The Death Penalty

[bornagainjoey]

The division arose over the question of who the first Caliph (i.e. successor) would be. The Shi'ites were those who favoured Ali, whilst the Sunnis favoured Abu Bakr.

The terms 'Shi'ite' and 'Sunni' didn't arise until later, but the division was there, from what was effectively a civil war within the Uofftopich.

 

[tmcblue]

That depends on where you live. In the US, in many states, "life" means "life without parole".



No jury with half a functioning brain cell would put him to death. Why make him a martyr for the cause?

As for my opinions, life is cheaper than death, and the death penalty is a blatant violation of the 8th Amendment to the US Constitution as far as I'm concerned. And it puts us (the US) in absolutely terrible company... Iran, Iraq, China? Yeah, great company to be in. Human Rights violators all around. And yes, I include any state with a death penalty in that category.

 

[TMan]

Amen GC

 

[fuzzy19]

This thread hasn't died yet?

 

[EnglishM]

I agree with the rest of the paragraph but what do you mean by the bit in bold, "life is cheaper than death"?

 

[LuLu_NYGIANTSt]

Sorry, 'bout that. There is research which concludes it's actually cheaper to keep someone in prison for life than to execute them.

 

[vickilyn_rules_u]

Ah right, yeah, I remember hearing something like that too. One in the eye for those people who complain about paying to keep murderers alive.

 

[ginger_jj]

GC, I have read some of the studies that make this point but most state government's budget would not bear this out. For every person charged the state must pay to prosecute, and many times, defend the same individual. For a Capital case the amount of money spent is astronomical and the only ones that make anything are the lawyers. Once the sentence of DEATH is given the appeals never stop until that person is dead. Hence the idea that it is cheaper to sentence them to life. But what the studies fail to show is how often "Life without parole" is appealed and how many more times a convicted person can appeal during a "life" sentence. I can not agree with on a violation of the 8th ammendmant either. Is death by lethal injection cruel or unusual? Is it that they are held on "no bond" before trial? Again, I have been on both sides of this issue and I believe, in rare circumstances, the death by a state is justifiable. The only arguement that I buy for repealing the Death Penalty is that innocent people have been convicted and have died.

 

[edhfv]

I see it as a per se violation of the 8th Amendment. For me personally, the State carrying out an execution is "cruel and unusual punishment", US Supreme rulings be damned.

And, speaking as someone in the system, I would say there are no more or less appeals from life sentences than death. If you're sentenced to a term of life imprisonment, there is no automatic right to an appeal. In PA (and probably other states in the US), there is an automatic right to an appeal by the highest state court when a criminal defendant is sentenced to death. Either way there are appeals, and they don't cost anything except filing fees and transcription records. Hardly bank-breaking enough to say "capital punishment is cheaper than life in prison".

Also, there is a certain point where appeals get cut off. You seem to be under the mistaken assumption that appeals can go on and on and on. That may happen in a select few high-profile cases, but on the average, most appeals don't make it past one or two hearings, and maybe on petition alleging ineffective counsel. For every case that makes it to the US Supreme Court, there are hundreds which never get past two appeals to the state; many Courts refuse to hear more appeals than they grant allocatur for. As for the costs to the lawyers, let's be realistic for a second. Either the defendant is paying out-of-pocket, or s/he gets a court-appointed attorney who doesn't get paid more for doing a death penalty case.

 

[Nickname]

Don't see how you can consider it cruel and unusual for say, Jeffrey Dahmer (sp?) or BTK! Their crimes were more brutal to the victims and the families of the victims then the state's imposition of a death sentence.




When you say your "in the system", do mean encarcerated? Not that it matters but it could she some light on your statements. But, I worked in MD for 8 years in corrections so I know a bit too. No, life does not mean automatic appeals, but you and I both know they happen more often then not. Your statement about the cost of "anything except filing fees and transcription records." is not correct. The states must pay the prosecutors, clerks, judges, and anyone else who is involved with the processing of the appeal! Including a defense attorney if the covicted is indigent. A life sentence allows defendands to file suits for any number of reasons while they are encarcerated. ie; not enough rec time, too hot, too cold, too tough, bad food, violations of 1984 Civil Rights Act. Heck I was sued only because the inmate knew my name.




Appeals can not go on and on, true. They are finite. But, they can go for years and years and years. Especially with one court making a ruling and another overiding it or sending it back down. Defendents paying for their own attorneys can not be added to the cost. The cost is this, the state pays for the DEFENSE and The Prosecution or these cases. Public defenders get paid the same no matter what they do. But a Capital case will have more defense lawyers by it's very nature. Also, after conviction and sentencing, most states spare no expense for Death Penalty appeals to make sure they dot each I and cross each T. In the end, Death means there is an end. The cost for the states is over when carried out. Life means, the cost for that inmate can continue for eons as there is no urgency. Delays, continuances, and the like are common place even for Death Penalty cases (an arguement as to why it is not a deterant).

 

[QueenofHearts]

Doesn't change my opinion.




