This is an example of why I think we should never completely do away with the death penalty

TJ8869

HR Legend
Gold Member
Dec 7, 2006
47,430
45,233
113
Guy decapitated his pregnant ex-girlfriend and put her head in a dumpster. The woman’s mother went to her home to check on her and found her daughter’s headless body on the floor.

There is no reason why this guy needs to keep taking up space for another 60 years. There is no rehabilitation from decapitating someone. There is nothing he has to offer humanity from this point forward.

Link
 

Finance85

HR Legend
Oct 22, 2003
16,808
17,553
113
Guy decapitated his pregnant ex-girlfriend and put her head in a dumpster. The woman’s mother went to her home to check on her and found her daughter’s headless body on the floor.

There is no reason why this guy needs to keep taking up space for another 60 years. There is no rehabilitation from decapitating someone. There is nothing he has to offer humanity from this point forward.

Link
How do we know with certainty the ex-boyfriend did it? Not beyond a reasonable doubt, but with certainty. I agree the death penalty should be a possible sentence, but only in cases where it's certain the accused person did it, and the crime is heinous. There are too many cases of circumstantial evidence being used to convict innocent people. Even DNA isn't the answer. We all constantly leave our DNA all over the place. There no way to tell when and how DNA got somewhere. I watch enough Dateline and other true crime to see how juries think prosecution theories are facts.
 

seminole97

HR Legend
Jun 14, 2005
16,643
16,791
113
Guy decapitated his pregnant ex-girlfriend and put her head in a dumpster. The woman’s mother went to her home to check on her and found her daughter’s headless body on the floor.

There is no reason why this guy needs to keep taking up space for another 60 years. There is no rehabilitation from decapitating someone. There is nothing he has to offer humanity from this point forward.

Link
I’ve worked with the child protection teams in Florida for over 20 years now. I don’t need any imagination to fathom crimes that should be punishable by death. But I’ve read too many times where innocent people were convicted of terrible crimes to support the death penalty in practice.
We definitely have people society would be better off without.
 

TJ8869

HR Legend
Gold Member
Dec 7, 2006
47,430
45,233
113
How do we know with certainty the ex-boyfriend did it? Not beyond a reasonable doubt, but with certainty. I agree the death penalty should be a possible sentence, but only in cases where it's certain the accused person did it, and the crime is heinous. There are too many cases of circumstantial evidence being used to convict innocent people. Even DNA isn't the answer. We all constantly leave our DNA all over the place. There no way to tell when and how DNA got somewhere. I watch enough Dateline and other true crime to see how juries think prosecution theories are facts.
He’s entitled to due process. But if it is determined that he did this then capital punishment should be on the table.
 

Finance85

HR Legend
Oct 22, 2003
16,808
17,553
113
He’s entitled to due process. But if it is determined that he did this then capital punishment should be on the table.
I somewhat agree, but determined how? Because he's the ex-boyfriend? What level of evidence do you propose is enough to convict, and sentence to death?
 
  • Like
Reactions: sober_teacher

goldmom

HR Legend
Mar 29, 2002
19,180
22,371
113
So he’s denying guilt?
I am not generally in favor of death and about 99% of the time I favor life without parole but in a separate prison with other depraved humans who are likely to have their own code of justified life/death.
 

TJ8869

HR Legend
Gold Member
Dec 7, 2006
47,430
45,233
113
I somewhat agree, but determined how? Because he's the ex-boyfriend? What level of evidence do you propose is enough to convict, and sentence to death?
Maybe video camera footage places him at the scene of the crime around the time it happened. It seems like almost half the houses in America have a Ring doorbell camera these days.

Cell phone GPS history.

Did he have a history of abusing her and/or make death threats against her.

It’s the state’s responsibility to build a case against him. All I’m saying is that if a jury determines beyond the shadow of a doubt that he did this, then I see no reason why we should keep him alive.
 

lucas80

HR King
Gold Member
Jan 30, 2008
93,983
119,843
113
I will repeat for HROT my views on why the death penalty is wrong in no particular order.
1. The OP's story is used as a justification for why the death penalty is needed, but crimes this heinous are not the ones where the death penalty is most applied. And, the more heinous the crime, the more bias in the jury becomes a factor. People have issues thinking objectively, especially when kids are involved.
2. Statistics show the death penalty is applied most to poor people, black and brown people, and most often to poor black and brown people. The Fugitive was a neat movie, but right white dudes don't get sentenced to death. Juries, cops, prosecutors, judges... They can all be biased.
3. Many prosecutors have political ambitions, and they push death penalty cases in order to burnish their credentials. Governors refuse to step in and use their powers to offer commutations or pardons. Think of Bill Clinton when he was running for POTUS and Arkansas executed an imbecile. Clinton could have, and should have given a commutation, but he knew he'd be attacked as soft on crime.
4. Death penalty cases are expensive. If society pushes for the death penalty, they need to fund an appropriate defense. Especially to fund expert testimony or scientific tests.
5. The death penalty has proven to be highly stressful on the corrections staff who carry out the sentence.
I'm leaving off a few things, but, this is just off the top of my head.
 

