Are you for, or against the death penalty?

[Seshmeister]

Fair enough then, Kill 'em all. Or don't kill them as long as tax dollars are not used to keep the scum alive

http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/death-penalty-cost

"Using conservative rough projections, the Commission estimates the annual costs of the present system ($137 million per year), the present system after implementation of the reforms ... ($232.7 million per year) ... and a system which imposes a maximum penalty of lifetime incarceration instead of the death penalty ($11.5 million)."
--California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice, July 1, 2008

Recent Cost Studies

A 2003 legislative audit in Kansas found that the estimated cost of a death penalty case was 70% more than the cost of a comparable non-death penalty case. Death penalty case costs were counted through to execution (median cost $1.26 million).

Non-death penalty case costs were counted through to the end of incarceration (median cost $740,000).
(December 2003 Survey by the Kansas Legislative Post Audit)

In Tennessee, death penalty trials cost an average of 48% more than the average cost of trials in which prosecutors seek life imprisonment.

(2004 Report from Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury Office of Research)
In Maryland death penalty cases cost 3 times more than non-death penalty cases, or $3 million for a single case.
(Urban Institute, The Cost of the Death Penalty in Maryland, March 2008)
In California the current sytem costs $137 million per year; it would cost $11.5 million for a system without the death penalty.
(California Commission for the Fair Administration of Justice, July 2008)

The greatest costs associated with the death penalty occur prior to and during trial, not in post-conviction proceedings. Even if all post-conviction proceedings (appeals) were abolished, the death penalty would still be more expensive than alternative sentences.

Trials in which the prosecutor is seeking a death sentence have two separate and distinct phases: conviction (guilt/innocence) and sentencing. Special motions and extra time for jury selection typically precede such trials.

More investigative costs are generally incurred in capital cases, particularly by the prosecution.
When death penalty trials result in a verdict less than death or are reversed, taxpayers first incur all the extra costs of capital pretrial and trial proceedings and must then also pay either for the cost of incarcerating the prisoner for life or the costs of a retrial (which often leads to a life sentence).

The death penalty diverts resources from genuine crime control measures. Spending money on the death penalty system means:

Reducing the resources available for crime prevention, mental health treatment, education and rehabilitation, meaningful victims' services, and drug treatment programs.

Diverting it from existing components of the criminal justice system, such as prosecutions of drug crimes, domestic violence, and child abuse.

Emergency services, creating jobs, and police & crime prevention were the three highest rated priorities for use of fiscal resources.

Schools/libraries, public health, and roads/transportation also ranked higher than the death penalty.

[Seshmeister]

People on Death Row in US found innocent


From Wiki

1970-1979

1973.
1. David Keaton Florida (Keaton v. State, 273 So.2d 385 (1973)). Convicted 1971.

1974
2. Samuel A. Poole North Carolina (State v. Poole, 203 S.E.2d 786 (N.C. 1974)). Convicted 1973.

1975.
3. Wilbert Lee Florida (Pitts v. State 247 So.2d 53 (Fla. 1971), overturned and released by pardon in 1975). Convicted 1963.
4. Freddie Pitts Florida (Pitts v. State 247 So.2d 53 (Fla. 1971), overturned and released by pardon in 1975). Convicted 1965.
5. James Creamer Georgia (Emmett v. Ricketts, 397 F. Supp 1025 (N.D. Ga. 1975)). Convicted 1973.
6. Christopher Spicer North Carolina (State v. Spicer, 204 SE 2d 641 (1974)). Convicted 1973.

1976
7. Thomas Gladish New Mexico. Convicted 1974.
8. Richard Greer New Mexico. Convicted 1974.
9. Ronald Keine New Mexico. Convicted 1974.
10. Clarence Smith New Mexico. Convicted 1974.

1977.
11. Delbert Tibbs Florida. Convicted 1974.

1978.
12. Earl Charles Georgia. Convicted 1975.
13. Jonathan Treadway Arizona. Convicted 1975.

1979.
14. Gary Beeman Ohio. Convicted 1976.
[edit]1980-1989

1980
15. Jerry Banks.
16. Larry Hicks.

1981
17. Charles Ray Giddens.
18. Michael Linder.
19. Johnny Ross.
20. Ernest (Shuhaa) Graham.

