Switch Theme:

Florida Death Penalty Process is Unconstitutional  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Most Glorious Grey Seer





Everett, WA

More specifically, the system by which a convicted felon is sentenced to death is unconstitutional.

The vote was 8 - 1. The article linked below contains the entire opinion including concurring and dissenting opinions.

http://mashable.com/2016/01/12/scotus-florida-death-penalty/#7bzBC_lOCgqO

Supreme Court: Florida death penalty system is unconstitutional

Florida's unique system for sentencing people to death is unconstitutional because it gives too much power to judges — and not enough to juries — to decide capital sentences, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.

The 8-1 ruling said that the state's sentencing procedure is flawed because juries play only an advisory role in recommending death while the judge can reach a different decision.

SCOTUSblog via Twitter wrote:
#SCOTUS rules that Fla's capital-sentencing scheme violates 6th Amendment in Hurst v. Florida, 8-1 by Sotomayor, Alito dissents

The decision could trigger new sentencing appeals from some of the 390 inmates on the Florida's death row, a number second only to California. But legal experts said it may apply only to those whose initial appeals are not yet exhausted.

The court sided with Timothy Lee Hurst, who was convicted of the 1998 murder of his manager at a Popeye's restaurant in Pensacola. A jury divided 7-5 in favor of death, but a judge imposed the sentence.

Florida's solicitor general argued that the system was acceptable because a jury first decides if the defendant is eligible for the death penalty.

Writing for the court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said a jury's "mere recommendation is not enough." She said the court was overruling previous decisions upholding the state's sentencing process.

"The Sixth Amendment requires a jury, not a judge, to find each fact necessary to impose a sentence of death," Sotomayor said.

The justices sent the case back to the Florida Supreme Court to determine whether the error in sentencing Hurst was harmless, or whether he should get a new sentencing hearing.

Justice Samuel Alito dissented, saying that the trial judge in Florida simply performs a reviewing function that duplicates what the jury has done.

Under Florida law, the state requires juries in capital sentencing hearings to weigh factors for and against imposing a death sentence. But the judge is not bound by those findings and can reach a different conclusion. The judge can also weigh other factors independently. So a jury could base its decision on one particular aggravating factor, but a judge could then rely on a different factor the jury never considered.

In Hurst's case, prosecutors asked the jury to consider two aggravating factors: the murder was committed during a robbery and it was "especially heinous, atrocious or cruel." But Florida law did not require the jury to say how it voted on each factor. Hurst's attorney argued that it was possible only four jurors agreed with one, while three agreed with the other.

Sotomayor said Florida's system is flawed because it allows a sentencing judge to find aggravating factors "independent of a jury's fact-finding."


This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/19 03:14:23


 
   
Made in us
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






Pleasant Valley, Iowa

I'm OK with this. Even if you're not really opposed to the death penalty in certain situations I think it's still a pretty hard sell to say that we're, as a nation, applying it in anywhere near a reasonable way. Truthfully I'd like to see a moratorium on it nationwide.

Really, since I don't think there's enough evidence it actually acts as a deterrent, it seems like maybe we should just get rid of it totally. It's a very expensive process, it takes so long I think there are some 8th amendment considerations, it seems to be quite difficult from a technical perspective.... there aren't that many great arguments for it in my opinion. I think I'm not wholly opposed to it conceptually, but we don't seem capable of doing it fairly in reality. Maybe the state shouldn't be in the killing people business.

and no, I don't mean we should outsource it, that hasn't worked well for prisons

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/18 11:04:36


 lord_blackfang wrote:
Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.

 Flinty wrote:
The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
 
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




Kamloops, BC

 Ouze wrote:
I'm OK with this. Even if you're not really opposed to the death penalty in certain situations I think it's still a pretty hard sell to say that we're, as a nation, applying it in anywhere near a reasonable way. Truthfully I'd like to see a moratorium on it nationwide.