nu2u

HR Legend
Aug 10, 2006
14,897
16,124
113
But I’ve read too many times where innocent people were convicted of terrible crimes to support the death penalty in practice.
One group, The Innocence Project, has overturned 375 convictions since it was founded in 1992 - prisoners with decades long sentences, including 26 prisoners who were wrongfully convicted and sentenced to death. This group relies on donations; it is therefore limited in the number of cases it can accept. The average length of incarceration prior to freedom is 16 years.

The US justice system is the best in the world but it isn't perfect.
 

Finance85

HR Legend
Oct 22, 2003
16,808
17,553
113
Maybe video camera footage places him at the scene of the crime around the time it happened. It seems like almost half the houses in America have a Ring doorbell camera these days.

Cell phone GPS history.

Did he have a history of abusing her and/or make death threats against her.

It’s the state’s responsibility to build a case against him. All I’m saying is that if a jury determines beyond the shadow of a doubt that he did this, then I see no reason why we should keep him alive.
It's a good conversation. That said, the standard for conviction everywhere is beyond a reasonable doubt. When I went through jury selection, the prosecutor made it clear that the standard wasn't "beyond any doubt".

I drive within two blocks of an ex-girlfriend's house every time I go to the grocery store. We parted on good terms, and have had no issues, but a dishonest or incompetent prosecutor could make a case I'm stalking her. I suspect there's some of my blood and DNA on her tools from doing yard work and maintenance on her house.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I believe there's no value in some people, and they should be treated like rabid dogs. Ted Bundy is a prime example.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom

Tenacious E

HR Legend
Gold Member
Dec 4, 2001
31,322
32,157
113
I will repeat for HROT my views on why the death penalty is wrong in no particular order.
1. The OP's story is used as a justification for why the death penalty is needed, but crimes this heinous are not the ones where the death penalty is most applied. And, the more heinous the crime, the more bias in the jury becomes a factor. People have issues thinking objectively, especially when kids are involved.
2. Statistics show the death penalty is applied most to poor people, black and brown people, and most often to poor black and brown people. The Fugitive was a neat movie, but right white dudes don't get sentenced to death. Juries, cops, prosecutors, judges... They can all be biased.
3. Many prosecutors have political ambitions, and they push death penalty cases in order to burnish their credentials. Governors refuse to step in and use their powers to offer commutations or pardons. Think of Bill Clinton when he was running for POTUS and Arkansas executed an imbecile. Clinton could have, and should have given a commutation, but he knew he'd be attacked as soft on crime.
4. Death penalty cases are expensive. If society pushes for the death penalty, they need to fund an appropriate defense. Especially to fund expert testimony or scientific tests.
5. The death penalty has proven to be highly stressful on the corrections staff who carry out the sentence.
I'm leaving off a few things, but, this is just off the top of my head.
I also have articulated my position previously. I am for the the death penalty if there is super proof for the most heinous crimes. For example, if there are multiple videos of someone shooting up a movie theater, you find various corpses in a cannibal's home in varying degrees of consumption, etc. In the Round Lake case also on the board, you have a bunch of drowned kids in a bathtub of the dad who wanted to deprive his estranged wife of them, who then tried to unsuccessfully commit suicide multiple times in the aftermath. In this case, let's see what the evidence is, including if there is video evidence. Perhaps his finger prints on her severed head.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Finance85

ThorneStockton

HR Legend
Oct 2, 2009
24,554
34,868
113
I don't really have a moral issue against the death penalty. I am generally against it based on the possibilities of misapplication. However, in scenarios where the crime is particularly heinous and there is no doubt at all, absolutely certain who did it and under what circumstances, sure.

How that standard is drafted and then applied by humans without introducing the possibility of error, I don't know exactly.
 
