In Texas, a man who didn’t kill anybody is about to be executed for murder
1–10 of 49 posts
Re: In Texas, a man who didn’t kill anybody is about to be executed for murder
#2It seems to me that such laws punish people for associating with certain individuals who go on to commit crimes, requiring everyone to essentially be psychic or predict others' actions correctly 100% of the time to stay on the right side of the law. Either that or avoid associating with anyone.
It's insane--and certainly unjust--that a law that makes such impossible and ridiculous demands of people is considered just.
Re: In Texas, a man who didn’t kill anybody is about to be executed for murder
#3>Legal experts say his case is rare, even in Texas, the execution capital of America — and a state that allows capital punishment for people who did not kill anyone or did not intend to kill.
Forty six US states have Felony Murder statutes. I don't think this is all that rare for states with capital punishment. According to the wiki "...the death penalty may be imposed if the defendant is a major participant in the underlying felony and 'exhibits extreme indifference to human life'."
Re: In Texas, a man who didn’t kill anybody is about to be executed for murder
#4It seems to me that such laws punish people for associating with certain individuals who go on to commit crimes, requiring everyone to essentially be psychic or predict others' actions correctly 100% of the time to stay on the right side of the law. Either that or avoid associating with anyone. It's insane--and certainly unjust--that a law that makes such impossible and ridiculous demands of people is considered just…
The facts of the topical case aren't that ludicrous. The link goes into enough detail where it's clear he was complicit in the murder, even if not present for the physical shooting.
Re: In Texas, a man who didn’t kill anybody is about to be executed for murder
#5IMO, the real apparent injustice in this case is the prosecutor's use of a forensic psychiatrist who apparently has a cottage industry in testifying against defendants:
> Wood was committed to a mental health hospital after he was found incompetent. A neuropsychologist had testified that Wood was delusional, unable to grasp the issues about his case and the reality facing him...
> The writ of habeas corpus, filed in July, spotlights something else the jury did not know: the troubled history of a forensic psychiatrist whose testimony resulted in Wood’s death sentence.
> James Grigson was no stranger to capital murder cases: By the time Wood went on trial, in 1998, Grigson said he had testified in 163 such cases. Prosecutors often sought his testimony to secure the ultimate punishment for defendants. Often, they were successful, earning Grigson a nickname: “Dr. Death.”
> In 1995, three years before Wood’s trial, Grigson was expelled from the American Psychiatric Association and its Texas branch at that time, the Texas Society of Psychiatric Physicians, for predicting a defendant’s potential threat to society based solely on a hypothetical. The expulsions followed an investigation by the Texas association’s ethics committee, which cited Grigson’s “willfully narrow rendition of psychiatric knowledge.”
Re: In Texas, a man who didn’t kill anybody is about to be executed for murder
#6It seems to me that such laws punish people for associating with certain individuals who go on to commit crimes, requiring everyone to essentially be psychic or predict others' actions correctly 100% of the time to stay on the right side of the law. Either that or avoid associating with anyone. It's insane--and certainly unjust--that a law that makes such impossible and ridiculous demands of people is considered just…
Setting aside the death penalty aspect, this case is not about association - it's about explicit participation in a felony that resulted in the death of an innocent victim.
Doesn't require a psychic to determine that committing a robbery with someone whom you know to own and carry a firearm could result in a death.
Re: In Texas, a man who didn’t kill anybody is about to be executed for murder
#7It seems to me that such laws punish people for associating with certain individuals who go on to commit crimes, requiring everyone to essentially be psychic or predict others' actions correctly 100% of the time to stay on the right side of the law. Either that or avoid associating with anyone. It's insane--and certainly unjust--that a law that makes such impossible and ridiculous demands of people is considered just…
Setting aside the death penalty aspect, this case is not about association - it's about explicit participation in a felony that resulted in the death of an innocent victim. Doesn't require a psychic to determine that committing a robbery with someone whom you know to own and carry a firearm could result in a death.
From the article, the "explicit participation" isn't all that clear, and not required to be proven by the prosecution? (but it's not purely association either)
Re: In Texas, a man who didn’t kill anybody is about to be executed for murder
#8It astounds me that Americans think themselves to be the pinnacle of civilisation, when they still gleefully enact the death penalty. It disgusts me that this vile, barbarous country has so much power in the world.
Re: In Texas, a man who didn’t kill anybody is about to be executed for murder
#9I'm a native Texan, which I point out solely to rebut the assertion that all--or even many--Texans are in favor of the death penalty, and I very much oppose the death penalty for reasons exactly such as this. Maybe this man committed a crime; it sure seems like he did. But maybe he didn't. Or maybe he didn't in the way that the state, or the psychiatrist, or the eyewitnesses claim he did.
That's the problem with the death penalty: There are vanishingly few situations where we can be 100%, absolutely clear on whether a person did something that warrants permanently removing that person from existence.
We are a nation of laws and we are also a nation of fallible human beings. If we could be completely certain, then perhaps I would be OK with the permanence of death. But we can't, so we shouldn't be killing criminals in the name of the people or the state. Because what happens if we are wrong? What happens if we are wrong 138 times[0]?
Why have we forgotten that "[i]t is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer?"
0 - http://tcadp.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/TXDPFactSheet01-...
Re: In Texas, a man who didn’t kill anybody is about to be executed for murder
#10>Legal experts say his case is rare, even in Texas, the execution capital of America — and a state that allows capital punishment for people who did not kill anyone or did not intend to kill. Forty six US states have Felony Murder statutes. I don't think this is all that rare for states with capital punishment. According to the wiki "...the death penalty may be imposed if the defendant is a major participant in the u…
OMG I already exhibit extreme indifference to human life; I guess I already have half of the requirements for the death penalty.