The problem with the being against the Death Penalty

[grumbler]

Grumbler, aren't you conflating penalty with verdict here and thus misrepresenting what dps has said? 

If the standard punishment for murder is death, then what happens when you have the evidence to convict but not the "higher standard of proof" for the DP?  I think it a fair question

I am not even sure what "a higher standard of proof" is, BTW.  Right now you have (in the US) a special phase during the sentencing deliberations in which the jury must consider whether there are the circumstances necessary to execute under state law, but hat uses the same standard of proof as the conviction does.

Anyway, although our reasons differ, I know we both oppose the death penalty, so I'm not really trying to pick a fight here. However, I thought some states did set a higher standard of proof for imposing the death penalty over that for imposing a life sentence once conviction has been achieved? I've got Texas in my head for some reason regarding this.

All states have specific criteria that must be met for a crime to be a capital crime, and require a special sentencing process, as I noted, in which the jury must confirm that they belief that the prosecution has met the burden of proof to sentence to death.  There isn't a different standard of proof, though.

Mostly, states make capital those crimes that are particularly heinous:  rape or torture, multiple killings, killing of a cop in the line of duty, and that sort of thing.  The vast, vast majority of murders in the US don't fall into those categories, and so the death penalty is never considered.

I have no idea why dps thinks making most murders capital crimes would be a good idea, nor why he thinks making them more public (you already can go see an execution if you really want to) would be better.  He didn't elaborate.

[Ed Anger]

I want to watch a crucifixion.

[grumbler]

I want to watch a crucifixion.

I hope you get your wish, and see it in a mirror.

[Ed Anger]

I want to watch a crucifixion.

I hope you get your wish, and see it in a mirror.

[Strix]

At least in the US they can waterboard him every day for years. Countries that don't embrace torture don't have that option though.

You can't even take away their cable TV in the US without a major legal battle.

[crazy canuck]

I want to watch a crucifixion.

Mel Gibson made a movie for you.

[Ed Anger]

I want to watch a crucifixion.

Mel Gibson made a movie for you.

Not the same. 

[DGuller]

As I said in such debates previously, I disagree with the notion of being against a death penalty because there is a possibility of a mistake.  It seems to make light of the life sentence. 

Yes, in theory someone who's in for life can be later exonerated.  In practice, that's far less likely to happen given lack of natural dramatic timeline.  And, in any case, sending people to life while thinking that if some extra standard of proof later exonerates them, they could be freed, seems very careless.

Whether you give someone a DP or give them life, you're effectively putting an end to their life.  Obviously death penalty is a worse punishment, but beyond a certain level where things are bad enough, worse doesn't matter much.  We should be equally comfortable or uncomfortable with sending people either to death row or to life in prison.

[viper37]

Grumbler, aren't you conflating penalty with verdict here and thus misrepresenting what dps has said?



Anyway, although our reasons differ, I know we both oppose the death penalty, so I'm not really trying to pick a fight here. However, I thought some states did set a higher standard of proof for imposing the death penalty over that for imposing a life sentence once conviction has been achieved? I've got Texas in my head for some reason regarding this.

No he isn't.  DPS said we needed an higher standard of proff for death penalty.  How do we achieve that?  Let the judge decide after the fact?  Endless appeal...
Decide before the fact if we go for DP or not?   Then either you get reduced sentence or acquittal.

[grumbler]

No he isn't.  DPS said we needed an higher standard of proff for death penalty.  How do we achieve that?  Let the judge decide after the fact?  Endless appeal...
Decide before the fact if we go for DP or not?   Then either you get reduced sentence or acquittal.

Plus, you end up with comparisons like this:
Case 1: Man breaks into a house, rapes, tortures, and kills a woman and her daughter over the course of a day, and gets convicted based on a DNA comparison that reduces him to one of only ten people in the country who could have done it, and the others have decent alibis.

Case 2:  Woman gets telephone call telling her her husband is on the way home after having just visited his mistress.  She is infuriated that he lied to her about not having a mistress, goes into the gun safe, pulls out the handgun the couple keeps for security, and blasts him when he comes through the door twenty minutes later.  She confesses to the police who arrive shortly thereafter.

Both charged with first-degree murder.  Which one would be executed under the "higher standard of proof" criteria for execution, as opposed to the current "greater crime" criteria?

I reject the idea that punishment should be based on how much evidence there is.  You are punishing the crime of murder, not the crime of sloppiness or stupidity.

[garbon]

Not the same. 

I'm not sure what the point of simulated violence is when we can watch actual wars on our televisions.

[sbr]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8586374.stm

Texas execution of Henry Skinner halted over DNA appeal

The US Supreme Court has stayed the execution of a convicted murderer, less than an hour before he was due to die, after an appeal for new DNA tests.

Henry Skinner was convicted in Texas in 1995 of the murders of his girlfriend and her two sons.

Skinner, who is now married to a French campaigner against the death penalty, had called for new DNA testing to prove his innocence.

His appeal received the support of French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

The French ambassador to the US has asked the Texas governor to pardon Skinner or halt the execution.

The stay of execution grants a delay but does not ensure the DNA tests will be carried out.

Skinner, 47, was told about the reprieve as he waited in a holding cell next to the death chamber in Huntsville, Texas.

"I had made up my mind I was going to die," he was quoted as saying by the Associated Press.

"I'm eager to get the DNA testing so I can prove my innocence and get the hell out of here. I'm greatly relieved. I feel like I really won today."

[jimmy olsen]

There's been a recent Supreme Court decision on capital punishment I think you need to be aware of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hyph_DZa_GQ&NR=1

[Zanza]

Why can they only make such decisions one hour before the execution is meant to take place? It makes for good Hollywood films I guess. They had 15 years to review the case and they do so hours before he is meant to be executed. That's really inefficient.

[DGuller]

Why can they only make such decisions one hour before the execution is meant to take place? It makes for good Hollywood films I guess. They had 15 years to review the case and they do so hours before he is meant to be executed. That's really inefficient.

I don't know about 15 years, but why stretch it out when there is a week left?  Are they trying to carry out a couple of mock executions before the real one, for good measure?  His lawyer should appeal his execution just on the grounds of cruel and unusual punishment.