Really, since I don't think there's enough evidence it actually acts as a deterrent, it seems like maybe we should just get rid of it totally. It's a very expensive process, it takes so long I think there are some 8th amendment considerations, it seems to be quite difficult from a technical perspective.... there aren't that many great arguments for it in my opinion. I think I'm not wholly opposed to it conceptually, but we don't seem capable of doing it fairly in reality. Maybe the state shouldn't be in the killing people business.

and no, I don't mean we should outsource it, that hasn't worked well for prisons


There is the potential that you could kill an innocent person as well.
   
Made in us
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






Pleasant Valley, Iowa

 Cheesecat wrote:
There is the potential that you could kill an innocent person as well.


Pretty sure that's happened at least once.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.

 Flinty wrote:
The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
 
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




Kamloops, BC

That doesn't surprise me.
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

The argument involved here is not that the death penalty is unconstitutional, it is that the way that particular sentence is arrived at is unconstitutional, being dependent more on the judge's thoughts than the jury's.

Obviously getting rid of the death sentence altogether would remove this particular problem, but surely ti could be solved in another way and allow Florida still to have the death sentence?

If that's what people want, of course...

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




 Cheesecat wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
I'm OK with this. Even if you're not really opposed to the death penalty in certain situations I think it's still a pretty hard sell to say that we're, as a nation, applying it in anywhere near a reasonable way. Truthfully I'd like to see a moratorium on it nationwide.

Really, since I don't think there's enough evidence it actually acts as a deterrent, it seems like maybe we should just get rid of it totally. It's a very expensive process, it takes so long I think there are some 8th amendment considerations, it seems to be quite difficult from a technical perspective.... there aren't that many great arguments for it in my opinion. I think I'm not wholly opposed to it conceptually, but we don't seem capable of doing it fairly in reality. Maybe the state shouldn't be in the killing people business.

and no, I don't mean we should outsource it, that hasn't worked well for prisons


There is the potential that you could kill an innocent person as well.


On the other hand, convicted murderers have been released and have committed further murders or murdered other people in prison. The question is, how should this be balanced?

http://www.wesleylowe.com/repoff.html

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/18 14:05:44


 
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Moustache-twirling Princeps





Gone-to-ground in the craters of Coventry

As a purely financial exercise, what is the cost per year for a criminal?
Stretch that through the maximum sentence (assuming that is the alternative to the death penalty).
Compare that with a visit to the chair, or the firing squad, or whatever the usual method is these days (injection, the last I heard).

This is ignoring the likelihood that a jury is going to ever order a death.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/18 14:35:47


6000 pts - Harlies: 1000 pts - 4000 pts - 1000 pts - 1000 pts DS:70+S+G++MB+IPw40k86/f+D++A++/cWD64R+T(T)DM+
IG/AM force nearly-finished pieces: http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/images-38888-41159_Armies%20-%20Imperial%20Guard.html
"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing." - George Bernard Shaw (probably)
Clubs around Coventry, UK https://discord.gg/6Gk7Xyh5Bf 
   
Made in us
Most Glorious Grey Seer





Everett, WA

 Skinnereal wrote:
As a purely financial exercise, what is the cost per year for a criminal?
Stretch that through the maximum sentence (assuming that is the alternative to the death penalty).
Compare that with a visit to the chair, or the firing squad, or whatever the usual method is these days (injection, the last I heard).

This is ignoring the likelihood that a jury is going to ever order a death.

One one hand, the appeal process in the US is so long and drawn out that an inmate pretty much serves a "life" sentence before he/she is finally executed. On the other hand, that very appeal process has allowed some people to be exonerated prior to execution which is usually considered a good thing.

Of all the reasons for the death penalty, saving money is one I do not believe is valid.


 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

 Breotan wrote:
 Skinnereal wrote:
As a purely financial exercise, what is the cost per year for a criminal?
Stretch that through the maximum sentence (assuming that is the alternative to the death penalty).
Compare that with a visit to the chair, or the firing squad, or whatever the usual method is these days (injection, the last I heard).

