They aren't having to face the same punishment they gave to their victims so I would imagine the are celebrating just like if the governor had given them a reprieve. Too bad they should not see another day longer after their appeals.
We execute people to show them the outcome if the commit a capital crime because we as a society have said such crimes warrant the ultimate punishment.
yep, people don't want to be responsible or killing an innocent man "Twice Wrongly Convicted of Murder - Ray Krone Is Set Free After 10 Years" http://www.forejustice.org/wc/ray_krone_JD_vol2_i9.htm
He wasn't executed. Under our system he had every opportunity to appeal the sentence and have all the evidence reviewed and it was and he has been serving a life sentence he was not on death row. The Judge in his second trial wrote in his ruling doubt about the identity and apparently helped lead the way to his release.
he got lucky, he almost was had republicans got their way and made it easier and faster to kill people on death row, he would have been dead today we have no idea how many innocent people have been executed over the years (State sanctioned murder) the da in that case should have been subject to criminal charges imo
It's not a business, it's the justice system where capital crimes warrant capital punishment. It serves the purpose of ridding us of them as they pay the ultimate price for the ultimate crimes.
Justice is not "lucky" geeezzzzzz. He was doing a life sentence he was not about to be executed, fail.
he was sentenced to death "Ray's conviction in 1992 was primarily based on "expert" testimony that his teeth matched bite marks on Ms. Ancona's breast and throat. After spending four years on Arizona's death row" lucky he was not murdered by the State, obviously not lucky in that he was falsely accused
Said appeals system is part of the reason why we spend millions more on death sentences than life convictions. Some might argue we should get rid of or limit the appeals process, but then surely all those innocent people removed from death row would have been executed. Our options with capital punishment is essentially to spend millions more on an appeals system, or risk executing innocent people, and even with the multi-million dollar appeals system, there is nothing guaranteeing that it will operate flawlessly, and innocent people won't be executed. The fact of the matter is all justice systems are flawed, they are all prone to corruption, and they are all prone to making mistakes. So the question is should an inevitably flawed system be allowed to go through with decisions that cannot be reversed or corrected, that cost us millions more in tax dollar revenue? but on the other hand, it would be more satisfying to execute individuals like the one you mentioned rather than keep them imprisoned for life. The reasons for not executing said individual would have more to do with the expenses and flaws in the system of capitol punishment itself than anything to do with the individual themselves
Off-topic: Wasn't Cayce a fraud? I read a book about him decades ago, and I liked his ideas about meditation and massage therapy for self-healing, but he seems to have been a clever cuckoo in my opinion. https://www.kentuckynewera.com/ep/opinion/article_17d2dda2-a89a-11e7-a21c-8f280b8a0047.html http://skepdic.com/cayce.html He claimed that color blindness resulted from one's behavior during a past life, and that America would build a death ray in 1958 to be used on Atlantis. Among other things. What do they do/have at his research center?
Ahh so now it's cost. If cost a HELL of a lot of money to keep someone in prison for life too. The fact is we have cases such as the one above in which there is NO DOUBT. The one case that Fresh tried to present was a person who was in prison for life and the appeals process did what it was supposed to do in reviewing it. Who do we know for a fact has been wrongfully executed particularly in the last 50 years? And quite frankly the anti-capital punishment sides makes the argument that life imprisonment is worse than a death sentence and execution. Well if that is the case will they be calling for the abolishment of life sentences.
While cost is a factor, I would say the point is we have more to lose than to gain from maintaining capitol punishment. Pragmatically speaking, we are spending more to have people executed than have them imprisoned for life, and innocent people are put on death row (be it by mistake, or by corruption) on a pretty regular basis. Just since the 1970s we have had over 150 people on death row who were ruled to be innocent and freed. On average multiple innocent people are removed from death row every year. With that we can either conclude that unlike the rest of the justice system, the appeals process has worked flawlessly in knowing who is innocent.. or we can conclude that during that time we have probably executed some innocent people. Given the imperfections of the justice system as a whole, the latter unfortunately seems more likely. The problem with the execution is once it is practiced, it cannot be reversed or corrected I used to be in favor of capitol punishment, but then as I learned more I began to question my support, and then over time after hearing arguments from both sides and being a part of the discussions myself on multiple occasions, the arguments against capital punishment seemed more rational than the arguments in favor of capital punishment. Both arguments were repetitive and formulaic, but the ones in favor of capitol punishment were consistently impulsive, and failed to demonstrate a reason based argument. Every argument I heard described a horrific crime, followed by the notion of how the person who committed the crime deserves to die. Usually this was followed by a question asking me if someone did that horrific crime to someone I loved, wouldn't I want to see the person responsible killed? Every time I was asked the question I had the same reply... absolutely I would, I might even want get rid of the restrictions on cruel and unusual punishment, and see that person killed through methods of torture However, in turn their arguments had the opposite intended effect on me, as I began to question if the satisfaction of having bad guys killed was the only reason I had left to support capitol punishment. I then began to question how we distinguish justice from revenge, my conclusion was if the notion is for justice, emotions cannot be the driving factor, the decision must be based in reason. In the end, it was the argument against capitol punishment that seemed more reasonable, and that was how my position on the issue switched.
And now the garbage that ought to be taken out will get to live out the rest of their worthless lives with three hots and a cot. Meanwhile, their victims lie moldering in their graves, their lives cut short by the actions of vermin who should be put down by a society wanting to cleanse itself of the presence of evil. Criminals deserve no sympathy and harsh punishment and the bleeding hearts who wish to defend them deserve little better. To hell with criminals and their defenders/enablers.
the DP is a get out of jail free card, let them be punished in this lifetime for the crimes they committed
Punished with a roof over their heads, free healthcare, three meals a day and a place to sleep. Not really a punishment as far as I'm concerned.
I simply think that some people are too dangerous to be around and it isn't fair to put the people at prison in harms way every day to have to be around them for the rest of the person's natural life. There is already a push to end solitary confinement so what the hell can we do with a sociopathic killer who cannot be kept isolated? As for the appeals in death penalty cases, they almost always boil down to either mental capacity to be executed or ineffective representation by the trial lawyer.
Name an innocent person who was executed? And as I noted in the case I cited, it was beyond ANY doubt. And it's not a matter of cost, it's a matter of justice and that is an entirely reasoned argument.
