Capital Punishment - lethal injections often fail

[Mwsinron]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texas Proud Goonie.... The problem with your post is that it actually cost more to put a criminal to death than to house them for the rest of their life... if they get life, there are few appeals... a capital murderer gets MANY appeals and then end of life court cases... all cost a lot of money... Texas has the largest population on death road AND the most people put to death... I don't mind it a bit to pay the extra money...

Need to rework the appeals system.

[haha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goonie When he was convicted....and there was preponderance of evidence against him.....he should have been sentenced to death....and the sentence should have been carried out!

I think the standard of evidence in criminal trials is "beyond a reasonable doubt", not a preponderance of the evidence. At least I hope it is!

Quote:

As for less dastardly crimes, I believe they need to bring back "chain gangs". We used to have them here in IL, but some bleeding hearts must have thought it was too cruel of a way to make them pay there 'debt' to society. But, man, the roadsides looked really well maintained for a few miles around the the state pens!!! When I saw them (way back when) it looked like a scene right out of "Cool Hand Luke"! :

I remember seeing chain gangs in Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana in the 40s. Pretty scary to see. But you are right, the cons will be working out with weights in prison, why not let them do something useful while they are toning their muscles to make them more lethal in a fight?

Ha

[LKH]

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 also think because of the cost and the fact that there are still mistakes, that CP should ONLY be used when the crime is exceedingly heinous, and the criminal continues to pose a threat, even in prison. Tim McVeigh needed to go away. In prison he would only have the opportunity to recruit more nutballs willing and able to explode more public buildings. People whose crimes show an excessive level of violence, suggesting that they would be a threat to fellow inmates and guards in prison would be another.

For other crimes, I think we should reconsider penalties. For example, I think violent rapists should get much longer sentences. Sex offenders have something like a 90% recidivism rate, so keep 'em off the streets as long as possible. Murderers, while the recidivism rate is much lower - more like 10% - have committed crimes that require a harsh punishment. If you deliberately take another person's live with malice and forethought, then I don't think you should breathe free air again. On the other hand, property criminals - I think a lot of the time, we might do better to make them repay for whatever they stole or damaged. The victims don't get any benefit from their burglar going to prison. Why shouldn't they be repaid, obviously through some sort of central fund rather than directly by the criminal, who shouldn't know where they live. I think we could shake loose a lot of space in prisons for violent offenders by making non-violent offenders work and repay.

[chinaco]

I experience Capital Punishment back in 2000 and boy it was murder. Although I didn't lose my life... it was only a $h!tl0ad of money that was lost. It was my sentence for not taking some money off the table when I knew I should have (a few individual stock holdings that ballooned).

Luckily most of the portfolio was diversified so my warden (DW) pardoned me.

[teejayevans]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich_in_Tampa The current method is to me cruel and unusual.

The victims that were stabbed or shot or raped or tortured might have a different
opinion.
TJ

[Texas Proud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LKH 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]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texas Proud 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.

Quote:

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]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martha 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]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martha 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]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texas Proud 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]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

Ain't got no toilets in Texas.

[Rustic23]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich_in_Tampa Ain't got no toilets in Texas.

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