Texas killed an innocent man - What should it do about it?

The death penalty is not morally wrong in my eyes, but until we can be 100% sure we are executing guilty criminals EVERY-SINGLE-TIME without bias and without error, then it is criminal to allow the death penalty to be used. If you execute one innocent man, the entire system is a failure and everyone who had a hand in allowing the death penalty to be used is a murderer.

What can you do to turn back the hands of time? Last time I checked, nothing. Especially when it comes to matters of the state, life, and death.

 

Posthumous exoneration, public apology, restitution based on $25,000/year from the time of sentencing to probable life expectancy.

 

This sums up my opinion on the death penalty exactly.

 

LOL -- sorry, I read exhumation at first, and I was picturing something pretty macabre.

 

Sam,

Not to take things off topic, but do you feel similarly about life sentences? Consider, for example, a man who is wrongly convicted, spends the remainder of his life in jail, and then dies there. Is that any less disturbing to you?

Personally, I don't think it's any better. But, that leaves us with few options for punishing "criminals" that are convicted of heinous crimes, doesn't it?

 

I think its more about the fact that dead people can't be exonerated.

If they die of natural causes before being set free, then that sucks, but at least it wasn't premature.

 

It's not a perfect solution, but I find it less disturbing. Living, even in prision, is still better than being executed. And just going by Sam's summary, it seems as if this guy would have had his conviction overturned had he not been executed.

 

Unfortunately not much. If I recall correctly didn't the USSC rule that innocence isn't necessarily a reason to overrule a death penalty as long as due process was carried out?

I like Pouhe's suggestion and that is the most I think that can be done in this case.

 

$25 thousand a year? That's pretty low on the "expected earnings" scale.

"Oh sorry Mrs. Fisher, turns out we wrongly executed your husband for murdering that young woman a few years back. We figure that's worth an apology and $200,000. Hope you feel better!"

 

The criminal justice system could use some Six Sigma.

 

My reply wasn't in opposition to any of Sam's remarks. His post just sparked a thought in my head and I wanted to get an opinion on it. I guess it was more of a question about what we should do instead of the death penalty (considering that life sentences are far from a perfect solution).

 

I've been hearing about this case lately and the most disturbing aspect to me is that there was an overwhelming amount of evidence of his innocence brought forth while he was still alive and the authorities responsible for evaluating his appeal just ignored it. How do people like this (and this ulitmately includes Governor Goodhair) live with themselves?

 

Once you are found guilty by a jury of your peers in this state it is very unlikely you will be set free.

 

I think that the problem with death penalty convictions is that they are brought too often. I think if someone is charged with the death penalty and found innocent after their death, the prosecutor should be tried with murder. They would have their day in court to explain why they chose to ignore exculpatory evidence (if there is any). But the potential litigation would certainly cause them to carefully consider whether to levy such harsh punishment, which is exactly how it should be IMO.

 

Bingo.

They all get to say "I don't hold any blame in this because I was just accepting the opinion of the ones who viewed the case before me."

 

You'd have to be able to meet a pretty high burden of proof. You'd have to be able to prove that the prosecutor maliciously ignored evidence and sought the death penalty when he knew the defendant was innocent.

FWIW, I believe that right now you can bring those charges.

 

I'm against the Death Penalty, but I have heard about this case before and I'll have to read this New Yorker article before I comment fully, but in the mean time what I've read before didn't leave me in a place where I thought this guy was innocent. The multiple stories he gave about how the fire was started. The bit about one of his daughters waking him to alert him to the fire yet she was found in bed. Also the first officer on the scene found him trying to move his car while his daughters were still in the house.