May 17, 2021
1,216
2,598
113
Absolutely horrible and heinous crime. But what about people who have cause lifetimes of trauma by having sexually abused several or sometimes even dozens or hundreds of children?

what about secretaries of state like Kissinger who presided over horrendous and unjust decisions like carpet bombing Cambodia and covering it up, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people? Apparently for Kissinger he is supposed to be a hero of some kind, correct?

We usually focus on small time criminals and particularly violent crimes and get our justice fix from them, part of the bread and circuses campaign to distract us away from the truly horrible crimes and the horrible people with great power who commit them and get away with it, some of them we love so much that we keep voting for them.

it has been proven that the death penalty is absolutely no deterrent. Also there are many examples of innocent people having been sentenced to die and their cases overturned because of corruption or ineptitude, and there have been many people who’ve been put to death who are innocent. It’s also much more expensive to convict someone to death and go through that whole process than to imprison someone for decades even. The death penalty is a relic of the middle ages And should be done away with if we have any hope to consider ourselves civilized society.
 

goldmom

HR Legend
Mar 29, 2002
19,180
22,371
113
It's a good conversation. That said, the standard for conviction everywhere is beyond a reasonable doubt. When I went through jury selection, the prosecutor made it clear that the standard wasn't "beyond any doubt".

I drive within two blocks of an ex-girlfriend's house every time I go to the grocery store. We parted on good terms, and have had no issues, but a dishonest or incompetent prosecutor could make a case I'm stalking her. I suspect there's some of my blood and DNA on her tools from doing yard work and maintenance on her house.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I believe there's no value in some people, and they should be treated like rabid dogs. Ted Bundy is a prime example.
Bundy is one of those cases where he demonstrated a clear and present danger to females when he was free. He escaped from one jail and would have tried again.
Rabid dog is fairly accurate.
 

Pinehawk

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2003
20,294
14,956
113
The prison sentence is for punishment in this example.
The death penalty lets them escape that punishment.
It's much harder to live 40-60 years in a cell, than to get a shot and go to sleep forever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman

Tenacious E

HR Legend
Gold Member
Dec 4, 2001
31,322
32,157
113
The prison sentence is for punishment in this example.
The death penalty lets them escape that punishment.
Its much harder to live 40-60 years in a cell, than to get a shot and go to sleep forever.
That is not my perspective. Prison is for deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, and retribution. Execution is for incapacitation and retribution, which is well-deserved in some instances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Finance85

lucas80

HR King
Gold Member
Jan 30, 2008
93,983
119,843
113
I also have articulated my position previously. I am for the the death penalty if there is super proof for the most heinous crimes. For example, if there are multiple videos of someone shooting up a movie theater, you find various corpses in a cannibal's home in varying degrees of consumption, etc. In the Round Lake case also on the board, you have a bunch of drowned kids in a bathtub of the dad who wanted to deprive his estranged wife of them, who then tried to unsuccessfully commit suicide multiple times in the aftermath. In this case, let's see what the evidence is, including if there is video evidence. Perhaps his finger prints on her severed head.
I get it. But, as I said, cases like this one are the ones where rules are bent the most, and people make trade offs mentally in the jury room, and people just don't think clearly.
 

Tenacious E

HR Legend
Gold Member
Dec 4, 2001
31,322
32,157
113
I get it. But, as I said, cases like this one are the ones where rules are bent the most, and people make trade offs mentally in the jury room, and people just don't think clearly.
And I get it that the death penalty may not be appropriate in this case, if there is no "super proof". I mean, it COULD be like a Shawshank Redemption scenario.
 

sober_teacher

HR Legend
Mar 26, 2007
12,916
15,830
113
I don't really have a moral issue against the death penalty. I am generally against it based on the possibilities of misapplication. However, in scenarios where the crime is particularly heinous and there is no doubt at all, absolutely certain who did it and under what circumstances, sure.

How that standard is drafted and then applied by humans without introducing the possibility of error, I don't know exactly.
We can’t and therein lies my objection to the death penalty. We’ve simply seen too many instances where there was police or prosecutorial misconduct -fabricating or losing key evidence, witnesses lying or being wrong, exonerating evidence not being found until later, or jury just being wrong. You’d have to conclusively, beyond any shadow of a doubt prove that this person did the deed, with no assumptions involved for me to even consider the death penalty.
 

lucas80

HR King
Gold Member
Jan 30, 2008
93,983
119,843
113
Not sure how I forgot this, but, I read a book years ago that rather forcefully documented that 1/10 death penalty convictions were faulty. Not that the person was a completely innocent person, but they didn't do the crime that they were convicted of. DNA is nice, but my belief is that we still execute innocent people in this country.
Get all of the things wrong with the death penalty, and then I'll be persuadable that it is justified.
 