This is ignoring the likelihood that a jury is going to ever order a death.

One one hand, the appeal process in the US is so long and drawn out that an inmate pretty much serves a "life" sentence before he/she is finally executed. On the other hand, that very appeal process has allowed some people to be exonerated prior to execution which is usually considered a good thing.

Of all the reasons for the death penalty, saving money is one I do not believe is valid.



Indeed, but again its only because of the stupidly long appeals process.

But saving money isn't really what is important.

We need to fix our entire justice system. There is nothing wrong with the Death Penalty itself, most of the people allegedly opposed to it are really basing their arguments on other problems but using the Death Penalty as an appeal to emotion.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/18 16:41:21


Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins




WA, USA

I've slowly grown against the death penalty over time, for a couple of reasons.

The first is that it isn't effective at deterring crime. It's effective in making us -feel- like we are righteous and tough on crime, but it isn't actually doing anything useful. The second is something inherent in the system, which has been pointed out is broken.

 Ouze wrote:

Afterward, Curran killed a guy in the parking lot with a trident.
 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

 curran12 wrote:
I've slowly grown against the death penalty over time, for a couple of reasons.

The first is that it isn't effective at deterring crime. It's effective in making us -feel- like we are righteous and tough on crime, but it isn't actually doing anything useful. The second is something inherent in the system, which has been pointed out is broken.


The problem with this view is that you are throwing the baby out with the bathwater as it were.

We need to reform our entire justice system anyway, so tossing aside the death penalty is treating a symptom and not the problem. Even if we don't have the death penalty, we still need to fix the problems. So we might as well keep it and fix the problems like we need to.

Punishments aren't always about being deterrents either. There are some people who must be permanently removed from society because they have committed something so terrible. Its about that person, not anybody else at that point.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins




WA, USA

 Grey Templar wrote:
 curran12 wrote:
I've slowly grown against the death penalty over time, for a couple of reasons.

The first is that it isn't effective at deterring crime. It's effective in making us -feel- like we are righteous and tough on crime, but it isn't actually doing anything useful. The second is something inherent in the system, which has been pointed out is broken.


The problem with this view is that you are throwing the baby out with the bathwater as it were.

We need to reform our entire justice system anyway, so tossing aside the death penalty is treating a symptom and not the problem. Even if we don't have the death penalty, we still need to fix the problems. So we might as well keep it and fix the problems like we need to.

Punishments aren't always about being deterrents either. There are some people who must be permanently removed from society because they have committed something so terrible. Its about that person, not anybody else at that point.


Then I will ask one thing, then. And this is not meant to be confrontational, but I'm sincerely curious.

Is there a death penalty system out there that works better?

 Ouze wrote:

Afterward, Curran killed a guy in the parking lot with a trident.
 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

 curran12 wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
 curran12 wrote:
I've slowly grown against the death penalty over time, for a couple of reasons.

The first is that it isn't effective at deterring crime. It's effective in making us -feel- like we are righteous and tough on crime, but it isn't actually doing anything useful. The second is something inherent in the system, which has been pointed out is broken.


The problem with this view is that you are throwing the baby out with the bathwater as it were.

We need to reform our entire justice system anyway, so tossing aside the death penalty is treating a symptom and not the problem. Even if we don't have the death penalty, we still need to fix the problems. So we might as well keep it and fix the problems like we need to.

Punishments aren't always about being deterrents either. There are some people who must be permanently removed from society because they have committed something so terrible. Its about that person, not anybody else at that point.


Then I will ask one thing, then. And this is not meant to be confrontational, but I'm sincerely curious.

Is there a death penalty system out there that works better?


I'm not familiar with all the legal systems that have it. But I would guess that our system is probably the best that currently exists, given that we follow due process and have advanced forensics. Meaning that overall the probability of being incorrectly sentenced is low as the burden of proof is so high.

