Troy Davis (Sylvester, White, Jersey: crimes, house, tax)

[neil0311]

Originally Posted by AnsleyPark

I live I world believing it is inhabited by an evolved and civilized society. Killing in the name of justice, just because a jury is 99.9% certain, is nonetheless the taking of a human life. If someone raped, tortured and murdered my child, I may personally try to exact the ultimate vengeance. But as a society, I would like to think we are beyond such. As human beings we can never be 100% certain, regardless of our investigative and scientific prowess. The risk of one innocent person being executed outweighs by unimaginable orders of magnitude the sense of self satisfied revenge over the death of the clearly guilty. Surely we are more evolved than that.

So you have doubt that Brian Nichols is 100% guilty of the murder of a judge, a federal agent, and others? If so, then you live on another planet.

Now I agree that people can have a principled disagreement on whether or not capital punishment is a deterrent or the proper penalty. What I do not agree with is that when you have multiple eyewitness and video evidence of the crime being committed, as in the Nichols case, then we are and can be 100% certain that he was the one who committed the crime. With DNA, we can get very close to that same level of certainty.

My belief is that some crime is so heinous and so notorious that the only fitting penalty is a death sentence. Would you have given Osama Bin Laden life in prison? How about Adolf Hitler? Were we wrong to execute the Nazi leadership at Nuremberg? How about Saddam Hussein?

I believe we can and should hold individuals to the consequences of their actions. In my opinion in some cases those actions deserve the ultimate penalty, and in the case of someone like Nichols, we have absolutely ZERO doubt that he is guilty. It's not about revenge. It's about justice, and we can make the bar high enough with scientific evidence.

[AnsleyPark]

Originally Posted by neil0311

So you have doubt that Brian Nichols is 100% guilty of the murder of a judge, a federal agent, and others? If so, then you live on another planet.

Now I agree that people can have a principled disagreement on whether or not capital punishment is a deterrent or the proper penalty. What I do not agree with is that when you have multiple eyewitness and video evidence of the crime being committed, as in the Nichols case, then we are and can be 100% certain that he was the one who committed the crime. With DNA, we can get very close to that same level of certainty.

My belief is that some crime is so heinous and so notorious that the only fitting penalty is a death sentence. Would you have given Osama Bin Laden life in prison? How about Adolf Hitler? Were we wrong to execute the Nazi leadership at Nuremberg? How about Saddam Hussein?

I believe we can and should hold individuals to the consequences of their actions. In my opinion in some cases those actions deserve the ultimate penalty, and in the case of someone like Nichols, we have absolutely ZERO doubt that he is guilty. It's not about revenge. It's about justice, and we can make the bar high enough with scientific evidence.

No, Neil. I have no doubt. Never said I did. Mars isn't such a bad place either... Geez. My point, which seems to be lost, is that if there is a risk that one innocent person can be put to death, then the system is flawed and the death penalty should be abolished. Snce we are people, we cannot insure that innocents will never be wrongly convicted and subsequently killed by the state.

[GRS86]

Too much doubt with the witnesses and the evidence to put this man to death. I think life without parole is the only option that the state has!!

[Gil3]

Originally Posted by rcsteiner

Is imprisoning someone for the rest of their life with no chance for parole somehow kinder?

A lot kinder than sticking a needle in an innocent man and realizing years later a mistake was made. At least with LWOP, things can be carefully examined and if warranted, a re-trial.

There are simply too many lingering doubts for this execution to go forward.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by AnsleyPark

No, Neil. I have no doubt. Never said I did. Mars isn't such a bad place either... Geez. My point, which seems to be lost, is that if there is a risk that one innocent person can be put to death, then the system is flawed and the death penalty should be abolished. Snce we are people, we cannot insure that innocents will never be wrongly convicted and subsequently killed by the state.

Should the same be said for life imprisonment? How is that better for the individual than killing them? Keeping them away from the outside world could be seen as needlessly cruel.

[AnsleyPark]

Originally Posted by rcsteiner

Should the same be said for life imprisonment? How is that better for the individual than killing them? Keeping them away from the outside world could be seen as needlessly cruel.

Ahm, I think murdering an innocent wrongly-convicted person is magnitudes more cruel than imprisoning someone for life.

[neil0311]

Originally Posted by AnsleyPark

Ahm, I think murdering an innocent wrongly-convicted person is magnitudes more cruel than imprisoning someone for life.

You seem to ignore that I am qualifying who would be eligible for the death penalty to only those where we have a very high degree of certainty. Someone such as Nichols. There is no case of mistaken identity or evil cop framing the guy. He is 100% guilty and deserves a dirt nap.

Many times there is no doubt. Guy robs a convenience store, shoots the owner, and it's caught on camera and he's seen by witnesses. DNA and other physical evidence ties him to the crime. Those kinds of cases happen more often than the one you want to cite where some hapless innocent is caught up in a case of mistaken identity and railroaded.

More often than not, what you have is a scumbag who committed the crime.

[Kemba]

I think Troy Davis should not be executed at this time. With 7 or so witnesses recanting, I think he should get a new trial. I am normally for executing killers, but this case seems to be riddled with severe doubt.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by AnsleyPark

Ahm, I think murdering an innocent wrongly-convicted person is magnitudes more cruel than imprisoning someone for life.

Of course, there's the obvious argument that imprisonment is a lot easier to undo. And I agree with that. But more cruel? I'm honestly uncertain about that.

[AnsleyPark]

Originally Posted by rcsteiner

Of course, there's the obvious argument that imprisonment is a lot easier to undo. And I agree with that. But more cruel? I'm honestly uncertain about that.

Ask the innocent guy on death row what he thinks.