Tookie Williams (Page 5)
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller | Reply |
|
![]() ![]() |
Giver ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() ChuckyFinster - 2005-12-13 1:57 PM His message would be a bit more palatable if he admitted what he did. Playing devil's advocate, and admittedly not knowing much about the facts of the evidence implicating him...what if he didn't do it? |
|
![]() ![]() |
Coach ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() The fact that Tookie did some good behind bars, more good than he's doing now that he's dead? I am sure the families of the victims were VERY happy to hear that Tookie reconsidered his ways and learned to differentiate between what’s right and what’s wrong after murdering their beloved ones… |
![]() ![]() |
Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() run4yrlif - 2005-12-13 12:36 PM ASA22 - 2005-12-13 1:31 PM The only thing I would urge all of you when reading about the facts of a particular case, please try to remember who is giving you those facts. I have seen the anti-death penalty side really bend the facts of the case. I urge you all, if you are truely interested in a case, to seek out the actual trial transcript. Attempt to get the full picture of what went on at the trial court level. So that's always good advice, but I'd be curious to hear what facts you think we're bending? The fact that life in prison isn't an easy one? The fact that it costs a bunch more money to execute a prisoner? The fact that we're morally convicted in our belief? The fact that Tookie did some good behind bars, more good than he's doing now that he's dead? Sorry I wasn't clear. I was addressing Coredump's recitation of facts of certain cases that have been overturned. |
![]() ![]() |
Giver ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() I'm sure they could give a rat's @ss about what he did behind bars. That's not my point, though. amiine - 2005-12-13 2:02 PM The fact that Tookie did some good behind bars, more good than he's doing now that he's dead?
I am sure the families of the victims were VERY happy to hear that Tookie reconsidered his ways and learned to differentiate between what’s right and what’s wrong after murdering their beloved ones… |
![]() ![]() |
Giver ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() ASA22 - 2005-12-13 2:03 PM Sorry I wasn't clear. I was addressing Coredump's recitation of facts of certain cases that have been overturned. Fair enough. But let's look at the first example: Joseph Burrows Illinois Conviction 1989 Released 1994No physical evidence linked Burrows to the murder of William Dulin.The prosecution's two chief witnesses recanted their testimony againstMr. Burrows, and one of them confessed to the murder for which Burrowshad been sent to death row. One of the witnesses said he had been coercedby prosecutors and police. Burrows was released in September, 1994, andthe Illinois appellate courts have upheld the overturning of his conviction. So two witnesses recanted their testimony, and one confessed to the crime he was convicted of. Anyone want to venture how the facts in that example were bent? |
![]() ![]() |
Champion ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() ChuckyFinster - 2005-12-13 12:04 PM possum - 2005-12-13 6:45 AM I don;t expect to find a criminal like Tookie out on the street. There is plenty of them out there, they just aren't hanging around Madison, WI. Watts and Compton, make a field trip out of it. um, that's kind of snotty. A) what I meant was just bc I (didn't) want him executed doesn;t mean I want him paroled or released B) I didn;t know that living in this city gives me less of a right to express my opinion, and C) even if it did, I have lived in Madison 2 short years. Lived in SE Washington DC, smack dab in the hood for 5, and before that, in Roxbury, smack dab in the hood, in Boston. Not that it has a THING to do with my values, and not I need to defend myself, but you made it personal. |
|
![]() ![]() |
Science Nerd ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() ChuckyFinster - 2005-12-13 12:04 PMThere is plenty of them out there, they just aren't hanging around Madison, WI. Watts and Compton, make a field trip out of it. News to me that there aren't criminals in Madison. There are plenty of places I wouldn't want to be in Madison at night (like Badger road). Also, my friend had the windshield of his car shot out in the parking lot outside his apartment while some people got in an argument. There's crime everywhere. Not just in Watts and Compton. |