We definitely need to make the entire system better though.

IMO, if someone receives the Death Penalty their execution date should be set in stone some period out, like 5 years or so. That's the time they have to overturn the sentence if they can find new evidence. No rolling back of the execution date with each appeal.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau




USA

 curran12 wrote:


Is there a death penalty system out there that works better?


In the words of a comedian; Any list that includes China, Saudi Arabia, and Iran in the top five is not a list you want to be on



God damnit ( )

The problem with this view is that you are throwing the baby out with the bathwater as it were.


This would require there to be a baby. All we have is dirty bath water. You complain about people opposed to the death penalty offering only appeals to emotion but honestly, what argument is there for the death penalty that isn't emotional appealing?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/18 17:18:29


   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

The metaphor is that you are discarding something important to get rid of something bad. Which is obviously not a good thing to do.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/18 17:21:05


Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Colonel





This Is Where the Fish Lives

 Grey Templar wrote:
The metaphor is that you are discarding something important to get rid of something bad. Which is obviously not a good thing to do.
And yet it's something you've firmly advocated for in the past.

Funny how that works.

 d-usa wrote:
"When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
 
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins




WA, USA

Then I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on that.

The issue, is, as you put it, we are still dealing with a probability of false sentencing. According to some very, very basic Googling (which I fully admit is not going to give me the best answer, but at least a decent one with a good source), we have some statisticians giving a 4.1% rate of false conviction among those sentenced to death (source - http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/04/28/how-many-people-are-wrongly-convicted-researchers-do-the-math/ ). To me, that is an unacceptably high figure, and I cannot in good conscience support a death penalty system with that. Especially in a legal system today that is rife with flaws, abuses and other factors.

In the interest of fairness, the article I found also goes into detail about how many of those falsely convicted to death wind up having their sentences reduced to life, so it is not as if 4 out of every 100 executions is false. That said, the article also points out that the average time it takes for one to be exonerated from such a conviction is 10 years, which your system would pretty well cut out.

As you said, ours is the system that is the best that currently exists when it comes to this. While we can debate on the fine points, I'm good with that base assumption. However, I do not believe that the 'best available' is good enough yet, and I would not trust it with the death penalty. The odds of mistake are too high, too costly and the benefits gained from it are too small.

That said, I'm not so lockstep opposed to the death penalty that I'll never entertain its validity. But as I said originally, my view is that any punishment should work to reduce crime overall, which the death penalty does not do currently. Your point on permanent removal is a valid one, but life imprisonment does much the same, so I don't find it to be strong enough to support the system as it is.

 Ouze wrote:

Afterward, Curran killed a guy in the parking lot with a trident.
 
   
Made in us
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau




USA

 Grey Templar wrote:
The metaphor is that you are discarding something important to get rid of something bad. Which is obviously not a good thing to do.


I obviously know what the metaphor means Grey

I'm saying there is no 'baby.' Arguments for the death penalty are like arguments for the drug war and against abortion and gay marriage. Empty sensationalism that makes people feel good sometimes. You say the system is broken. How? This is awfully similar to another time you complained about the courts but could offer no compelling reason for wanting them fixed or what their problem was. I can think of at least three good reasons not to have a death penalty;

The State shouldn't kill people, especially citizens, just to appease public anger when it doesn't have to (i.e. when they are no longer a threat to the public) = The State should not condemn some solely because others are angry.

The State shouldn't kill people when there is a possibility they could be exonerated (i.e. still have appeals, and no there shouldn't be a time limit on that as it would violate Due Process) = Costs are exorbitant and people sentenced to death spend years, even decades, in prison even dying before they're turn on the block comes up. Might as well make the death penalty death by old age (life in prison).

The Death Penalty does not deter crime which is relevant because that's part of what the justice system is for; punishment, determent, and rehabilitation. The Death Penalty ignores ones of those things entirely and is ineffective for another. It is solely about punishment which just goes back to the previous two points; why should we keep around a penalty whose only purpose is to punish some to make some feel better, especially when the costs are exorbitant?

