We Need to stop the Death Penalty

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
Wrong Man Executed?
ST. LOUIS, Missouri (AP) -- Citing grave concerns that Missouri executed an innocent man, a coalition that includes a congressman, high-profile lawyers and even the victim's family pointed to evidence Tuesday that they said could clear Larry Griffin's name.
Prosecutors have decided to reopen the case of Griffin, who was convicted in 1981 in the murder of Quintin Moss, a 19-year-old drug dealer who was shot to death. Griffin maintained his innocence to the end, but was put to death in 1995.

Now, many people, including some members of Moss' family, believe him.

"What I have heard recently is very troubling and leads me to believe an innocent man was executed for this murder, while the real killers have not been brought to justice," said Rep. William Lacy Clay, D-Missouri, who spoke at a news conference Tuesday with other supporters of Griffin.

The news conference followed a report compiled by a University of Michigan Law School professor who discovered new information on the case in the last year. The report suggests that:

# The first police officer at the scene of the 1980 shooting, Michael Ruggeri, now says that the story told by the supposed eyewitness was false, even though Ruggeri's own testimony at trial supported what the witness said.

# A second victim of the shooting, Wallace Conners, has said he was never contacted by the defense or the prosecution. Conners, now 52, who was wounded in the attack, said the supposed eyewitness was not present at the shooting.

"I tell all you all, Larry Griffin did not commit this crime," Conners told reporters. "Larry Griffin definitely wasn't in the car."
It is a mess, and needs to stop!
 

zimv20

macrumors 601
Jul 18, 2002
4,388
7
toronto
bias against minorities, sloppy prosecution and wrongful convictions are why former illinois governor cleared illnois' death row a couple year ago.

"I'm going to sleep well tonight knowing that I made the right decision," said Governor Ryan.

"Because the Illinois death penalty system is arbitrary and capricious - and therefore immoral - I no longer shall tinker with the machinery of death," he said.
a wise move, imo.
 
"I'm going to sleep well tonight knowing that I made the right decision," said Governor Ryan.

"Because the Illinois death penalty system is arbitrary and capricious - and therefore immoral - I no longer shall tinker with the machinery of death," he said.
Hmm, the death penalty is immoral regardless of its capriciousness. Murder is murder, regardless of how many hands the blood is on.
 

eva01

macrumors 601
Feb 22, 2005
4,714
0
Gah! Plymouth
Just to play devils advocate because its fun

I know that people on death row end up staying there for a while and costing a lot of money, but back to my point cause its fun.

Why get rid of death penalty? It saves space in prisons so that more are not made which costs a lot in tax payers money. If you don't kill people then you have to get them a bed, food, and all the other fruits of being in prison. Which then means more and more people in prison for longer periods of time, which means less space in prisons already around, which means need to make more prisons, which costs a lot of money.

Now what we could do is just ship them off to a random island, ala Australia and pretend they don't exist. Or do with them what the French did with Napoleon.
 

bousozoku

Moderator emeritus
Jun 25, 2002
13,951
3
Gone but not forgotten.
eva01 said:
Just to play devils advocate because its fun

I know that people on death row end up staying there for a while and costing a lot of money, but back to my point cause its fun.

Why get rid of death penalty? It saves space in prisons so that more are not made which costs a lot in tax payers money. If you don't kill people then you have to get them a bed, food, and all the other fruits of being in prison. Which then means more and more people in prison for longer periods of time, which means less space in prisons already around, which means need to make more prisons, which costs a lot of money.

Now what we could do is just ship them off to a random island, ala Australia and pretend they don't exist. Or do with them what the French did with Napoleon.
The U.S.A. was originally a dumping ground for English prisoners, as much as Australia became, after the revolt here. (The New Zealanders are fond of noting how their country was never a prison colony.)

