Capital Punishment for the Innocent
- Thread starter gvf
- Start date
I would never make such silly assertions.
These brothers don't deserve the use of public air. Why do you think they chose to go to trial? This case would have never gone to trial if they had been offered life w/o parole. They fought to live which is exactly why they should die. If they are allowed to live they can enjoy conversation, write to their relatives, eat, celebrate, live...all of these things are too good for them. Justice for society in their case is their non-existence. Justice for the victims will never come.
It would be interesting to know some statistics from China where the death penalty is enforced frequently. But then I guess one could argue the differences in their society and the western world. It would, if nothing else give us a glimpse or clue as to what/how the death penalty does work where strictly enforced.
One thing for sure is that once enforced it tends to stop repeat offenders, which does happen. sometimes to other prisoners, unfortunately a life sentence comes with the provision of parole. If life without, there is always the chance of bleeding hearts getting laws changed. Death tends to be kinda permanent.
JuanCarlos
New member
Fair enough.
Amazing how that last bit works so well as both a pro- and anti-death penalty argument.
Actually, if there is one subset where I'm comfortable with the use of the death penalty, it's repeat offenders (assuming both crimes are ones determined to warrant the death penalty). While I find the probability of somebody being convicted once of a capital crime in error to be too high for my personal comfort, I think the chances of somebody being mistakenly convicted twice are close enough to zero for my tastes.
JuanCarlos
New member
Read it the first time. I know there are limited scenarios where guilt is so "obvious" that the death penalty seems perfectly reasonable. However, I also know that in practice the death penalty is unlikely to be limited to such scenarios. It's simply not a clear-cut enough standard.
True. But as I've said before, I find the idea of an innocent losing their life at the hands of a murderer preferable to an innocent losing their life at my hands...by way of the government. Obviously, I'd prefer neither but that's not a realistic option.
JuanCarlos said:
Actually, I think there are different groups, but we'll start with yours;
* Desperate (mentally/chemically impaired) - drug addicts & disturbed people
* Those who think they won't be caught for the crimes ("the planner")
+ Killings in the heat of passion or in retribution for something very recent.
+ The hardcore criminal - this is the one who doesn't give a s*** about you, me or even himself. He plans to take as many with him as he can.
Only the planner and perhaps the retribution killer might be deterred from committing a homicide. The hardcore badguy is just going to do what he wants, regardless of the punishment.
Stats 2004 and Others
Statistics are from the Bureau of Justice and are the official United States statistics as compiled by the government.
107 inmates were released from Death Row in 2004. Of the 107, 25 inmates had their convictions overturned and were released from Death Row, while another 72 inmates had their death sentences removed while still being convicted fo the original crime. 4 Death Row inmates were given commutations, meaning a lesser sentence. 6 DR inmates had their death sentences declared unconstitutional by the Kansas Supreme Court.
Of the 107 inmates released from Death Row, 57 are serving a lesser sentence, 20 are awaiting a new trial, 23 are awaiting a new sentencing and 1 had all capital charges dropped. The other 6 had no new actions taken since being removed from DR.
Since 1973, 118 people have been found innocent after serving time on Death Row.
In 2004, 6 people previously on Death Row awaiting execution were found innocent and freed.
1. Alan Gell, NC, sentenced to death in 1998. Granted new trial as prosecutors withheld evidence. Acquitted of the crime in his new trial and freed.
2. Gordon Steidl, IL, sentenced to death in 1987. Death Sentence overturned due to inadequate legal representation. IL decided not to retry him after reinvestigating the case and he was freed.
3. Laurence Adams, MA, sentenced to death in 1974. Conviction overturned due to the police withholding evidence. The state dropped the charges against him and he was freed.
4. Dan Bright, LA, sentenced to death in 1996. Conviction overturned after the state was found to have withheld evidence concerning their key witness. Charges were dropped and he was freed.
5. Ryan Matthews, LA,sentenced to death in 1999. A new DNA test excluded him. All charges against him were dropped and he was freed.
