At what point do we need to re-evaluate the death penalty in Texas?

If we had a perfect justice system then yes we should keep the death penalty.

Do we have a perfect justice system?

 

I don't agree with this logic. So locking people up for their entire lives despite an imperfect justice system is ok? The innocent man in prison is whole life is somehow an "acceptable" loss?

I have no issue with the death penalty. I have issues with our perturbingly unfair and misguided justice system. The two are not linked, nor should they be.

 

If exculpatory evidence comes out later that the person was innocent then you can remedy the situation. You can't do that if you have executed the person.

They are inextricably linked if you acknowledge that the Justice system is flawed yet are willing to determine life and death with it.

 

The exculpatory evidence was available when the man in this article was still alive, but it wasn't allowed because it was not "new." I think there are credible arguments of fairness to be applied to the question of the death penalty, but I don't think this man's case is the best example. He could have remained in jail for the next 100 years and the work of this PI would not see the inside of a courtroom. Executing him didn't cut his options short.

 

There's no such thing as a perfect system. There's a percentage of failure in everything. No matter how much you change a crime lab or the court systems, there will always be a possibility of a mistake.


What are your priorities? Is the need for revenge so important that there's an acceptable rate of failure you are comfortable with (failure being the execution of an innocent person)? Are you ok with 1 in 1000? 1 in 10,000? 1 in 100,000? 1 in 1,000,000,000?

To me, when you are talking about your state killing people in your name and with your tax dollars, they have to be right 100% of the time. But like I said, 100% is an impossibility.

 

The death penalty is vengeance, not justice.

 

I hardly consider letting someone out after 30 odd years of jailtime a remedy. If you mean compensation, then it's really more of a penance for the state, and that can still take place via relatives of the executed.

The justice system will always be flawed. The punishments are not. They just are. Again, I could just as easily substitute jail time, bail, or even humiliation in place of the "life and death" within you statement. All of those would be unfair. The punishment is neutral and separate.

 

Ergo, I accept it and move on. I think some people deserve death as punishment so I fail to draw any distinction between an unfair stint in jail and an unfair execution.

A better argument for you to use would be arguing that said unfairness is deliberate and vindictive. I have a hard time with that one.

 

it makes us feel better.

 

How can you defend the guy being alive on the streets? The guy was twice arrested on major cocaine trading charges and both times let go early, then he was selling cocaine again and whether or not he acted in self defense 2 people are dead and this guy pulled the trigger after his 3rd time selling cocaine. I mean I'm all for second chances as much as the next guy but this guy had 3 chances to change his life and yet everytime he reverted to selling cocaine. That alone should warrant a death penalty, he's a threat to people everywhere selling that stuff and yes he was very unproductive in his time on earth so either way the world didn't exactly lose mother theresa last night. Seriously go to chron.com and read their article it gives details on his earlier charges and this guy should have been thanking his lucky stars to even be back on the street but instead he decided to go back to his old ways. Case closed, the taxpayers win this one.

 

Uhhh spending anytime in prison takes it beyond remedy.

 

Tell that to the dead guy.

 

Why? Errors are a reality of an imperfect system - but that doesn't mean we don't try to correct them as best we can. Why eliminate that possibility - what is the benefit of it?

I'd guess if you ask the innocent person stuck on death row, they'd consider getting out more of a remedy than getting executed and the state saying "oops".

 

So selling cocaine is now worthy of the death penalty?

 

I really have a problem with it because of this...because of human error inherent in any human system. In any group of humans at all.

Also the whole, "you executed my Lord" thing kinda leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

 

The "benefit" (I don't think that is a good word - "rationale" might be better) is that some crimes deserve death. If you want to "correct" something, correct the bad trials. What you're advocating is just a compensation for them. I think that's the wrong way to go about it.

And the argument that the death penalty somehow prevents or eliminated corrections is disengenuous. There are a lot of appeals, and it takes a loooooong time to actually be scheduled for execution.

 

Premeditated murder should always bring the death penalty.

 

I'm sure its a relief to relatives that they can get compensation if their relatives are wrongfully executed.

What you are missing though is that true anytime a punishment is given to someone wrongfully convicted, whether it be a speeding ticket or murder, it is unfair but given that the point of a criminal system isn't just punishment but public safety. You are arguing an absolute that all punishments are essentially equal just that the process is flawed so either we do away with all punishments since the process is flawed or that we have to accept all punishments even though the process is flawed. All punishements are not equal in the severity or in how they are remedied. So while an injustice was done to Reuben Carter and he spent 20 years in jail that is still better than if he had been executed after 19 years.

 

It did since as long as he was alive there were still further legal options to be pursued. For instance in the case of Reuben Carter there was exculpatory evidence that was covered up. It took decades for that to come out but it eventually did.

 

If you have a good way to correct the bad trials, please share. Given that we can't really do that, then we're left at looking other alternatives. Do we come up with a solution that could at least partially help, or just say "oh who cares"?

Our judicial system is generally designed to err on the side of caution in terms of the type of proof we try to require, the technicalities we require cops and prosecutors to adhere to, etc. The death penalty is one major piece of the judicial system that seems to not put a lot of value on that.

And yet we're still finding numerous mistakes in the late stages of the appeals process - and since we generally don't keep pursuing cases after the execution, it's impossible to know how many more never got corrected.