Recommended Posts
yeah, and they also lynched blacks. Or in the rush to justice, hung a scapegoat instead of the guilty party. The tyanny of the mob in its finest.
sorry, if we're talking about the old west, the duels at high noon were grossly outnumbered by simple murders. Your version is the Hollywood version.
sorry, if we're talking about the old west, the duels at high noon were grossly outnumbered by simple murders. Your version is the Hollywood version.
kallend 2,117
QuoteQuoteJust seems to me it would be much chaper if we went back to the hangin days.
I was saying the same excat thing.
Did you know that the needle used for lethal injection HAS to be sterile. HA????
There are cheap ways of killing scumbags that rape and kill little girls, murder parents, and and just plain dont do us any good!! Spending money in these sumbags is rediculous
How do you know who is a scumbag and who is being railroaded without a fair trial and appeals process?
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
QuoteHow do you know who is a scumbag and who is being railroaded without a fair trial and appeals process?
Many people are satisfied just so long as SOMEBODY is killed in revenge. It really doesn't matter who, so long as they look scummy.
First Class Citizen Twice Over
QuoteQuotehttp://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/03/02/killer.nurse/index.html
Here is a man that killed 40 innocent people, and now gets lfe in prison. Guess who gets to dish out the cash to keep this lovely member of the society alive....you guessed...YOU the TAX PAYER!
well, if it's just about cost, executions have been shown to be more expensive.
I think that's only because we allow a staggeringly unreasonable amount of appealing -- even "automatic appeals" when there is zero reason to suspect the court has made any error!
If we took it seriously, and actually put the faith into the justice system that is supposed to be implicit, we wouldn't be second-guessing things and making "execution" cost a fortune. (It's not really the execution that costs, it's the bullshit appeals.)
Oh, and if you're worried about putting the wrong person to death, make faking evidence, tampering with witnesses, withholding evidence, planting evidence, or any other type of defrauding a trial, a capital offense as well. As in, if the prosecutor pulls bullshit shenanigans, he stands to be executed, himself.
-
-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
Richards 0
QuoteI wonder how the victim's family would feel if it turns out later that the wrong man was executed.
In this case there is a confession, so there is no possibility of that. I would be very prudent with the use of the death penalty for that reason. I would want proof in the form of a confession or DNA or the killer videotaping his crimes before I would do it but when the possibility of innocence is eliminated then it's time to throw out the garbage (execute him).
Richards
My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.
People have been known to confess when they're not guilty, either to protect someone else, or because they take a plea rather than risk the death sentence with a jury.
Did you see the chart I posted? The average trial is SO much more expensive on average. Just the trial, not the appeals.
Richards 0
QuotePeople have been known to confess when they're not guilty, either to protect someone else, or because they take a plea rather than risk the death sentence with a jury.
Then the simple solution is to not confess to something you did not do. I would not agree with limitting punishment due to failings in process. Adjust the process to eliminate those flaws and then move on to increasing the punishment.
Richards
My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.
kallend 2,117
QuoteQuotePeople have been known to confess when they're not guilty, either to protect someone else, or because they take a plea rather than risk the death sentence with a jury.
Then the simple solution is to not confess to something you did not do. I would not agree with limitting punishment due to failings in process. Adjust the process to eliminate those flaws and then move on to increasing the punishment.
Richards
Ha ha.
www.ccadp.org/deathrow10.htm
Just hope it never happens to you.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
rehmwa 2
QuoteHow do you know who is a scumbag and who is being railroaded without a fair trial and appeals process?
same way you can tell which are the delayed neutrons - the little yellow stripe
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
rasmack 0
QuoteQuoteHow do you know who is a scumbag and who is being railroaded without a fair trial and appeals process?
same way you can tell which are the delayed neutrons - the little yellow stripe
Possibly the best one-liner ever.
HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...
QuotePeople have been known to confess when they're not guilty, either to protect someone else, or because they take a plea rather than risk the death sentence with a jury.
How is it a factor that we might put an innocent person to death if they confess specifically because it spares them the death penalty?
-
-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
QuoteThere are some advantages to that. Do you know how much it costs to try a death penalty case? My understanding is that when adding up all the costs for an LA County death penalty trial, it comes to aroud $1.5 -2 million dollars. That's including the costs for investigations (figure probably 100-200k), experts to testify (another 100-200k), attorney time spent (DA's and defense - probably a cool million (figure 5-20 DA's workign on a murder case at any one time at an average of 75k per year, plus defense attorneys)).
Add to that court costs (probably 300-500k) and time spent keeping them in a relatively expensive county jail during the trial.
Please clarify what the "court costs" of $300-500k could possibly be... That has me baffled. What, in addition to all the other stuff you itemized, could "court costs" possibly be on top of it all?
I'm sorry, "investigations" and "expert testimony" should not cost nearly what you say they do. Paying "experts" to testify is just incentive for them to make shit up to be worth the money.
Two million fucking dollars just so society can get what it's entitled to -- to be rid of a piece of shit murderer?!
QuoteI support the death penalty politically and morally. Economically, I don't see any real benefit.
No one ever claimed, though, that economics was the way we were expecting to benefit from executing murderers. Back when execution was first come up with (probably going wayyyyy back in human history), I'm sure there was not much consideration of the money aspect -- just the justice aspect.
-
-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
QuoteIf we followed your plan, the 123 innocent people listed below would be dead.
