I live in Texas, the death penalty capital of the United States. And for the most part, I support the death penalty (I know...that's not very characteristic of my otherwise Liberal philosophy). Child molesters, for example, should either be executed (in my opinion) or locked up forever. They can't be rehabilitated and every time the state releases one, they are gambling with the safety of our children, and against very poor odds, I might add.

But all that aside, in this morning's paper there was a story about a man who has been on Texas' death row for 31 years. Not just in prison - he has been in lock down on death row for over 3 decades. He killed a young man in the commission of a felony (armed robbery). Maybe he deserved the death penalty, or maybe he should have received life in prison. What he got was both.

I think that after 31 years, this man has paid his debt. He is not in some "country club prison" where he can play golf and surf the 'Net. He is not allowed TV (he has a radio). He gets one 5 minute phone call every 3 months. He has no cell mate....no contact with other human beings except the guards and an occasional visitor, viewed only thru thick, bullet-proof glass.

Rick Perry is not going to commute this man's sentence, but if I were governor of Texas, I would.

This is another area where I too stray from my liberal roots. I belive in reform, but I also believe that some people cannot be reformed.

The way we execute people now costs too much. It costs hundreds of thousands per year, per person, for death row housing. It's absurd that people are on death row for decades.

**Edit: I should clarify. It's not the technical way we execute people that costs too much. The drugs & equipment for a lethal injection costs around $83, but the average execution costs over $3 million.

The article said it costs $65.00 per day to keep an inmate on death row in the Texas penal system. So I guess that's a bargain (tongue planted firmly in cheek).

There is no telling how much we have spent on this one man over the years for appeals, etc. His case has been overturned and re-tried several times - strictly on technicalities relating to the sentencing phase. There was never any question about his guilt.

There was never, of course, any attempt to rehabilitate this man, as it was understood from the beginning that he would never get out of prison. But he has come to terms with what he did and makes no excuses. He said, "Yes, I was young, but from the time you're six years old, you know right from wrong."

He does believe that each day of life is a blessing but thinks he truly has paid his debt to society. He went to prison as a 20 year old in 1976. He's never seen a computer, an ipod, a cell phone, or a CD. E-mail and the Internet sound like science fiction to him. When he went to prison, Gerald Ford was in office. And time will continue to stand still for him until his execution, which is supposed to take place within a month, but who knows?

This man's crime was horrible - he beat a man to death with the stock of a shotgun - but how many killers serve 31 years? Not many.....

I don't understand the reasoning for keeping them alive so long. If a person is sentenced to Death, this should be carried out as quickly as possible. Not only would it be an example to others, but it would also save LOTS of $$$ to taxpayers.

Executions are always years away from the trial, even the swiftest ones. Texas law provides an automatic appeals process for anyone who received the death penalty. And those wheels turn very slowly.

Yeah, actual costs of the actual housing average under $100, just like actual execution averages under $100. But we pay out the ass for both once you factor in the process.

I don't understand the reasoning for keeping them alive so long. If a person is sentenced to Death, this should be carried out as quickly as possible. Not only would it be an example to others, but it would also save LOTS of $$$ to taxpayers.

I agree. The usual argument is "you never know" when someone is truly innocent, and it's not fair to deny them the opportunity of winning an appeal. Whatever. There was someone in my uncle's prison whose appeal is still going after 11 years. And - switching to "criminal" mode - if I committed a crime, and was sentenced to death, you bet your ass the first thing I'd do is start filing for appeals left and right, and hope that the appeals process would take long enough that I could rot away in prison in the meantime.

Several states have tried to get a cap on appeals implemented. I'm not sure how many have been successful. At one time Florida was one of the states pushing the hardest, wanting to implement not only a cap to the number of appeals, but a time limit of 5 years to end the appeal. The courts saw it as the state wanting to kill people quickly, irrespective of innocence. The state saw it as the court system being too afraid of the state stepping on its territory.

I went to college with James McCloskey, the man who started "Centurion Ministries", a group who has gotten dozens of innocent men (who had been convicted of murder and who were on death row awaiting execution) out of jail. "Centurion Ministries" never used technicalities to free the death row inmates, unless you consider "not having committed the murder" a technicality.

There have been close to 100 death row inmates who were found to be not guilty. One inmate was on death row for 18 years.

In Illinois, a graduate class at Northwestern, interviewed a death row inmate for a class project and decided to investigate his assertion that he was innocent. They eventually tracked down the real murderer who confessed when confronted. No believing their luck that they had picked the only innocent man on death row at that prison by random chance, they interviewed another death row inmate. By the time they were through, 13 of 25 death row inmates were found to be innocent and the students had tracked down all 13 of the murderers (who all confessed when found).

You can set a man free when he is serving a sentence of “life with no chance of parole” if he is found innocent at a later date, but you can not free a man from a miscarriage of justice which culminates in his execution and death.

I went to college with James McCloskey, the man who started "Centurion Ministries", a group who has gotten dozens of innocent men (who had been convicted of murder and who were on death row awaiting execution) out of jail. "Centurion Ministries" never used technicalities to free the death row inmates, unless you consider "not having committed the murder" a technicality.

