2 debates ago, Republicans cheered for Perrys recored Death penalty exicutions.

[pocketfullofshells]

funny..I see the republicans all dancing around basics and ignoring the case itself...Maybe it does not matter if he did it or not, after all, the party of life seems to really good at Death.

 

[BigRob]

you seem to think that our courts actually care if your guilty or not after the first case...the courts have even said they can't say he is guilty anymore...the Burden is now on him to prove he did not...even though out of 11 people...

I will grant you that the appeals process is different than the first trial, but the fact remains that he has brought up the issue to court after court now, all of which disagree with him.

9 have all said what they where forced to testify and have recanted there story's...

This is not even true. Apparently since 1996 seven of the nine have recanted "all or part" (what parts is critical here) of their testimony...This issue has also come before the courts, and was found to be unpersuasive.

But you think this is good enough to kill someone? the word of 2 people, one of who was a suspect...and one other person..and no physical evidence?

I think that if we cannot have faith in our court system, then the framework of this country will collapse.

so knowing this, could you pull the switch...just because..after the fact...after the trial..knowing that almost everything the guilt was based on, is now at best questionable or more likely was a lie...would you be able to say well sucks for you, and kill him?

I don't know any of those things...I know that court after court has come down saying he is guilty, or were not moved by the new claims of his defense team etc.

At what point in the process do we finally say he is guilty? How many courts have to uphold the verdict?

 

[Pandora]

so would you as Gov...Execute this man.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/news-item/usa-clock-ticks-on-troy-davis-execution

And after reading this, do you think it shows how our Judicial system in fact does not protect against wrongly convicted being killed.

Note, this is not the case in Texas where the Jury was basicly told Black men are more dangerous then a white Criminal would be ...that case already got put on hold.

They stopped the execution because a judge decided that the statement about blacks that was made, they did not stop the execution because the man was found innocent or there is a chance the man was found innocent.

I dont even believe in the death penalty but if a state has it and someone is found guilty then i don't see how someone saying black people are dangerous should stop it, I believe his own attorney is not saying he is innocent at this point, just saying the comment was wrong and they should not kill him now because of it.

 

[BigRob]

The law is about "reasonable doubt!" And there is enough "reasonable doubt" to spare his life.

No court to date has agreed with your assertion here.

Funny, though, that it is the party of "pro-life" that is the most adamant about "killing!"

Is this about stopping the execution or about trying to take political shots?

 

[bododie]

I have no idea what your talking about...no one said the guy in the racism case did not do it...that was not a issue...The issue on that case is Unfair trials...Also again I was talking about other case that I posted the link about...the one where there are good odds the guy did not do it

And who brought up the guy in TEXAS?

Note, this is not the case in Texas where the Jury was basicly told Black men are more dangerous then a white Criminal would be ...that case already got put on hold.

It wasn't the trial either, it was the SENTENCING HEARING. Let's hear it for the Minnesota teachers who are entrusted with teaching peoples children to read.

See certain people. See certain people try to read. See certain people fail and blame it on everyone else. See a liberal. See Dick.

 

[dogtowner]

The law is about "reasonable doubt!" And there is enough "reasonable doubt" to spare his life.

Too many "mistakes" have already been made.

Funny, though, that it is the party of "pro-life" that is the most adamant about "killing!"

There was no reasonable doubt at the trial and there is no case filed to appeal or re-try. Sounds like no reasonable doubt now else it would be back before a judge.

Christ had no problem with the thieves being executed along with him. Why ? They said it themselves, they were guilty. Conservatives take issue with murder or the taking of innocent life, you know like a baby.

 

[dogtowner]

funny..I see the republicans all dancing around basics and ignoring the case itself...Maybe it does not matter if he did it or not, after all, the party of life seems to really good at Death.

I read your article. Lots of innuendo ans reinitialization but nothing that is good enough to go back before a judge about. If its so convincing why has no one bothered to take it to court but instead choose to whine ?

 

[bododie]

I have no idea what your talking about...no one said the guy in the racism case did not do it...that was not a issue...The issue on that case is Unfair trials...Also again I was talking about other case that I posted the link about...the one where there are good odds the guy did not do it.

