Another reason forthe death penalty to go

[ed]

On Monday, a state trial judge found there was enough evidence to justify a hearing about Mr. Awkal’s sanity but that he could not hold one immediately because witnesses were not available. The Ohio Supreme Court should have granted a stay of execution, which it wrongly denied shortly before the governor stepped in because of the trial court’s finding.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/07/opini ... D88C73E601

So the thinking was that since it was a problem to assemble witnesses we ought to just kill a human being because otherwise it is inconvenient or something. Is that it?

[DrMatt]

On Monday, a state trial judge found there was enough evidence to justify a hearing about Mr. Awkal’s sanity but that he could not hold one immediately because witnesses were not available. The Ohio Supreme Court should have granted a stay of execution, which it wrongly denied shortly before the governor stepped in because of the trial court’s finding.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/07/opini ... D88C73E601

So the thinking was that since it was a problem to assemble witnesses we ought to just kill a human being because otherwise it is inconvenient or something. Is that it?

Getting all libberul on us in your old age?

[ed]

always was.

[Nyarlathotep]

On Monday, a state trial judge found there was enough evidence to justify a hearing about Mr. Awkal’s sanity but that he could not hold one immediately because witnesses were not available. The Ohio Supreme Court should have granted a stay of execution, which it wrongly denied shortly before the governor stepped in because of the trial court’s finding.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/07/opini ... D88C73E601

So the thinking was that since it was a problem to assemble witnesses we ought to just kill a human being because otherwise it is inconvenient or something. Is that it?

Yep, sounds like it. Plus if they go ahead and execute the guy it makes all the politicians involved look tough on crime. So there was no downside to killing him and no upside to not killing him. Of course they were going to deny his stay. What's a man's life if it advances one's political career?

To be honest, I am surprised that the governor granted him a stay. He would have benefitted too.

[Anaxagoras]

On Monday, a state trial judge found there was enough evidence to justify a hearing about Mr. Awkal’s sanity but that he could not hold one immediately because witnesses were not available. The Ohio Supreme Court should have granted a stay of execution, which it wrongly denied shortly before the governor stepped in because of the trial court’s finding.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/07/opini ... D88C73E601

So the thinking was that since it was a problem to assemble witnesses we ought to just kill a human being because otherwise it is inconvenient or something. Is that it?

Pro tip: If you cut off everything from the URL after html, you can view the article without it counting against your 10 articles per month limit.

[corplinx]

I used to be very pro death penalty. I think anyone seeking a more rational and evidence based reality eventually winds up opposing it because support carries far too many disclaimers as time goes by.

The government should not be allowed to kill people. Not because some of those people don't deserve it, but because the government being composed of humans, is very fallible to a point of compounded fallibility.

[Abdul Alhazred]

I'm with corplinx on this, but it's more than just a question of "fallibility".

Prosecutors frequently prosecute people they know are innocent for the purpose of getting ahead as prosecutors (or later in politics). This happens all the time.

The system is set up in a way that actively encourages such malfeasance. An honest prosecutor has a serious career disadvantage.

[ed]

I think that the Rutgers incident gave many folks pause.

[Anaxagoras]

You know who should get the death penalty? Spammers. And people who write malware.

Motherfuckers.

[Rob Lister]

You know who should get the death penalty? Spammers. And people who write malware.

Motherfuckers.

And people that take up two parking spaces.

[Bearguin]

You know who should get the death penalty? Spammers. And people who write malware.

Motherfuckers.

And people that take up two parking spaces.

Don't forget people who yell "In the Hole" every time a golfer hits a ball. But they need to be shot in the gut so they die slowly and painfully, in full view of the cameras as a lesson to the rest in the crowd.

[Bruce]

You know who should get the death penalty? Spammers. And people who write malware.

Motherfuckers.

And people that take up two parking spaces.

Don't forget people who yell "In the Hole" every time a golfer hits a ball. But they need to be shot in the gut so they die slowly and painfully, in full view of the cameras as a lesson to the rest in the crowd.

There must be a worse punishment for people who made pop-up ads, especially the ones that suddenly expand and cover the article you're trying to read.