![]() ![]() |
Elite![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() In any war there will be casualties on both sides. How much research was done to build the list that Coredump provided? How hard was it for ASA to build his list? Remember, ASA is one attorney and he is listing off cases from his own experience. How many ASA's are there? Coredump on the other hand produced a list that some anti-death penalty advocate searched far and wide to build - and yet they were all let off on appeals. I have no problems removing the death penalty if criminals were put into forced labor camps and paid for their own food, clothes, and housing and were not a danger to the guards. Next time I drink a 40, I'll tip one for Tookie. |
![]() ![]() |
Elite![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Artemis - 2005-12-13 10:14 AM ChuckyFinster - 2005-12-13 12:04 PMThere is plenty of them out there, they just aren't hanging around Madison, WI. Watts and Compton, make a field trip out of it. News to me that there aren't criminals in Madison. There are plenty of places I wouldn't want to be in Madison at night (like Badger road). Also, my friend had the windshield of his car shot out in the parking lot outside his apartment while some people got in an argument. There's crime everywhere. Not just in Watts and Compton. bhahahahaha, sorry, you had me there, for a second I thought you were serious - comparing Madison to Compton. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() Opus - 2005-12-13 10:56 AM crusevegas - 2005-12-13 1:45 PM When you are a convicted criminal, you lose certain right, the ability to interact with the outside world should be one of them. So, does that mean there is no such thing as rehabilitation? I'm asking in all seriousness, because it is supposed to be one of the cornerstones of western justice systems. Or do you mean just people convicted of capital crimes? I am primarily referring to Capital cases where the criminal is either on death row or life in prison. I am all about keeping the costs down and the criminals out of sight and out of mind. If they are going to spend the rest of their life in prison, I fail to see how them becoming “rehabilated” means anything to anyone but themselves. Maybe they can find Christ in their solitude. Also, all this talk about how easy life is in prison makes me wonder why there is so much talk on tv and elsewhere about prison rape. It sounds like the rule (if not an implicit part of doing hard time), not the exception, and that doesn't sound to cushy to me. There is a guy up here in Canada, David Milgaard, who was convicted of murder and served around 22 years in prison until his conviction was overturned. He said he was raped incessantly. I wonder if having 3 squares, cable tv and a comfortable bed made that experience tolerable for him. I see no reason that any prisoner should have television, it is a privilege not any kind of right. Exercise equipment again is no right, they can do calisthenics in their cell or isometric exercises, yoga or a number of other things for their physical health. Regarding prison rape, I think the system should do more to protect prisoners, form each other. Again more solitude would assist in that. I don’t why you said that I mentioned they have an easy or cushy life, I just think it should be with fewer costly amenities and less access to the outside world. That seems to be a common political tactic, trying to put words in other people’s mouth that they didn’t say. I never said that I thought being in prison was easy, I just stated that I feel it should have fewer privileges and less access to the outside world. I think that more people, myself included would consider abolishing the death penalty, if they had fewer privileges, including access to the outside world. |
![]() ![]() |
Elite![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() sorry possum, it was snotty of me. |
|
![]() ![]() |
Pro ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() I didn't realize we were declaring war on our own citizens Chucky, or that there were "acceptable casualties" in that war. To clarify your statement, you are okay with the idea that our current system can allow us to kill an innocent person? You have no qualms about doing so? I think you scare me more than Tookie. -C |
![]() ![]() |
Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() run4yrlif - 2005-12-13 1:08 PM ASA22 - 2005-12-13 2:03 PM Sorry I wasn't clear. I was addressing Coredump's recitation of facts of certain cases that have been overturned. Fair enough. But let's look at the first example: Joseph Burrows Illinois Conviction 1989 Released 1994No physical evidence linked Burrows to the murder of William Dulin.The prosecution's two chief witnesses recanted their testimony againstMr. Burrows, and one of them confessed to the murder for which Burrowshad been sent to death row. One of the witnesses said he had been coercedby prosecutors and police. Burrows was released in September, 1994, andthe Illinois appellate courts have upheld the overturning of his conviction. So two witnesses recanted their testimony, and one confessed to the crime he was convicted of. Anyone want to venture how the facts in that example were bent? 1) No physical evidence? I doubt it. I'd love to see the trial evidence list. So there were no autopsie photos, no crime scene photos. nothing? I seriously doubt it. Those are physical evidence! 2) Attention people of the U.S. there is no legal requirment that there be physical evidence to convict!!!!! All evidence is judged by the same standard, the standard for weighing the credibility of evidence is the same for physical and testimonial. 3) There is no legal difference between testimonial evidence and physical evidence. 4) What physical evidence are you expecting given the specifics of the case? Here's an example, if I shoot the victim from long range, I dispose of the gun, but an eye witness sees me committ the shooting. Let's assume I am aprehended 10 days after the crime. What physical evidence would there be? 5) CSI is a TV show people. Most of what you see is total crap!!!!!! 6) I don't have an answer for the recantation. It happens often. Some recantations are valid, some are BS. Believe it or not, some criminals that are incarcerated for a long period of time make up stories of police and prosecutorial misconduct in an attempt to get their own convictions over turned or to try to strike a deal for a reduction in their sentence. All Gasp in shock. believe it or not the guy doing life for a rape has nothing to loose by lying. ( I don't know the specifics of this case, I'm just speaking from actual first hand personal experience) I've even seen people confess to murders they didn't committ. I've seen this occurr, that the person that confessed to the crime was serving a life sentence and confessed with the specific agreement that the Government would not seek the death penalty. I know it happens, we had a guy confess to a murder and we were able to conclusively show that he wasn't even in the State at the time of the murder he confessed to. 7) What is meant by "coerced by prosecutors and police"? Did the guy have pending felony charges and they offered him a plea for his testimony? Did they threaten him somehow? Again, I've been accused of threatening a witness and a defendant, when all I did was offer them a deal in exchange for their testimony. So without knowing the specifics of what the coercion was I'm not willing to conceed anything. And the term "coercion" is nebulus without knowing the specific facts. 8) It is typical for murder cases, to take 2-3 years before they reach the initial trial. Most of the delays is artibutable to the DEFENDANT!!!! It is very seldom the Government that is asking for the continuances in a Capital Case. It is the Defense delaying the initial trial. However, anti-death penalty advocates never relay this little bit of reality when they give dates. The implication is "look how long it took, and how long this poor man/woman suffered" 9) Looks like the system ultimately worked. The conviction was overturned. (Of course from this synopsis the clear implication is that the conviction was overturned due to some form of misconduct, but that is only an implication. The case may have been over turned for another reason. Without the benefit of the actual opinion it is impossible for me to say.) |
![]() ![]() |
Pro ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() ChuckyFinster - 2005-12-13 12:27 PMsorry possum, it was snotty of me. Ad hominem's are a dumb debate tactic. ![]() -C |
![]() ![]() |
![]() run4yrlif - 2005-12-13 11:04 AM I'm sure they could give a rat's @ss about what he did behind bars. That's not my point, though. amiine - 2005-12-13 2:02 PM The fact that Tookie did some good behind bars, more good than he's doing now that he's dead?
