|
Hi teamliquid,
I don't know if anyone has heard about Troy Davis, I searched to forums and found nothing, but basically in 1989 a jury found of guilty of killing a police officer. Troy Davis has repeatedly stated his innocence in the case, and some serious doubts about the evidence used in the case.
Here's a link outlining the basic premises of the case and his current situation: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15008387
Now it should be noted that Troy Davis is black and is being held in the state of Georgia. There are many protestors outside of the jail that he is being held at. He has had 4 scheduled executions, and is currently waiting on a Supreme Court verdict on whether or not to delay the execution.
The case brings up serious questions about the morality of the death penalty and the American legal system as a whole. I personally believe that if you have enough cases involving murder that a jury is bound to make a mistake which means that the state will kill an innocent person.
Any other thoughts on this story, I am interested to hear what non-Americans think about this case and the America legal system as a whole.
EDIT: The main outrage of this specific case is that 7 of the 12 key witnesses in the case RECANTED (disavowed) their claims. The lack of DNA or gun evidence also brings further doubt about the case and makes me outraged that the courts still thought that they were 100% sure he was guilty of murder. On top of that he was strapped down to a chair for 3 hours while waiting for the courts to finally conclude that he was to be executed a truly inhumane fate. It must have been a truly horrifying time for him waiting for his death...
|
I prefer a system based on rehabilitation rather than vengance. It tends to foster a gentler society, ie. more trust between people, less violence, etc.
As such the death penalty can never be good, and the US system is bad in general as it seems to put high values on vengance.
Edit: And to be case specific, any time it's not crystal clear beyond all doubts ever, the death penalty instantly becomes problematic. If you are to use the death penalty you better be damned sure you don't accidentally kill someone innocent. In this particular case a commute to life in prison would seem like the obvious choice.
|
I've been following this story for a while now... and it looks like it's going to end poorly...
RIP t.t
|
hi will, also broken system is broken
User was warned for this post
|
On September 22 2011 10:48 HellRoxYa wrote:
I prefer a system based on rehabilitation rather than vengance. It tends to foster a gentler society, ie. more trust between people, less violence, etc.
As such the death penalty can never be good, and the US system is bad in general as it seems to put high values on vengance.
It's less about the death penalty in general, and more that we're likely about to execute an innocent man.
It's possible he is guilty, but there was never any physical evidence, and he was convicted based on eye witness accounts, whom I believe have *all* since recanted their testimony.
|
On September 22 2011 10:50 Haemonculus wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2011 10:48 HellRoxYa wrote:
I prefer a system based on rehabilitation rather than vengance. It tends to foster a gentler society, ie. more trust between people, less violence, etc.
As such the death penalty can never be good, and the US system is bad in general as it seems to put high values on vengance. It's less about the death penalty in general, and more that we're likely about to execute an innocent man. It's possible he is guilty, but there was never any physical evidence, and he was convicted based on eye witness accounts, whom I believe have *all* since recanted their testimony.
The OP asked about the death penalty (/US system) in general. As well as the case.
|
What can I say?
I stand against the idea of a state-enforced death penalty, but even by the State's standards, they don't have enough evidence to put this man to death.
On another note, I'd like to ask what you mean, exactly, by pointing out that "he's black and being held in Georgia." If you mean to imply that his sentence has something to do with the fact that he's black, and furthermore he's being held in a southern (implied "racist") state, then you've just opened up a whole new can of worms. As the story points out, Texas, another southern state, just put a white supremacist to death for dragging a black man behind his vehicle by a chain. We can talk about institutional racism and the moral implications it has for state-enforced capital punishment, but we've at least got be up front about it, eh? Don't beat around the bush.
EDIT: Along the same lines I'm going to put forth the theory that he's being put to death with almost zero evidence against him because it was a police officer that died, and less because of the color of his skin. The State aggressively defends its faithful acolytes, the civilian be damned.
|
He should not be killed. The death penalty is wrong.
|
On September 22 2011 10:52 SonicTitan wrote:
What can I say?
I stand against the idea of a state-enforced death penalty, but even by the State's standards, they don't have enough evidence to put this man to death.
On another note, I'd like to ask what you mean, exactly, by pointing out that "he's black and being held in Georgia." If you mean to imply that his sentence has something to do with the fact that he's black, and furthermore he's being held in a southern (implied "racist") state, then you've just opened up a whole new can of worms. As the story points out, Texas, another southern state, just put a white supremacist to death for dragging a black man behind his vehicle by a chain. We can talk about institutional racism and the moral implications it has for state-enforced capital punishment, but we've at least got be up front about it, eh? Don't beat around the bush.
Many black Americans believe he was convicted, because he was black. In america a lot of people believe that police officers blame a black guy because they know that it will be easy to convict. I know in my town (in Maine) where 90% of the people are white, I see the small number of backs in our town getting pulled over more frequently than other members of our town. It is appalling that racism still is an integral part of our legal system.
|
On September 22 2011 10:57 Supert0fu wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2011 10:52 SonicTitan wrote:
What can I say?
I stand against the idea of a state-enforced death penalty, but even by the State's standards, they don't have enough evidence to put this man to death.
