DNA evidence frees man after 27 years

[phillyfan26]

Originally posted by AchtungBono
Is this supposed to be a case against the death penalty? If it is I don't see the connection.

This man was happily found innocent, however there are hundreds others who have been JUSTLY convicted and sentenced - should they ALL go free now?

Hell, why wait? Let's free Scott Peterson and John Couey now.....and every other convicted killer/rapist/kidnapper who has ever been convicted....

I stand by my opinion - the death penalty is just and necessary in extreme cases and this case changes nothing.

I'm going to try to exact patience with you since I'm in a good mood. Follow my line of thinking for a moment:

No one claimed that we should free every convicted person. Can we agree to that?

If he had been convicted of a death penalty crime, this man would have been executed. Can we agree to that?

If this man had been executed, it would have been for a crime he did not commit. Can we agree to that?

If you can agree to those three points, then this discussion can continue. If we cannot, you are a complete waste of time. Those three things are crucial to you understanding what we're trying to say here, and they don't even have anything to do with the death penalty debate. It requires tremendous amounts of patience to get even this far with you, and it's not even the real issue.

So, respond to those three points. If you agree to them, then I will make another post getting more towards the heart of the issue.

[AchtungBono]

Originally posted by phillyfan26


I'm going to try to exact patience with you since I'm in a good mood. Follow my line of thinking for a moment:

No one claimed that we should free every convicted person. Can we agree to that?

If he had been convicted of a death penalty crime, this man would have been executed. Can we agree to that?

If this man had been executed, it would have been for a crime he did not commit. Can we agree to that?

If you can agree to those three points, then this discussion can continue. If we cannot, you are a complete waste of time. Those three things are crucial to you understanding what we're trying to say here, and they don't even have anything to do with the death penalty debate. It requires tremendous amounts of patience to get even this far with you, and it's not even the real issue.

So, respond to those three points. If you agree to them, then I will make another post getting more towards the heart of the issue.

Hello Philly,

OF COURSE I agree with these three points! Do you think that I'm a total droid devoid of all human feelings?

I applaud and salute the fact that the man was cleared of all blame and I'm appalled that he served even ONE DAY in jail not to mention 27 years(!!!) for a crime he didn't commit - that was a horrendous miscarriage of justice and I wouldn't be surprised if he filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit against anyone involved with his wrongful imprisonment. Although no amount of money can give him those 27 years back......

That isn't the point I raised in my post.

I'm not talking about cases like this where a man was wrongfully convicted. I'm talking about murderers who were JUSTLY tried, convicted and sentenced, and with whom there is no doubt at all of their guilt - examples of which I gave in my previous post.

Now, if I may, let me ask YOU 3 questions and by your answers I'll see if you can understand the point I'm trying to get across:

1. Was the death penalty justified in the case of John Couey - who kidnapped Jessica Lunsford, raped her and buried her alive?

2. Was the death penalty justified in the case of the Manson family who butchered 7 innocent people - especially Susan Atkins who repeatedly stabbed a pregnant Sharon Tate, ignoring her pleas for mercy? Notwithstanding the fact that their sentence was commuted.

3. Was the death penalty justified in the case of Ted Bundy who viciously murdered over 30 people in several states before finally getting caught?

Finally, let me ask you a hypothetical question (which I hope will be a real one soon):

If Osama Bin Laden were finally caught and brought to trial (G-d willing), would you support his being sentenced to death for the attacks on the USS Cole, the Bali Bombings, the Madrid bombings and Sept. 11th? Even though he didn't actively participate in the attacks (much like the case of Charles Manson who didn't commit the crimes himself but sent his followers to do the work for him but was sentenced to death anyway).

Thank you and have a good day.

[BVS]

Originally posted by AchtungBono


OF COURSE I agree with these three points! Do you think that I'm a total droid devoid of all human feelings?

This has nothing to do with feelings.

Originally posted by AchtungBono

I applaud and salute the fact that the man was cleared of all blame and I'm appalled that he served even ONE DAY in jail not to mention 27 years(!!!) for a crime he didn't commit - that was a horrendous miscarriage of justice and I wouldn't be surprised if he filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit against anyone involved with his wrongful imprisonment. Although no amount of money can give him those 27 years back......

That isn't the point I raised in my post.

I'm not talking about cases like this where a man was wrongfully convicted. I'm talking about murderers who were JUSTLY tried, convicted and sentenced, and with whom there is no doubt at all of their guilt - examples of which I gave in my previous post.

I give up.