In order to be included on the list, defendants must have been convicted and sentenced to death, and subsequently either:
a) their conviction was overturned and they were acquitted at a re-trial, or all charges were dismissed;
What possibility is there that at least some of those 123 actually DID do the murders they were initially convicted of, but later got off for some reason or other? As in, is it 100% absolutely positively sure that they did NOT do the murders of which they were convicted?
-
-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
crwtom 0
Quote
What possibility is there that at least some of those 123 actually DID do the murders they were initially convicted of, but later got off for some reason or other? As in, is it 100% absolutely positively sure that they did NOT do the murders of which they were convicted?
-
so you would go ahead an kill 123 people because there is a
possibility that one of them is a crimial?
Cheers, T
*******************************************************************
Fear causes hesitation, and hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true
Fear causes hesitation, and hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true
rehmwa 2
Quoteso you would go ahead an kill 123 people because there is a possibility that one of them is a crimial?
I'm sure that's EXACTLY what he said
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
A portion were released because DNA evidence excluded them. Others were released because evidence other than DNA indicated they were innocent. Others were released because a jury couldn't convict them based on available evidence.
If someone can't be convicted of a crime because a jury believes there's "reasonable doubt", the state has no business executing them.
If we're not 100% positive that they DID commit a crime, execution cannot be a reasonable option. Killing an innocent person is murder. I don't know about you, but I don't want their blood on my hands, and, as we live in a government that is "by the people", we are all some way responsible for the actions of our government.
If someone can't be convicted of a crime because a jury believes there's "reasonable doubt", the state has no business executing them.
If we're not 100% positive that they DID commit a crime, execution cannot be a reasonable option. Killing an innocent person is murder. I don't know about you, but I don't want their blood on my hands, and, as we live in a government that is "by the people", we are all some way responsible for the actions of our government.
QuotePlease clarify what the "court costs" of $300-500k could possibly be... That has me baffled. What, in addition to all the other stuff you itemized, could "court costs" possibly be on top of it all?
Okay. I'd be happy to give you just a slight rundown of costs. What are "costs?" Everything but attorney fees. "Costs" includes, but is not limited to, the following:
1) Investigations
- Money for every freaking forensic test performed. (Think about a cost of roughly $100.00 per DNA test (done on several different blood samples), at least another hundred for every other lab test, investigator time looking for every hair, skin cell, fiber, etc.) Actually, just lwatch an episode of CSI and think of how much money it would cost to run all those tests.
- running fingerprints
- ballistics
- all the site investigation (officer salaries)
- Subpoenas of paperwork and copy costs (in the thousands)
- Subpoenas of witnesses
- Add possible travel costs for investigators, etc.
- Fees for blow-ups, other exhibits, etc.
2) Experts
- Experts on every freaking test run by the crime lab (for both sides), all at an hourly/half-day/daily rate. These guys are not only experts testifying, but they are paid a pretty penny for every hour working up the case, too.
- Psych experts
- Crimonologists
- Treating physicians (if the victim doesn't die immediately - BIG bucks)
- Countless other types (experts on shoeprints, tiremarks, knife experts,)
3) Ordinary witnesses
- subpoena fees
- witness fees (including statutory fees, travel, etc.)
- court reporter costs for depositions (this is the big one - a half day deposition will run $800.00)
- videotapes for the interview room
4) Court costs
- Salaries of judge, clerk, bailiff, etc.
- Court reporter fees again ($500 per day - think of that with a 15 day trial).
- Jury fees ($30-$50 per juror, per day)
5) Jail costs
- Think about $100 per day for county jail (they ain't in the pen yet)
- Transportation of prisoner
- Booking, processing, etc.
6) If death penalty phase
- All the court costs
- All the witness costs
- New experts, psychiatric, etc.
This doesn't include attorney fees, dude. The BIGGEST costs are with experts. I handled a malpractice case a couple of years ago where the costs of taking it to trial were (and this is just our side):
1) Filing and motions - $190 (it's $320 now in California for just the first paper on the civil side)
2) Jury fees of $1,507
3) Deposition costs - $7,377
4) Subpoenas - $1,396
5) Ordinary and Expert Witnesses - $62,793
6) Models, blow-ups, exhibits - $1,049
7) Court reporter fees - $2,348
8) Court-ordered meditation - $1,700
Add those up, it's $78,500. For defending a chiropractor. Those are costs for just my side - exclusive of attorney fees. (add about $50k to that). And we didn't have to deal with all the laboratory stuff. That is the stuff that will add up quickly.
If I had to do it over again, I would have become an expert in some field (like mold) and charged $5k per day to be a trial witness, along with $800 per hour for working up the case, doing reviews, etc.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
by the way JC I am sure you are aware that ballistic ID is a very subjective if not faulty science as the ballistic charaterics change every time a round is fired and every time the weapon is cleaned (unless there is a serious flaw in the barrel that remains unchanged )
so I don't see in your breakdown much reason to believe non capital punishment cases would be that much cheaper. People don't want to go to jail for life any more (or much more) than they want to be executed after 10-20 years of jail.
Quoteso I don't see in your breakdown much reason to believe non capital punishment cases would be that much cheaper. People don't want to go to jail for life any more (or much more) than they want to be executed after 10-20 years of jail.
The reason is twofold:
1) For death penalty cases, you have to prove a "special circumstance"; and
2) There's a whole new phase of trial for the penalty.
Now, for a standard murder case, all the prosecutors have to prove is that the defendant killed the other person. That streamlines it.
For a death penalty case, you have a case within a case - the "special circumstance." There are TWO cases, not just one.
Then, there's a sentencing phase of trial. So, there are, in effect, three trials worth of evidence to put on, instead of one.
I hope that clarifies it a little.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites