US Committed Murder Tod...I Mean Carried Out the Death Penalty

[Peppergirl]

I do

covers the costs for all states that have the death penalty-

Thanks foir this, BK - I was hoping someone had it. Thanks for taking the time to respond to me.

[BlaqueKatt]

In regards to the people who are talking about innocent people being locked up or executed is there a study that outlines how many innocents vs guilty are executed and how many people are cleared while alive versus those locked up? I've never heard any specific numbers on this and I am curious.

executed-no studies because no state wants to spend money to admit they executed an innocent person however there is this story from the new yorker-long read but worth it-texas has executed a factually innocent man-Cameron Todd Wilingham.

As for exhonerations check out the innocence project-
There have been 245 post-conviction DNA exonerations in the United States.
Since 1989, there have been tens of thousands of cases where prime suspects were identified and pursued—until DNA testing (prior to conviction) proved that they were wrongly accused.

and they only work on DNA cases-some of these individuals were on death row.


and this is a fantastic representation of our justice system at work
some highlights
The state's chief witness in the case, Paula Gray, claimed to have been at the scene of the crime with the four men. After her testimony secured indictments of all four men, she recanted and the charges against Jimerson were dropped.
Gray, who had been convicted as an accomplice and for perjury after her recantation, reverted to her original story and testified against Williams to gain her own release from prison.
Archie Weston(defense attourney) would later admit during a hearing in a different case that he was so stressed during the trial of Williams, Adams and Rainge that he couldn't think straight. He was disbarred for fraud committed in another case.
Adams's appeals were denied, but Williams and Rainge won new trials and were convicted again based on both the eyewitness testimony and the perjured testimony that had convicted Jimerson.
They also discovered that the police had been tipped to the identity of the actual perpetrators, but did not pursue the lead. Eventually, DNA testing exonerated all four men and implicated three other men, two of whom confessed and pleaded guilty to the crimes in 1997.

The prosecution's star witness later recanted her story, saying she made it up because she felt pressured and threatened by the police.

so 4 men sent to prison and two to death row because somone lied-great system we have

[AdminAssistant]

I'm a woman; but, I find a lot of heinous crimes committed by women are downplayed because oh she was stressed, she was abused, blah blah blah blah. A crime is heinous whether it's committed by men women black white whatever. A crime shouldn't be downplayed because of a person's gender or race. *Sorry for the thread jack, it's just a trend that's irritating to me LOL!*

I just read a pretty interesting book called No Constitutional Right to be Ladies by Linda Kerber for a US Women's History class. It covers all of the various aspects where men and women are not treated equally in the eyes of the law throughout history, everything from property rights, suffrage, jury duty, and the draft. It's an interesting read, if you want to know more about the subject and don't mind dense, academic tomes.

[kibbles]

I just read a pretty interesting book called No Constitutional Right to be Ladies by Linda Kerber for a US Women's History class. It covers all of the various aspects where men and women are not treated equally in the eyes of the law throughout history, everything from property rights, suffrage, jury duty, and the draft. It's an interesting read, if you want to know more about the subject and don't mind dense, academic tomes.

That sounds really interesting (even if it is a bit dense and academic ). Thanks for the tip!

[daleduke17]

I'm a woman; but, I find a lot of heinous crimes committed by women are downplayed because oh she was stressed, she was abused, blah blah blah blah. A crime is heinous whether it's committed by men women black white whatever. A crime shouldn't be downplayed because of a person's gender or race. *Sorry for the thread jack, it's just a trend that's irritating to me LOL!*

"She was on her period...."

[gremcint]

Call it revenge if you want, doesn't change my point that it was a well known consequence of what he CHOSE to do. Therefore I am fine with the death penalty, If you choose to walk off a cliff and die that is a consequence of an action you chose, same thing here.

In fact I say Rapists and Child Molesters should also get the death penalty, and forget lethal injection or electricity we should go back to older methods of execution that are reusable and don't use resources, hanging, guillotine or a knife. Come and join me in supporting a new death penalty initiative: The Green Death Penalty.

[kibbles]

Count me out, I don't feel like supporting the country going backwards in terms of civilization IMO. I think that life sentences should actually mean life sentences and that should be the consequence for criminals who make the choices they do.

[crashhelmet]

I do

covers the costs for all states that have the death penalty-

From that site...

Report of the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice

“The additional cost of confining an inmate to death row, as compared to the maximum security prisons where those sentenced to life without possibility of parole ordinarily serve their sentences, is $90,000 per year per inmate. With California’s current death row population of 670, that accounts for $63.3 million annually.”

Using conservative rough projections, the Commission estimates the annual costs of the present (death penalty) system to be $137 million per year.

The cost of the present system with reforms recommended by the Commission to ensure a fair process would be $232.7 million per year.

The cost of a system in which the number of death-eligible crimes was significantly narrowed would be $130 million per year.

The cost of a system which imposes a maximum penalty of lifetime incarceration instead of the death penalty would be $11.5 million per year.

Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice, June 30, 2008).

Ok. Apparently, it's far cheaper to keep them in jail on a life sentence than on Death Row. I've never worked in corrections, so I'm completely baffled at how that differentiates. Death Row is supposed to be the worst of the prison system. Not a free upgrade to 5 star accommodations.

You know... I'm wondering how much of these costs are inflated with $200 hammers, $50 pop tarts, and other tricks the government likes to do with funding?

I still think we'd be saving money on quicker executions. Why is Richard Ramirez still alive? He was convicted 20 years ago.

CH

[Greenday]

Why is death row more expensive? The inmates need their own section of guards, because they are deemed much more dangerous than anyone else. These guards have to be paid a lot more than regular guards because the prisoners are much more dangerous. Meal time is done a different way because they can't be brought into the mess hall with everyone else. Etc. etc.

[Lace Neil Singer]

Want nightmares? Look up the Phoenix strangler. That scumbag is still alive and well in South Africa, where they don't have the death penalty.

I'll take your Phoenix strangler and raise you a Pedro Lopez. Seriously, this guy raped and murdered hundreds of young girls and nope, he didn't get the death penalty. Plus, he's free right now; he served his sentence then was deported. Seeing as he wasn't caught for fucking years and police thought that the girls were being kidnapped by white slavers rather than being murdered, he could still be doing it now.

Sweet dreams.

[DesignFox]

<snip>
Sweet dreams.

*sad puppy face*

I do not have my boyfriend to hug me if I wake up crying from nightmares tonight.

I am NOT looking up those details today.

And Greenday, if death row inmates require the special guards, meal times, etc. that isn't going to change if we keep them alive...so...I don't see how giving them life sentences would save money on those particular examples. They'd still be the most dangerous criminals and require maximum security type treatment.

I think the only reason we spend so much more to execute someone is because of the appeals process. Unless I misinterpreted information...

[Greenday]

And Greenday, if death row inmates require the special guards, meal times, etc. that isn't going to change if we keep them alive...so...I don't see how giving them life sentences would save money on those particular examples. They'd still be the most dangerous criminals and require maximum security type treatment.

If we didn't have death row, they wouldn't have to be separated from the general population and wouldn't need any special stuff.

[Nyoibo]

If we didn't have death row, they wouldn't have to be separated from the general population and wouldn't need any special stuff.

I'm going to turn that arguement around and ask then why can't they be put into general population where they don't need that stuff until it's their time?

[Greenday]

I'm going to turn that arguement around and ask then why can't they be put into general population where they don't need that stuff until it's their time?

By giving them the death penalty, we are saying they are unable to live with anyone. As such we obviously have to separate them from everyone else.

[Nyoibo]

So what, if they didn't have the death penalty then that would magically make them safer around others?