1982
21. Annibal Jaramillo.
22. Lawyer Johnson Massachusetts (Commonwealth v. Johnson, 429 N.E.2d 726 (1982)). Convicted 1971.

1985
23. Larry Fisher.

1986
24. Anthony Brown.
25. Neil Ferber.
26. Clifford Henry Bowen.

1987
27. Joseph Green Brown.
28. Perry Cobb.
29. Darby (Williams) Tillis.
30. Vernon McManus.
31. Anthony Ray Peek.
32. Juan Ramos.
33. Robert Wallace.

1988
34. Richard Neal Jones.
35. Willie Brown.
36. Larry Troy.

1989
37. Randall Dale Adams Texas (Ex Parte Adams, 768 S.W.2d 281) (Tex. Crim App. 1989). Convicted 1977[3][4].
38. Robert Cox.
39. James Richardson.
On April 8, 2010, former death row inmate Timothy B. Hennis, once exonerated in 1989, was reconvicted of a triple murder, thereby dropping him from the list of those exonerated. [1] Sentenced to death by military court-martial 15 April 2010
[edit]1990-1999

1990
40. Clarence Brandley Texas (Ex Parte Brandley, 781 S.W.2d 886 (Tex. Crim App. 1989). Convicted 1981.
41. John C. Skelton.
42. Dale Johnston.
43. Jimmy Lee Mathers.

1991
44. Gary Nelson.
45. Bradley P. Scott.
46. Charles Smith.

1992
47. Jay C. Smith Pennsylvania. Convicted 1986.

1993
48. Kirk Bloodsworth Maryland. Convicted 1984. Exonerated 1993; first prisoner to be exonerated by DNA evidence. Serving life in prison when exonerated, as earlier death sentence was overturned.
49. Federico M. Macias.
50. Walter McMillan.
51. Gregory R. Wilhoit Oklahoma. Convicted 1987. Along with Ron Williamson, Wilhoit later became the subject of John Grisham's 2006 non-fiction book The Innocent Man: Murder and Injustice in a Small Town[5].
52. James Robison.
53. Muneer Deeb.

1994
54. Andrew Golden.

1995
55. Adolph Munson.
56. Robert Charles Cruz.
57. Rolando Cruz.
58. Alejandro Hernández.
59. Sabrina Butler.

1996
60. Joseph Burrows. Joseph Burrows was released from death row after his attorney Kathleen Zellner persuaded the real killer to confess at the post-conviction hearing.
61. Verneal Jimerson.
62. Dennis Williams.
63. Roberto Miranda.
64. Gary Gauger
65. Troy Lee Jones.
66. Carl Lawson.
67. David Wayne Grannis.

1997
68. Ricardo Aldape Guerra.
69. Benjamin Harris.
70. Robert Hayes.
71. Christopher McCrimmon.
72. Randall Padgett.
It is later revealed, through additional research by Prof. Samuel Gross of the University of Michigan, that though James Bo Cochran was acquitted of murder, he did plead guilty to a robbery charge in an agreement made with prosecutors prior to his release. Therefore, Cochran is no longer on the list of those exonerated from death row. [2]

1998
73. Robert Lee Miller, Jr.
74. Curtis Kyles.

1999
75. Shareef Cousin Louisiana (Louisiana v. Cousin, 710 So. 2d 1065 (1998)). Convicted 1996.
76. Anthony Porter Illinois. Convicted 1983.
77. Steven Smith.
78. Ronald Williamson Oklahoma. Convicted 1988. Along with Gregory R. Wilhoit, Williamson later became the inspiration for and subject of John Grisham's 2006 non-fiction book The Innocent Man: Murder and Injustice in a Small Town[5].
79. Ronald Jones.
80. Clarence Dexter, Jr.
81. Warren Douglas Manning.
82. Alfred Rivera.
[edit]2000-2009

2000
83. Steve Manning.
84. Eric Clemmons.
85. Joseph Nahume Green.
86. Earl Washington Virginia (pardoned). Convicted 1994 (1984, without life sentence).
87. William Nieves.
88. Frank Lee Smith (died prior to exoneration).
89. Michael Graham.
90. Albert Burrell.
91. Oscar Lee Morris.

2001
92. Peter Limone.
93. Gary Drinkard.
94. Joachin José Martínez.
95. Jeremy Sheets.
96. Charles Fain.

