When Life in Prison Is Not Enough

[Loki]

Loki, this is when I pull my hair out when it looks like you purposefully miss the point.

The argument that you can kill an innocent man in error, is not on the same line that 'any punishment is permanent'.

There is a stark difference in the degree of going to Prison for 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, and Death, and you know it.

Except the likelihood that an innocent man who spends 10 years in prison will be found to be innocent is incredibly low. People spend so much time on death row (and get extra appeals), that chances are any evidence that could possibly exist to exonerate the prisoner would be found before he's executed (assuming such evidence exists).

So why the obsession with the fact that our system might perhaps kill a handful of innocent people, while not caring about the fact that the same system likely imprisons hundreds (if not thousands) of innocent people for lengthy periods of time? I don't get why 5 incorrect executions are worse than hundreds of incorrect life sentences (which will not get overturned, despite what you claim).

[Nessus]

Lewkowski, you didn't answer me

Who should the state execute to make up for the execution of an innocent? The jury members? The judge? The prosecutor?

Someone has to die. Certainly a false death sentence is a more heinous societal wrong than stealing tooth paste.

[Aimless]

I'm curious, just how many people have been exonerated after long sentences or even death sentences due to eg. DNA evidence, new evidence, reappraisals of the initial trial, etc? How many do we presume COULD be if the world weren't such a cruelly entropic place?

[Khendraja'aro]

I'm curious, just how many people have been exonerated after long sentences or even death sentences due to eg. DNA evidence, new evidence, reappraisals of the initial trial, etc? How many do we presume COULD be if the world weren't such a cruelly entropic place?

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/inno...alty#inn-yr-rc

[Loki]

Note how they were exonerated while still on death row, not after being executed, in which case the death penalty is irrelevant. Furthermore, someone on death row gets extra appeals, which means that many of these people would end up serving life in prison instead of being exonerated.

[GGT]

Note how they were exonerated while still on death row, not after being executed, in which case the death penalty is irrelevant.

No, it doesn't.

Furthermore, someone on death row gets extra appeals, which means that many of these people would end up serving life in prison instead of being exonerated.

If a death penalty sentence gets more appeals, it's certainly not irrelevant.

Obviously, our system needs some changes. Whether it's jury selection, public defenders, "reasonable doubt" definitions, sentencing and/or parole parameters. Maybe all of the above.

[Khendraja'aro]

Note how they were exonerated while still on death row, not after being executed, in which case the death penalty is irrelevant. Furthermore, someone on death row gets extra appeals, which means that many of these people would end up serving life in prison instead of being exonerated.

Ah, so there are actually people who work to exonerate people post-execution?

[Loki]

Ah, so there are actually people who work to exonerate people post-execution?

Actually, yes.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...996809,00.html

[Khendraja'aro]

Actually, yes.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...996809,00.html

What I meant: Is there a systematic approach? Or is that just an anecdote?

[GGT]

In the US, with our history of lynchings and hangings outside the judicial system? Most likely no systematic approach, Khen.

[Khendraja'aro]

In the US, with our history of lynchings and hangings outside the judicial system? Most likely no systematic approach, Khen.

Then I wonder where Loki gets his arguments from.

[GGT]

Then I wonder where Loki gets his arguments from.

He'll be along eventually (to tell me how wrong I am) and educate ALL of us.

[rumrunner]

The slogan does not advocate closing all the prisons, but reinforces the need for such a high burden of proof as "beyond a reasonable doubt" in criminal cases. beside's I was being glib when I posted it

[Wraith]

What I meant: Is there a systematic approach? Or is that just an anecdote?

It depends on what you mean by a systematic approach. If you mean "is it an intrinsic part of our system of justice", then no, but then, there is no intrinsic part that ever works to exonerate convicted felons of any type. There are groups that focus on doing these sorts of investigations and pushing them through court though, and the court cases don't necessarily stop when the sentence has been carried out.