It happens...

Yup...Make it the ultimate "felony perjury"...

Less testimony...More TRUTHFUL testimony...

As I said, I'd rather be absolutely correct a few times, than almost correct alot of times...

Understood...

Being 100% in 5 cases is better than being 80% right in 10 cases...

People who yell "soft on crime!" would point out 3 more people off of the streets, but they don't realize the 20% error is more damaging to the system as a whole...

And the problem is usually not recent...

A lot of people exonerated are people who were found guilty over a dozens years ago when technology and different systems were in place...

More recent people on death row but found to be innocent is the result of outright lying and malicious endeavors by either law enforcement or tampered witnesses...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

I have always believed that the penalties for perjury should be much stiffer.

I used to be pro DP because it cost more to keep a person in jail for life than to just get rid of them. It was pointed out to me that the myriad of appeals made execution much more expensive than keeping them in jail.

The other thing that makes me wonder is that it seems to me that keeping someone in jail for life is a much bigger punishment than putting them out of their misery.

I'm still conflicted.

Again--interesting thoughts. From a "right/wrong" perspective I tend to agree with Tris on this one that is is pretty hypocritical that we punish people for killing by killing. (I just thought of something ironic--an "eye for an eye" is NOT a Christian principle and aren't folks arguing that this nation should be patterned on Xtianity in another thread?)

But I'm also a pragmatist. For now we are stuck with it. Your assessment of older cases v. new seems to make sense although I'd like to see the raw stats before making any assumptions.

One day I will learn how to multi-quote a post. Sigh...

I was pro DP for years too for almost the same exact reasons. And also that thing about why should someone who took a life get to keep theirs. I have come to realize--like you--that I'd rather die than spend my life in a cage. I said it somewhere else (my memory fails me as to which thread now) that the DP is such a heated topic and yet I kind of see it as the easy way out for the truly guilty.

For the innocent though...are we in it for justice or revenge? Why do we rush to impose the DP?

I am of the opinion that if a person deprives another of their rights then they do not deserve their own.


click the icon NEXT TO the quote button for each post that you want to quote. On the last one that you want to quote, hit the QUOTE button.

the DP is not rushed in any sense. Most people that are on death row have multiple appeals before the execution is carried out. 10 years is NOT unusual at all.

You're very right. 10 years worth of appeals is not at all unheard of. I was unclear in my post. Mea culpa. I actually meant being so quick to impose the DP as a sentence rather than actually carrying it out.

Thanks for giving me the chance to clarify.

I agree with you very much to a point. I agree as long as the person is truly guilty. I'm still assuming we're talking murder and death row? They should lose most of their rights once proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be guilty. Obviously we are effing up on that "reasonable doubt" clause.

But I seriously doubt you mean their right to appeal. In fact I know you don't. Once proven guilty and convicted then certain rights being stripped is to be expected. But the right to appeal is always there.

My whole point is I have no problem with imprisoning criminals. Let's just make sure they're all criminals is all.

I STRONGLY concur!