17 rules for being a good Democrat

Right, but have any actually been sentenced to death and then put to death? I did see where one man died while on death row, waiting but of natural causes. If someone is later found to be innocent during an appeal or granted a retrial that (to me) shows that though the system may have broken down to garner a conviction (which as I said earlier is a statistical anomaly) the appeals process reviews the case, as they do in pretty much any death row case and at least in a few of those instances worked, which to me says even though part of the system broke down for the conviction the system as a whole functioned.

That being said I do not believe the system to be infallible. In fact I think the system makes a regular habit of screwing up and screwing people over, though usually the system will error on the side of caution by not convicting people or accepting lesser convictions than what is called for. For example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_White

But then the system also convicts (men primarily) people wrongfully almost routinely just 20 years ago, as evidenced by the fact that Dallas, TX put so many men in prison for rape during such a short amount of time based solely on unreliable eye witness statements from emotionally overcharged victims and infuriated juries. These convictions were a tragic failure.

I also believe deporting violent gang offenders as a "punishment" rather than trying them for crimes is a tragedy (especially since many return).

I think our DUI laws are getting to be stupid due to political pressure from special interest groups like MADD. For example in Texas they have started drawing blood from everyone suspected of a DUI on certain dates using a carte blanche John Doe warrant. The purpose of a warrant is to state specific, articulated, probable cause for a search or arrest thus in my mind a John Doe carte blanche warrant is a gross violation of the 4th and 5th Amendments, but so far it has not been successfully argued so in court. Again in this same situation MADD keeps pushing the legal intoxication limit downward, then when the crime rate goes up they use these statistics to prove that "more action" is needed and thus are able to raise more money, increase influence, etc. showing that we have a demonstrable problem when indeed the crime rate is largely manufactured. They also have a gross imbalance of punitive actions taken on offenders who are convicted of these artificially low tolerances for DUI whereby the crime (if indeed one has occurred) nowhere near resembles the punishment. MADD uses emotionally charged headlines and tragedy to make their case, much like any murder case. The difference is that should like practices to get DUI convictions take place for murder convictions the Supreme Court would be on the states like white on rice and rightfully so. My point is the lesser the crime the more the "system" can get away with, murder is unique in that it is very, very difficult to gain a conviction in the face of overwhelming evidence much less fabrications, half-truths, spotty testimony, etc.

Also as a personal note, anytime someone writes or says the offender is "mentally retarded" or "has the mental capacity of an 8 year old" etc. I immediately dismiss this as inconsequential, after all the mental capacity of an offender does not somehow magically bring the victim to life nor does it remove the violence some of these supposed "mentally retarded" people are capable of. I have personally met some of the most vicious people you will hopefully never see and I can tell you that almost to a man, not one was what I would consider especially brilliant. Most were uneducated, some couldn't read and I'd be willing to bet that the right clinician could "prove" them to be mentally unbalanced, ill or retarded. After all, with rare exception it is not normal, functioning human beings that commit extreme acts of violence and murder as these acts are unnatural and take a special kind of depravity, especially in rape/homicides or violence against children.

By the way the Willingham statement you quoted me on? Since this is after the fact on a conviction the offender is no longer considered innocent until proven guilty, thus my choice of words. If we were talking about it as if being tried right now, I'd say he's "clearly guilty".

 

This may deviate slightly from the main point but I don't believe the system errs on the side of caution with the "smaller" issues. I know a few falsely convicted people or people who were involved in multi-year court battles due to baseless charges. When it comes to "smaller" issues the system errs on the side of making money and forcing plea bargains. Hardly an error, I believe it is quite intentional. Although I'm sure it varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. I live in Colorado Springs.

 

I agree, I think the system errors on the side of caution in capital punishment cases or highly publicized cases. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that.

"Smaller" issues like DUIs, speeding tickets, etc. are all about money and convictions make it.

Likewise rape cases seem to have a "guilty until proven innocent" approach which is crappy.

 

Who resurrected this old thread?
Why doesn't this thread have the decency to die?

 

Just in...man beats and tortures 4 year old to death over the course of several days. http://www.toledoonthemove.com/news/story.aspx?id=444888

Now how is it right this guy only faces life? Honestly, I wish go God he had done this in Texas.

 

I wish that he had committed suicide before beating the 4 year old.

My guess is that if he is convicted to life in prison, his life would be much shorter in the prison general population than it would be on death row, even in Texas.

 

That's the thing though, child abusers, sex offenders, rapists, etc. are all in protective custody along with the snitches. They have their own segment of a prison and generally are not mixed anywhere near the general pop. Too bad, this guy should be making lipstick out of Skittles and pondering all possible meanings of the words "tootsie roll".