2002
97. Juan Roberto Melendez-Colon Florida. Convicted 1984.
98. Ray Krone Arizona (State v. Krone, 897 P.2d 621 (Ariz. 1995) (en banc)). Convicted 1992.
99. Thomas Kimbell, Jr.
100. Larry Osborne.

2003
101. Aaron Patterson.
102. Madison Hobley.
103. Leroy Orange.
104. Stanley Howard.
105. Rudolph Holton.
106. Lemuel Prion.
107. Wesley Quick.
108. John Thompson.
109. Timothy Howard Ohio. Convicted 1976.
110. Gary Lamar James Ohio. Convicted 1976.
111. Joseph Amrine.
112. Nicholas Yarris Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania v. Yarris, No 690-OF1982, Court of Common Pleas, Delaware County, September 3, 2003. Order vacating conviction). Convicted 1982.

2004
113. Alan Gell.
114. Gordon Steidl.
115. Laurence Adams.
116. Dan L. Bright.
117. Ryan Matthews.
118. Ernest Ray Willis.

2005
119. Derrick Jamison.
120. Harold Wilson.
2006
121. John Ballard.

2007
122. Curtis McCarty.
123. Michael McCormick.
124. Jonathon Hoffman.

2008
125. Kennedy Brewer Mississippi. Convicted 1995.
126. Glen Edward Chapman North Carolina. Convicted 1995.
127. Levon "Bo" Jones[6] North Carolina. Convicted 1993.
128. Michael Blair Texas.

2009
129. Nathson Fields Illinois. Convicted 1986.
130. Paul House Tennessee. Convicted 1986.
131. Daniel Wade Moore Alabama. Convicted 2002.
132. Ronald Kitchen Illinois. Convicted 1988.
133. Herman Lindsey Florida. Convicted 2006.
134. Michael Toney Texas. Convicted 1999. (Toney later died in a car accident on October 3, 2009, just one month and a day after his exoneration.)[7].
135. Yancy Douglas Oklahoma. Convicted 1997.
136. Paris Powell Oklahoma. Convicted 1997.
137. Robert Springsteen Texas. Convicted 2001.
[edit]2010-2019

2010
138. Anthony Graves Texas. Convicted 1994.

2011
139. Cory Maye Mississippi. Convicted 2004.

[jhale667]

How many innocent people are you willing to kill each year?

What would be an acceptable number for you?

That's the bottom line question. Because there IS that chance. Not all cases are open & shut.

Yes, someone like Brewer got off TOO easy, if you read the reports of Byrd trying to balance himself on his elbows while being dragged in a futile attempt to save his life, until they were worn to the point his right arm snapped off - right before his head did - that poor guy suffered horrifically, and Brewer should have too if we're going to be in the business of executions. The punishment should fit the crime. Matter of fact, I want that little fucker than ran over the black dude with his truck in Mississippi to be tried as an adult and then - when he's no doubt found guilty due to the fact the murder (not the assault, but definitely the murder) was caught on video - not even a shadow of doubt there - RUN OVER BY A GARBAGE TRUCK. That's a fitting punishment.

Davis on the other hand - 7 out of 9 witnesses recant - some claim coercion; 5 jurors say knowing that now they wouldn't have voted to convict - the dude had more than established "reasonable doubt". Amazing when asked about the change in evidence the cop's mom - while her grief is understandable - says "oh he can talk himself into anything", but she completely ignores the fact that it wasn't just him proclaiming his innocence until the end - others were coming out of the woodwork contesting the original verdict.

It's a tough issue. Yes, people like Brewer and that Mississippi kid deserve to die, but their guilt in both cases can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. In cases like this I think EVERY effort should be made to remove any shred of doubt before proceeding with an execution. I'm not one to believe the death penalty is much of a deterrent either, as evidenced by the Mississippi case...

[Nitro Express]

How many innocent people are you willing to kill each year?

What would be an acceptable number for you?

A life in prison under hard labor conditions would make them wish they were dead. Just giving them a shot and putting them to sleep might be too good for some of these scumbags. I think life in an Alaskan gulag with no heat, breaking rocks in the summer and shoveling snow in the winter, shitting in a bucket would be just fine.

[Nitro Express]

I'm intrigued to know what other crimes you think it should be used for.

Also, almost all of the evidence suggests that the death penalty does not deter people from committing crime - consequently, whilst it is certainly 'being hard on crime' it is doing so for the sake of it rather than in a useful manner.

