Equal Protection and Equality

I support the death penalty when there is NO doubt of guilt. That appears to be the case here so it is frustrating that this is still continuing. Female or male is irrelevant. Originally Posted by Laz

I was born and raised a Texan and have lived most of my life here, always having a home here so take that for what it is worth when I say that in general (I'm sure there are a few courtrooms that would be exempt) I would never have "NO doubt of guilt" when it comes to a person of color in a Texas courtroom.

Besides, it is not even so much the guilt as it is whether if she were white (but still poor) she would have been given the death penalty. Statistically, blacks are 2X to 4X more likely to get the death penalty than whites depending on whether the victim was black or white. Thus, according to those statistics blacks are just badder and more deserving of death than whites for pretty much the same crimes. Not too terribly just in my view.

As for the appeals process I would agree if it were not for the people on death row that have been proven innocent. The death penalty is final and should not be used if there is any possible doubt. Life in prison without the possibility of parole for those is actually less expensive to the taxpayer and still an adequate penalty. Originally Posted by Laz

Agreed and I think it would have other benefits as well.

Get rid of the death penalty, and you take away a powerful tool that prosecutors use to obtain plea bargains. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

That's a defect, not a feature.

That is yet another GOOD reason to do away with the death penalty.

See my post above about the Central Park jogger.

SHIT! Now my day is ruined. I agree with austtxjr.

Dammit.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Dammit COG, you f'ed up my day too. Oh well, at least you got a two for one and screwed a libtard in the process. That at least should brighten it some

Hell, my day was screwed when I had to complement JB. Shit, we need to get off this damn topic and bring up guns and Obama again quick!

The same cops would have framed the innocent with, or without the death penalty....they just would have found another path to the same result....in your Central Park situation, the defect was bad/corrupt cops, NOT the death penalty.

Shit it was a crazy NY media frenzy that created an atmosphere that likely pushed the cops to get confessions....that and the political establishment that wanted to show leadership.

There were all kinds of "defects" in the central park case, and death penalty was NOT one of them.

That's a defect, not a feature.

That is yet another GOOD reason to do away with the death penalty.

See my post above about the Central Park jogger. Originally Posted by ExNYer

I support the death penalty when there is NO doubt of guilt. Originally Posted by Laz

There is RARELY such a thing.

The 5 teenage defendants in the Central Park jogger case CONFESSED to a heinous rape and beating of a woman. They were tricked into it by NYPD cops that used lies, threats, coercion and false promises of release.

A confession is usually taken as an indication of NO doubt about guilt. But in this case, it clearly wasn't.

The death penalty can be wrongly applied; but that doesn't warrant throwing the baby out with the bath water.....

Apply the death penalty judiciously and in specific cases.

DNA, video evidence, criminal history, eye witnesses, confessions, motive, intent, opportunity and other incriminations.....

I favor the application of the death penalty when properly applied.

In the case of the above Ms. McCarthy, it seems clear she is guilty of the crime...I don't know anyone maintaining her innocence at this point.....the death penalty is warranted.

The same cops would have framed the innocent with, or without the death penalty....they just would have found another path to the same result....in your Central Park situation, the defect was bad/corrupt cops, NOT the death penalty. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

And corrupt cops are ALWAYS going to exist. That means that shit like that will ALWAYS happen in a certain percentage of cases.

The fundamental point you missed is that the death penalty is irrevocable. The teenagers who confessed in the Central Park jogger case were eventually exonerated and are now in their 30s and they are able to enjoy life. If they were executed, they would be gone forever.

So, yeah, the defect IS in the death penalty, too. The defect is that it is irrevocable by its nature.

And that makes it an unfair tool for prosecutors to use. An innocent accused person might be willing to fight for their freedom if they know the penalty is 20 years in prison. They might not be willing to fight if they know it is possible they will die.

So when that rare situation exists do you favor the death penalty ?

There is RARELY such a thing.

. Originally Posted by ExNYer

BTW, NY state doesn't have a death penalty (in practice); so the Central Park joggers likely didn't cop a plea because of any threat of a death sentence. More likely they were coerced by other threats from NYPDs finest.

[QUOTE=ExNYer;1052284169]...
The fundamental point you missed is that the death penalty is irrevocable. I didn't miss anything.

So, yeah, the defect IS in the death penalty, too. The defect is that it is irrevocable by its nature. You obviously don't know what a "defect" is. The defect is the wrong application of the death penalty; cases in which certainty of guilt is not present....

And that makes it an unfair tool for prosecutors to use. Unfair ? Stop your whining.

An innocent accused person might be willing to fight for their freedom if they know the penalty is 20 years in prison. They might not be willing to fight if they know it is possible they will die. This makes no rational sense. People fight for their lives for decades on death row; wtf are you jabbering about ? It is the convicted who are serving life sentences that don't engage in endless appeals, pardons, or clemency.[/QUOTE]

So, yeah, the defect IS in the death penalty, too. The defect is that it is irrevocable by its nature. You obviously don't know what a "defect" is. The defect is the wrong application of the death penalty; cases in which certainty of guilt is not present.... Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Notice I said "too". Wrong application is certainly a defect. But, since you don't know for certain in every case whether the death penalty is being wrongly applied, the fact that you cannot correct your mistake after the fact makes the death penalty defective, too.

