What happens when we put an innocent person to death?

Question

It has happened. Should one example of killing an innocent man be reason enough to get rid of capital punishment? Keep in mind that with the cost of appeals, putting someone to death is more expensive than life in prison. Also keep in mind that most people on death row die from natural causes, not from execution.

the absence of DNA testing in previous years, and the small number of times DNA isn't 100% is proof enough to me that innocent people have been executed. Look how many have been released from death row when their cases were looked over AFTER they were convicted, and found that the evidence was CONCLUSIVELY not them. MAny have been released, I think over 100 in Ohio alone. Do you think that only those people were mistakenly found guilty, and none before them? To believe that mistakes have not been made is to live with your head in the sand. A jury of 12 peers is not a panel of 12 witnesses. They weren't there, they are at the mercy of the information provided to them. An eye for an eye leaves us both blind. ANd if it deterred crime, death penalty states would have lower crime rates than non death penalty states. They don't. Finally, I'm not suggesting that we free people instead of killing them. I'm suggesting we put them in prison for life

Strong Cases of Innocence
Cases where a person has been executed despite a high likelihood of innocence:
[1] Roy Stewart (Florida): Stewart's conviction of the murder of a woman in 1979 rested almost solely on the testimony of a witness who testified that he had confessed the killing. Several years after the trial witness recanted stating that she gave her story for the sole purpose of avoiding a jail sentence herself for forgery and possession of marijuana. She was released from jail following her testimony at Stewart's trial and was paid a cash reward for her false story. Three state's Attorneys who prosecuted Stewart later came forward opposing the execution for lack of evidence.

2] Jesse Tafero (Florida) Tafero was sentenced to death along with Sonia Jacobs for the murder of two policemen at a highway rest stop in 1976. A third co-defendant received a life sentence after pleading guilty and testifying against Jacobs and Tafero. A childhood friend and filmmaker, Micki Dickoff, then became interested in Jacobs case. Jacobs's conviction was overturned on a federal writ of habeas corpus in 1992. Following the discovery that the chief prosecution witness had failed a lie-detector test, the prosecutor accepted a plea in which Jacobs did not admit guilt, and she was immediately released. Jesse Tafero, whose conviction was based on much of the same highly questionable evidence, had been executed in 1990, two years before the evidence of innocence had been uncovered.

I have 25 examples right now, far too many to list here. The number is around 100 or so, for all of America, not just Ohio. My mistatement. sorry

Answer 1

Our legal system is seriously flawed. A lot of times, evidence that could prove a person's innocence isn't allowed to be entered. We have a guy sitting on death row right now, Mauriceo Brown, set to be executed tonight for a murder he says he didn't commit. He was denied a DNA test that possibly would have proven that he was not the killer. A lot of people who support the death penalty aren't very knowledgeable about it, unfortunately. They aren't knowledgeable about our legal system. They assume guilt because the person was convicted. Since 1973, 123 people on death row have been exonerated. Consider the fact that all of these people were convicted, some on little to no evidence.

Take the case of John Ballard, for instance (article link cited below):

"The Florida Supreme Court unanimously overturned the conviction of death row inmate John Robert Ballard and ordered his acquittal in the 1999 murders of two of his acquaintances. The Court concluded that the evidence against Ballard was so weak that the trial judge should have dismissed the case immediately. The primary evidence presented against Ballard was a hair and a fingerprint, both of which he could have left during his many visits to the victims' apartment. Bloody fingerprints and 100 other hair samples were found associated with the crime scene, none of them belonging to Ballard, who has always maintained his innocence. One of the victims was a known drug dealer.

The state Attorney General's office said that it would not seek a rehearing in the case. At Ballard's trial, only 9 of the 12 jurors recommended a death sentence. The judge decided to sentence Ballard to death, commenting: "You have not only forfeited your right to live among us, but under the laws of the state of Florida, you have forfeited your right to live at all." Ballard was released on February 25, 2006."

There are still innocent people on death row. And not all are old cases. Ballard was tried and convicted in 2003, when DNA testing was already available. All I can say is our system needs reform.

Answer 2

It'd be nice if we at least felt bad about putting somebody to death who did not commit the particuler crime they were sentenced to die for. Niether attitude about capital punishment makes sense to me.

First it is not a deterent. Nobody expects to get caught and if they do life in prison is the same as death. Worse really. Capital punishment is a mercy compared to natural life in prison.