6. Ernest Ray Willis, TX, sentenced to death in 1987. Conviction overturned due to the state suppressing evidence and inadequate legal representation. A new arson specialist found no evidence of arson, all charges were dropped and he was freed.
MORE EGREGIOUS CASES
JUAN MELENDEZ
A farm worker who was wrongly convicted of murder and spending 17 1/2 years on Death Row in FL. Juan says "Lots of times I wanted to commit suicide [while in prison]. Beautiful dreams of my childhood took me out of those thoughts. That's God's work." There was no physical evidence linking him to the crime at his trial, only the testimony of questionable witnesses. The conviction was overturned when another man confessed to the crime.
ANIBAL JARRAMILLO
Conviction overturned on appeal when evidence against him was deemed weak, "not legally sufficient to support a conviction." The evidence seems to instead point to the victim's roommate.
ANTHONY BROWN
Acquitted during a retrial. His partner-in-crime, who got life in prison instead of the DP, admitted he had lied during the trial.
ANTHONY RAY PEEK
After 9 years on Death Row, he was acquitted during his 3rd retrial (to be acquitted means you are found not guilty of a crime you were previously convicted of). Hair evidence as explained by an expert witness was found to be false.
JUAN RAMOS
No physical evidence linked Juan to the crime. The Florida Supreme Court granted him a new trial because of the prosecution's improper use of evidence. He was acquitted at retrial.
BRADLEY P. SCOTT
Arrested 10 years after the crime. The evidence supporting his alibi had been lost. His conviction was based on shaky eyewitness testimony. Released from Death Row by the Florida Supreme Court while his case was appealed. The court found that the evidence against him was "not sufficient to support a finding of guilt."
ROBERT HAYES
Acquitted of murder after being granted a new trial by the Florida Supreme Court. DNA evidence proved the hairs found clutched in the victim's hands were from a white man and Hayes is black.
TROY LEE JONES
Released after 14 years in prison. After the California Supreme Court granted him a new trial, the state dropped the charges rather than retry him. The defense attorney in his original trial was found to have failed to interview witnesses, failed to obtain police reports, and while cross-examining a witness damaged his own client by getting the witness to reveal harmful testimony.
JUDY HANEY
Her court-appointed defense attorney came to court drunk. The judge held the lawyer in contempt of court and ordered the lawyer to spend a night in jail. The very next day, the lawyer was allowed to continue representing Haney in her death penalty case. The Alabama Supreme Court has upheld her death sentence and she is still on Death Row.
WANDA JEAN ALLEN
Executed by the state of Oklahoma in 2001. Her court-appointed lawyer had never tried a death penalty case before and wasn't confident in his abilities. He asked the public defender's office to either remove him from the case or to offer him assistance. It did neither. The lawyer was only paid $800 to represent Wanda. He did not tell the jury that Wanda was mentally retarded (prior to 2002, it was legal in the US to execute the mentally retarded).
EARL WASHINGTON
A mentally retarded Virginia man, he was facing the death sentence prior to 2002 when the US stopped executing the mentally retarded. He wound up on Death Row after confessing to a murder in a series of confusing statements. At times he described the victim as white and at other times black. The governor commuted his sentence. He was cleared of the crime through DNA tests.
DELMA BANKS, JR.
The US Supreme Court has agreed to review this case. The only evidence against Banks was the testimony of a jailhouse informant whose arson charge was dismissed in exchange for his testimony. Also, the defense lawyer did not properly investigate his client's case in order to support Banks' alibi that he was out-of-state at the time of the murder.
FROM ANOTHER SITE COMPLILING RATIO STATS:
Since 1977, some 553 people have been executed in the United States while another eighty death row inmates have been released after they were found innocent. For every seven executed, one innocent person is freed-an “error rate” of more than twelve (12) percent. In the State of Illinois, 12 people have been executed since 1977 while 13 have been released after proving their innocence-an error rate of 52 percent.