And that makes it an unfair tool for prosecutors to use. Unfair ? Stop your whining. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Is that supposed to be an intelligent answer? I point out a particular source of government abuse of citizens in the criminal justice system and you - the alleged conservative - respond "stop your whining". I guess prosecutors strong-arming citizens is OK with you so long as the right citizens are getting strong-armed.

An innocent accused person might be willing to fight for their freedom if they know the penalty is 20 years in prison. They might not be willing to fight if they know it is possible they will die. This makes no rational sense. People fight for their lives for decades on death row; wtf are you jabbering about ? It is the convicted who are serving life sentences that don't engage in endless appeals, pardons, or clemency. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Do contrary facts ever interrupt your beliefs? Even facts already mentioned in this thread? Twice already in this thread I pointed out the Central Park jogger defendants, who were convicted of rape and assault and sentenced to long prison terms, but NOT the death penalty.

And yet these convicted teens who were service long sentences did, in fact, engage in endless appeals, pardons, clemency, etc.

And Rubin "Hurricane" Carter was convicted TWICE of a triple homicide and sentenced to LIFE not DEATH, but he kept fighting for a third trial. When the third trial was granted, he was released and prosecutors declined to try for a third time.

And the Texas Innocence Project (snd similar ones in other states) have made a crusade of using DNA evidence to get convictions overturned a decade or more later.

My point was that prosecutors can use the threat of death to coerce a confession from innocent but terrified defendants. Those same defendants might refuse to confess and plea bargain if they were only faced with long prison sentences. And even if convicted and sent to prison for 24 years or life, they can STILL continue to fight.

So, what exactly were you jabbering about?

But, since you don't know for certain in every case whether the death penalty is being wrongly applied, the fact that you cannot correct your mistake after the fact makes the death penalty defective, too. Originally Posted by ExNYer

I'm unclear as to what that references ... any attorney handling a death penalty case will know if "the death penalty is being wrongly applied" or not. At least in Texas, which has specific categories of "death penalty worth" offenses with specific elements that must be proved to establish the possible imposition of death.

So when that rare situation exists do you favor the death penalty? Originally Posted by Whirlaway

No, because keeping the death penalty in force for those rare cases allows it to be abused in the not-so rare cases were there is some doubt about guilt.

If I knew for certain that the death penalty would never be abused, then yeah, I would be in favor of it for some of our truly heinous monsters - like the rednecks that dragged James Byrd to his death or the woman in this thread.

But that is NEVER going to be the case. It is administered by government bureaucrats and will frequently be abused.

BTW, NY state doesn't have a death penalty (in practice); so the Central Park joggers likely didn't cop a plea because of any threat of a death sentence. More likely they were coerced by other threats from NYPDs finest. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

I wasn't implying that they were coerced by the death penalty. The death penalty was never even an option, since the jogger did not die. NY does not permit executoin for rape and assault.

But, yeah, the cops kept them in lock up for a few days without letting parents or lawyers see them, rather than for 24 hours like the law permits. And they told them their other buddies had already confessed and implicated them and had been allowed to go home. And promised them they could go home, too, if they just "told the truth" and confessed.

The kids kept denying everything, but got worn down after several days and gave in to the false promises. And the confessions they gave were contradictory to each other since they were essentially making up different stories about something they didn't do. But the ever-helpful NYPD coaxed them on the details of the other defendants' confession so they could "correct" themselves and match up with the official story.

Despite the fact that they all supposedly raped and beat the jogger, NONE of their DNA was found on the jogger.

Despite the complete lack of physical evidence and the inconsistencies in their confessions, those confessions were the bases of their convictions.

A false argument since statues can be written that specify the conditions in which the death penalty may or may not be applied by DAs.

No, because keeping the death penalty in force for those rare cases allows it to be abused in the not-so rare cases were there is some doubt about guilt.
Originally Posted by ExNYer

I'm unclear as to what that references ... any attorney handling a death penalty case will know if "the death penalty is being wrongly applied" or not. At least in Texas, which has specific categories of "death penalty worth" offenses with specific elements that must be proved to establish the possible imposition of death. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Wrongly applied wasn't my term. it was Whirly's. He meant that the death penalty might be wrongly applied to an innocent person, not that it would be applied to a non-death penalty crime, like double parking.

A false argument since statues can be written that specify the conditions in which the death penalty may or may not be applied by DAs. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

They are written in a specific manner as per the SCOTUS. Plus the jury must be charged with the exact elements with sufficient proof in the record to support the decision of the jury. Then there are other issues to consider. That's why appeals take so long.