I am sure the families of the victims were VERY happy to hear that Tookie reconsidered his ways and learned to differentiate between what’s right and what’s wrong after murdering their beloved ones… One of the things after looking at all of your posts is obvious to me. You don't give a Rat's A@@ about he victims, their families or how they fell about having to hear about what a wonderful person Tookie is. |
![]() ![]() |
Giver ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() ASA22 - 2005-12-13 2:31 PM 1) No physical evidence? I doubt it. I'd love to see the trial evidence list. So there were no autopsie photos, no crime scene photos. nothing? I seriously doubt it. Those are physical evidence! Of course there's physical evidence. If there's a body, there's physical evidence. What is implied is physical evidence linking the person to the crime. 2) Attention people of the U.S. there is no legal requirment that there be physical evidence to convict!!!!! All evidence is judged by the same standard, the standard for weighing the credibility of evidence is the same for physical and testimonial. Not true. All evidence is not judged by the same standard. It's the jury's call, but I'd venture to say that DNA evidence carries more weight in their minds than circumstantial, he-said she-said evidence. 3) There is no legal difference between testimonial evidence and physical evidence. True, but juries decide how to view the evidence. And if you've got a guy on the stand ratting his buddy out to avoid prosecution himself, well, I think that evidence wouldn't carry as much weight as say, GSR on the accused's hands. 4) What physical evidence are you expecting given the specifics of the case? Here's an example, if I shoot the victim from long range, I dispose of the gun, but an eye witness sees me committ the shooting. Let's assume I am aprehended 10 days after the crime. What physical evidence would there be? Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. 5) CSI is a TV show people. Most of what you see is total crap!!!!!! The only thing that is crap is the timeline and neatness in which cases are wrapped up. The forensics and police work are, I think, pretty accurate. 6) I don't have an answer for the recantation. What about, in this case, the guy that CONFESSED? It happens often. Some recantations are valid, some are BS. Believe it or not, some criminals that are incarcerated for a long period of time make up stories of police and prosecutorial misconduct in an attempt to get their own convictions over turned or to try to strike a deal for a reduction in their sentence. All Gasp in shock. believe it or not the guy doing life for a rape has nothing to loose by lying. ( I don't know the specifics of this case, I'm just speaking from actual first hand personal experience) I've even seen people confess to murders they didn't committ. I've seen this occurr, that the person that confessed to the crime was serving a life sentence and confessed with the specific agreement that the Government would not seek the death penalty. I know it happens, we had a guy confess to a murder and we were able to conclusively show that he wasn't even in the State at the time of the murder he confessed to. 7) What is meant by "coerced by prosecutors and police"? Did the guy have pending felony charges and they offered him a plea for his testimony? Did they threaten him somehow? Again, I've been accused of threatening a witness and a defendant, when all I did was offer them a deal in exchange for their testimony. So without knowing the specifics of what the coercion was I'm not willing to conceed anything. And the term "coercion" is nebulus without knowing the specific facts. 8) It is typical for murder cases, to take 2-3 years before they reach the initial trial. Most of the delays is artibutable to the DEFENDANT!!!! It is very seldom the Government that is asking for the continuances in a Capital Case. It is the Defense delaying the initial trial. However, anti-death penalty advocates never relay this little bit of reality when they give dates. The implication is "look how long it took, and how long this poor man/woman suffered" 9) Looks like the system ultimately worked. The conviction was overturned. (Of course from this synopsis the clear implication is that the conviction was overturned due to some form of misconduct, but that is only an implication. The case may have been over turned for another reason. Without the benefit of the actual opinion it is impossible for me to say.) |
|
![]() ![]() |
Science Nerd ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() ChuckyFinster - 2005-12-13 2:24 PM bhahahahaha, sorry, you had me there, for a second I thought you were serious - comparing Madison to Compton. When did I compare the two? You said that "they [criminals] just aren't hanging around Madison, WI". I said there are criminals there, not just in Compton. I didn't say there were as many or that crime is as bad, but there is certainly crime. That's all. Edited by Artemis 2005-12-13 1:39 PM |
![]() ![]() |
![]() coredump - 2005-12-13 11:30 AM I didn't realize we were declaring war on our own citizens Chucky, or that there were "acceptable casualties" in that war. To clarify your statement, you are okay with the idea that our current system can allow us to kill an innocent person? You have no qualms about doing so? I think you scare me more than Tookie. -C Now, everyone is more of a threat than Tookie. But, that was just plain mean. |
![]() ![]() |
Giver ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() crusevegas - 2005-12-13 2:32 PM One of the things after looking at all of your posts is obvious to me. You don't give a Rat's A@@ about he victims, their families or how they fell about having to hear about what a wonderful person Tookie is. You know what? If you knew anything about me you'd know that wasn't true. It pains me to no end that people lose loved ones. I'm a father of a 5 year old girl. I'd be in human not to. I've asked myself before how I would feel if something happened to her, and I can honestly say that I would probably want whoever did anything to hurt her dead of a horrible death. But I don't like that part of me. It's not Christian, and it's not who I am. It's an animalistic, primitive reaction, and I strive to be better than that. I believe if we kill the killers, then we're no better than they are. And I seriously want to be better than that. I know this is a sensitive topic, and one fraught with emotion. But if we can't have the argument without personal attacks, then I want no part of it. So cut it out, please.
