Capital Punishment - lethal injections often fail

[Texas Proud]

It's true that CP costs a LOT more than keeping them locked up. And yes, a good share of that is appeals. But before we talk about changing that, keep in mind that even WITH all the appeals, we've executed hundreds of people who turned out to be innocent. I'm all for making absolutely certain we have the right person before we pull the switch, and to me, that's worth the additional cost of appeals.

I call BS on this post.... from what I have read... there are only a few that people claim, but their innocence was in doubt... ie, some think they were innocent as the evidence is not a slam dunk.. it was awhile ago, but I had read an article that there were NO proveable people that had been executed later to have evidence that proved they were innocent.. much less 100s...

Yes, there have been a number that were convicted and put on death row, but they were later released because of new evidence... but never executed.

BTW, they did 'fix' the appeals process in Texas... for the worse I might add ... IIRC, you get 'one shot'.. after that, to bad... EVEN IF YOU GET EVIDENCE PROVING YOU ARE INNOCENT!!!. To me, this is SO wrong. I am not talking about evidence that leans a little toward innocence, but that no sane person can dispute (it is hard to change the minds of the vitims family and the prosecutors)...

One of the problems in Texas is there is a big gap in sentences... you can sentence a man to life in prison, but they will get out in 40 years no matter what they did.... OR if a capital case, give them the death penalty... that is why we have some many on death row.... we don't want them back out in society..

 

[Martha]

I call BS on this post.... from what I have read... there are only a few that people claim, but their innocence was in doubt... ie, some think they were innocent as the evidence is not a slam dunk.. it was awhile ago, but I had read an article that there were NO proveable people that had been executed later to have evidence that proved they were innocent.. much less 100s...

Yes, there have been a number that were convicted and put on death row, but they were later released because of new evidence... but never executed.

The problem with your statement is that the innocence projects only tackle cases where the person has not yet been executed. There hasn't been any coordinated attempt to see whether executed people may be innocent. Given the number of convictions set aside on DNA grounds, the advances in science regarding witness identification errors and figure print match erros, and the historical the lack of funding for defense teams, most certainly people were executed that were innocent. No one in the biz doubts this. And remember, for a number of years capital punishment was illegal throughout the United States because of due process issues.

BTW, they did 'fix' the appeals process in Texas... for the worse I might add ... IIRC, you get 'one shot'.. after that, to bad... EVEN IF YOU GET EVIDENCE PROVING YOU ARE INNOCENT!!!. To me, this is SO wrong. I am not talking about evidence that leans a little toward innocence, but that no sane person can dispute (it is hard to change the minds of the vitims family and the prosecutors)...

One of the problems in Texas is there is a big gap in sentences... you can sentence a man to life in prison, but they will get out in 40 years no matter what they did.... OR if a capital case, give them the death penalty... that is why we have some many on death row.... we don't want them back out in society..

I remember in law school reading a case from Texas where there was a law that after a certain number of felonies you get life imprisionment. This was before the now popular three strikes laws. A guy was drunk in a bar and busted a toilet. It was a felony and he got life. It went on appeal on cruel and unusual punishment grounds and he lost. Whenever law school friends talk about going south someplace to visit or work, someone always says "don't bust any toilets."

 

[Texas Proud]

I remember in law school reading a case from Texas where there was a law that after a certain number of felonies you get life imprisionment. This was before the now popular three strikes laws. A guy was drunk in a bar and busted a toilet. It was a felony and he got life. It went on appeal on cruel and unusual punishment grounds and he lost. Whenever law school friends talk about going south someplace to visit or work, someone always says "don't bust any toilets."

Martha.... you can check me on this.... but, I do believe you are a bit off on the felonies punishment... it is that you MAY get life... that is left up to the jury.

I was on a jury where they charged a guy with felony DWI... they told us that Texas does not have the three strike rule like other states where it can be mandatory... but punishment is based on the crime committed and their history... SO, this guy blew a 2.2 IIRC, but did not harm a soul... they proved in court that he was drunk and that he had committed at least one other felony.... he was found guilty... then during punishment, we found that he had over 50 convictions.. most pleaded out.. since he was felony DWI, his sentence could have been anywhere from 20 years to life... but again... LIFE in this case meant he would be out in 15 years from what they told us... he got 45 years... but still will be out in 15...

 

[Martha]

You're probably right on it being a jury decision. I took criminal law too many years ago to remember. Either way, I ain't breaking any toilets in Texas.

 

[REWahoo]

Either way, I ain't breaking any toilets in Texas.

Sounds like you've gained an understanding of the true meaning of the term "Don't mess with Texas".

 

[haha]

I was on a jury where they charged a guy with felony DWI... they told us that Texas does not have the three strike rule like other states where it can be mandatory... but punishment is based on the crime committed and their history... SO, this guy blew a 2.2 IIRC, but did not harm a soul... they proved in court that he was drunk and that he had committed at least one other felony.... he was found guilty... then during punishment, we found that he had over 50 convictions.. most pleaded out.. since he was felony DWI, his sentence could have been anywhere from 20 years to life... but again... LIFE in this case meant he would be out in 15 years from what they told us... he got 45 years... but still will be out in 15...

IMO, anyone who has a 2.2 needs to be taken out of his car. Until there is a technology to do that, he/she needs to be in jail, at least long enough to suggest even to a moron like this that it might be wise to stay out from behind the wheel while drunk. So what if he didn't harm anyone? That was only luck.

Ha

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

You're probably right on it being a jury decision. I took criminal law too many years ago to remember. Either way, I ain't breaking any toilets in Texas.

Ain't got no toilets in Texas.

 

[Rustic23]

Ain't got no toilets in Texas.

And remember.... you can catch ebola from Texas toilet seats!