Do you have enough faith in our jurors to believe that everyone on death row is guilty? Are we all so comfortable in trusting in our judicial system that we never give it a second thought? I'm just curious about how all of you feel about this...
2006-07-10 06:23:37 · 23 answers · asked by kb 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Just consider what the standard of guilt is suppose to be in a death penalty case. It's suppose to be practically IMPOSSIBLE for an innocent person to be sentenced to death. What we've seen is, it's not that rare. In fact it's shockingly common.
Now think about non-death penalty cases, where the standard of guilt is much less. It's unsettling to suppose how many innocent people have been convicted of lessor crimes, rotting away their lives for something they didn't do.
2006-07-10 06:41:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
This reminds me of the O.J. Simpson trial. The question on practically every street corner and hallway gab sessions was as inevitable as the sunrise. "Do you think he did it?" "Do you believe he's guilty?" This went on for months.
How the heck would any of us KNOW if he was guilty? We weren't there when it happened. Even with practically round the clock coverage of the trial, there is no way any of us could hear all the testimony, see all the evidence, know all the applicable laws. It wasn't just that the question came at me all day, from all directions. What irked me most was that in was an inanswerabel question.
Even after the verdict, it was not accepted by many people, and the controversy rages on, these many years later. Right after, and during the trial, the sales of white, Ford Bronco's soared. This year, O.J. was ragged on for his part in a practical joke where he was paid to "sell" a white Bronco.
Is he guilty? According to the law, no, he is not. Did he do it?
I DON'T KNOW!
2006-07-10 06:36:59 · answer #2 · answered by Vince M 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i'm not positive i like the way you're drawing interest now. You admit that folk do not actual accuse you of this... so why ask it? besides, i'm very sceptical of the inability of existence penalty. before each and every thing certainly with the aid of the indisputable fact that's irreversible. Verdicts are overturned each and each and every of the time. yet secondly, I also imagine imprisonment for existence is actual a worse punishment than the inability of existence penalty. As to problematic exertions, nicely people do might want to artwork in reformatory. those that refuse get solitary confinement... that is truly ugly too. there is actual style of a situation with this: prisons in recent times are truly a worthwhile market. As stated on QI a even as in the past, interior the U. S. a huge area of the protection force kit is produced by using prisoners. and on account that the U. S. also has a a lot more advantageous relative reformatory inhabitants than the different industrialized united states, one would argue slavery has been reintroduced there by skill of the back door. So the problematic exertions element: certain, yet watch very heavily the position the money flows.
2016-10-14 07:44:23 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not always is everyone on death row guilty and that is why there is an appeal system in place and afforded those on death row. That is the beauty of our system. Once the gavel has slammed down doesn't mean the fat lady has sang her last song on the case.
2006-07-10 06:27:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes! Everyone on death row is guilty! Now... let's bring out the Big Fry Daddy and get to cooking!!!
2006-07-10 06:26:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
of course not everyone is guilty...and that alone is reason to abolish the death penalty. if just 1 innocent person is executed, then the death penalty should be abolished. If we believe that killing people is wrong, then the death penalty must be abolished. We will never truly rise above "monkey" status until we stop killing each other (for any reason, justice or not).
2006-07-10 06:28:47 · answer #6 · answered by michaelscar 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Unfortunately, no, I do not. I remember seeing a program on Court TV where a man had been on death row for years but was exonerated after techology advances proved that the DNA from the crime scene did not belong to him, but to another inmate elsewhere that was now serving time for murder.
2006-07-10 06:28:45 · answer #7 · answered by bottleblondemama 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually look at it from economics not morally. It cost alot more to put somebody to death then it does for prison for life (real life). All the appeals they have to do the amount they are allotted in court to spend for defense. That is why I am against it.. and if somebody hurt somebody I cared about I would not want them to have a easy way out… but that is not very nice of me is it.. lol
2006-07-10 06:27:46 · answer #8 · answered by Tequila Gypsy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably not guilty, you can't be 100% sure in cases where they don't plead guilty because even evidence can ba faulty...although I suppose people who say they are guilty could be innocent too, just covering for someone close and willing to die to protect them (I saw that on a film once!)
2006-07-10 06:27:12 · answer #9 · answered by galaxygirl_00_uk 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I believe there are people that were innocent that have been killed by the state. If assigned a public defender in your case ,you will not get a fair representation. They have to many cases to focus on one. The DA's twist evidences to work in there favor ,etc.
2006-07-10 06:29:50 · answer #10 · answered by Maria D 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