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

If a drunk driver kills someone it is terrible .. it shows a lack of pre-thought and judgement. . . .we want them nailed against the wall
but
a prosecution/cops/system - methodically and deliberately move a man to his death . . .we wanna just say . . OOPS MY BAD!

Where is the accountability?

The Legal system . . . Judges/Cops/Prosecutions seem more about CONVICTIONS than living up to the convictions of our society
or . . .loosely translated. . it is more about WINNING than JUSTICE

I think those responsible should be put on trial

Rocket River

 

He claimed that he moved the car because it was full of gasoline. Just so you know, gasoline does not react well to open flames.

 

How about this . . simple. . . at the very least . . . YOU LOSE YOUR JOB
and BANNED FOR LIFE FROM BEING ON THAT SIDE OF THE ISLE

If someone Embezzles. . . he finds it hard to be an accountant again

I won't say they should not be allowed to practice law
but
They should definately not be a prosecutor again.
Same with anyone that was a part of the issue.

I think they too comfortable . .they need to know the HAMMER is out there
and it can fall on them too.

Rocket River

 

It's a lot easier to hold someone accountable for making the decision to drink and drive that leads to someone's death than it is to hold a prosecutor responsible for sending someone to his death. Proving that a cop/prosecutor KNEW that the person they arrested/prosecuted was innocent and ignored that out of some malicious desire to inflict harm is a tough thing to do.

 

No one would ever want to prosecute a case if anytime they got one wrong it meant they were fired.

 

Abolish the death penalty. It's not a viable deterrent. It's not applied equally on a racial/economic basis. It's blood for blood.

As for Cameron Todd Willingham, it's too late for him. But what can be done as a consequence is to take a long hard look at a system that can execute an innocent man without so much as blinking an eye. If you support the death penalty in TX, you have this man's blood on your hands.

 

I think Rocket River is suggesting this happens only in the event someone is wrongly executed.

But even if he's not, most of these wrongful conviction stories include a prosecutor/law enforcement officer who was notified of exculpatory evidence and either withheld it from the defense or never even bothered to investigate it. That's inexcusable - the moment new evidence is discovered, it should be thoroughly investigated by both sides. Failing to do this should be considered a fireable offense.

Of course, the best way to prevent this is for citizens to immediately vote out any DA whose office is found to have wrongfully convicted and executed a defendant. Unfortunately, most people don't pay attention to DA elections unless the candidate is caught in an affair or using a racial epithet. Maybe the best way would be to pass a statute that required the immediate removal of said DA. But I doubt that would ever get passed.

 

Enough already. Get rid of the death penalty.

 

Have you guys read the articles on Sharon Keller? Talk about ridiculous...even more so considering she keeps getting voted back into offfice.

Here is the latest from Texas Monthly...

http://www.texasmonthly.com/2009-08-01/feature2.php

 

That seems either too broad or too narrow an accusation.

 

Bravo to you sir. Your sarcasm is biting and your wit is sharp.

 

Agreed.

 

I am not against the death penalty, but I would agree that unless guilt could be established beyond any doubt (reasonable doubt is not sufficient), then death penalty should never be applied. So short of overwhelming DNA evidence and other circumstantial evidence, and until all alternative theories or challenges have been addressed, the death penalty should not be an option.

 

I am sorry, but as long as there are people willing to take the lives of others in cold blood, the death penalty should absolutely stand, but heavily modified in its application.

 

Exactly. . . it is one thing to burn a burger
another thing to burn down the fricking store!

Rocket River
or even give an old woman 3rd degree burns with the HOT COFFEE

 

sounds like it's less than 100% sure that this man was innocent.

That said, I feel no one should be executed on circumstantial and hearsay evidence, and anyone that is not 100% clearly guilty should not be eligible. Sounds like this guy shouldn't have been on death row to me.

Problem is... "reasonable" doubt. How many people do you know that agree with you entirely on what is "reasonable" on anything? It is subject to interpretation more often than not (always?) and thus while I do support the death penalty in certain cases, this certainly doesn't seem to have been one of them.

Lastly, thread title is a bit inflammatory and egregious, given that no one really knows if he was or wasn't innocent. Yes, I know how it looks, but again, I don't think with this case he should have been there to begin with either. The gas thing is just stupid... if you have a house burning with your children in it, you don't move the car first. Yes, I know gasoline is flammable. Does that make him guilty? no. Does it seem suspicious? As a father, I would say very much so.

 

Like others, I'm not philosophically or morally opposed to the death penalty in theory. In actuality, I am very much opposed because of the inadequacies and unfairness of the way it is implemented... not just in Texas, but across the country. If you commit a heinous crime on one side of a state line, you could get death but if you do it 5 feet away on the other side of the state line, all you can get is life. Plus all the legal representation/money/race issues.

Anyway, on reasonable doubt... it seems to me that we have had a rather profound shift over the last 50 years in how we define reasonable doubt. I think too many people now test reasonable doubt against Hollywood plot creations. In other words, folks evaluate the facts against the movies they've seen and the novels they've read without stopping to consider that many of those plot twists are impossible or incredibly improbable. This raises the bar much higher than it ever was before and consequently, I think it makes it much tougher for anyone railroaded into a trial. In the movies it is possible that the guy spent years studying how to tamper with brakes without leaving traces and waited until the right time to cash in on the enormous life insurance policy he just took out on his wife so he could elope with his sister-in-law, who was also in on the plan to exact revenge on Mom and Dad for favoring her sister, so therefore he is guilty.

 

I think BANISHMENT should be the Option.
You convicted.
We pop a chip into you. [tracking]
You got 2 weeks to find a country to take you.
Beyond that . . .we put ya on a boat and push . . .
you come back . . you can be shot dead on site
you are PERSONA NON GRATA!!

better than Death Penalty

Rocket River

 

Didn't the British do that with Australia?