One more example. Not sure how many more we need.

 

Overzealous prosecutor whose #1 goal was to get a quick, easy conviction. The witness said the killer was white. Said it multiple times. Witnesses was a child whose dad is a white supremacist and told the son that it had to be a "black person." So the kid changed his testimony and then years later said he lied.

 

DNA did not match the accused.

 

Accused's girlfriend said she lied to hurt him for cheating on her.

 

They're hanging on to some comments made by the guy convicted that COULD be construed as him being guilty. YET there's no evidence.

 

Yet they are still pursuing a date to kill this guy.

 

Come on. That's not what we're about.

 

Accused Murderer Awaits Execution While OC Prosecutors Hide Exculpatory DNA | OC Weekly

I agree. We need to move beyond the death penalty in this country. That's coming from somebody who used to support it. I realized that if I was going to be "Pro-Life" against abortion on demand, I needed to be consistent across the board.

Sounds like someone should call the Innocence Project.

I totally support the death penalty. A case that needs revisited because of the stacks of evidence show a faulty verdict doesn't sway that for me. Something needs to change in this case, not the death penalty IMO. Probably not popular, but it's all mine.

I totally support the death penalty. A case that needs revisited because of the stacks of evidence show a faulty verdict doesn't sway that for me. Something needs to change in this case, not the death penalty IMO. Probably not popular, but it's all mine.

 

I couldn't agree more. The death penalty is not the problem in this case. A witness lied on the stand and committed Perjury. Through all the appeals process this should have been caught.

 

I am a firm believer that some people can not be rehabilitated and feel the overflow of America's prison population is due to criminals no longer being concerned with the punishments.

 

I am also pro-life but can see a massive difference in protecting the life of an innocent and taking the life of someone who made their own bed and now has to lie in it.

 

Just my thoughts.

I totally support the death penalty. A case that needs revisited because of the stacks of evidence show a faulty verdict doesn't sway that for me. Something needs to change in this case, not the death penalty IMO. Probably not popular, but it's all mine.

 

My mindset is I'm not willing to kill a person who is "probably" innocent. I'd rather have a bastard who is 1000% guilty LIVE than one innocent person die. If we have to err we err on the side of innocence being protected.

 

Your argument against this?

I couldn't agree more. The death penalty is not the problem in this case. A witness lied on the stand and committed Perjury. Through all the appeals process this should have been caught.

 

I am a firm believer that some people can not be rehabilitated and feel the overflow of America's prison population is due to criminals no longer being concerned with the punishments.

 

I am also pro-life but can see a massive difference in protecting the life of an innocent and taking the life of someone who made their own bed and now has to lie in it.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

Did you read the case? It wasn't just a "witness." It was the damn prosecutor looking for a pelt for the wall. So the problem is NOT the death penalty. The problem is HUMANS and ego.

 

If we had a guaranteed way to eliminate errors then I'd be all for it when there is question. Decades and decades have shown that's not possible.

I don't know exactly where you draw the line @Clyde but guys like the Boston Marathon bomber, Timothy McVey, the Columbine Shooters, Va Tech shooter, and etc. deserve the death penalty.

 

I know those are massive killings versus this case, but these situations are deserving of the death penalty and it would be hard to change my mind on that.

My mindset is I'm not willing to kill a person who is "probably" innocent. I'd rather have a bastard who is 1000% guilty LIVE than one innocent person die. If we have to err we err on the side of innocence being protected.

 

Your argument against this?

 

The English jurist William Blackstone gets credit for the following: "All presumptive evidence of felony should be admitted cautiously; for the law holds it better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent party suffer."

I don't know exactly where you draw the line @Clyde but guys like the Boston Marathon bomber, Timothy McVey, the Columbine Shooters, Va Tech shooter, and etc. deserve the death penalty.

 

I know those are massive killings versus this case, but these situations are deserving of the death penalty and it would be hard to change my mind on that.

 

Yes those cases do.

 

However, how do you write law to allow those obvious cases vs the 1000s of cases like the guy in the article I linked? If you can't then IMO the desire to go "eye for an eye" against the Boston bomber is NOT worth killing an innocent person. I struggle with the logic that says otherwise.

Did you read the case? It wasn't just a "witness." It was the damn prosecutor looking for a pelt for the wall. So the problem is NOT the death penalty. The problem is HUMANS and ego.

 

If we had a guaranteed way to eliminate errors then I'd be all for it when there is question. Decades and decades have shown that's not possible.

I did not read the case and while I always agree that there will be human error, I still feel that the risk of error is worth the reward. Now the prosecutor should be punished for this and I know that does not fix the mistake but there will always be human error. The loss of innocent life is terrible no doubt about it but there is also a loss of innocent life in war so should we give up our morales and standing for what is right?

 

One could argue since there is human error and horrible people in the medical field performing surgery we should discontinue it. There have been many doctors with God complex that have patients lives indangered just for the opportunity to save them.

 

While this is a tragic story it does not change the picture as a whole for me. Not saying I am right just my two cents.

The English jurist William Blackstone gets credit for the following: "All presumptive evidence of felony should be admitted cautiously; for the law holds it better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent party suffer."

 

I just can't imagine how anyone would disagree with that.

I totally support the death penalty. A case that needs revisited because of the stacks of evidence show a faulty verdict doesn't sway that for me. Something needs to change in this case, not the death penalty IMO. Probably not popular, but it's all mine.

 

What are your thoughts on this in regard to "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone?"

Yes those cases do.

 

However, how do you write law to allow those obvious cases vs the 1000s of cases like the guy in the article I linked? If you can't then IMO the desire to go "eye for an eye" against the Boston bomber is NOT worth killing an innocent person. I struggle with the logic that says otherwise.

 

Yeah, definitely with you. I don't know how you do it at all. I'd have a really hard time abolishing the death penalty and it meant those got to live.

 

I don't know how the DNA not matching doesn't end this case right then and there.

John Grisham, The Innocent Man is a good read and these types of situations always reminds me of that.