I'm sure a lot of these criminals are suicidal or borderline suicidal anyways. When you are that far gone dying is not much of a deterant but working your ass off everyday in miserable conditions would. Death would be welcome after a few days in the salt mines.

Everyone is for the death penalty if it's their wife or daughter that gets brutally raped, tortured and killed or it's their brother who gets dragged to death behind a truck. It's all how personal the pain is for you. When it's someone else's problem it's easy to sit at the computer terminal and say you are against it. You are against it until the horror enters your own space and then people tend to change their position. Let's see how civilized you would be in those circumstances. Let's see how civilized you would be if someone raped your kid right in front of you and then you found a pick ax handle sticking out of the rafters.

[binnie]

That's the bottom line question. Because there IS that chance. Not all cases are open & shut.

Yes, someone like Brewer got off TOO easy, if you read the reports of Byrd trying to balance himself on his elbows while being dragged in a futile attempt to save his life, until they were worn to the point his right arm snapped off - right before his head did - that poor guy suffered horrifically, and Brewer should have too if we're going to be in the business of executions. The punishment should fit the crime. Matter of fact, I want that little fucker than ran over the black dude with his truck in Mississippi to be tried as an adult and then - when he's no doubt found guilty due to the fact the murder (not the assault, but definitely the murder) was caught on video - not even a shadow of doubt there - RUN OVER BY A GARBAGE TRUCK. That's a fitting punishment.

Davis on the other hand - 7 out of 9 witnesses recant - some claim coercion; 5 jurors say knowing that now they wouldn't have voted to convict - the dude had more than established "reasonable doubt". Amazing when asked about the change in evidence the cop's mom - while her grief is understandable - says "oh he can talk himself into anything", but she completely ignores the fact that it wasn't just him proclaiming his innocence until the end - others were coming out of the woodwork contesting the original verdict.

It's a tough issue. Yes, people like Brewer and that Mississippi kid deserve to die, but their guilt in both cases can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. In cases like this I think EVERY effort should be made to remove any shred of doubt before proceeding with an execution. I'm not one to believe the death penalty is much of a deterrent either, as evidenced by the Mississippi case...

The death penalty is an act of anger and vengence, not one of reason. Yes, we are all horrified by the actions of Brewer: however, doesn't our lust to kill him or see him die make us slide from the moral high-ground in some small way? To me, a state that kills is the product of a society which is not particuarly civilized.

I'm not sure how we can be argued that one individual does not have the right to take the life of another, but the collective has to right to remove the life of the individual. Regardless of what the person has done, regardless of how warped they are, it is still unethical - and inhumane - to kill them in my eyes. It degrades us as humans to live in a state which does so.

[jhale667]

The death penalty is an act of anger and vengence, not one of reason. Yes, we are all horrified by the actions of Brewer: however, doesn't our lust to kill him or see him die make us slide from the moral high-ground in some small way? To me, a state that kills is the product of a society which is not particuarly civilized.

I'm not sure how we can be argued that one individual does not have the right to take the life of another, but the collective has to right to remove the life of the individual. Regardless of what the person has done, regardless of how warped they are, it is still unethical - and inhumane - to kill them in my eyes. It degrades us as humans to live in a state which does so.

And again, I'm inclined to agree with you... but in regards to Brewer, as the line in the Jane's Addiction song goes "Some people....SHOULD die." But agree, you certainly can't claim the moral high ground for offing him - even though you're doing the world (and the gene pool) a favor in doing so.

[Nitro Express]

The death penalty is an act of anger and vengence, not one of reason. Yes, we are all horrified by the actions of Brewer: however, doesn't our lust to kill him or see him die make us slide from the moral high-ground in some small way? To me, a state that kills is the product of a society which is not particuarly civilized.

I'm not sure how we can be argued that one individual does not have the right to take the life of another, but the collective has to right to remove the life of the individual. Regardless of what the person has done, regardless of how warped they are, it is still unethical - and inhumane - to kill them in my eyes. It degrades us as humans to live in a state which does so.