There have been close to 100 death row inmates who were found to be not guilty. One inmate was on death row for 18 years.

In Illinois, a graduate class at Northwestern, interviewed a death row inmate for a class project and decided to investigate his assertion that he was innocent. They eventually tracked down the real murderer who confessed when confronted. No believing their luck that they had picked the only innocent man on death row at that prison by random chance, they interviewed another death row inmate. By the time they were through, 13 of 25 death row inmates were found to be innocent and the students had tracked down all 13 of the murderers (who all confessed when found).

You can set a man free when he is serving a sentence of “life with no chance of parole” if he is found innocent at a later date, but you can not free a man from a miscarriage of justice which culminates in his execution and death.

That's my problem w/the death penalty. There's no telling how many innocent people have been executed.

That's my problem w/the death penalty. There's no telling how many innocent people have been executed.

Some people have been quick to point out that no one who has been executed for murder in the USA has ever been found to be innocent afterwards. :faint:

Of course not. There is nothing in our judicial system that would allow a dead man to be retried.

If a man was executed for a murder and a week later a man showed up with a video tape of himself committing the murder and the murder weapon, and then he confessed and related details only the true murderer could know, the executed man could still not be found innocent in a court of law. There is no process on the books to do it.

Several states have tried to get a cap on appeals implemented. I'm not sure how many have been successful. At one time Florida was one of the states pushing the hardest, wanting to implement not only a cap to the number of appeals, but a time limit of 5 years to end the appeal. The courts saw it as the state wanting to kill people quickly, irrespective of innocence.

Texas has the same mindset. As one comedian said, while other states are doing away with the death penalty, Texas has put in an express lane.

I am right now in the middle of reading a John Grisham book....the only non-fiction book he's written....based on small-town 'justice' in Ada, OK....and the young men who were convicted of two un-related murders , sentenced to death and were later proven to be not guilty. One was extremely mentally ill and should never have even stood trial. Title -INNOCENT MAN.

I am right now in the middle of reading a John Grisham book....the only non-fiction book he's written....based on small-town 'justice' in Ada, OK....and the young men who were convicted of two un-related murders , sentenced to death and were later proven to be not guilty. One was extremely mentally ill and should never have even stood trial. Title -INNOCENT MAN.

I need to read that...I like John Grisham.

Ted Kopel when he was still doing NightLine, interviewed the Governor of Virginia.

There was a man on death row who had been convicted of the rape and murder of a young women many years earlier and was approaching his execution.

He was convicted based on his alleged confession to a cell-mate while awaiting trial. That cell-mate, who had been moved to the man's cell because he had been arrested numerous times before and had always been able to get off early by getting people awaiting trial to confess to him (even though it was proven a some occasions that lies were involved), testified that the man on trial had said that he had broken into the woman's home by himself and while raping her in a semi-missionary position had stabbed her repeatedly in the chest.

Since his rape and murder conviction, DNA had come on the scene. The semen on the clothing that the victim was wearing when murdered proved to be that of another person after a DNA test. Virginia has a law that new evidence can not be submitted after a time-frame (I think 6 months or a year) so since this was over ten years later, no new trial could be ordered. The prosecuting attorney said he would not ask for a new trial, because the DNA only proved that he was not the rapist, not that he was not the murderer (even though the only evidence was the alleged confession to the cell-mate which said the rape and murder was done alone).

Ted Kopel asked the governor who was a death penalty advocate what he was going to do. The governor said he might pardon him, but that Virginia was going to pass a bill that would cap appeals at about 5 or 6 years, so this situation would not happen again. Ted kopel said if that law had been in effect when the man was convicted, he would have been executed 5 years before it was found he was not guilty.

The governor replied "yes I know".

Ted Kopel asked the governor who was a death penalty advocate what he was going to do. The governor said he might pardon him, but that Virginia was going to pass a bill that would cap appeals at about 5 or 6 years, so this situation would not happen again. Ted kopel said if that law had been in effect when the man was convicted, he would have been executed 5 years before it was found he was not guilty.

The governor replied "yes I know".

That is awful...

I don't support the death penalty because even one innocent person being put to death is too many. Too many innocent people suffer in jail and die. Too many are falsely accused.

That being said, I don't know how I would feel if a loved one was a victim of homocide, and I totally understand victim's families supporting the death penalty. I don't think I would change my stance, but I can't really be 100% certain.

It's a complicated issue for sure. But my official stance is that I do not support it.

I feel the same way, Sunta. I am very much against the death penalty, for the same reason you are. As a family member of a murder victim (my cousin was killed by his wife, who then forced their daughters to help her hide the body), I understand that the victim's family wants revenge and vengeance, but I feel our society should take the higher road. I like the saying "an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind."

I feel the same way, Sunta. I am very much against the death penalty, for the same reason you are. As a family member of a murder victim (my cousin was killed by his wife, who then forced their daughters to help her hide the body), I understand that the victim's family wants revenge and vengeance, but I feel our society should take the higher road. I like the saying "an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind."

Contrary to popular opinion, "an eye for an eye" was not justification for getting even, but a limit to the amount of retrobution. "No more than an eye for an eye" was what they meant.