Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The only downside I see to the death penalty is by all reports it currently costs more to carry out a death sentence than to maintain a prisoner for life.
That's because those studies are produced with an intended bias to try to prevent the death penalty.
They ignore all the cost savings of people that plea guilty to life in order to avoid the DP....and ignore all the costs of big long trials for life sentences where the person would otherwise plea to avoid the DP.
but the case has not been adjudicated yet, and until that point in time, AND he is found guilty, you never know what will happen. how many cases, even ones like this, have been overturned on appeal, or the defendant was acquitted in the initial trial? remember OJ? perhaps some defense lawyer can find a technical reason to have the tape thrown out of court, and that may end the case right there.
That the person in question may escape on a technicality has no bearing over a desire that the outcome of the legal proceedings ends at a death sentence.
Basically, I think you are arguing against something no one is saying.
No one is saying grab the guy and lynch him without a trial.
Yes, but those appeals are mandated by state laws that were drawn to comply with Gregg v. Georgia.
A lot of pro death penalty people complain, but those appeals were the price to get the death penalty back to legal status.
and i dont really have an issue with that. too many people have been wrongly convicted of crimes, only to be absolved later.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy
That the person in question may escape on a technicality has no bearing over a desire that the outcome of the legal proceedings ends at a death sentence.
Basically, I think you are arguing against something no one is saying.
No one is saying grab the guy and lynch him without a trial.
at least not publicly, yet. all i am saying is that we need to stop putting the cart before the horse. for instance instead of saying i hope he gets the death penalty, a better choice of words is, if he is convicted, i hope he gets the death penalty. we get a big head of steam up in this country when things like this happen, and then if the person gets acquitted either on a technicality, or because he was in fact innocent, that head of steam builds up, and people tend to blow up and do stupid things which leads to more criminal activiety, this time due to anger over the issue.
Rhetorical question: Can someone who is murdered request the way in which they're murdered .. before they're murdered?
Good topic for another post?
Your choice on How you would prefer to be Murdered?
Harrier recalls a chapter in a book that he read about a guy named Larry Gene Bell in S. Carolina who murdered a teenage girl. He had her write a will and last testament, and gave her a choice of how to die. She had the option of shooting, suffocation or drug overdose, and chose suffocation and had a reason for doing so.
Bell was executed in 1994.
The book is Mindhunter by John Douglas and the chapter where this is detailed is called "God Wants You to Join Shari Faye".
The word 'allegedly' in the headline is wrong. He Did kill her. He admits to killing her.
The questions are, was the killing a crime, and if so, which specific crime.
I don't know why this is political or controversial. Because a gun was used, or a guy killed his wife, or what ?
He has pled not guilty, so the idea that he killed someone remains an allegation - and must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.