You call it a "horrendous miscarriage of justice", and then you say "I'm talking about murderers who were JUSTLY tried, convicted and sentenced". They are were tried by the same system. The system will NEVER be 100% absolute, therefore you can never have a 100% absolute sentence.

Why is this so hard for some to understand?

Your stance is purely an emotional one, it's clear by the questions you ask. Justice isn't based on emotion.

[Diemen]

Originally posted by AchtungBono

1. Was the death penalty justified in the case of John Couey - who kidnapped Jessica Lunsford, raped her and buried her alive?

Life in prison without the possibility of parole would be perfectly acceptable to me. I don't look for sentences that satisfy a need for revenge based on my emotional reaction to the crime.

2. Was the death penalty justified in the case of the Manson family who butchered 7 innocent people - especially Susan Atkins who repeatedly stabbed a pregnant Sharon Tate, ignoring her pleas for mercy? Notwithstanding the fact that their sentence was commuted.

Life in prison without the possibility of parole would be perfectly acceptable to me. I don't look for sentences that satisfy a need for revenge based on my emotional reaction to the crime.

3. Was the death penalty justified in the case of Ted Bundy who viciously murdered over 30 people in several states before finally getting caught?

Life in prison without the possibility of parole would be perfectly acceptable to me. I don't look for sentences that satisfy a need for revenge based on my emotional reaction to the crime.

If Osama Bin Laden were finally caught and brought to trial (G-d willing), would you support his being sentenced to death for the attacks on the USS Cole, the Bali Bombings, the Madrid bombings and Sept. 11th? Even though he didn't actively participate in the attacks (much like the case of Charles Manson who didn't commit the crimes himself but sent his followers to do the work for him but was sentenced to death anyway).

Life in prison without the possibility of parole would be perfectly acceptable to me. I don't look for sentences that satisfy a need for revenge based on my emotional reaction to the crime. Both sentences do the same thing - remove a dangerous person permanently from society. Only life in prison removes the blood from our hands.

Frankly your examples only highlight your poor understanding of the subject and your tendency to look for revenge and not justice. And like BVS and everyone else here has pointed out, the system is not perfect. The same system that tried and convicted Manson and all these bad people you've named, is the same one that tried and convicted Charles Chatman - an innocent man. You can never be 100% sure of guilt in our system. I'm sorry but that's just how it works. But if you're okay with a few innocent people getting put to death as long as the ones that really evoke your sense of revenge get it to, then go ahead, keep arguing for it. Just remember that the blood of the wrongly convicted is on your hands too.

Killing someone because they killed someone else is not justice, it is revenge. Period.

[AchtungBono]

Originally posted by Diemen


Life in prison without the possibility of parole would be perfectly acceptable to me. I don't look for sentences that satisfy a need for revenge based on my emotional reaction to the crime.

How can that be acceptable?

From the CNN website:

Couey, a convicted sex offender, was staying nearby in a trailer with his half-sister. Couey kidnapped the girl from her bedroom and later, in a taped confession, admitted that he buried the child alive. "I went out there one night and dug a hole and put her in it. Buried her," he said.

She was found wrapped in garbage bags, holding a stuffed toy dolphin, her hands bound with stereo wire. Jessica died from asphyxiation after being sexually assaulted, according to a medical examiner's report

I can't believe that you have no problem with this man going on living, eating 3 meals a day, watching TV, exercising, and basically going on with his life after he so brutally took Jessica's life away.

. You can never be 100% sure of guilt in our system. I'm sorry but that's just how it works.

Are you telling me that you're NOT SURE about the guilt of Couey, Manson or Bundy and that they might have been wrongly convicted?

Killing someone because they killed someone else is not justice, it is revenge. Period.

Webster defines justice as: "the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments"

The key word here is MERITED......and these criminals certainly did MERIT their sentences. Revenge has nothing to do with it.

[Diemen]

No, the key word is impartial. One can't be impartial if you're so outraged over the crimes that you want to kill whoever did it.

And look, you're just going to have to face it that there are people out here who don't believe in killing people for the crimes they've committed, no matter how heinous.

[Diemen]

Oh, and one more thing:

Originally posted by AchtungBono
I can't believe that you have no problem with this man going on living, eating 3 meals a day, watching TV, exercising, and basically going on with his life after he so brutally took Jessica's life away.

Life in prison is no picnic, despite how you make it sound.

Why don't you just admit that it's not justice you're after, but revenge?

Ok, so one more thing along the lines of merit. Back when hanging was in practice, or death by beheading, or being drawn and quartered: do you think those types of death were merited?