Statistics are from the Bureau of Justice and are the official United States statistics as compiled by the government.
107 inmates were released from Death Row in 2004. Of the 107, 25 inmates had their convictions overturned and were released from Death Row, while another 72 inmates had their death sentences removed while still being convicted fo the original crime. 4 Death Row inmates were given commutations, meaning a lesser sentence. 6 DR inmates had their death sentences declared unconstitutional by the Kansas Supreme Court.
Of the 107 inmates released from Death Row, 57 are serving a lesser sentence, 20 are awaiting a new trial, 23 are awaiting a new sentencing and 1 had all capital charges dropped. The other 6 had no new actions taken since being removed from DR.
Since 1973, 118 people have been found innocent after serving time on Death Row.
In 2004, 6 people previously on Death Row awaiting execution were found innocent and freed.
1. Alan Gell, NC, sentenced to death in 1998. Granted new trial as prosecutors withheld evidence. Acquitted of the crime in his new trial and freed.
2. Gordon Steidl, IL, sentenced to death in 1987. Death Sentence overturned due to inadequate legal representation. IL decided not to retry him after reinvestigating the case and he was freed.
3. Laurence Adams, MA, sentenced to death in 1974. Conviction overturned due to the police withholding evidence. The state dropped the charges against him and he was freed.
4. Dan Bright, LA, sentenced to death in 1996. Conviction overturned after the state was found to have withheld evidence concerning their key witness. Charges were dropped and he was freed.
5. Ryan Matthews, LA,sentenced to death in 1999. A new DNA test excluded him. All charges against him were dropped and he was freed.
6. Ernest Ray Willis, TX, sentenced to death in 1987. Conviction overturned due to the state suppressing evidence and inadequate legal representation. A new arson specialist found no evidence of arson, all charges were dropped and he was freed.
MORE EGREGIOUS CASES
JUAN MELENDEZ
A farm worker who was wrongly convicted of murder and spending 17 1/2 years on Death Row in FL. Juan says "Lots of times I wanted to commit suicide [while in prison]. Beautiful dreams of my childhood took me out of those thoughts. That's God's work." There was no physical evidence linking him to the crime at his trial, only the testimony of questionable witnesses. The conviction was overturned when another man confessed to the crime.
ANIBAL JARRAMILLO
Conviction overturned on appeal when evidence against him was deemed weak, "not legally sufficient to support a conviction." The evidence seems to instead point to the victim's roommate.
ANTHONY BROWN
Acquitted during a retrial. His partner-in-crime, who got life in prison instead of the DP, admitted he had lied during the trial.
ANTHONY RAY PEEK
After 9 years on Death Row, he was acquitted during his 3rd retrial (to be acquitted means you are found not guilty of a crime you were previously convicted of). Hair evidence as explained by an expert witness was found to be false.
JUAN RAMOS
No physical evidence linked Juan to the crime. The Florida Supreme Court granted him a new trial because of the prosecution's improper use of evidence. He was acquitted at retrial.
BRADLEY P. SCOTT
Arrested 10 years after the crime. The evidence supporting his alibi had been lost. His conviction was based on shaky eyewitness testimony. Released from Death Row by the Florida Supreme Court while his case was appealed. The court found that the evidence against him was "not sufficient to support a finding of guilt."
ROBERT HAYES
Acquitted of murder after being granted a new trial by the Florida Supreme Court. DNA evidence proved the hairs found clutched in the victim's hands were from a white man and Hayes is black.
TROY LEE JONES
Released after 14 years in prison. After the California Supreme Court granted him a new trial, the state dropped the charges rather than retry him. The defense attorney in his original trial was found to have failed to interview witnesses, failed to obtain police reports, and while cross-examining a witness damaged his own client by getting the witness to reveal harmful testimony.
