Inhumane

[Nero]

The only serious part of the response was that you completed the John Coffey/Jesus metaphor for me.

Look, where else but on the SKMB was someone going to complete that metaphor for me? And I couldn't resist pointing out that you did when you did because it may never happen again!
It actually was fantastic.
And it made me giggle.
Please blame the medium if it felt snide. It actually was genuine glee that caused me to post my response.

And sorry it took so long for me to post it, I don't get online so much these days.
And yes of course, I read both your previous responses.

oh ok in that case YOU ARE MOST WELCOME!

my bad on misinterpreting what you said, my most humble apologies at riling up @ you. can you forgive me?? I am not that touchy normally i swearz

[themadone06]

Do you have any clue as to just how many inmates have been exonerated through DNA testing just in the last few years, that have spent a decade or more on death row?
Just how many innocents have the courts in say, Texas murdered do ya reckon?
They practically have an assembly line.

The fact is, a very large percentage of folks that have been convicted of heinous death penalty crimes, have been convicted because of simple eye witness testimony...absolutely proven to be one of the most unreliable form of evidence.

Thankfully, more and more conviction are now being signed sealed and delivered through science and not eye witness accounts, but don't believe everything you see on CSI Possumbump.

Never did I say that there should not be rules stipulating when someone should be sentenced to death. I personally feel to have a death sentence there should be at least three eye witnesses. I understand that there are some people that have been exonerated by DNA. That is great and most are now living off millions of dollars the government owed them for being wrongfully accused. There have also been people who have probably been put to death even though they are innocent. It is sad, and thats why there should be set laws about who faces the death penalty.

I am just saying that if a person is proven guilty, 100% guilty with DNA evidence and the backup of several witnesses and other evidences that they should have to pay for their crime. If you murder someone in the first degree then you should have to pay with your life. If you rape someone, particularly a child, I hope you get twice the punishment in prison. Jail and sentencing today is already to cushy and lenient on inmates, and that is why they do not learn a lesson.

[themadone06]

Possumbump.

I forgot about this. Why does this mean? Is it an insult? I've never heard this word before.

[Kymatty]

I believe in the death penalty for the most extreme crimes against a person; IE rape or murder. Now that we have the technology, it shouldn't be to hard to prove if it was said person or not (is there was evidence left).
I don't believe that someone who took another's life in anger (or in some cases just because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time) should be allowed to live. Why should we, as american citizens pay for this person to spend the rest of their life in a cell? Eye for an eye

[PatInTheHat]

Never did I say that there should not be rules stipulating when someone should be sentenced to death. I personally feel to have a death sentence there should be at least three eye witnesses. I understand that there are some people that have been exonerated by DNA. That is great and most are now living off millions of dollars the government owed them for being wrongfully accused. There have also been people who have probably been put to death even though they are innocent. It is sad, and thats why there should be set laws about who faces the death penalty.


I am just saying that if a person is proven guilty, 100% guilty with DNA evidence and the backup of several witnesses and other evidences that they should have to pay for their crime. If you murder someone in the first degree then you should have to pay with your life. If you rape someone, particularly a child, I hope you get twice the punishment in prison. Jail and sentencing today is already to cushy and lenient on inmates, and that is why they do not learn a lesson.

No you didn't exactly say, well, all of that, but your original post read more like a sound bite..no offense.
And there is no "probably" about it, we'll never know the extent as to the untold numbers of poor saps executed for a myriad of reason..some possibly more understandable than others, absolutely none forgivable.
There are in fact "set laws" varied state by state and at the federal level...who by the way, tend to execute in a most steamlined manner.
I would like to add, if you think incarceration is cushy, you've obviously never been or have ever known anyone who has, but that's another discussion.

I forgot about this. Why does this mean? Is it an insult? I've never heard this word before.

No, this isn't an insult, it was more of a reference point.
(I'll apologize if I came off this way..I often do..kay sarah sarah..see?..oh my word, I can't help myself..I may need a program..think?...see?)
Every jurisdiction is different, every state has it's own laws, various court sytems don't proceed in the same manner, though procedures may be similar, and every criminal investigation is, or should be, unique.
Prosecutions should always be about absolute truth, it hardly ever is, the defense too...I see it as who ever tells the best most convincing lies, usually wins, so what does that tell us, except of course you get what you pay for, and the poor can't...not many millionaires on death row (percentage wise that is), I'll wager a big toe to a donut (custard filled..Yum! the donut, not my toe...I do know the proper usage of soap puhleeez...though that's not to say my big toes ain't yummy..no, I wouldn't know) on that one.

The legal profession, for the most part, considers wins verses losses as the criteria for measuring success...truth & justice has virtually nothing to do with it.
Most folks don't really give a hoot about the presumption of innocence..,that is until they sit in front a jury of their "peers".
If your sitting there, well hell, you must have done something.
Prosecuters take advantage of that, as well they should I suppose.
It's all the other what else's they often have a propensity to do for a "win" that's disturbing, and no not all of 'em, not even close to most I would hope, but certainly enough.
A boat load of district attorneys, have made their career bones on wrongful capital convictions, what do we do with that?

The thing is, in the Possumbump's, the Podunks, and the Bug Tussles (that's actually the name of a real town..like Frog Bottom), many of the small places is what I'm sayin', they don't have the money or resources that the Las Vegas's, Miami's or New York New York (it's a wonderful town, the people do stuff in holes in the ground..or so I hear...sorry) "C.S.I's" do...hell, these days, the big towns don't have the cash anymore either.
And what's more, communities that are well to do enough that have that advantage, it ain't no where even close like the portrayal's on TV.
(I'm not & was not, suggesting that's necessarily where you may get your information either..it was just a reference point, 'k?)

The odds of 100% sure bet guilty as charged capital punishment convictions, isn't as large as most folks would like..me included.
Unfortunately, there are waaayy too many who don't care one way or the other, as long as someone "pays".
If a few (now if someone would please define few please...what would be an acceptabe percentage?) innocents die, it's for the greater good damn it..kill 'em quick, the ends justify the means, full speed ahead!
And that does indeed scare the ever lovin' crap outta me!

[Damaris]

Never did I say that there should not be rules stipulating when someone should be sentenced to death.

There are rules. They are called "laws." And they can only work as well as the system they were designed both by and for.

I understand that there are some people that have been exonerated by DNA. That is great and most are now living off millions of dollars the government owed them for being wrongfully accused.

The government doesn't "owe" those who have been wrongfully convicted and later exonerated. In cases where those people have sued for reparations (and many don't), they generally are awarded less than $250,000. It still sounds like quite a bit but it's rather difficult to put a price on years taken from your life, the hardships the process brings to you and your family, and a history that will follow you to the grave. How much is a decade of your life worth? What value do you ascribe wrongfully stripped freedom, not being able to sleep in your own bed, and the inabillity to bathe without the constant fear of gang-rape?

There have also been people who have probably been put to death even though they are innocent.

There is no "probably" to it.

...thats why there should be set laws about who faces the death penalty.

And again, there are. But all laws have limits, and even lawmakers with our best interests at heart (assuming they do exist) cannot write laws that solve every problem or operate perfectly in every case.

I'm not picking on you, honest. I just think these are common assumptions that many people make without stepping back to see how faulted they can be.