Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What It’s Like to Almost Get Executed

themarshallproject.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 120 posts

Re: What It’s Like to Almost Get Executed

#31

Post by citricsquid »

sevenless wrote: post #25

The family of four he brutally murdered might have had an opinion on that, too.

There are victims and families of victims who do not support the death penalty. A documentary aired in the UK a few years ago that spoke with the family of a prison officer (Daniel Nagle) who was murdered, the perpetrator (Robert Pruett) had been sentenced to the death penalty and the Nagle family were against the sentence -- even though they believe him to be guilty of the murder.

If you're in the UK you can watch that here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03zndw4/life-and-death...

I'm not quite sure if I'm interpreting your comment correctly, apologies if I've misunderstood the point you're making.

Re: What It’s Like to Almost Get Executed

#32

Post by barrkel »

ajkjk wrote: post #28
the_ancient wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>>I'm not against the Death Penalty on general principle grounds You should be... When you kill someone outside the conditions of self defense that is murder and is immoral. I do not care if the government doing it as some kind of "punishment" or a person doing it for another reason, murder is murder, "capital punishment" is murder. If we want a peaceful, just and free society, it can not include capital punishment.…

It's very easy for me to have a preferred moral code that is almost like yours except that I do not axiomatically declare that capital punishment is equivalent to murder.

Governments are made by people out of people. The whole system is just people, telling one another what to do, with the carrot of reward and the rod of violence, as necessary. An organization isn't a shield against personal morality. Capital punishment is a bunch of people telling another person to kill yet another person. That's all it is.

(And yes, war is murder too.)

Re: What It’s Like to Almost Get Executed

#33

Post by coldtea »

sevenless wrote: post #25

The family of four he brutally murdered might have had an opinion on that, too.

They are the last ones who should have an opinion on the matter, as pain clouds their judgement towards revenge.

Besides, they'd be saying the same things for anybody, if they were convinced or led to believe that he/she was the culprit, even if he/she were innocent.

Only if they were against the death penalty should they be heard, because that would be a sign that they speak putting revenge and petty sentiments aside.

The justice system shouldn't be a mechanism for revenge but for the protection of society.

Re: What It’s Like to Almost Get Executed

#34

Post by function_seven »

the_ancient wrote: post #30
ajkjk wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very easy for me to have a preferred moral code that is almost like yours except that I do not axiomatically declare that capital punishment is equivalent to murder.

Why? Because it is "legal". Do you base your morality on what is legal and what is illegal? How do you define murder?

Sincere question. Why are you allowed to murder someone in self-defense, but not as a punishment for crimes? What moral code do you rely on that draws the line there? Why is that moral code more correct than one that draws the line between punishment and capricious violence?

FWIW, I'm somewhere between you and OP in my thoughts. Definitely against the death penalty in practice, and somewhat ambivalent in theory. But it's interesting to really think about the axioms we construct our morals and ethics from, and why they're the way they are.

Re: What It’s Like to Almost Get Executed

#35

Post by svdr »

jveld wrote: post #18

Dostoevsky (The Brothers Karamazov, Crime And Punishment) was sentenced to be executed by the Tsarist government in 1849. He was actually in front of the firing squad , waiting for his turn to die, when he learned that his sentence had been commuted to a measly 10 years hard labor in Siberia. One could argue that this was the defining moment of his life, and most of his greatest works were motivated in some way by th…

One of the main characters in Tolstoy's War and Peace (Pierre) was also almost executed. You can read the scene here:

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2600/2600-h/2600-h.htm#link2...

Re: What It’s Like to Almost Get Executed

#36

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast »

rayiner wrote: post #8
CapitalistCartr wrote: post #3

In the United States, innocence has never been grounds for an appeal, a stay, overturning, or clemency. Here in Florida, I could write an accurate algorithm for calculating the application of the Death Penalty. Skin darkness (literally, not race), IQ, wealth, sex are the relevant factors. The elements of the case are not. I'm not against the Death Penalty on general principle grounds; I'm against it because we clearl…

Actual innocence is a grounds for vacating a conviction.

“There is no basis in text, tradition, or even in contemporary practice (if that were enough), for finding in the Constitution a right to demand judicial consideration of newly discovered evidence of innocence brought forward after conviction.”

Re: What It’s Like to Almost Get Executed

#37

Post by ams6110 »

CapitalistCartr wrote: post #12
rayiner wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actual innocence is a grounds for vacating a conviction.

In the USA, innocence isn't grounds for an appeal. Actual, post-conviction DNA tests aren't a basis. Errors at trial are. So good lawyers find one. Jury instructions, evidentiary errors, procedural, etc., which is why money buys justice.

Death sentenced are always granted an appeal, however.

Re: What It’s Like to Almost Get Executed

#38

Post by colin_mccabe »

the_ancient wrote: post #23
studentrob wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you smoking? I'd ask for sources but this is an absurd idea. You don't even need innocence in the US. You need to show there is reasonable doubt that the individual is guilty. At least that's how it works during trial. I'm not going to claim this works flawlessly, nor that it justifies a death penalty, but let's be real here.

>>At least that's how it works during trial. That is for the first trial, and the first trial only After that you are guilty, the only thing that matters to the legal system then is their arbitrary rules. The other commenter is 100% correct that actual innocents is irreverent for any appeal. The US Legal System is completely off the rails of any common sense, justice, or rational thought at this point. "The law perve…

The intention behind debating guilt only at the first trial is to prevent endless retrials for the same thing. Imagine if you were cleared of a charge but someone kept re-accusing you over and over, dragging you back to trial again and again. Or similarly, if someone was found guilty of the murder of someone you loved, but kept being re-tried again and again, and you had to keep giving testimony as a witness each time.

What is "perverted" about the system is that people have found ways around it to essentially get retrials for the same crime. Because there are so many laws, and so confusingly worded, the prosecutor can often just keep throwing things at you until something sticks (especially for white-collar crimes.) And appeals, which ought to be rare, somehow have become routine for many cases.

Re: What It’s Like to Almost Get Executed

#39

Post by wyldfire »

CapitalistCartr wrote: post #19
studentrob wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you smoking? I'd ask for sources but this is an absurd idea. You don't even need innocence in the US. You need to show there is reasonable doubt that the individual is guilty. At least that's how it works during trial. I'm not going to claim this works flawlessly, nor that it justifies a death penalty, but let's be real here.

You are completely misinformed. Reasonable doubt applies at trial, not on appeals. Also, the ad hominem adds nothing to your point. Edit: look at Herrera v. Collins (SCOTUS): "Petitioner's claim of actual innocence based on newly discovered evidence is not ground for federal habeas relief. United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed." Two questions were presented for the Supreme Court's review: Do t…

Is the critical distinction in "federal habeas relief"? Does that mean that state appellate courts can/do consider evidence of innocence in order to vacate a conviction?
Post reply on HN