of the stuff about the boat anchors, the eye witness at the marina. And a re-enactment of the boat unloading a facsimile of the body in the weather that day likely would have been impossible without capsizing the boat. And a few others I can’t think off right now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bsu_alum9 said:

Robert Pruett Texas Convicted 2002 Executed 2017

Texas executed Robert Pruett on October 12, 2017, after the Texas courts deemed DNA evidence in his case "inconclusive" and denied him a stay of execution to further review the evidence in his case. Pruett was sentenced to death in 2002 for the 1999 stabbing death of Officer Daniel Nagle, a state correctional officer who was at the center of a prison corruption investigation. Pruett had long maintained that he had been framed for the murder. Earlier on the day of the mjrder, Officer Nagle had given Pruett a disciplinary write-up for eating a sandwich in an unauthorized area. A bloody shank and a torn-up copy of the disciplinary report were found next to the officer’s body. Pruett had no history of prison violence. The prosecution's case turned on dubious testimony from prison informants and the junk-science testimony of a forensic analyst who linked the tape wrapped around the handle of the shank used to kill Nagle to the prison craft shop in which Pruett’s cellmate worked. A state investigator’s notes that had not been disclosed to the defense revealed that a key prison witness—Harold Mitchell—had been promised a transfer to a prison close to his family’s home in Virginia if he testified against Pruett, and had been threatened with being charged with Nagle’s murder if he did not. Pruett's post-conviction lawyers later debunked the forensic methodology the state's expert had used to link the tape on the murder weapon to Pruett, and results of a subsequent DNA test of the murder weapon found DNA that did not match either Pruett or Nagle. According to Pruett’s clemency petition, Officer Nagle had been working to identify corrupt correctional officers who had been helping prison gangs launder drug money, and Nagle's name had been discovered on a secret note that had been passed between inmates, which said that a prison gang wanted the officer dead. The same day Pruett was indicted, four correctional officers were indicted on federal bribery charges for participating in a drug smuggling ring. Pruett’s lawyers argued that the unidentified DNA may belong “to the person [who] killed Nagle.” 

That's a great example of why circumstantial murder convictions should never have the punishment of death.

For the death penalty, I think there has to be more than circumstantial evidence.   And I don't look at the death penalty as a deterrent.  It's a punishment.  Reserved for the absolute worst criminals who walk among us.  But we're nowhere near being able to apply that properly.

It's also a good example of why prosecutors shouldn't put such onus on obtaining convictions. If there wasn't such pressure for high conviction rates, then many people wouldn't be falsely charged and/or convicted of crimes they didn't commit.

One of the biggest problems with the justice system is the goal is no longer justice.  It's process.  Innocent people can be framed by those who understand the way the system works.  That's needs to be fixed. 

51t4uwlffaL._SL160_SS150_.jpg324804241_0b7c67b2af_m.jpg

BCS is to Football what Fox News is to Journalism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/20/2018 at 4:58 PM, CV147 said:

I'm for it when the killer is caught in the act, like the Florida school shootings.

I'm not for it otherwise.

What do you mean by caught in the act? I thought I read that he left the school and was arrested an hour or so later in a nearby neighborhood?

Or do you mean caught in the act as in caught on video committing the crime? i.e. not only circumstantial evidence? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, BSUTOP25 said:

The state should not have the authority to decide life or death in a contained, non-threatening situation. The death penalty/executions are morally wrong.

I think it's morally wrong that my taxes go to paying to keep inmates clothed and fed for life.

Just kidding. But for that argument, I wonder how much it costs to complete an execution (including all the appeals, etc.) in terms of years of imprisonment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...