On another note, I'd like to ask what you mean, exactly, by pointing out that "he's black and being held in Georgia." If you mean to imply that his sentence has something to do with the fact that he's black, and furthermore he's being held in a southern (implied "racist") state, then you've just opened up a whole new can of worms. As the story points out, Texas, another southern state, just put a white supremacist to death for dragging a black man behind his vehicle by a chain. We can talk about institutional racism and the moral implications it has for state-enforced capital punishment, but we've at least got be up front about it, eh? Don't beat around the bush. Many black Americans believe he was convicted, because he was black. In america a lot of people believe that police officers blame a black guy because they know that it will be easy to convict. I know in my town (in Maine) where 90% of the people are white, I see the small number of backs in our town getting pulled over more frequently than other members of our town. It is appalling that racism still is an integral part of our legal system.
ah, your from maine? i live in lisbon falls. how bout you?
|
If you take the life of another person and it's not an accident you should have to give your own life. I don't why everyone thinks that's so weird.
|
I'm absolutely against the death penalty, but not solely for moral reasons. When someone is convicted of murder, there are 2 options (for the most part, just to keep it simple) - life in prison or death penalty. Suppose that someone is convicted of murder, but then 5 years later there is substantial evidence that they are actually innocent (which unfortunately does happen very rarely):
A. They were sentenced to life in prison, so they can be released which of course is still in no way fully compensating for their years of wrongful imprisonment but makes the punishment at least partially "reversible."
B. They were sentenced to the death penalty, which is a completely irreversible punishment once fully carried out; there is no way for the government or anyone else to do anything to even slightly right such a wrong.
I also have moral objections to the death penalty which I won't go into here, but just from a logical viewpoint I believe life in prison is still a better punishment for murder than the death penalty.
So of course, in this specific case there being some doubt in the evidence makes the death penalty an absolutely ridiculous choice for the court to make.
|
On September 22 2011 10:48 HellRoxYa wrote:
I prefer a system based on rehabilitation rather than vengance. It tends to foster a gentler society, ie. more trust between people, less violence, etc.
As such the death penalty can never be good, and the US system is bad in general as it seems to put high values on vengance.
Edit: And to be case specific, any time it's not crystal clear beyond all doubts ever, the death penalty instantly becomes problematic. If you are to use the death penalty you better be damned sure you don't accidentally kill someone innocent. In this particular case a commute to life in prison would seem like the obvious choice.
Yeah, I feel the same way. The need for revenge is really strong, especially for victims, but it seems so brutal.
|
Racism might not be the sole cause, but it is worth mentioning. Keep in mind that some counties n Georgia were holding racially segregated proms as late as 2008.
|
The fact that human sacrifice is still being practiced in a number of states reinforces the stereotype many around these parts have that Americans are still culturally somewhat backward. Also, capital punishment is one of the few cases where anti-Americanism is directed not towards the government which routinely practices state-sanctioned homicide in its pseudo colonial pursuits, but towards the people who uphold these laws.
My personal sentiment is that if the people decide this is the best course of action, who are we to judge. In this country we used to summarily execute deserters during WWII; are we all not animals?
|
On September 22 2011 10:59 Megatronn wrote:
If you take the life of another person and it's not an accident you should have to give your own life. I don't why everyone thinks that's so weird.
It has to do with the cultures people are raised in, not even necessarily the general culture across an entire country but the several different atmospheres even just within the U.S.
Having been born in Texas, I personally don't have a problem with the death penalty, I think that what it tries to do is right.
I also know that it's right far more often that it's wrong, but every single time the death penalty is wrongly applied a tragedy beyond human comprehension occurs. As such the system should be under constant scrutiny and always try to improve.
It's definitely a flawed system, but I personally recognize what I believe is the need for such a system.
|
Statistically in i learned in personal law class that only 98.5% of people who recieve the death penalty are guilty, meaning 1.5% die for a crime they didnt commit.
|
I watched this in a critical thinking video that I cannot remember the name of, so it's not an original thought but: I believe that having a death penalty for murder will encourage the murderer to kill any and all witnesses/loose ends due to a survival instinct. With no death penalty there leaves room for compassion, empathy, and the ability for the murder to turn himself in for rehabilitation.
|
I saw this on CNN today, of all places, and the guy seems to come from a pretty rational position.
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/20/prosecutor-says-he-has-no-doubt-about-troy-davis-guilt/?hpt=hp_t1
It's no secret that there is always the in-court battle, and the public relations battle, when it comes to cases like this. When its been reviewed in a court, multiple times, in an environment devoid of emotion, they've always come to the same conclusion; guilty.
I hate the death penalty, however. Ethically, I don't think its our place to decide when to end someone's life, and it's not even feasible fiscally, since the appeals process costs the state an order of magnitude more money than would be spent keeping the person under permanent detainment - offering a chance of redemption without the need for a vindictive end to their life. It's the result of a primitive way of justice, combined with fiscal irresponsibility and I can't in good conscience condone it.
|
On September 22 2011 10:59 Megatronn wrote:
If you take the life of another person and it's not an accident you should have to give your own life. I don't why everyone thinks that's so weird.
vengeance and severe punishment is seen as old and outdated. every second the world gets more progressive and liberal.
anyways that's why people thinks that it's weird. whether taking someones life on purpose should end your life is a different story and heavily debated without an answer.
and people are trying to use statistics and stuff to argue that when someone does someone wrong rehabilitation is a much more effective tool. anyways punishing someone to deter is seen as a really old school approach to helping society. i personally would like the US and specifically the south abolish the death penalty but that's a can of worms i don't wanna open
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