JUDY HANEY
Her court-appointed defense attorney came to court drunk. The judge held the lawyer in contempt of court and ordered the lawyer to spend a night in jail. The very next day, the lawyer was allowed to continue representing Haney in her death penalty case. The Alabama Supreme Court has upheld her death sentence and she is still on Death Row.
WANDA JEAN ALLEN
Executed by the state of Oklahoma in 2001. Her court-appointed lawyer had never tried a death penalty case before and wasn't confident in his abilities. He asked the public defender's office to either remove him from the case or to offer him assistance. It did neither. The lawyer was only paid $800 to represent Wanda. He did not tell the jury that Wanda was mentally retarded (prior to 2002, it was legal in the US to execute the mentally retarded).
EARL WASHINGTON
A mentally retarded Virginia man, he was facing the death sentence prior to 2002 when the US stopped executing the mentally retarded. He wound up on Death Row after confessing to a murder in a series of confusing statements. At times he described the victim as white and at other times black. The governor commuted his sentence. He was cleared of the crime through DNA tests.
DELMA BANKS, JR.
The US Supreme Court has agreed to review this case. The only evidence against Banks was the testimony of a jailhouse informant whose arson charge was dismissed in exchange for his testimony. Also, the defense lawyer did not properly investigate his client's case in order to support Banks' alibi that he was out-of-state at the time of the murder.
FROM ANOTHER SITE COMPLILING RATIO STATS:
Since 1977, some 553 people have been executed in the United States while another eighty death row inmates have been released after they were found innocent. For every seven executed, one innocent person is freed-an “error rate” of more than twelve (12) percent. In the State of Illinois, 12 people have been executed since 1977 while 13 have been released after proving their innocence-an error rate of 52 percent.
These sentences were reinstated in 2006 after the SCOTUS found otherwise.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/06/26/scotus.death/index.html
There were some pretty angry Kansans after the 2004 case. If the ruling would have stood the Carr brothers linked by me earlier would have received commutations. That would have been unjust.
Interesting
Interesting how out of all those stats and all those people, you labelled just two unjust, the 2 you feel would have been unjust to commute - (and refer to the Supremes agreement that when a Kansas jury finds equal reason to condemn as not to condemn, they are to condemn) - but were silent on all the those convicted by mistake (or purposely) that were innocent.
Justice for all.
And the conclusion would be: the courts, getting some who are guilty, the innocent regualrly condemned along with them is acceptable.
Justice for all.... O I get it, THAT'S why Justice is blind.
Interesting how out of all those stats and all those people, you labelled just two unjust, the 2 you feel would have been unjust to commute - (and refer to the Supremes agreement that when a Kansas jury finds equal reason to condemn as not to condemn, they are to condemn) - but were silent on all the those convicted by mistake (or purposely) that were innocent.
Justice for all.
And the conclusion would be: the courts, getting some who are guilty, the innocent regualrly condemned along with them is acceptable.
Justice for all.... O I get it, THAT'S why Justice is blind.
Last edited:
These are the only 2 cases I am familiar with. I would guess that the other 4 sentences were just too, I just don't know the cases. I trust the good people of Kansas who sat on the juries of the individual trials represented by the remaining 4 convicts.
As to the reasoning behind the SCOTUS findings, keep in mind guilt has already been established. They are not speaking of a threshold for a finding in the case, only the determination of the sentence by the jury. The SCOTUS case was about the very carefully worded post-conviction pre-sentencing instructions given to the jury.
I was a defense investigator for a number of years. I began doing that from a position of 'Every person charged with a crime deserves a good defense'. I still believe that, but I tired of looking for exculpatory evidence where none existed.
I can think of one case which my investigation resulted in the charge (murder) being dismissed. One case which resulted in a conviction (voluntary manslaughter) even though I believe evidence which was presented from my investigation should have resulted in a finding of not guilty. In that case I am pretty sure the defendant did the murder but I don't believe the evidence presented should have resulted in conviction.