What's it like to make up everything, and then run away when proven wrong?

 

[Openmind]

There was no reasonable doubt at the trial and there is no case filed to appeal or re-try. Sounds like no reasonable doubt now else it would be back before a judge.

Christ had no problem with the thieves being executed along with him. Why ? They said it themselves, they were guilty. Conservatives take issue with murder or the taking of innocent life, you know like a baby.

There is plenty of reasonable doubt today, now that 7 out of the 9 witnesses have recanted their testimony, and there NEVER was physical evidence.

A life is a life. Christ was wrongly accused, and died at the hands of self-righteous and political people (sounds familiar?).

There is still no comparison between taking the life of a full grown man, or a life child, and the early termination of a pregnancy.

 

[bododie]

There is plenty of reasonable doubt today, now that 7 out of the 9 witnesses have recanted their testimony, and there NEVER was physical evidence.

Hmm.. Isn't perjury a felony?

 

[BigRob]

There is plenty of reasonable doubt today, now that 7 out of the 9 witnesses have recanted their testimony, and there NEVER was physical evidence.

Again, no court has agreed with this statement.

A life is a life. Christ was wrongly accused, and died at the hands of self-righteous and political people (sounds familiar?).

There is still no comparison between taking the life of a full grown man, or a life child, and the early termination of a pregnancy.

It is about scoring political points then I suppose?

 

[BigRob]

There is still no comparison between taking the life of a full grown man, or a life child, and the early termination of a pregnancy.

As an aside, I did want to get your opinion on this:

You have stated in the past that a baby that is not capable of living outside of the womb is really not a life. If that is the case, if I went and killed someone who was a vegetable on life support, have I taken a life?

 

[Openmind]

As an aside, I did want to get your opinion on this:

You have stated in the past that a baby that is not capable of living outside of the womb is really not a life. If that is the case, if I went and killed someone who was a vegetable on life support, have I taken a life?

I believe I have given my OPINION on this a couple of months ago. . .but then again, it might have been in another forum.

Well, I believe that what makes us human, what makes us who we are is not just breathing, eating, and instinctual reflexes, but it is OUR BRAIN, who then influences our EMOTIONS.

I believe that if a person has been in a prolonged coma (not an "induced" coma") and that several tests have demonstrated that there was NO MORE brainwaves and no possibility of regaining brain activity, that the brain is dead, what we have there is a living cadavre, and YES I would support a family's wish (or, preferably a previously drawn "living will" wish) to remove the comateus person from EVERY life support.

In fact, I have my living will ready, and this is my clearly expressed wish, as it is my husband's wish.

 

[Alias]

There is plenty of reasonable doubt today, now that 7 out of the 9 witnesses have recanted their testimony, and there NEVER was physical evidence.

A life is a life. Christ was wrongly accused, and died at the hands of self-righteous and political people (sounds familiar?).

There is still no comparison between taking the life of a full grown man, or a life child, and the early termination of a pregnancy.

I totally agree with the last sentence. There is absolutely no comparison with a murderer being found guilty by a jury and sentenced to death with murdering an innocent human being before they are given a chance to live their life.

A life is a life. Right?

 

[Openmind]

Again, no court has agreed with this statement.



It is about scoring political points then I suppose?

No, it has nothing to do with "scoring political points!"

It has to do (in my case at least) with my profound belief that, as human being, with all the shortcomings that this entails, we have no right to kill a man based on "our belief" that he may be guilty of a crime.

That "a life for a life" actually sounds more like the "Sharia law" that everyone hates so much.

I believe in murderers being punished for their crimes, IF they have been proven guilty BEYOND THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT, which is not the case here.

We are not infallible. Our court system is not infallible. Too many people have been put to death and later shown to have been innocent. Too many people have been thrown on death row for YEARS, then released because they were innocent . . .at least, they were able to be release because we did NOT act on our "belief" that they were guilty and deserved death!

By the way, for some people, death is much less of a punishment than life without parole in jail. So. . .what is it that we are trying to accomplish with the "put them to death" exactly?