Question about capital punishment in state of Texas

Typically correct spelling saves many inmates from being executed.

 

In the punishment phase, generally the jury has to answer two questions after finding someone guilty of capital murder (in Texas):

1. Was the murder committed intentionally?

2. Will the person be a continuing threat to society? (keep in mind that society could include inside a prison)

 

Are pro life people also against execution?

 

The state of Texas does not exacute any inmates.

 

The punishment for a Capital Offense is Life or Death, it just depends on how the prosecution presents the case and how the Defense works for their client. There are 7 areas of criteria to constitute a Capital Offense, I would get into it but I'm driving home from work and keeping this brief. Go take a look at the Texas Penal Code under Section 19.02 and it explains the charge very simply.

On a side note, working 20 hour shifts during the Lonestar Biker Rally blows. Haven't been home to see the wife and kid since Wednesday. Hope that answered your question a bit.

 

basically if you're poor and/or black, you're ****ed.

 

In order to get a death sentence for capital murder, two things have to happen. First, the district attorney's office must file the case seeking the death penalty. Because of the extra expense involved in seeking the death penalty, this happens in less than five percent of capital murder cases. If convicted of capital murder when the State is not seeking the death penalty, the punishment is automatic life in prison without parole.

If the State does seek the death penalty, then the choice of death or life without parole goes to the jury. The focus of the punishment phase of a death penalty case is the future danger of the defendant to society. One of the reasons that death penalty cases are so expensive is because the State must use special expert witnesses to try to predict the future dangerousness of the defendant based on psychological evaluations and evidence of past behavior. The defense also presents mitigating evidence from their experts, along with testimony from people who know the defendant to try to prove that the defendant is not a future danger to society and should not be executed. If the jury decides the defendant should not be executed, the sentence is also life in prison without parole.

 

More reason if you are poor and/or black you should not put yourself in a situation were you can be accused of killing someone.

 

I read on the internet that ~70% of pro-lifers are for the death penalty.

Go figure.

Spoiler

Like Rick Perry, most ‘pro-life’ Americans OK with death penalty

Only about one-in-ten (11 percent) Americans hold a “consistent ethic of life” position, opposing legalized abortion and capital punishment. In fact, in the general public, there is no significant correlation between attitudes about the legality of abortion and views on capital punishment. Fully two-thirds of Americans overall say they favor the death penalty for persons convicted of murder, compared to only three-in-ten who say they oppose it. Support for capital punishment is virtually identical to the general population among Americans who say abortion should be illegal (69 percent) and among those who identify as “pro-life” (69 percent).

 

Ahhh taking two topics of gray and making them black and white.

I only support execution if the individual is a continuous threat to society AND there is no doubt of their crime.

 

Interesting thing about that article is that it points to the report and survey. In that report and survey, the words 'death penalty' or similar words do not appear. While it would not surprise me if the number is the article are roughly accurate, that report has no information regarding the death penalty and the question was not asked.

 

These are not the two questions asked to the jury in the punishment phase. If the murder wasn't committed intentionally, they wouldn't be guilty of capital murder (or murder in general).

The two questions are something along the lines of (I forget the exact wording now):
1) Is the person a continuing threat to society?
2) Is there any mitigating evidence?

To answer the OPs question. Capital murder in Texas carries two sentences - life without parole or the death penalty. Just because someone committed capital murder does not mean that the DA will seek the death penalty. For example, after Pat Lykos became DA in Harris County, she didn't seek the death penalty as often as her predecessors.

Getting a jury to give someone the death penalty has actually become more difficult since 2005. The reason is that prior to 2005, Texas didn't have life without parole. It just had a life sentence. A normal life sentence in Texas means someone is eligible for parole after 30 years (not that they will necessarily get it, but they are eligible). Now that there is life without parole proving that someone would continue to be a threat becomes harder to prove.

Bottom line, someone guilty of capital murder does not automatically get the death penalty. After 2005 they could be in prison for life or get the death penalty. If the crime occurred before 2005, they could be eligible for parole after 30 years if they didn't get the death penalty.

 

I just realized I misspoke - for capital murder you weren't eligible for parole until after 40 years not 30

 

Considering my wife was on a death penalty jury in Texas (albeit prior to the year 2000) those WERE exactly the two questions they had to answer in the affirmative prior to the sentence being pronounced. Committing murder in the act of another felony (in this case a robbery), caused it to be a capital case. In this case, the criminal, definitely intended to kill the person as he did it 'execution' style and it wasn't simply a wayward bullet.

 

That some weak sauce.



Usual caveats apply:

• I found the article on the Internet, so who knows if it is true.
• People who are good at writing (people who wrote the article) may not be good at math. The article writers had to read a study with math and stats in it, so right away we are on thin ice.
• The study was sponsored by the Public Religion Research Institute. We can probably trust them as much as we do "Biblical Historians".
• Study covers two huge political land mines, Abortion and the Death Penalty. It would be hard to believe that politics was not in part some motivation for the study. Needless to say, politics and politicians can not be trusted.

I tend to believe that the article is on the up-and-up due to the quote:

which seems stranger than fiction.

 

Did you actually read the report that the Washington Post linked to? Read it and see if you see anything regarding the death penalty. I was not speaking about the Post article, but the actual report.

Here is a link to the full report:

http://publicreligion.org/site/wp-c...nials-Abortion-and-Religion-Survey-Report.pdf

Somehow they must have connected a different report with this one in order to come up with their numbers, but as far as I can tell, the question wasn't asked in the survey that the Post article linked to.

EDIT - also, did you notice that I wrote that their number would not surprise me - which is an indication that I believe their numbers?

 

seems a good of a topic to bring it up, but there is not much talk about California Prop 34 this election season.

ending the death penalty is on the ballot for California voters. all death row inmates would get a retroactive life sentence without the possibility of parole...

 

I did not read the report at all. I was mesmerized by the bright and shiny graphic.

I feel betrayed by the Washington Post.

 

Isn't the argument of pro life that only God can make the decision of life or death? Seems a bit hypocritical.