*raises hand*.....I would.
How would you feel if you pulled the plug on someone who was found guilty, and then found out afterwards that he was actually innocent of the crime you killed him for?
*raises hand*.....I would.
This is all kinds of fucked up
I always throw this verse out when conversing with a fellow Christian about the death penalty:
VENGEANCE IS MINE; I WILL REPAY, SAITH THE LORD
The criminal justice system is in place to keep the innocent out of harm's way, not play God. Execution is never an appropriate sentence.
And then I'm expected to sit there and make a decision about whether or not someone lives or dies based on a few days or weeks or months' worth of testimony? Yeah, who wouldn't want that job! If I find out I sentenced an innocent person to death row, hell, yeah, that's going to weigh on my conscience heavily.
I'd also point out that one would think Christians would be against the death penalty because, you know, Jesus was put to death for no logical reason.
But most logically his death fulfilled Bible prophecy. Or so some of us believe.
Lawyers can't serve on a jury.
Jesus was put to death for a very logical reason, he challenged the political power structures of the Romans and the sanhedrin. But most logically his death fulfilled Bible prophecy. Or so some of us believe.
Would you be willing to pull the trigger on someone who may be innocent of the crime?
How would you feel if you pulled the plug on someone who was found guilty, and then found out afterwards that he was actually innocent of the crime you killed him for?
Are you surprised that it's coming from her? I'm not.
This is all kinds of fucked up
AchtungBono said:I'm a devout fan of real crime shows on TV (like "Crime stories", "Medical detectives" etc.) and the percentage of accuracy in convictions due to forensic technology is astounding. There is no way that a person can be convicted of a crime if he didn't do it.
AchtungBono said:Hi Jive,
Did you not see the people I mentioned in my post?
Ted Bundy - who tortured, raped and murdered over 30 women - did he really deserve to live? was he innocent and wrongfully put to death?
John Gacy - one of the worst serial killers who disguised his cruelty under a clown's outfit and killed over 30 innocent boys? was he also innocent?
John Couey - the monster who kidnapped and raped little Jessica Lunsford and then put her in plastic bags and buried her alive, causing her to slowly suffocate to death - a truly innocent soul, right?
Adolph Eichman - one of the main architects and executors of the "final solution". Millions of Jews were herded like cattle onto railway cars and transported to death camps where they were either gassed on arrival or worked to death, slowly dying from malnutrition, disease, beatings, and ghastly experiments - all orchestrated by Adolph Eichman and his cohorts.
A true piller of the community, right?
I repeat - I would have GLADLY pulled the plug on any one of these loathsome creatures.......
If you think that's fucked up.....well, so be it.
......and here's a hug for you too.......
I say again......that can't happen today with today's DNA and forensic technology.
I'm a devout fan of real crime shows on TV (like "Crime stories", "Medical detectives" etc.) and the percentage of accuracy in convictions due to forensic technology is astounding. There is no way that a person can be convicted of a crime if he didn't do it.
Hi Jive,
Did you not see the people I mentioned in my post?
I don't know, I can sorta see where AB is coming from there. There are some sick people on this earth who don't deserve to live.
I don't know, I can sorta see where AB is coming from there. There are some sick people on this earth who don't deserve to live.
No, because if they were innocent of the crime they wouldn't have been convicted and sentenced to death.
No, because if they were innocent of the crime they wouldn't have been convicted and sentenced to death.
This is simply not true. Did you not read the article that started this thread?
Study: 2,000 convicted then exonerated in 23 years - CBS News
I'm sorry but you are grossly misinformed.
No, because if they were innocent of the crime they wouldn't have been convicted and sentenced to death.
Hi BVS,
I read the article and the exerpt below proves my point:
half of the 873 exonerations studied in detail, the most common factor leading to false convictions was perjured testimony or false accusations. Forty-three percent of the cases involved mistaken eyewitness identification, and 24 percent of the cases involved false or misleading forensic evidence.
In two out of three homicides, perjury or false accusation was the most common factor leading to false conviction. In four out of five sexual assaults, mistaken eyewitness identification was the leading cause of false conviction.
DNA doesn't lie and physical evidence doesn't lie either - witnesses can be mistaken and evidence can be falsified, but a murderer's DNA on a victim is a slam-dunk - you cannot falsify DNA evidence.
DNA doesn't lie and physical evidence doesn't lie either - witnesses can be mistaken and evidence can be falsified, but a murderer's DNA on a victim is a slam-dunk - you cannot falsify DNA evidence.
Hi BVS,
I read the article and the exerpt below proves my point:
half of the 873 exonerations studied in detail, the most common factor leading to false convictions was perjured testimony or false accusations. Forty-three percent of the cases involved mistaken eyewitness identification, and 24 percent of the cases involved false or misleading forensic evidence.
In two out of three homicides, perjury or false accusation was the most common factor leading to false conviction. In four out of five sexual assaults, mistaken eyewitness identification was the leading cause of false conviction.
DNA doesn't lie and physical evidence doesn't lie either - witnesses can be mistaken and evidence can be falsified, but a murderer's DNA on a victim is a slam-dunk - you cannot falsify DNA evidence.