Grisham’s “The Innocent Man” modified my view. Not opposed to the death penalty, but I do believe evidence should be so concrete no person of reasonable intelligence could deny.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Biden's Pardons
- Thread starter UKDslayer
- Start date
Grisham’s “The Innocent Man” modified my view. Not opposed to the death penalty, but I do believe evidence should be so concrete no person of reasonable intelligence could deny.
There are some cases out there that should make everyone question any decision by the justice system. If you start down the wrongful conviction rabbit hole, it doesn't take long to realize that nobody is safe from the jack boots and their DA's with that gavel in their eyes. There is nothing some of them aren't willing to do to see a conviction. Their careers are based on conviction rates, and you're just the 50th person they've seen this month. To some of them, you're just a nail and they are the hammer. Oh, and if they get caught, nothing happens. They can't punish them, because then they could potentially get a retrial for every conviction they've achieved in their careers. This little snag is how kamala Harris avoided (I think it was 5 seperate convictions for felony jury interference, evidence tampering etc.). They found her guilty 5 times but wouldn't convict her because it would open thousands of her previous cases to an automatic retrial. Can't have that.
Last edited:
Yes, a "collateral" deterrent. I just don't believe TPTB should "promote" or "market" it as a deterrent (i.e. "We should have the death penalty because it will deter crime").
Pretty effective deterrent. I believe it was Roy Bean that said, “I’m not hanging you because you stole a horse. I’m hanging you so you don’t steal another.
Want to get really pissed off? Google Pee Wee Gaskins. Read about his victims and why he was finally executed.
I don't deny that it definitely deters that one individual from committing more crimes. But, again, that's a "collateral benefit." I guess I'll have to agree to disagree with Roy Bean. One should not execute people "so they don't commit" future crimes. They should execute only "because of the crime they've already committed."
If I wereTrump, I’d have Pam Bondy as Attorney General challenge every one of the pardons, as it’s clearly unlikely Biden granted them. Someone else did it in his name. Only the president can grant a pardon.
FJB still has to sign them. So. technically, he's responsible, even though others prep the letters and shove them in front of him for his signature.
Team Trump Responds to Biden's Decision to Commute Sentences of 37 of 40 Prisoners on Federal Death Row - Including Child Rapists and Killers | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila
In response to Biden's historic commutation of federal death row inmates, Trump vows to reinstate capital punishment, igniting a fierce debate on justice and clemency. Discover the details behind this unfolding political drama.
www.thegatewaypundit.com
If that's the case, then yes, it should be investigated by the DOJ. He's supposed to sign his own docs, or if he can't, then invoke the 25th.
Of course, I suspect FJB will pardon everyone in his family (including Jill) so it really doesn't matter.
foolish thinking on my part that he would just help pack and load the moving trucks for a few weeks
If anyone thinks/believes that the deep state has rolled over and quit just because Trump won they are in for an awakening.
"Among those who will no longer face the death penalty is a monster who raped two little girls before stabbing them to death.
Jorge Avila-Torrez: In 2005, Avila-Torrez sexually assaulted two little girls, Laura Hobbs, 8, and Krystal Tobias, 9 before stabbing them both to death. Avila-Torrez also strangled naval officer Amanda Snell, 20, to death inside her barracks in Virginia."
Jorge Avila-Torrez: In 2005, Avila-Torrez sexually assaulted two little girls, Laura Hobbs, 8, and Krystal Tobias, 9 before stabbing them both to death. Avila-Torrez also strangled naval officer Amanda Snell, 20, to death inside her barracks in Virginia."
Proving that his commutations were 100% political and he has zero valid or virtuous reasons behind them. A woketard placating the other woketards.
I am against the death penalty, will argue against it, but unless there was a good reason to commute or pardon the people convicted and sentenced I wouldn't do it even if it was within my power. It's the law, and people wrung their hands over these decisions for a very long time, as well as considering the impacts on the victims, which Biden did not do... When you look at Trump's pardons and commutations, as far as I've seen, there was always a reason, like it was an egregiously long sentence for a first offense, or there is evidence that wasn't allowed by a judge at the trial.
At least Biden wasn't paid like Clinton was for Marc Rich.
I would hope that the "Autopen" is for more mundane things than Pardons/commutations. If FJB is allowing pardons, etc. to be "autopen'ed," then I say again, DOJ investigation.
i am pro death penalty, but i don't think of it as the state killing people.
convicted murderers choose their own crimes and the associated penalties.
we have no say in what they choose. i am not killing anyone.
that said, i would prefer lifetime incarceration if not for the ability of most humans to adapt reasonably well to confinement.
/and we don't allow torture unless they are j6ers.
- Judge Roy Bean: [talking to Maria Elena] Maybe you can explain to these people here that I mean them no harm. Tell 'em it's going to be a new place. It's going to be a nice place to live. I'm the new judge. There will be law. There is going to be order, progress, civilization, peace... Above all, peace. And I don't care who I have to kill to get it. Now go on, you tell 'em that.
I'd be much more comfortable with this if eligibility for the death penalty were a bit more "automated" than it is now (ie. if the prosecutor was no longer involved in "seeking' it). I know, that's what caused the initial problems and led to prosecutor's seeking it, but I don't mind the pendulum swinging the other way a little. Maybe we have specific Capital crimes that are death penalty eligible and then let the jury decide if is warranted in this particular case. Of course, the prosecutor gets to decide with what to charge the defendant, so there is that. But perhaps, those capital crimes can have extra requirements to prove that the jury can evaluate.
Yes, if it is only a crime for which life or life without parole is warranted but no greater. If the crime/circumstances so warrant the "forfeiture of life," then it should be carried out.
Last edited:
one of the "justice" problems in the capital punishment debate is the very real cost to society at large of maintaining prisoners in the extravagant way they are treated and coddled; ,recreation,med care,diet quality,freedom of movement. if our prisons were like those in china,cuba,mid east,then recidivism would be a lesser issue. people i knew that had been in castro's prisons said they would do anything to not go back. why should taxpayers spend any money to do anything but keep them locked up? have heard cost per prisoner is 100K/yr. don't know #s but that sounds close.
yes and of course we must assume the person is actually guilty and not railroaded.
noticed many of the ones on death row were convicted of killing prisoners, so incarceration is not a safe option for anyone else.
Yeah, I'm told it's often more costly to seek a death sentence than it is to incarcerate someone for life (without parole).
that's part of the problem. decades of litigation.
the actual answer depends on how long they live at the $40-130k per year cost to incarcerate them.
We've allowed the death penalty to be a joke anyway. How long does the average prisoner sit on death row before sentence is carried out?
Almost 19 years on average.
WTF.
Almost 19 years on average.
WTF.
could be true. but the games played in the courts by lawyers and politics likely the cost of that. took fl 10 years to execute ted bundy. shows the biggest problem in our system. it is how the word games are played. the guilt or innocence of the defendant is only a minor consideration. IMHO the only thing should be convincing 13 of real "peers" that he/she did it or didn't beyond reasonable doubt. modern tech does make that more reliable seems to me but that's why jury trials exist.
brings up the jury issue.
brings up the jury issue.
Similar threads