I know there have been and are innocent people in the prison system. I believe the numbers are exceedingly low. The safeguard in death penalty cases is the mandatory appeals processes in place. There are, IMO, very few (now in the 21st century) who get the needle who are not completely deserving of the sentence they receive.
At virtually every death sentence there are those bleeding hearts who are crying and holding vigils in front of the prison. These are the same people who propose marriage to death row inmates and generally don't exert one bit of effort to console the families of the monster's victims. I am curious if the stories you posted came from one of those convicts rights groups. They don't look like anything which would be found on the Department of Justice sites.
No
The figures are Justice Dept stats or gotten from the JDept, State Records.
The name of the work I mentioned at thread's start is The Exonerated.
That material is transcripts in public records and interviews.
The names of any DeathRowers and their histories are public records- - that can be verified - as say the Government of Illinois did, whereafter executions were suspended due to the 52% error rate - which moratorium remains after 7 years, as far as I know,.
The figures are Justice Dept stats or gotten from the JDept, State Records.
The name of the work I mentioned at thread's start is The Exonerated.
That material is transcripts in public records and interviews.
The names of any DeathRowers and their histories are public records- - that can be verified - as say the Government of Illinois did, whereafter executions were suspended due to the 52% error rate - which moratorium remains after 7 years, as far as I know,.
JuanCarlos
New member
One thing to remember is that people opposed to the death penalty come in [EDIT: at least] two flavors. One is the "bleeding heart" variety you mention here. The kind of people that argue that it's wrong for the government to kill anybody, that we don't have the right to take the lives of criminals, and blah blah blah. They're generally the more visible and vocal of the two.
The other are people like me. I wouldn't shed one tear at the execution of most murderers, rapists, etc. I don't see anything wrong whatsoever with putting people to death for crimes that society has deemed heinous enough to warrant it, and I think our society as a whole is fairly reasonable about such things. The only problem I have with the death penalty is the idea that innocent people might wind up executed.
The former are generally not worth arguing with; they're generally motivated by strong enough religious/moral conviction that nothing you say could ever convince them. That latter...well, you're probably still not going to convince them. After all, my aversion to the execution of innocent people is largely based in moral convictions too; numerically the death penalty probably saves more innocent lives than it takes. But at least the conversation can be a little more interesting.
Personal Opinon: There is no Justice on this side of the grave. Worked around prisoners, suspects, victims, witnesses, and now parolees, to back up my belief.
Question: What do you do with a prisoner who is on Life without Parole (In PA Life means just that Life) and he kills a Corrections Officer or other staff member? Give him double Life. Mark his meal card: NO Desert, Take away his Birthday?
We can only punish a guy so much, I know of one case where a guy is locked down so tight he is not allowed to see unfiltered daylight but he is still alive.
I have worked on Death Row, no one was executed on my tour there but it was a different place, and I was told that these guys had nothing to lose, they could kill me just so they could go thru another trial and start thier whole process again.
I have no answers. Just doing the best I can, my philosphy, I try and keep the order while the bad guys are on the side of chaos.
Question: What do you do with a prisoner who is on Life without Parole (In PA Life means just that Life) and he kills a Corrections Officer or other staff member? Give him double Life. Mark his meal card: NO Desert, Take away his Birthday?
We can only punish a guy so much, I know of one case where a guy is locked down so tight he is not allowed to see unfiltered daylight but he is still alive.
I have worked on Death Row, no one was executed on my tour there but it was a different place, and I was told that these guys had nothing to lose, they could kill me just so they could go thru another trial and start thier whole process again.
I have no answers. Just doing the best I can, my philosphy, I try and keep the order while the bad guys are on the side of chaos.
Paraphrasing the late Chief Justice of SCOTUS our system of justice does not and has never guaranteed perfection. What people are entitled to is a fair trial by a jury of their peers. Because people are involved in the equation there will always be a measure of error. This is not to say that we shouldn't strive to achieve perfection, but what justice and the constitution require is a fair trial, not a perfect one.