The first illusion is this is a civilized world. You only need to look at nature to realize it's far from perfect even if us lousy human beings were not here to mess it up. Lot's of death, carnage, and the young and weak getting eaten. Maybe the Stanists are the smart ones. They embrace the survival of the fittest and do as thou will concepts. It's the religious people or atheists thinking reason and science will turn this place into some sort of utopia. Atheists think we can do it ourselves and religious people think some demi god is going to do it for us. All I can say is spend some time on a coral reef and see how brutal those beautiful places are and how much killing goes on there. It is what it is. It was that way before you came into this world it will be that way when you go out. Nothing will change much. These arguments have been going on for a long time and if history teaches us anything, the world isn't civilized. This isn't heaven. Maybe it's hell. LOL!

[Guitar Shark]

And again, I'm inclined to agree with you... but in regards to Brewer, as the line in the Jane's Addiction song goes "Some people....SHOULD die." But agree, you certainly can't claim the moral high ground for offing him - even though you're doing the world (and the gene pool) a favor in doing so.

The problem with this is that it allows for a certain subjectivity to enter into the analysis -- value judgments on who should and should not die -- which isn't really any different from the system we now have.

I agree with the binster.

[binnie]

The first illusion is this is a civilized world. You only need to look at nature to realize it's far from perfect even if us lousy human beings were not here to mess it up. Lot's of death, carnage, and the young and weak getting eaten. Maybe the Stanists are the smart ones. They embrace the survival of the fittest and do as thou will concepts. It's the religious people or atheists thinking reason and science will turn this place into some sort of utopia. Atheists think we can do it ourselves and religious people think some demi god is going to do it for us. All I can say is spend some time on a coral reef and see how brutal those beautiful places are and how much killing goes on there. It is what it is. It was that way before you came into this world it will be that way when you go out. Nothing will change much. These arguments have been going on for a long time and if history teaches us anything, the world isn't civilized. This isn't heaven. Maybe it's hell. LOL!

I understand what you mean, but the logic doesn't follow. 'The world is full of inhumane people, therefore we should treat them inhumanely'. Of course we can't make the world perfect; but we should always strive for a better and more civil world shouldn't we?

[Seshmeister]

I find it odd that a lot of Americans are suspicious of government but happy to let it kill people.

[VAiN]

I'm sure a lot of these criminals are suicidal or borderline suicidal anyways. When you are that far gone dying is not much of a deterant but working your ass off everyday in miserable conditions would. Death would be welcome after a few days in the salt mines.

Everyone is for the death penalty if it's their wife or daughter that gets brutally raped, tortured and killed or it's their brother who gets dragged to death behind a truck. It's all how personal the pain is for you. When it's someone else's problem it's easy to sit at the computer terminal and say you are against it. You are against it until the horror enters your own space and then people tend to change their position. Let's see how civilized you would be in those circumstances. Let's see how civilized you would be if someone raped your kid right in front of you and then you found a pick ax handle sticking out of the rafters.

This.

As far as how many innocents am I will to let die - Less than would be actually guilty. Odds are they did something anyway. What other crimes do I feel we should include? Off the top of my head I'll go with rape. And yes, I know... it can be vague - I'm talking the guy totally did it style. I realize this is impossible because it would require a common sense-based justice system. And yes, I'm a heartless bastard.

[FORD]

I'd actually be inclined to apply the death penalty to child molesters, but it wouldn't cost the state much to do that. All they would have to do is print "BABY RAPER" in big block letters on the back of their orange prison jumpsuits.

The other convicts would take it from there. Just as they did with Jeffery Dahmer and one of the priestophiles from Boston.

[binnie]

I'd actually be inclined to apply the death penalty to child molesters, but it wouldn't cost the state much to do that. All they would have to do is print "BABY RAPER" in big block letters on the back of their orange prison jumpsuits.

The other convicts would take it from there. Just as they did with Jeffery Dahmer and one of the priestophiles from Boston.

Is the sentiment which you are expressing there any less morally objectionable than the illegal war in Iraq?

Wasn't part of the Bush/Blair argument that Saddam was a 'bad guy' therefore it is OK to invade his country?

[Seshmeister]

I'd actually be inclined to apply the death penalty to child molesters, but it wouldn't cost the state much to do that. All they would have to do is print "BABY RAPER" in big block letters on the back of their orange prison jumpsuits.

The other convicts would take it from there. Just as they did with Jeffery Dahmer and one of the priestophiles from Boston.

Doesn't deal with the innocent problem at all.

A few years ago in England a pediatrician was run out of her house which was attacked by stupid people with poor vocabulary.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/901723.stm