Did Texas execute an innocent man?

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

Right. So why even have one?

Because a great many Americans are concerned about executing an innocent person or are concerned about executing someone without due process.

On a perverse level, I bet the deterrent effect of the death penalty might go way up if a lot more people were summarily executed immediately after conviction but you'd have to do it on a massive scale. You think it would be worth it, Cheerfulgreek?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

On a perverse level, I bet the deterrent effect of the death penalty might go way up if a lot more people were summarily executed immediately after conviction but you'd have to do it on a massive scale. You think it would be worth it, Cheerfulgreek?

That works great in China. Used to (still does?) work well in Russia. Completely stopped all of their crime.

-- no wait.. it didn't.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by Kevin

That works great in China. Used to (still does?) work well in Russia. Completely stopped all of their crime.

-- no wait.. it didn't.

Did anyone say it would completely stop it?

And you may have actually made my point for me about Russia. Do you have the impression that crime is up or down under a less oppressive, or at least differently oppressive government?

ETA: actually this might be pretty hard to judge. But my impression is that criminal enterprise is up in Russia compared to when it was part of the USSR.

I'm not in favor of them, but I do think that completely oppressive governments have less street crime.

EATA: Actually, I have no idea. I had kind of forgotten about the large number of governments that manage to be that amazing combination of really oppressive and completely dysfunctional, unlike how I think of China and the former Soviet Union, which are/were oppressive and controlling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._homicide_rate


up to 1999

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...e_rate_to_1999

That presents a comparison between a Soviet total and a Russian total, but who knows what part of the Soviet total was based on the geographic area limited to Russia.

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Did anyone say it would completely stop it?

And you may have actually made my point for me about Russia. Do you have the impression that crime is up or down under a less oppressive, or at least differently oppressive government?

ETA: actually this might be pretty hard to judge. But my impression is that criminal enterprise is up.

I'm not in favor of them, but I do think that completely oppressive governments have less street crime.

Then I guess I don't get your point. Are you trying to argue in favor of immediate execution upon conviction?

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

Then I guess I don't get your point. Are you trying to argue in favor of immediate execution upon conviction?

Nope. I was just acknowledging that this kind of oppression might have an upside to Cheerfulgreek.

It's not one that would be worth it to me.

Kevin seemed to suggest that China and Russia previously had dabbled in similarly oppressive policies without seeing those results, and I think he's wrong about that.

ETA: I'm not a fan of China's policies, and I'm not sure if any reported crime rates from the governments have any foundation in reality at all. However, I suspect that their crime rates would be much higher without their oppressive judicial policies. Similarly, caning the bejesus out of people may help keep the graffiti down in Singapore.

I don't want to see similar policies in the US and condemn China, USSR, and Singapore for having them, but they may in fact affect crime rates.

ETA: Similarly, I bet you could bend speeding rates down to about zero if the officer just shot people at the side of the road. I'm not in favor, but I think it would "work".

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Because a great many Americans are concerned about executing an innocent person or are concerned about executing someone without due process.

On a perverse level, I bet the deterrent effect of the death penalty might go way up if a lot more people were summarily executed immediately after conviction but you'd have to do it on a massive scale. You think it would be worth it, Cheerfulgreek?

Although due process is an American legal entity, my debate is centered around the individual caught in the act of committing the crime. As an example, Sir Han Sir Han was caught in the act of killing Senator Robert Kennedy in 1968. His sentence of death was commuted to life in prison without parole. He's been in prison for over 41 years, which has been costing the tax payer a ton money, and to my knowledge Sir Han Sir Han did not, has not, and will not contribute anything that will benefit society. He's just eating, sleeping, reading, and can even (if not already) receive the highest level of education that exist (a PhD) and FOR FREE, which can't even be utilized anywhere. My position in terms of capitol punishment was centered around a person who is absolutely guilty with 100% accuracy of committing the crime, that at sentencing be taken directly from the courtroom to the gallows, and the sentence be immediately carried out. That would really deter crime, and doing it this way is what I call "due process". However, I do believe in due process when an alleged crime has been committed and new evidence may eventually appear that will exonerate the person accused.

Originally Posted by Kevin

That works great in China. Used to (still does?) work well in Russia. Completely stopped all of their crime.

-- no wait.. it didn't.

To my knowledge Russia and China don't have a very high crime rate, at least not like it is here. When did I say it would completely stop all crime? I didn't. That's impossible anywhere. What I was implying was that it could deter crime. I just think it should be an eye for an eye or a tooth for a tooth.

Originally Posted by KSigkid

So what would happen if the sentence is wrong? Does the increase in efficiency outweigh the problems with such an approach?

Again, I'm talking 100% accuracy. Like the DC sniper for example. He ran out of appeals and as far as I know, his death sentence will be carried out next month. How long ago did this happen? 7 years ago? We all know he's guilty, and 7 years later his sentence is being carried out based on the original evidence. So based on that, that 7 year period has been a complete waste of time and tax payer money, and the only people who benefit from this particular case are lawyers, and now they will proceed in seeking similar cases $$$$$$$$......

The Manson Family (proven guilty), John Wayne Gacy (proven guilty) Ted Bundy (proven guilty) Jeffrey Dahmer (proven guilty) David Berkowitz (proven guilty) and you literally think these monsters should have had an appeal process???