May 27, 2010
14,947
18,616
113
I’ve evolved in my feelings about this over the years and my position now is that the government shouldn’t be in the business of executing people. Too many innocent people have been wrongly convicted and executed over the years and because of that, no matter how rare it is, I just can’t support the practice.

Do many criminals deserve execution? Absolutely, but it doesn’t outweigh the death of an innocent person, for me anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NoleinATL

SolarHawk

HR MVP
Jun 27, 2021
1,145
2,406
113
One group, The Innocence Project, has overturned 375 convictions since it was founded in 1992 - prisoners with decades long sentences, including 26 prisoners who were wrongfully convicted and sentenced to death. This group relies on donations; it is therefore limited in the number of cases it can accept. The average length of incarceration prior to freedom is 16 years.

The US justice system is the most profitable in the world but it isn't perfect.
FIFY
 

fsu1jreed

HR Legend
Apr 1, 2002
48,246
5,008
113
I'm a liberal tree hugger, but acknowledge that some people shouldn't be breathing any longg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Finance85

nu2u

HR Legend
Aug 10, 2006
14,897
16,124
113
You changed my original post to read: "The US justice system is the most profitable in the world but it isn't perfect"

While I'm aware of contract "for profit" jaills and would agree that they should be eliminated wherever possible, have you ever reviewed a county or city budget to discover the expense line items costs related to incarceration? The taxpayers aren't making any money on housing, feeding, and accomodating inmates.
 

Keehawk

HR All-American
May 24, 2011
4,960
4,607
113
Imo executing someone like this or the guy who drowned his kids is not worth the executions from other cases that might not be as egregious or have certainty of guilt. Unless we can be 100% sure that not one single innocent person is killed, then the death penalty needs to end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SolarHawk

SolarHawk

HR MVP
Jun 27, 2021
1,145
2,406
113
You changed my original post to read: "The US justice system is the most profitable in the world but it isn't perfect"

While I'm aware of contract "for profit" jaills and would agree that they should be eliminated wherever possible, have you ever reviewed a county or city budget to discover the expense line items costs related to incarceration? The taxpayers aren't making any money on housing, feeding, and accomodating inmates.
Yes, I’m aware taxpayers are footing the bill. For profit prisons are absurd and the ugly reality of our justice system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nu2u

23 so far

HR Heisman
Mar 24, 2016
9,399
16,939
113
The prison sentence is for punishment in this example.
The death penalty lets them escape that punishment.
It's much harder to live 40-60 years in a cell, than to get a shot and go to sleep forever.
Don't care. Hang these bastards in the public square.
 

23 so far

HR Heisman
Mar 24, 2016
9,399
16,939
113
Imo executing someone like this or the guy who drowned his kids is not worth the executions from other cases that might not be as egregious or have certainty of guilt. Unless we can be 100% sure that not one single innocent person is killed, then the death penalty needs to end.
It's 2022. In cases where there is irrefutable proof, your ass goes down, and there are a shit ton of those when you're constantly being watched.

The Average Joe is probably being filmed about 50% of the time on a normal day if you bother to leave your house.
 

hawkifann

HR Legend
Gold Member
Oct 5, 2001
37,834
15,695
113
I agree the death penalty should be a possible sentence, but only in cases where it's certain the accused person did it, and the crime is heinous.
How do you define “heinous”? Death penalty is almost impossible to apply “fairly” or “equitably”.
 

hawkifann

HR Legend
Gold Member
Oct 5, 2001
37,834
15,695
113
Not sure how I forgot this, but, I read a book years ago that rather forcefully documented that 1/10 death penalty convictions were faulty. Not that the person was a completely innocent person, but they didn't do the crime that they were convicted of. DNA is nice, but my belief is that we still execute innocent people in this country.
Get all of the things wrong with the death penalty, and then I'll be persuadable that it is justified.
There are scenarios where, regardless of the story the DA tries to tell, that DNA evidence is worthless. If my wife (no pic) catches the dead tomorrow and I’m investigated, guess what - they’ll find my DNA all over the house. They can prove I was here. They could prove that we had contact, but that would be useless in a murder conviction. Example would be that I own a machete that I use to hack away at bamboo and other overgrowth in my yard. I’ve used it plenty and cut myself a couple times, including 4-5 days ago. If that were to become a weapon of harm for anything in my house, my DNA will likely be found on it, whether I was the one wielding it or not.
 

Latest posts