Why not simply shoot to kill during the crime? It'll eliminate a lot of paperwork, public expense, and hospital/prison space. It's efficient and expedient.
 

skunk

macrumors G4
Jun 29, 2002
11,745
3,996
Republic of Ukistan
Clive Stafford Smith has been on about this for years. The figures speak for themselves:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clive_Stafford-Smith

Clive Stafford-Smith is a British born human rights lawyer based in the United States and practising US law. He is most famous for his tireless campaigns to have the death penalty abolished. In the 2000 New Year honours list, he was awarded the Order of the British Empire (OBE).
His early efforts, in the the final appeal of Edward Earl Johnson, were the subject of the acclaimed 1988 documentary, Fourteen Days in May.
In his representations of some 300 death row clients, he has had sentences overturned on all but four occasions. At present he is representing 45 inmates held at Guantanamo Bay.
Stafford-Smith had planned on leaving school to become a campaigning journalist, but after he spent a summer visiting death row inmates he resolved to learn and practise law as a practical means of acting on the sense of injustice aroused in him by the death penalty.​
 

eva01

macrumors 601
Feb 22, 2005
4,714
0
Gah! Plymouth
bousozoku said:
Why not simply shoot to kill during the crime? It'll eliminate a lot of paperwork, public expense, and hospital/prison space. It's efficient and expedient.
even better idea than mine
 

miloblithe

macrumors 68020
Nov 14, 2003
2,076
28
Washington, DC
eva01 said:
I know that people on death row end up staying there for a while and costing a lot of money, but back to my point cause its fun.

Why get rid of death penalty? It saves space in prisons so that more are not made which costs a lot in tax payers money. If you don't kill people then you have to get them a bed, food, and all the other fruits of being in prison. Which then means more and more people in prison for longer periods of time, which means less space in prisons already around, which means need to make more prisons, which costs a lot of money.
Well, it's an interesting theoretical argument, but it has no basis in reality. It costs more to execute someone than it does to keep them alive.

Other good reasons:
killing is immoral
the State should not have the right to execute its own citizens
the legal system is imperfect and executing an innocent person is beyond unnacceptable
 

Applespider

macrumors G4
Since I don't believe in the concept of a Hell after death, I really can't see the point of killing someone. There's no sense of punishment.

I'd rather see them locked up and losing their liberty with the ability to be able to reflect on their crime for the rest of their life. There is always the possibility that they might be rehabilitated sufficiently not to be released but to give something back to society. Killing them achieves nothing - it's a waste of another life.
 

feakbeak

macrumors 6502a
Oct 16, 2003
925
1
Michigan
anonymous161 said:
Hmm, the death penalty is immoral regardless of its capriciousness. Murder is murder, regardless of how many hands the blood is on.
I'm don't think the death penalty is immoral/unethical. I believe there are crimes that deserve the punishment of death. I believe there are people who deserve to die. However, I am still against the death penalty - not because I believe it is wrong but because I do not believe it can be enforced without error and I do not trust any institution enough to possess that type of power.

I also believe a license should be required in order to have and raise children because the consequences of poor parenting are temendous upon society. Again though, I don't trust any institution enough to grant them that power.
 
feakbeak said:
I'm don't think the death penalty is immoral/unethical. I believe there are crimes that deserve the punishment of death. I believe there are people who deserve to die. However, I am still against the death penalty - not because I believe it is wrong but because I do not believe it can be enforced without error and I do not trust any institution enough to possess that type of power.
I like to keep it simple: No person should be allowed to kill another person. I apply that to everyone, whether murderer or fetus. Life is the only thing we are given in this world and we should be allowed to keep it no matter what. If someone poses a threat to others then they should be removed from society but they shouldn't be denied the right to live.
 

Desertrat

macrumors newbie
Jul 4, 2003
2
706
Terlingua, Texas
I'm no humanitarian. I'm in accord with the old-time lawman who opined, "There are some folks who just need killing." Some people are plain and simple "Evil"; there's no other descriptive word. "Crispy? Or, extra fried?" isn't just gallows humor; it's a justifiable attitude against those who've denied their own humanity.