|
![]() ![]() |
Pro![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() crusevegas - 2005-12-13 2:26 PM I don’t why you said that I mentioned they have an easy or cushy life, I just think it should be with fewer costly amenities and less access to the outside world. That seems to be a common political tactic, trying to put words in other people’s mouth that they didn’t say. I never said that I thought being in prison was easy, I just stated that I feel it should have fewer privileges and less access to the outside world. It wasn't my intention to put words in your mouth, or to use some kind of political tactic on you. Other posts mentioned meals and cable tv, internet etc. as well. It was a general comment which was why I said, "All this talk..". It is true, though, that I inferred from your post and others that complaints about amenities revolved around the prisoners' lives being too easy. I see that, in your case, I was wrong. Sorry. I understand your position better now, I think. |
![]() ![]() |
Elite![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() coredump - 2005-12-13 10:32 AM ChuckyFinster - 2005-12-13 12:27 PMsorry possum, it was snotty of me. Ad hominem's are a dumb debate tactic. ![]() -C It was a genuine apology. |
|
![]() ![]() |
Expert ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Taking of another human life is wrong. Period. While it is justifiable in cases of self-defense, it's still wrong. Just because a society has determined that a certain type of killing is right (and for me, this means euthanasia, suicide, abortion, capital punishment) doesn't mean it is. [I allow that I have never been in the circumstances which have required me to personally deal with these issues, and I appreciate that it is possible that if I had, I may have a different opinion. I believe that society in general has a disregard for the value of human life.] Edited for clarification: I also think the penal system is seriously messed up. There has GOT to be a way to remove criminals from society, and the associated privileges like TV, etc, and to eliminate the horrible things that happen in prison, such as rapes, etc. Personally, I don't know what that way is. Edited by Rennick 2005-12-13 1:53 PM |
![]() ![]() |
![]() run4yrlif - 2005-12-13 11:45 AM crusevegas - 2005-12-13 2:32 PM One of the things after looking at all of your posts is obvious to me. You don't give a Rat's A@@ about he victims, their families or how they fell about having to hear about what a wonderful person Tookie is. You know what? If you knew anything about me you'd know that wasn't true. It pains me to no end that people lose loved ones. I'm a father of a 5 year old girl. I'd be in human not to. I've asked myself before how I would feel if something happened to her, and I can honestly say that I would probably want whoever did anything to hurt her dead of a horrible death. But I don't like that part of me. It's not Christian, and it's not who I am. It's an animalistic, primitive reaction, and I strive to be better than that. I believe if we kill the killers, then we're no better than they are. And I seriously want to be better than that. I know this is a sensitive topic, and one fraught with emotion. But if we can't have the argument without personal attacks, then I want no part of it. So cut it out, please.
Your right I don't know you. I am basing and standing by my statement solely on what I have seen you share on this topic. I have seen many of your posts in the past, and yes some are worth paying for. On this subject however, you come across as completely unsympathetic to the victims and or their families. You actually think, don't you, that Tookie being allowed to become a celebrity author is a good thing with no consideration for the families of his victims? If you don't you should go back and re-read some of your own posts.. Tell me why should he or any other convicted criminal be allowed to benefit from publishing a book in prison? |
![]() ![]() |
Pro ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() ASA22 - 2005-12-13 12:31 PM run4yrlif - 2005-12-13 1:08 PM 1) No physical evidence? I doubt it. I'd love to see the trial evidence list. So there were no autopsie photos, no crime scene photos. nothing? I seriously doubt it. Those are physical evidence!ASA22 - 2005-12-13 2:03 PM Sorry I wasn't clear. I was addressing Coredump's recitation of facts of certain cases that have been overturned. Fair enough. But let's look at the first example: Joseph Burrows Illinois Conviction 1989 Released 1994No physical evidence linked Burrows to the murder of William Dulin.The prosecution's two chief witnesses recanted their testimony againstMr. Burrows, and one of them confessed to the murder for which Burrowshad been sent to death row. One of the witnesses said he had been coercedby prosecutors and police. Burrows was released in September, 1994, andthe Illinois appellate courts have upheld the overturning of his conviction. So two witnesses recanted their testimony, and one confessed to the crime he was convicted of. Anyone want to venture how the facts in that example were bent? None that linked the accused to the scene. IE, no fibers from his clothes, no bloody fingerprints, etc. Rather to the contrary, blood was found at the scene, but was not his. And the murder weapon was recovered, and was also not his. 2) Attention people of the U.S. there is no legal requirment that there be physical evidence to convict!!!!! Yep, and I find it scary that a person's life can be taken without it. 3) There is no legal difference between testimonial evidence and physical evidence.4) What physical evidence are you expecting given the specifics of the case? Here's an example, if I shoot the victim from long range, I dispose of the gun, but an eye witness sees me committ the shooting. Let's assume I am aprehended 10 days after the crime. What physical evidence would there be? Let's assume that I shot them as you describe, but I testify that I saw you do it. Now what? 5) CSI is a TV show people. Most of what you see is total crap!!!!!!6) I don't have an answer for the recantation. It happens often. Some recantations are valid, some are BS. Believe it or not, some criminals that are incarcerated for a long period of time make up stories of police and prosecutorial misconduct in an attempt to get their own convictions over turned or to try to strike a deal for a reduction in their sentence. All Gasp in shock. believe it or not the guy doing life for a rape has nothing to loose by lying. ( I don't know the specifics of this case, I'm just speaking from actual first hand personal experience) I've even seen people confess to murders they didn't committ. I've seen this occurr, that the person that confessed to the crime was serving a life sentence and confessed with the specific agreement that the Government would not seek the death penalty. I know it happens, we had a guy confess to a murder and we were able to conclusively show that he wasn't even in the State at the time of the murder he confessed to. The specific cases in Illinois is pretty well documented, and was not "made up". 7) What is meant by "coerced by prosecutors and police"? Did the guy have pending felony charges and they offered him a plea for his testimony? Did they threaten him somehow? Yes to both, see the Rolando Cruz case. Again, I've been accused of threatening a witness and a defendant, when all I did was offer them a deal in exchange for their testimony. So without knowing the specifics of what the coercion was I'm not willing to conceed anything. And the term "coercion" is nebulus without knowing the specific facts. In my opinion, *any* such testimony is tainted. 8) It is typical for murder cases, to take 2-3 years before they reach the initial trial. Most of the delays is artibutable to the DEFENDANT!!!! It is very seldom the Government that is asking for the continuances in a Capital Case. It is the Defense delaying the initial trial. However, anti-death penalty advocates never relay this little bit of reality when they give dates. The implication is "look how long it took, and how long this poor man/woman suffered" If anything, I think they should move slower, not faster. Someones life is not a decision to rush. 9) Looks like the system ultimately worked. The conviction was overturned. (Of course from this synopsis the clear implication is that the conviction was overturned due to some form of misconduct, but that is only an implication. The case may have been over turned for another reason. Without the benefit of the actual opinion it is impossible for me to say.) We must have different opinions of "worked". The opinions and history of the cases I quoted is easily discovered with a quick google search. http://www.law.northwestern.edu/depts/clinic/wrongful/exonerations/cruz.htm http://www.law.northwestern.edu/depts/clinic/wrongful/exonerations/burrows.htm -C |
![]() ![]() |
Elite![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() coredump - 2005-12-13 10:30 AM I didn't realize we were declaring war on our own citizens Chucky, or that there were "acceptable casualties" in that war. To clarify your statement, you are okay with the idea that our current system can allow us to kill an innocent person? You have no qualms about doing so? I think you scare me more than Tookie. -C I'm perfectly fine with our imperfect system because 99.999999% of the time we get it right. You want perfection in an imperfect world. Why stop at the death penalty, after all we can't be sure that ALL the people behind bars are truly guilty so why not let everyone go free for the fear that we may imprison an innocent man? Take it a step further, we should not arrest anyone for fear that we falsely accuse an innocent man. We wouldn't want to hurt his feelings would we. |
|