As an attorney, I think I know what goes into filing an appeal since I've filed a number of them since I began practicing law. You're adding in extra costs that simply don't exist. Those prosecutors, judges, and anyone else involved with the appeal get paid whether a criminal defendant appeals or does not appeal. If, for example, a client chooses not to appeal, I don't lose anything from my salary, the prosecutor doesn't, nor does the judge. We all get paid whether someone appeals or not. Same with the Appellate Courts. They exist whether a defendant chooses to appeal or not. The only extra cost is in filing fees and transcription records, and that isn't all that expensive. Appellate Divisions will exist without homicide cases; we have enough to do with bad searches, odd rulings of law, and cases of first impression to keep appellate attorneys busy whether or not a homicide defendant appeals; appeals don't exist just for homicide cases.

As for all you "little suits", I can tell you from experience that most of them never make it past a judge who denies most of them as a matter of course. And for the record, Section 1984 suits are not appeals. They are civil actions alleging a violation of someone's civil rights. Don't confuse the two. Just because some inmates get sue happy doesn't mean they're exercising their appellate rights, there is a world of difference.



Where to begin?

As I said earlier, the county pays me, an Assistant Public Defender (PA is one of 4 states with a county system instead of a state system), whether Mr. or Ms. Defendant appeals or not. I do not, nor do any of my associates in the US, receive extra pay for handling capital cases, nor do we get paid extra for filing appeals. None of the Appellate Courts or Common Pleas Judges receive extra pay for handling capital cases. We get paid whether our clients appeal or not. In PA, at least, there are only 2 attorneys required to handle a homicide case from the defense end. One for the guilt phase, one for the death phase. As I have repeated ad nauseum, either the defendant is paying for those, or the county/state is paying them a flat salary to do their job. The only extra burden on a homicide attorney is that many states are requiring them to get "death qualified" to guarantee proper representation.

It's very easy to claim that it's an extra cost to appeal because of the workload, but you seem to be confusing the workload with some monetary cost per case, which does not exist. Your arguments to the contrary are simply wrong.

Additionally, you are confusing lawsuit happy inmates with geniuine appellate issues surrounding the finding of death and life which, as noted above, are simply not related.

You have yet to show that any extra cost goes into a death penalty versus life penalty case than the cost associated with me filing an appeal on a bad search. You don't know the intricacies of the system as well as you like to think, and as a result you are confusing two very distinct issues. Hopefully I've explained the difference.

 

[Dianaaa:]]

Until there is a 100% accurate method of determining guilt, an unreversable penalty should not be used.

 

[Poojie]

LOL!

 

[GnarlyCharlie]

Now thats some ownage right there.

 

[QueenC]

You know what? IMO this demonstrates precisely the reason why I think the death penalty is wrong. When people say stuff like that it just demonstrates that they are not in the frame of mind to look at what has happened objectively because they are too caught up in the emotional turmoil of the crime.

I personally think that the best way to keep people safe is not to kill the killers but to find out what it was that lead them to doing it in the first place. This goes for terrorism too IMO. I wonder if the reason that people don't want to do this is largely because they know full well where much of the fault will lie.

 

[LeoLion]

I agree, removing the motivation has got to be preferable to removing the culprit

 

[ProudAussie]

Jonmonk, you believe I am not in a frame of mine ... because I am caught up in the emotional turmoil of the crime? What? I believe I have been objective all along but I do not really care why someone kills! If it is self defense fine case closed; emotional distress, mania, depression, etc. I don't care. If the person was insane and could not distinquish right from wrong I believe in life w/out parole. But if the the person is a sociopath or just plane does not care about what he did to another human being, I have no problem with the Death Penalty. I will let the same people that have been trying "Rehabilitation" in jails and Penitentiaries worry about why. If it was my daughter that was taken, raped, murdered, and buried I would only want to know that the perp would be found sane. To hell with why. I don't care. I don't care because I DO CARE about the victim and those affected. Through out history many people have had the "let us find out why" mentality and that is fine. For that crowd, but I really don't care because they still are no closer to providing reason "WHY" then when we they started. Have changes occured that help, yes.
GangrelChilde is an attorney, a Public Defender, someone that does not get paid nearly what their time is worth. I respect where he comes from. I also know this debate won't change his mind nor will he change mine. He has more facts then I have as I have been outside the system for over 10 years. Gangrel, I believe time spent by you does have a cost. I cede that maybe I am confusing appeals vs. trial. But, if you and your collegues have to spend more time to prepare, file, etc. a capital case, does this not affect the docket? Does this not mean the whole system slows down? Have you tallied the cost in man hours (huge thing to do in business these days)? I may have drifted off my point that it usually costs more to house an inmate then what it costs to pay the correctional officers. Per capita. I may have drifted too far and you do make valid statements.

 

[Frango]

I will be more than happy to concede that there are certainly more manpower hours which go into a capital case than other cases. And there are more manpower hours in a "life" case than a felony, and so on. I just don't want people thinking that because some inmates are sue-happy that the legal system tolerates this stuff.

 

[anonoxford]

Tolerate? NOOOO! But the legal system, because of transgressions the STATE has committed, will entertain lawsuits that have no merit yet go on for years, involve many PDs., etc.

 

[tobyishere]

Look, I wasn't having a go at you personally, I was explaining my POV using what you said as an example. It's a shame you can't tell the difference. Wind your neck in and be sensible.

My point is simple. If you really care about your loved ones and were really worried about them getting raped or murdered, wouldn't it be better to understand the roots of the problem and address those thus preventing the crime in the first place rather than simply killing off murderers after they've already killed your daughter, wife, whatever?