I think there's always an argument to be made that some people can't be deterred or rehabilitated to begin with (drug lords and serial killers), and that punishing them is really all there is, but we don't apply the death penalty that way. We apply it left and right whenever public anger is high enough and so that politicians and law enforcement can say they're Tough on Crime . As it stands now the death penalty serves little if any public utility, except as an appeal for the emotions of some to express their anger.

   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

1) State shouldn't kill people. I disagree. It ties in with some people need to be forcibly removed, and simply locking them in a cell till they die isn't enough to do that. If the state needs to kill someone to protect the greater public, weather that be an external enemy or an internal one, then they need to do that. Following proper channels of course.

2) Possibility of Exoneration. Saying we should only sentence people if we are 100% certain is unreasonable. If you use that logic, than it should extend to other punishments as well because we don't want to be wrong. Which is obviously impossible. We should endeavor to keep the false conviction rate low of course, but we also shouldn't have the possibility of false conviction, especially at the low levels it is currently at, prevent us from continuing it at all. I would say 95.9% of people convicted being correctly convicted is acceptable. And compared to other crime convictions I would imagine its an exemplary success rate. You may disagree, but that's just your opinion. Why should we ditch a punishment when, historically, our probability of finding the correct person who committed the punishment is the highest it has ever been?

3) Deterring crime. As you said, its only part of the system's purpose. It has a purpose as a solution to deal with people who are irredeemably evil and need to be permanently removed from society. Again, it sounds like you only have an issue with how its implemented, not the death penalty itself. So lobby for changing how we implement sentences, not what the sentences are.


Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins




WA, USA

On your second point. You're absolutely right that we need to keep false convictions low. The problem with capital punishment is that it is extremely irreversible once its carried out. You can let someone out of jail who is falsely convicted (with a whole lot of other costs to come for screwing up but that is off topic), but you can't un-execute someone.

 Ouze wrote:

Afterward, Curran killed a guy in the parking lot with a trident.
 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

That's why have high burden of proof.

And as far as the idea you can let someone out of jail, yes. But that's not reversing their sentence. You can't undo the time they already served, that's true for any punishment in fact. You can't undo any punishment which has already been carried out.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau




USA

 Grey Templar wrote:
1) State shouldn't kill people. I disagree. It ties in with some people need to be forcibly removed, and simply locking them in a cell till they die isn't enough to do that. If the state needs to kill someone to protect the greater public, weather that be an external enemy or an internal one, then they need to do that. Following proper channels of course.


Then we agree in principal and disagree as to where the line of necessity is.

2) Possibility of Exoneration. Saying we should only sentence people if we are 100% certain is unreasonable.


That's not what exoneration entails and that is what we should be doing. It's called Due Process. No person can be denied their rights with out it. And yes, it does apply to all punishments. The simple reality is that death, being rather permanent, is going to attract far more attention and scrutiny from the Defense and the Courts than a 5 year stint in Sing Sing. No person can be sentenced unless convicted by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. No sentence can be in excess of the crime, least it be cruel and unusual. No sentence or conviction should ever under any circumstance be unappealable, least we deny mistakes can be made and corruption is real.

You may disagree, but that's just your opinion.


Stellar counter argument

Why should we ditch a punishment when, historically, our probability of finding the correct person who committed the punishment is the highest it has ever been?


Because there is no greater time to fear government power and overreach than when government is convinced it is correct, more so when it argues that being correct means it can deprive people of life.

So lobby for changing how we implement sentences, not what the sentences are.


I have an issue with implementation, but that's just one of three issues I have. I also have issue with the cost and the principal that when we're in the top five of a list that includes Iran, China, and Saudi Arabia, maybe we should be considering the morality of what we're doing

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/18 18:30:25


   
Made in ca
Tzeentch Veteran Marine with Psychic Potential





High burden of proof? What?

