- Joined
- Apr 27, 2007
- Messages
- 69,284
- Reaction score
- 143
What does Matt and sweat have to do with this thread? This thread is about executing 67 years old man.
I was questioning your reasoning about death penalty and legal system...
What does Matt and sweat have to do with this thread? This thread is about executing 67 years old man.
Is there any possibility? Only sane man could call this a possibility.
but does this thread talking about escaped felon, eh?
Jiro, now you are starting to see your own mistake! Its because your just human being like myself, the judge of the law, Prosecutor, DA, jurors, and so on could make mistakes.
um.... what?
my stance has never changed since ever. the use of death penalty should be limited to a more heinous crime... like Richard Matt and David Sweat.
My stance has never changed since ever, no one should be executed UNTIL the system proves to run perfectly. How can you prove that? Really, you can't prove because many of facts or information within judicial system often withheld from the public, often they were sealed in some form. Because of hidden information exists, how could we trust those people doing their job properly?
Did she shoplift or not?
If she pled out, she confessed that she sold it to him. You can't say that the cops forced her to do so if she didn't do it.
Why are you guys confused?
I am totally against the idea of execution, simple as is, nothing more nothing less all due to nature of human beings that could make mistakes. How hard is it to understand this?
I am still confused.No....besides did you miss the part that she did not have her purse it was at home and this is where she stashed the extra meds??
If they have "evidence" against you ...what is a person to do? Keep fighting it and end up going to jail for years or plead out to a lesser crime and go about thwir life....the cop does not care his case is closed....even though it wasn't her that stole it...they did not recover it nor did they even have her purse where she hid it...
Did the cops give false info? Or maybe she lied to you about it? Maybe you are not aware, a best friend can lie.cops says she stashed more in her purse.
I am not confused. You have a right to speak your own mind.Why are you guys confused?
I am totally against the idea of execution, simple as is, nothing more nothing less all due to nature of human beings that could make mistakes. How hard is it to understand this?
I am still confused.
Did the cops give false info? Or maybe she lied to you about it? Maybe you are not aware, a best friend can lie.
I am not confused. You have a right to speak your own mind.
Reba has a very good question for you but you haven't answered it yet.
Would you still complain that innocent people get a lifetime imprisonment instead of death penalty?
OK, that's a good answer. However, if a prosecutor can prove that the right person is a killer, I want him/her dead while you don't.lifetime prison have chance to exonerate and clear one's name, but once executed, its over and we may never know the guilty one still free on street ready to strike. Once executed, case close, there is no turning back.
Lifetime, plenty of chances to prove innocent
Death is final, no more chances, potential ill-fate final mistake if they are innocent.
OK, that's a good answer. However, if a prosecutor can prove that the right person is a killer, I want him/her dead while you don't.
My point is that if a person hears that there's no more death penalty, that person will kill someone and if s/he gets caught, it doesn't matter to him/her because s/he knows that the heart of his/her will still be beating. Do you think that it's fair that the heart of the killer is still beating while the victim's heart is no longer beating?
Remember the Boston bomber? He's found guilty so no death penalty for him? He murdered a little boy!Does not matter, if we allow one, the other case would try follow by saying, hey that previous case allows execution why not this one which leads more arguments. If death penalty remain banned, then there won't be any future argument thus saving legal costs in the long run.
Remember the Boston bomber? He's found guilty so no death penalty for him? He murdered a little boy!
He got death penalty.