KOTM Nominee Humanitas Hyperbolizes (Re: Non resident posters to be executed!)
Henrietta K. Thomas
>On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 09:17:45 GMT, Henrietta K. Thomas <usa...@wwa.com>
>wrote:
>
> May I crosspost this to a group I use for following threads in
> over-trafficked groups? If you say no, that's okay & I understand.
I can't think of any good reason to be against it just now.
> (And I suppose us.config isn't really the right place, either...
> should it be us.legal? I tried that with follow-ups, in case.)
Nah, don't bother us.legal; might as well just leave it here
since it's already started here.
>>On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 02:42:37 -0400, Unit...@SputSouth.Com wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:16:04 +0100, <huma...@justice.com> wrote, in
>>>misc.misc,news.admin.censorship,news.admin.misc,news.admin.net-abuse.usenet,
>>>AND us.config:
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>>>I was forgetting Illinois has a moratorium because it was sentencing more
>>>>innocent people to death than guilty people.
>>>
>>> I think you've been playing Scrabble with your stats again.
>>>
>>> Don't make me go looking things up again. You'll lose every time.
>>
>>We *do* have a moratorium on the death penalty here in Illinois,
>>declared by the Governor after a number of men on death row
>>were exonerated.
>
> That part is true. My objection was to the statistics (sentencing
> *more* innocent people to death than guilty ones). I heard a long
> report on it on NPR fairly recently, and although I don't recall
> details, it wasn't "more".
Nobody knows for sure whether it's 'more', 'less', or 'roughly
equal'. :-(
> Quote from CNN article: "[Illinois Governor] Ryan's faith in the
> system was shaken by the exoneration of several death row inmates."
> & another:
> "[NWU professor] Protess and his students have uncovered evidence
> leading to the exoneration of seven men convicted of murder in Illinois,
> including three on death row."
I don't know if there were seven, but it's true that Northwestern
University students investigated cases as class projects,
and, in one case, found the real murderer somewhere else.
Best source of background info on the situation in Illinois
is a series of Chicago Tribune articles to be found at:
http://chicagotribune.com/news/metro/chicago/ws/0,,37842,00.html
> Another story mentioned 13 death row releases in IL earlier this year.
> That's CNN's version (and I am oft skeptical of CNN). Looking at the
> Washington Post, it says that Ryan's decision "came after the freeing
> of 13 wrongfully condemned inmates in Illinois in the past 13 years
> and a series of Chicago Tribune stories last year exposing inequities
> in the state's capital punishment system."
The Washington Post is more likely correct. The releases were
over a fairly long period of time. But as each new release occurred,
more questions were raised about the criminal justice system in
Illinois.
> There are (were, on 17 Jun) 161 inmates on death row in Illinois.
Probably true. I found a page on the web that says there were
167 as of April 1. See http://www.essential.org/dpic/
> Most of the convictions overturned, nationwide, are due to procedural
> errors, which doesn't mean the person was not guilty.
Some were also due to overzealous prosecution, and some
were also due to underzealous defense. DNA testing has also
found men convicted of capital crimes they didn't commit.
>>They're doing studies now, and I believe
>>some recommendations have already been made as to ways
>>and means of ensuring that nobody is judged guilty of a crime
>>s/he did not commit.
>
> Don't get me wrong. I think the execution of any innocent person is
> a horrible thing, which is why I have serious ambivalency about the
> death penalty. On one hand, if the person is definitely guilty of a
> heinous sort of murder, did it quite deliberately and with no remorse,
> I see no reason to keep that sort of person around. OTOH, I worry
> about railroading convictions when there might be a question. The
> problem is the jury has no choice except guilty or not, and they are
> *supposed* to vote "not" if there's any question in their mind, but
> that doesn't necessarily work. Additional safeguards are obviously
> needed.
That is the whole point, I believe. We've gotten sloppy in our
law enforcement, and we need to correct that. The Constitution
provides that no one shall be deprived of life "without due
process of law" -- that's where we're falling down on the job.
We want to solve the crime so badly sometimes that almost
any likely suspect will do. I'm not too keen on the death penalty,
but I say if you're going to do it, at least try to get it right. Death
is final; you can't bring anyone back to apologize to them for
your mistake.
> It's thorny, and I have to remain ambivalent.
You might not make a very good juror in a capital case, then.
One requirement, I understand, is that jurors have to be able
to seriously consider the death penalty if they find the person
guilty.
> Nonetheless, I get plum grumpy when people spout off totally
> bogus stats, especially when they won't give any sort of reference
> that one can go to and evaluate for themselves.
There are a lot of people who do that in Usenet; Gregory is
just one extreme example of that.
> Here are some stats and a link that includes more about the story.
>
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/nation/specials/socialpolicy/deathpenalty/A39349-2000Jun11.html
>"In one of the most exhaustive studies of capital punishment ever, Columbia
>University law professor James S. Liebman found that just 5 percent of the
>5,760 inmates sentenced to death nationwide between 1973 and 1995 were
>executed within the study period. And when capital cases were sent back for a
>new trial, 7 percent of the defendants were found not guilty, and fewer than
>two in 10 of those who were convicted again got another death sentence, the
>study found."
Thanks for the information. I am not surprised. New trials involve
new prosecutors, new defense attorneys, and new jurors. Plus,
time has intervened and the need for revenge is not so strong.
>>I can look it up if you like to get a few more details. The Chicago
>>Sun-Times and Tribune are both up there on the web.
>
> Mercy. You have more than enough to do. But thanks. If I care
> enough to enter into any real debate, I'll look it up myself
> (like I just did - argh!). :-)
Well, I went and looked up a coupla things anyway. :-)
Henrietta