Comments on: DEATH PENALTY – The Controversy Continues http://www.thelangreport.com/brain-food/death-penalty-the-controversey-continues/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=death-penalty-the-controversey-continues Sat, 21 May 2011 16:22:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4 By: Bretton http://www.thelangreport.com/brain-food/death-penalty-the-controversey-continues/comment-page-1/#comment-257163 Bretton Tue, 19 Apr 2011 03:53:33 +0000 http://www.thelangreport.com/brain-food/death-penalty-the-controversey-continues/#comment-257163 I totally agree with you. If we believe that their crimes are so bad that they deserve to die then why do they spend so much time on death row where we have to pay to keep them housed. I think that they should just be stuck with the needle and then let it be lights out for them. I totally agree with you. If we believe that their crimes are so bad that they deserve to die then why do they spend so much time on death row where we have to pay to keep them housed. I think that they should just be stuck with the needle and then let it be lights out for them.

]]> By: Brandon Pavlov http://www.thelangreport.com/brain-food/death-penalty-the-controversey-continues/comment-page-1/#comment-196029 Brandon Pavlov Fri, 15 Oct 2010 00:36:06 +0000 http://www.thelangreport.com/brain-food/death-penalty-the-controversey-continues/#comment-196029 Often, the actual death fee dialogue gravitates to the subject of innocents at risk of execution. Seldom is a more common problem reviewed. That is, exactly how innocents tend to be more at risk without the death penalty. To state the blatantly obvious, living murderers, in jail, after release or get away, are more likely to damage and murder, again, compared to are performed murderers. Even though an obvious truism, it is surprising how often people overlook the improved incapacitation advantages of the death penalty more than incarceration. No knowledgeable and honest party questions that the death fee has the most extensive because of process protections in All of us criminal law. Therefore, real innocents are more likely to be sentenced to life imprisonment and more likely to die within prison serving under which sentence, that it is that an real innocent will be executed. Often, the actual death fee dialogue gravitates to the subject of innocents at risk of execution. Seldom is a more common problem reviewed. That is, exactly how innocents tend to be more at risk without the death penalty.

To state the blatantly obvious, living murderers, in jail, after release or get away, are more likely to damage and murder, again, compared to are performed murderers.

Even though an obvious truism, it is surprising how often people overlook the improved incapacitation advantages of the death penalty more than incarceration.

No knowledgeable and honest party questions that the death fee has the most extensive because of process protections in All of us criminal law.

Therefore, real innocents are more likely to be sentenced to life imprisonment and more likely to die within prison serving under which sentence, that it is that an real innocent will be executed.

]]> By: Karen http://www.thelangreport.com/brain-food/death-penalty-the-controversey-continues/comment-page-1/#comment-195726 Karen Tue, 21 Sep 2010 18:36:48 +0000 http://www.thelangreport.com/brain-food/death-penalty-the-controversey-continues/#comment-195726 I feel the death penalty SHOULD be in effect for those people on death row asap. If everything is proven against these people, forget the appeals. And to give them a shot? Forget it! Fry them and give them pain as they have done to their innnocent victims. Why should we, as taxpayers, support them? For the other offenders, such as rapists, neuter them. I am not a violent person at all and don't believe in guns, etc. but some people can't be "fixed." Putting them back into society, I don't believe will help them. I feel the death penalty SHOULD be in effect for those people on death row asap. If everything is proven against these people, forget the appeals. And to give them a shot? Forget it! Fry them and give them pain as they have done to their innnocent victims.
Why should we, as taxpayers, support them?

For the other offenders, such as rapists, neuter them. I am not a violent person at all and don’t believe in guns, etc. but some people can’t be “fixed.” Putting them back into society, I don’t believe will help them.

]]> By: dudley sharp http://www.thelangreport.com/brain-food/death-penalty-the-controversey-continues/comment-page-1/#comment-8495 dudley sharp Mon, 19 Jan 2009 19:30:13 +0000 http://www.thelangreport.com/brain-food/death-penalty-the-controversey-continues/#comment-8495 The Death Penalty Provides More Protection for Innocents Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters, contact info below   Often, the death penalty dialogue gravitates to the subject of innocents at risk of execution. Seldom is a more common problem reviewed. That is, how innocents are more at risk without the death penalty.   To state the blatantly clear, living murderers, in prison, after release or escape,  are much more likely to harm and murder, again, than are executed murderers.   Although an obvious truism, it is surprising how often  folks overlook the enhanced incapacitation benefits of the death penalty over incarceration.   No knowledgeable and honest party questions that the death penalty has the most extensive due process protections in US criminal law.   Therefore, actual innocents are more likely to be sentenced to life imprisonment and more likely to die in prison serving under that sentence, that it is that an actual innocent will be executed.   That is. logically, conclusive.   16 recent studies, inclusive of their defenses, find for death penalty deterrence.   A surprise? No.   Life is preferred over death. Death is feared more than life.   Some believe that all studies with contrary findings negate those 16 studies. They don't. Studies which don't find for deterrence don't say no one is deterred, but that they couldn't measure those deterred.   What prospect of a negative outcome doesn't deter some? There isn't one . . . although committed anti death penalty folk may say the death penalty is the only one.   However, the premier anti death penalty scholar accepts it as a given that the death penalty is a deterrent, but does not believe it to be a greater deterrent than a life sentence. Yet, the evidence is compelling and un refuted that death is feared more than life.   Some death penalty opponents argue against death penalty deterrence, stating that it's a harsher penalty to be locked up without any possibility of getting out.   Reality paints a very different picture.   What percentage of capital murderers seek a plea bargain to a death sentence? Zero or close to it. They prefer long term imprisonment.   What percentage of convicted capital murderers argue for execution in the penalty phase of their capital trial? Zero or close to it. They prefer long term imprisonment.   What percentage of death row inmates waive their appeals and speed up the execution process? Nearly zero. They prefer long term imprisonment.   This is not, even remotely, in dispute.   Life is preferred over death. Death is feared more than life.   Furthermore, history tells us that lifers have many ways to get out: Pardon, commutation, escape, clerical error, change in the law, etc.   In choosing to end the death penalty, or in choosing not implement it, some have chosen to spare murderers at the cost of sacrificing more innocent lives.   Furthermore, possibly we have sentenced 25 actually innocent people to death since 1973, or 0.3% of those so sentenced. Those have all been released upon post conviction review. The anti death penalty claims, that the numbers are significantly higher, are a fraud, easily discoverable by fact checking.   The innocents deception of death penalty opponents has been getting exposure for many years. Even the behemoth of anti death penalty newspapers, The New York Times,  has recognized that deception.   To be sure, 30 or 40 categorically innocent people have been released from death row . . . (1) This when death penalty opponents were claiming the release of 119 "innocents" from death row. Death penalty opponents never required actual innocence in order for cases to be added to their "exonerated" or "innocents" list. They simply invented their own definitions for exonerated and innocent and deceptively shoe horned large numbers of inmates into those definitions - something easily discovered with fact checking.   There is no proof of an innocent executed in the US, at least since 1900.   If we accept that the best predictor of future performance is past performance, we can, reasonably, conclude that the DNA cases will be excluded prior to trial, and that for the next 8000 death sentences, that we will experience a 99.8% accuracy rate in actual guilt convictions. This improved accuracy rate does not include the many additional safeguards that have been added to the system, over and above DNA testing.   Of all the government programs in the world, that put innocents at risk, is there one with a safer record and with greater protections than the US death penalty?   Unlikely.   Full report -All Innocence Issues: The Death Penalty, upon request.   Full report - The Death Penalty as a Deterrent, upon request   (1) The Death of Innocents: A Reasonable Doubt, New York Times Book Review, p 29, 1/23/05, Adam Liptak, national legal correspondent for The NY Times   copyright 2007-2009, Dudley Sharp Permission for distribution of this document, in whole or in part,  is approved with proper attribution.   Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters e-mail sharpjfa@aol.com 713-622-5491, Houston, Texas   Mr. Sharp has appeared on ABC, BBC, CBS, CNN, C-SPAN, FOX, NBC, NPR, PBS, VOA and many other TV and radio networks, on such programs as Nightline, The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, The O'Reilly Factor, etc., has been quoted in newspapers throughout the world and is a published author.   A former opponent of capital punishment, he has written and granted interviews about, testified on and debated the subject of the death penalty, extensively and internationally.   The Death Penalty Provides More Protection for Innocents
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters, contact info below
 
Often, the death penalty dialogue gravitates to the subject of innocents at risk of execution. Seldom is a more common problem reviewed. That is, how innocents are more at risk without the death penalty.
 
To state the blatantly clear, living murderers, in prison, after release or escape,  are much more likely to harm and murder, again, than are executed murderers.
 
Although an obvious truism, it is surprising how often  folks overlook the enhanced incapacitation benefits of the death penalty over incarceration.
 
No knowledgeable and honest party questions that the death penalty has the most extensive due process protections in US criminal law.
 
Therefore, actual innocents are more likely to be sentenced to life imprisonment and more likely to die in prison serving under that sentence, that it is that an actual innocent will be executed.
 
That is. logically, conclusive.
 
16 recent studies, inclusive of their defenses, find for death penalty deterrence.
 
A surprise? No.
 
Life is preferred over death. Death is feared more than life.
 
Some believe that all studies with contrary findings negate those 16 studies. They don’t. Studies which don’t find for deterrence don’t say no one is deterred, but that they couldn’t measure those deterred.
 
What prospect of a negative outcome doesn’t deter some? There isn’t one . . . although committed anti death penalty folk may say the death penalty is the only one.
 
However, the premier anti death penalty scholar accepts it as a given that the death penalty is a deterrent, but does not believe it to be a greater deterrent than a life sentence. Yet, the evidence is compelling and un refuted that death is feared more than life.
 
Some death penalty opponents argue against death penalty deterrence, stating that it’s a harsher penalty to be locked up without any possibility of getting out.
 
Reality paints a very different picture.
 
What percentage of capital murderers seek a plea bargain to a death sentence? Zero or close to it. They prefer long term imprisonment.
 
What percentage of convicted capital murderers argue for execution in the penalty phase of their capital trial? Zero or close to it. They prefer long term imprisonment.
 
What percentage of death row inmates waive their appeals and speed up the execution process? Nearly zero. They prefer long term imprisonment.
 
This is not, even remotely, in dispute.
 
Life is preferred over death. Death is feared more than life.
 
Furthermore, history tells us that lifers have many ways to get out: Pardon, commutation, escape, clerical error, change in the law, etc.
 
In choosing to end the death penalty, or in choosing not implement it, some have chosen to spare murderers at the cost of sacrificing more innocent lives.
 
Furthermore, possibly we have sentenced 25 actually innocent people to death since 1973, or 0.3% of those so sentenced. Those have all been released upon post conviction review. The anti death penalty claims, that the numbers are significantly higher, are a fraud, easily discoverable by fact checking.
 
The innocents deception of death penalty opponents has been getting exposure for many years. Even the behemoth of anti death penalty newspapers, The New York Times,  has recognized that deception.
 
To be sure, 30 or 40 categorically innocent people have been released from death row . . . (1) This when death penalty opponents were claiming the release of 119 “innocents” from death row. Death penalty opponents never required actual innocence in order for cases to be added to their “exonerated” or “innocents” list. They simply invented their own definitions for exonerated and innocent and deceptively shoe horned large numbers of inmates into those definitions – something easily discovered with fact checking.
 
There is no proof of an innocent executed in the US, at least since 1900.
 
If we accept that the best predictor of future performance is past performance, we can, reasonably, conclude that the DNA cases will be excluded prior to trial, and that for the next 8000 death sentences, that we will experience a 99.8% accuracy rate in actual guilt convictions. This improved accuracy rate does not include the many additional safeguards that have been added to the system, over and above DNA testing.
 
Of all the government programs in the world, that put innocents at risk, is there one with a safer record and with greater protections than the US death penalty?
 
Unlikely.
 
Full report -All Innocence Issues: The Death Penalty, upon request.
 
Full report – The Death Penalty as a Deterrent, upon request
 
(1) The Death of Innocents: A Reasonable Doubt,
New York Times Book Review, p 29, 1/23/05, Adam Liptak,
national legal correspondent for The NY Times
 
copyright 2007-2009, Dudley Sharp
Permission for distribution of this document, in whole or in part,  is approved with proper attribution.
 
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters
e-mail sharpjfa@aol.com 713-622-5491,
Houston, Texas
 
Mr. Sharp has appeared on ABC, BBC, CBS, CNN, C-SPAN, FOX, NBC, NPR, PBS, VOA and many other TV and radio networks, on such programs as Nightline, The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, The O’Reilly Factor, etc., has been quoted in newspapers throughout the world and is a published author.
 
A former opponent of capital punishment, he has written and granted interviews about, testified on and debated the subject of the death penalty, extensively and internationally.
 

]]> By: Michael Lang http://www.thelangreport.com/brain-food/death-penalty-the-controversey-continues/comment-page-1/#comment-8461 Michael Lang Mon, 19 Jan 2009 00:41:40 +0000 http://www.thelangreport.com/brain-food/death-penalty-the-controversey-continues/#comment-8461 Bob, thanks for your comment. You raise a very interesting and valid point that I too thought about when the issue of DNA was first raised as a device to free wrongly convicted people. The fact is that where there are people in the process, there is fallibility. And that is with the best of intentions. The answer? We do the best we can and where there is "reasonable doubt"...the accused must go free. Mike Lang Publisher Bob, thanks for your comment. You raise a very interesting and valid point that I too thought about when the issue of DNA was first raised as a device to free wrongly convicted people.
The fact is that where there are people in the process, there is fallibility. And that is with the best of intentions.
The answer?
We do the best we can and where there is “reasonable doubt”…the accused must go free.

Mike Lang
Publisher

]]> By: Bob S http://www.thelangreport.com/brain-food/death-penalty-the-controversey-continues/comment-page-1/#comment-8445 Bob S Sun, 18 Jan 2009 20:17:37 +0000 http://www.thelangreport.com/brain-food/death-penalty-the-controversey-continues/#comment-8445 I work in Dallas Texas as a paralegal. As part of my job responsibilities I do background checks both for felonies and misdemeanors on our clients at the Dallas County clerk's office. Quite often the paper files are "missing" and/or incomplete. A few times I have found material belonging to other cases and other individuals totally unrelated to our clients in our client's files. My question is are the files containing DNA samples from twenty-year old cases kept with more integrity than the paper files? How do we know that the DNA that was collected before anyone knew hot to properly collect and maintain DNA that is now used to exonerate the defendants was the actual DNA belonging to the proper case? It is possible that people are being released because the wrong samples are being tested due to poor record keeping. Also, I am being very kind when critiquing the record keeping of Dallas County misdemeanor and felony cases. I work in Dallas Texas as a paralegal. As part of my job responsibilities I do background checks both for felonies and misdemeanors on our clients at the Dallas County clerk’s office. Quite often the paper files are “missing” and/or incomplete. A few times I have found material belonging to other cases and other individuals totally unrelated to our clients in our client’s files. My question is are the files containing DNA samples from twenty-year old cases kept with more integrity than the paper files? How do we know that the DNA that was collected before anyone knew hot to properly collect and maintain DNA that is now used to exonerate the defendants was the actual DNA belonging to the proper case? It is possible that people are being released because the wrong samples are being tested due to poor record keeping. Also, I am being very kind when critiquing the record keeping of Dallas County misdemeanor and felony cases.

]]>