From what I can see, there doesn't even need to be actual scientific evidence to throw someone in jail for life in the USA. Just a bunch of angry people, far too interested media swaying public opinion, and a bunch of people interested in incarcerating someone for a crime rather than finding out the absolute objective truth in a scientific manner.

In short, I disagree that the burden of proof is high, as there are examples in which it wasn't even a requirement and people still spent their lives behind bars.

The very act of proving who committed a crime and incarcerating them needs to be removed from any human bias and reviewed objectively. Someone should not go to jail if it can't be scientifically proven they did it. It seems like the phrase "beyond a reasonable doubt" has many different meanings for some than others.

Some people think it means "you think he's guilty so much you're personally convinced" when it actually means "the evidence is scientifically compelling to the point where I can't possibly doubt in any way that the suspect is the criminal, there is absolutely no possibility for anything else to have happened."

If the method of incarceration was better, the death penalty would be acceptable and also less expensive. The criminals would be very unlikely to be exonerated as they will have been scientifically proven to be the culprit. No sense waiting anymore. The best possible thing for the justice system would be higher confidence that no one had made the wrong choice, intentionally or by mistake.

I think there is a problem when the judge has all sentencing power, but the death penalty itself is not a problem... the rest of the justice system being inaccurate and unscientific is.

7500 pts Chaos Daemons 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

Yes, there is actually quite a high burden of proof for crimes which warrant the death penalty, or the burden of proof becomes higher if you are seeking the death penalty. Its fairly common for prosecutors to seek a lesser sentence to increase the odds of conviction.

 LordofHats wrote:

I have an issue with implementation, but that's just one of three issues I have. I also have issue with the cost and the principal that when we're in the top five of a list that includes Iran, China, and Saudi Arabia, maybe we should be considering the morality of what we're doing


Cost can be addressed without removing the death penalty.

As for being on a list with Iran, China, and Saudi Arabia, so what? I'm sure I could make any number of lists which would have us together with them. Just being on a list with morally reprehensible people or countries doesn't mean you are suddenly on morally shaky ground. As bad as our justice system is, its nowhere near that bad. Which actually illustrates that its not the Death Penalty itself that is a problem. Our numbers of executions are also significantly less than those other countries.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka





Bathing in elitist French expats fumes

Any system that takes eye witness account as the sole thing necessary (or as highly reliable) does not have a high burden of proof.

Eye witness testimony is completely unreliable.

So without saying if I am for or against the death penalty, I would say we have a problem right there.

 GamesWorkshop wrote:
And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids!

 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

I have not heard of any recent death penalty cases where eyewitness testimony was the sole evidence used to convict. Its always checked against the forensic evidence to confirm, and its reliability is always questioned I believe.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/01/18 19:53:09


Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

To turn the question around, what do you think makes the death penalty an essential tool in the arsenal of justice?

There are many modern countries (nearly all of them, actually, to be honest) that make their way forward without a massive crime wave thanks to dropping the death penalty.

Surely there must be some overwhelmingly positive reasons to maintain the death penalty, not just things like there aren't many mistakes made.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

 Kilkrazy wrote:
To turn the question around, what do you think makes the death penalty an essential tool in the arsenal of justice?

There are many modern countries (nearly all of them, actually, to be honest) that make their way forward without a massive crime wave thanks to dropping the death penalty.

Surely there must be some overwhelmingly positive reasons to maintain the death penalty, not just things like there aren't many mistakes made.


At the very least, its because there are some people who need to be executed for what they did.

Take that guy who killed all those kids in Norway. Instead, he's alive in prison to continue preaching his ideology. And worse, due to the way that legal system works, he could potentially get released due to sentence reevaluations every 20 years(apparently the maximum you can get sentenced for).

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

Why do they need to be executed. What purpose does it serve?

Do you think it will deter other potential mass murderers, or is it just a sense of vengeance?

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: