Tweet
Note: This post will be US-centric by it's nature.
As it stands, there are too many people on death row that have been proven innocent and released. But far worse are those who were never granted their freedom. Either the proof of their innocence came too late or was ignored by those with a duty to review it.
Our court systems have been proven to be too corrupt, too easily manipulated, and too motivated by a need for convictions rather than a need for justice to be trusted with the ability to cause the ending of another person's life.
Sometimes we get cases that are so appalling that it's a travesty that more people don't know about them. Such as the case with Cameron Todd Willingham. First he had to suffer outside his family home while his three daughters burned to death, and then, after it was discovered that fire in flashpoint situations will do exactly what happened in his house and that the arson investigator made several telling omissions from his report, those responsible for ensuring that innocent people are not actually put to death (the panel responsible for reviewing death row inmates who looked at the original trial and rubber stamped the verdict - the new report was provided to all of them prior to their decision - and Gov. Rick Perry, who was also furnished with a copy) ignored it all and let him die anyway. The only murderers in his story were those who had a duty to protect him.
But more often you get grey-area cases. Cases that are full of unsympathetic defendants who are guilty of some crimes related to the case, and where the victim was someone beloved in the community.
Like Troy Anthony Davis. This is not a pillar of his community. The guy was a thug. But no matter what his other crimes may have been, the trial which convicted him for murder, and at which he was sentenced to death was a joke. Nearly every witness involved has since recanted their testimony under comments of police coercion. One of the only two "witnesses" left holding to their testimony is the man who otherwise would be charged with the murder and who reported him as the shooter. One key piece of evidence had to be dismissed because the police threatened the owner of the house if she didn't let them in. There were more crimes committed in the drive to convict him than he'd committed in the first place. And there is not a single piece of physical evidence that he was the shooter. Not more, or less, than they have on his accuser and co-thug, Sylvester "Redd" Coles, who admits to having had the same type of weapon as Davis and who was with him at the time. There are so many questions, as well as evidence of malfeasance in this case, it's not even funny. And, distressingly, it's far too commonly the case in such trials as this.
Then there's the case of Joseph Murphy, which is the topic of another thread already. He grew up abused, is borderline mentally retarded (possibly brain damaged from abuse), has been in and out of a dozen mental hospitals, and was originally sentenced at a time where the only options were jail with the possibility of parole or death; life without parole as a sentence wasn't available until four years after sentencing. He doesn't dispute that he is guilty or that it was a terrible thing to do. However, it was for people such as him that the life without parole option was created, and his sentence should have been adjusted long ago. Even the victim's niece is fighting for his sentence to be changed.
Just yesterday, the Supreme Court intervened and prevented Texas Gov. Rick Perry from putting another notch in his execution belt as they intervened to stay the execution of Duane Buck, who, while guilty, should never been on death row based on the testimony involved. Perry had, as he has every time, denied any clemency, stay, or retrial. Whether Buck will ultimately be sentenced to death fairly will be determined in a hearing that will not be tainted by the possibility of racial prejudice.
I cannot understand how anyone with any modicum of intelligence, the ability to do even rudimentary research, and an ounce of compassion or moral fiber could ever uphold the death penalty with how flawed it and our court system have proven to be so many times.
How anyone who has any interest in justice can continue to support such a system is beyond me.
^-.-^
As it stands, there are too many people on death row that have been proven innocent and released. But far worse are those who were never granted their freedom. Either the proof of their innocence came too late or was ignored by those with a duty to review it.
Our court systems have been proven to be too corrupt, too easily manipulated, and too motivated by a need for convictions rather than a need for justice to be trusted with the ability to cause the ending of another person's life.
Sometimes we get cases that are so appalling that it's a travesty that more people don't know about them. Such as the case with Cameron Todd Willingham. First he had to suffer outside his family home while his three daughters burned to death, and then, after it was discovered that fire in flashpoint situations will do exactly what happened in his house and that the arson investigator made several telling omissions from his report, those responsible for ensuring that innocent people are not actually put to death (the panel responsible for reviewing death row inmates who looked at the original trial and rubber stamped the verdict - the new report was provided to all of them prior to their decision - and Gov. Rick Perry, who was also furnished with a copy) ignored it all and let him die anyway. The only murderers in his story were those who had a duty to protect him.
But more often you get grey-area cases. Cases that are full of unsympathetic defendants who are guilty of some crimes related to the case, and where the victim was someone beloved in the community.
Like Troy Anthony Davis. This is not a pillar of his community. The guy was a thug. But no matter what his other crimes may have been, the trial which convicted him for murder, and at which he was sentenced to death was a joke. Nearly every witness involved has since recanted their testimony under comments of police coercion. One of the only two "witnesses" left holding to their testimony is the man who otherwise would be charged with the murder and who reported him as the shooter. One key piece of evidence had to be dismissed because the police threatened the owner of the house if she didn't let them in. There were more crimes committed in the drive to convict him than he'd committed in the first place. And there is not a single piece of physical evidence that he was the shooter. Not more, or less, than they have on his accuser and co-thug, Sylvester "Redd" Coles, who admits to having had the same type of weapon as Davis and who was with him at the time. There are so many questions, as well as evidence of malfeasance in this case, it's not even funny. And, distressingly, it's far too commonly the case in such trials as this.
Then there's the case of Joseph Murphy, which is the topic of another thread already. He grew up abused, is borderline mentally retarded (possibly brain damaged from abuse), has been in and out of a dozen mental hospitals, and was originally sentenced at a time where the only options were jail with the possibility of parole or death; life without parole as a sentence wasn't available until four years after sentencing. He doesn't dispute that he is guilty or that it was a terrible thing to do. However, it was for people such as him that the life without parole option was created, and his sentence should have been adjusted long ago. Even the victim's niece is fighting for his sentence to be changed.
Just yesterday, the Supreme Court intervened and prevented Texas Gov. Rick Perry from putting another notch in his execution belt as they intervened to stay the execution of Duane Buck, who, while guilty, should never been on death row based on the testimony involved. Perry had, as he has every time, denied any clemency, stay, or retrial. Whether Buck will ultimately be sentenced to death fairly will be determined in a hearing that will not be tainted by the possibility of racial prejudice.
I cannot understand how anyone with any modicum of intelligence, the ability to do even rudimentary research, and an ounce of compassion or moral fiber could ever uphold the death penalty with how flawed it and our court system have proven to be so many times.
How anyone who has any interest in justice can continue to support such a system is beyond me.
^-.-^
Comment