But I'm against the death penalty.

Too many instances of "Oops! He didn't dunnit!" One is more than enough too many.

Costs too much for all those appeals, compared to Life Without Parole. And, takes too long. We've created a horrible system of suspense, as well. The emotional ups and downs bug me. If you're gonna kill someone, do it; don't jack'em around.

The death penalty obviously hasn't worked as a deterrent. Maybe you could get a Bad Guy's attention with, "Hey, ya wanna spend the rest of your life in a steel closet?"

Go to Tombstone, Arizona. Go to Boot Hill. One of the markers there says, "Hanged by mistake". Reflect on it.

'Rat
 

mactastic

macrumors 68040
Apr 24, 2003
3,647
661
Colly-fornia
There's one of those in Gold Country in the Sierra Foothills... Hangtown I think the name was, now Placerville.

Gravestone reads "Lynched by mistake, the joke's on us." Talk about gallows humor. :rolleyes:
 

bousozoku

Moderator emeritus
Jun 25, 2002
13,951
3
Gone but not forgotten.
IJ Reilly said:
Gallows humor, a fine old tradition.
Gallow can you go?

I hope that skunk wasn't referring to my post as humour. I meant it quite seriously. I think shoot first, ask questions later is a valid technique in law enforcement, esp. since our police in Central Floriduh aren't brave enough to stop people breaking the law under normal circumstances that wouldn't frighten a 12 year old.
 

Desertrat

macrumors newbie
Jul 4, 2003
2
706
Terlingua, Texas
bouzozoku, maybe you need to import some "attitudes" from the Villa Acuña, Mexico, police. (Across from Del Rio, Texas)

Sheriff Jim Wilson of Shooting Times Magazine was telling cop stories at lunch today. While Jim was sheriff over at Ozona, Texas, a pair of young-guy burglars stole some rifles and hied their way across the Rio Grande. ("Otro la'o del Rio") Unfortunately for the burglars, the cops weren't clueless. Jim already knew the police chief in Acuña; he phoned; the guys were caught and the guns recovered.

While setting up the return of the guns to the US, the chief asked Jim, "Do you want us to kill them, or what?"

That's cold.

'Rat
 

bousozoku

Moderator emeritus
Jun 25, 2002
13,951
3
Gone but not forgotten.
Desertrat said:
bouzozoku, maybe you need to import some "attitudes" from the Villa Acuña, Mexico, police. (Across from Del Rio, Texas)

Sheriff Jim Wilson of Shooting Times Magazine was telling cop stories at lunch today. While Jim was sheriff over at Ozona, Texas, a pair of young-guy burglars stole some rifles and hied their way across the Rio Grande. ("Otro la'o del Rio") Unfortunately for the burglars, the cops weren't clueless. Jim already knew the police chief in Acuña; he phoned; the guys were caught and the guns recovered.

While setting up the return of the guns to the US, the chief asked Jim, "Do you want us to kill them, or what?"

That's cold.

'Rat
Exactly. Why mess with the paperwork? "Dead men don't talk." and they don't enter appeals.

We have the exact opposite here, though. A woman who murdered her daughter and one of her daughter's friends and gave brain damage to another of her friends was recently let out of her two concurrent 15 year sentences while her appeal was being processed.

Considering that the car was somehow headed backwards into the tree when it struck, it's a bit obvious the woman didn't have full control. She didn't have control of the car, either. The judge had delayed the case, allowed her special treatment, and finally, after she went to prison, let her out during the appeal.

It's sad that this is so typical of the state. Yes, I'm harsh, because law enforcement here isn't.
 

zap2

macrumors 604
Mar 8, 2005
7,242
1
Washington D.C
i think it should be left up to the family( so if it helps the family to have the killer dead, after he is proven guilty, they kill him) , if i died and my family had that chose i would want them to let the killer live. BUt my opion is strting to chage to no-one should face that( after this case ad such) i'll think it over some.