Capital punishment is two things. Revenge and to make sure that particuler person never ever has the chance to walk the street again. Laws change, natural life can be shortened, comuted, or otherwise anulled. Many lifers live long enough to see the streets again. Some prove why they should have never been let loose or allowed the opportunity to escape. Others become productive citizens.

As long as they live there are some who are a clear danger to others. Sexual preditors in particuler. Mass murderers of the sexual and political kind are guarenteed to do it again if they get the chance. There is no way to rehab certain people. Retarded killers for example. They cannot comprehend what they do but that does not stop the urges which caused them to kill in the first place. Some racial/politically motivated killers will happily do so again given even half a chance. Those are examples.

The guy who blows away a clerk at a store is usually not going to fit in that catagory. 20 years in prison will tend to age the violence right out of them and for the most part they grew up in environments where violence was a normal way of life. While this doesn't excuse the behavior it does explain it to an extent. The guy who shoots a cop might even be involved in a means of self defense. The drunk who gets stupid why execute these people? They are the bulk of who we execute. Instead we need to execute the Ted Bundy's of the world. Bundy was a high escape risk and the second he was loose the odds are another girl would die. Anybody who kills a small child intentionally should die. Sexual preditors that kill victems, they should die.

As for innocence. That should be the ONE and only factor in a trial on a death penalty offense. Evidence should be worked over with a fine tooth comb. Normal evidence rules should be disallowed to give a jury the best possible ability to determing guilt or innocence. These are crimes too important to get wrong. If we are wrong then somebody innocent dies. If we let loose somebody who deserves the death penalty under my description they will do it again and soon. If we convict an innocent person they will die. Such trials are necessary.

One single wrongfull execution should wake us up. That could have been you or me or somebody we care about executed for a crime they/we did not commit. Instead of blaming the death penalty we seriously need to look at police investigation tactics and the court system. You can no more blame the death penalty for a wrongfull death of an innocent than you can the gavel which ended the sentancing of that innocent person. Remember prisons are not safe places. People die there too. Even if they live, it is not a real life. It is a virtual execution. 20 years in prison is very close to execution and an innocent serving one day much less 20 years in prison is inexcusable. It also seems rather strange to focus on the death penalty rather than on the frequent convictions of innocents that happen in our court system.

Answer 3

First, look into the definition of Hammurabi's Code; that is, an eye for an eye, etc etc etc.... You steal from me, I steal from you, we are both happy and sad about it. The ends can never justify the means. Will killing anybody prevent crime from happening again? If it does, then why is there more crime than ever each and every year?
Putting an innocent man on death row is a question of faith in the American justice system. Can we believe that a jury of 12 of our peers can sentence us to death for something we didn't do? Improbable.
As far as "it has happened", prove it. Show me one case where an innocent person has been put to death. I haven't heard of any. Mostly, an innocent person is "innocent" only because of the appellate system. If there was a mistake in the trial court, does that justify setting free a guilty person?
But seriously, show me your case where an innocent person has been put to death by the American Justice system.

Answer 4

When we put an innocent person to death, we, as a country, become a less moral and less trustworthy. The death penalty is wrong, and it's applied unequally - more blacks get death than whites, and more poor get death than rich.
It's sanctioned by 36 states, and in South Carolina and Louisiana, you can be put to death for crimes other than murder - including rape and more than one instance of sex with a child. Most methods of humane execution are anything but - electrocution is cruel, and often doesn't kill a person right away, and we have no idea if lethal injection is painful or not (there is evidence that it is).
As a nation, we cannot condemn murder by private citizens while condoning it by the state. Moreover, the death penalty isn't a even a good deterent to crime. It ought to be abolished in favor of life without the chance of parole.

Answer 5

When people are arrested for serious crimes, it is the result of "police work".

This usually means that someone informed the police. It's not all CSI, in fact, that is only a relatively small part of making the arrest.

Almost always in the real world, the person arrested was guilty of something. You sleep with dawgs, you get fleas.

The term "known associate" has meaning and implications.
If your friend is a criminal, then you are complicit for not reporting them. If the wrong person is nabbed, who do you think framed them?

Why their "friend" the killer of course!

Regular folks living in suburbia aren't getting arrested for crimes they did not commit. People with scumbags for friends are.

Most people and especially women are killed by people they know. The police know this.

Answer 6

we basically feel kinda bad and move on

Answer 7

he dies