China and Russia were brought up and I'm going to add Japan to that same list. Why is it that there are twice as many engineers and scientists in those countries than there are lawyers? as opposed to twice as many lawyers in the United States as there are engineers and scientists? $$$$$$$..... Most, if not all of our missile control systems and technology are built in Japan. Hmmm I wonder why. All I'm saying is this country needs to find a better way to deter crime.

I understand that you and Kevin are preparing to become lawyers, and I think that's great, but this is a topic that we will have to disagee on. There just needs to be a better more effective way to deter crime in the United States. That's all I'm saying.

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

To my knowledge Russia and China don't have a very high crime rate, at least not like it is here. When did I say it would completely stop all crime? I didn't. That's impossible anywhere. What I was implying was that it could deter crime. I just think it should be an eye for an eye or a tooth for a tooth.



China and Russia were brought up and I'm going to add Japan to that same list. Why is it that there are twice as many engineers and scientists in those countries than there are lawyers? as opposed to twice as many lawyers in the United States as there are engineers and scientists? $$$$$$$..... Most, if not all of our missile control systems and technology are built in Japan. Hmmm I wonder why. All I'm saying is this country needs to find a better way to deter crime.

Sure crime is lower in China and Russia then it is here, but both those countries also are known for having very oppressive policing systems. Even Japan is a lot less free then we are. If you are unfortunate enough to go to trial in Japan, the conviction rate is something like 90 percent. There has to be a balance between freedom and suppression of crimes.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

To my knowledge Russia and China don't have a very high crime rate, at least not like it is here. When did I say it would completely stop all crime? I didn't. That's impossible anywhere. What I was implying was that it could deter crime. I just think it should be an eye for an eye or a tooth for a tooth.

Russia's murder rate is over 4 times ours as well as being a major source and destination country for drugs and human trafficking. Maybe they have a higher rate of property crime, etc., but remember, crime rates only consist of reported crimes, and I'm just going to go out on a limb here and suggest that as much as no one trusts the police over there, most crimes go unreported except for murder which is rather difficult to hide.

As for China, no one really knows. The government there filters all data released to the public.

Bad examples.

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

Although due process is an American legal entity, my debate is centered around the individual caught in the act of committing the crime. As an example, Sir Han Sir Han was caught in the act of killing Senator Robert Kennedy in 1968. His sentence of death was commuted to life in prison without parole. He's been in prison for over 41 years, which has been costing the tax payer a ton money, and to my knowledge Sir Han Sir Han did not, has not, and will not contribute anything that will benefit society. He's just eating, sleeping, reading, and can even (if not already) receive the highest level of education that exist (a PhD) and FOR FREE, which can't even be utilized anywhere. My position in terms of capitol punishment was centered around a person who is absolutely guilty with 100% accuracy of committing the crime, that at sentencing be taken directly from the courtroom to the gallows, and the sentence be immediately carried out. That would really deter crime, and doing it this way is what I call "due process". However, I do believe in due process when an alleged crime has been committed and new evidence may eventually appear that will exonerate the person accused.

Do you know that it would deter crime, though? I mean, as Kevin said, it seems like nations like the USSR still had comparable crime rates with an expedited execution process. I'm just skeptical of whether it would truly deter crime.

Put in a more practical sense - do you think a guy who is about to commit a murder is thinking about the appeals process?

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

Again, I'm talking 100% accuracy. Like the DC sniper for example. He ran out of appeals and as far as I know, his death sentence will be carried out next month. How long ago did this happen? 7 years ago? We all know he's guilty, and 7 years later his sentence is being carried out based on the original evidence. So based on that, that 7 year period has been a complete waste of time and tax payer money, and the only people who benefit from this particular case are lawyers, and now they will proceed in seeking similar cases $$$$$$$$......

You realize that a lot of these appeals are taken pro se, right? As in, the lawyer isn't getting paid for their work. That, or it's a public defender doing the work for low pay. These cases take up a lot of hours, with relatively little pay (hint: remember what Kevin said about the socioeconomic backgrounds of those on death row...are they going to be able to pay high fees for attorneys?).

It's incorrect to assume that all of these appeals are taken by fat cat lawyers filling their pockets.

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

China and Russia were brought up and I'm going to add Japan to that same list. Why is it that there are twice as many engineers and scientists in those countries than there are lawyers? as opposed to twice as many lawyers in the United States as there are engineers and scientists? $$$$$$$..... Most, if not all of our missile control systems and technology are built in Japan. Hmmm I wonder why. All I'm saying is this country needs to find a better way to deter crime.

I understand many people don't like lawyers, but I have no idea what the bolded part has to do with your argument. If you think that more kids should grow up to be scientists, or that lawyers don't add as much to society, that's a totally different argument.

As I said above, a lot of these appeals are being taken pro se or by the appeals branches of public defenders' offices. For example, my state (Connecticut) has an appellate division of the Office of the Public Defender. Those guys aren't running up billable hours on these files, and they're not being paid much for the number of hours that they're working on these appeals.

Again, for the most part, the lawyers who are taking these cases aren't greedy lawyers trying to run up billable hours and high incomes.

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

I understand that you and Kevin are preparing to become lawyers, and I think that's great, but this is a topic that we will have to disagee on. There just needs to be a better more effective way to deter crime in the United States. That's all I'm saying.

No one is telling you that you have to agree with us. What we are saying is that we disagree with you, and we are giving you our reasons why. Just because you disagree doesn't mean that we have to give up our arguments.