[BVS]

Originally posted by AchtungBono


Are you telling me that you're NOT SURE about the guilt of Couey, Manson or Bundy and that they might have been wrongly convicted?

Did you see them commit and document these crimes on tape for us?

You can never be 100% absolute of someone's guilt.

So how do you determine who gets the chair or not? Because Manson is scary looking guy and it's an infamous crime does that make that one worthy of death?

[phillyfan26]

Originally posted by AchtungBono
OF COURSE I agree with these three points! Do you think that I'm a total droid devoid of all human feelings?

It had nothing to do with feelings, AB. I was making sure you understood those things, because based on the post that I quoted, you did not have an understanding.

Now that we can move past those points...

Originally posted by AchtungBono
I applaud and salute the fact that the man was cleared of all blame and I'm appalled that he served even ONE DAY in jail not to mention 27 years(!!!) for a crime he didn't commit - that was a horrendous miscarriage of justice and I wouldn't be surprised if he filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit against anyone involved with his wrongful imprisonment. Although no amount of money can give him those 27 years back......

That isn't the point I raised in my post.

I'm not talking about cases like this where a man was wrongfully convicted. I'm talking about murderers who were JUSTLY tried, convicted and sentenced, and with whom there is no doubt at all of their guilt - examples of which I gave in my previous post.

But you see, here's the thing:

That point you're saying you're not raising? THAT HAS TO BE THE POINT.

You're correct, it isn't the point you raised. Do you know why? You're MISSING the point.

Was this man not justly tried, convicted and sentenced? Under the same exact system as the ones you want the death penalty for?

Originally posted by AchtungBono
Now, if I may, let me ask YOU 3 questions and by your answers I'll see if you can understand the point I'm trying to get across:

1. Was the death penalty justified in the case of John Couey - who kidnapped Jessica Lunsford, raped her and buried her alive?

2. Was the death penalty justified in the case of the Manson family who butchered 7 innocent people - especially Susan Atkins who repeatedly stabbed a pregnant Sharon Tate, ignoring her pleas for mercy? Notwithstanding the fact that their sentence was commuted.

3. Was the death penalty justified in the case of Ted Bundy who viciously murdered over 30 people in several states before finally getting caught?

Finally, let me ask you a hypothetical question (which I hope will be a real one soon):

If Osama Bin Laden were finally caught and brought to trial (G-d willing), would you support his being sentenced to death for the attacks on the USS Cole, the Bali Bombings, the Madrid bombings and Sept. 11th? Even though he didn't actively participate in the attacks (much like the case of Charles Manson who didn't commit the crimes himself but sent his followers to do the work for him but was sentenced to death anyway).

Thank you and have a good day.

1. No.
2. No.
3. No.
4. No.

Why? We can't have a system in which we try to decide which cases have more certainty. There's no possible way to judge that.

[Angela Harlem]

AchtungBono, justice and the justice system involves the competing and conflicting needs of 3 different groups. It is not justice when all are not taken into acount. It's difficult to swallow, especially given the heinousness of some crimes, but a justice system is a complex framework - not an emotional or personal institution. You cannot refuse to take into account the 3 different parties. It must work for all. What you always propose fails in this.

[phillyfan26]

Originally posted by AchtungBono
Are you telling me that you're NOT SURE about the guilt of Couey, Manson or Bundy and that they might have been wrongly convicted?

Correct.

Our system uses the words "beyond a reasonable doubt." Because of this, we will never, ever, ever, ever be certain.

[deep]

This man is on death row

he kinda looks like a killer, doesn't he?




why trust this new dna evidence?

here is the article, how many chances do we give these convicted killers?

[AchtungBono]

Originally posted by deep
[B]

This man is on death row

he kinda looks like a killer, doesn't he?

No he doesn't, and neither does she:



And neither did he:



What's your point?

[Angela Harlem]

deep just thinks everyone has this built in racism chip. you know, we all subconsciously feel differently to black folk etc.
there's only one person on fym who is hung up on race differentiation.

[phillyfan26]

You have conveniantly skipped over this post, haven't you, AchtungBono.

Originally posted by phillyfan26
Correct.

Our system uses the words "beyond a reasonable doubt." Because of this, we will never, ever, ever, ever be certain.

[deep]

Masters to be released from prison

That guy sure looks guilty.

Just look at that outfit.

He won't even look you in the eye.



He had a trial.

He was found guilty.

He should have been executed a long time ago.


But noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

With this new dna evidence.


He will walk free.

What about the 15 year old girl that was sexually mutilated and murdered?


Where is the justice.

an eye for a eye