Sorry it's been awhile since I have had some time to log back in. Lots of projects going on here at work.
"Many studies have been conducted on innocents being put to death. While they all identify faults in the justice system, not one has alleged that someone innocent has been put to death in the past 50 years."
I think your wrong about this one. Have you read "Actual Innocence"? George Will commented on this book on April 6 of this year that "[this book] compels the conclusion that many innocent people are in prison,and some inncent people have been executed." Based on this, Will argues "Conservatives, especially, should draw this lesson from the book: Capital punishment, like the rest of the criminal justice system, is a government program, so skeptism is in order." The next day Pat Robertson agreed. Republican Governor George Ryan of IL has placed a moratorium on executions in his state because 13 death row inmates were found to be wrongly convicted. In March, New Hampshire lawmakers (including many conservative ones) voted to repeal the death penalty due to questions regarding wrongful convictions. I use these because I'm assuming your conservative, you can correct me if I'm wrong. If you do have some source or study that describes no wrongful death penalty convictions in the past 50 years, I would like to know what they are, and I would be willing to read them as objectively as I can.
Consider the case of David Spence who was sentenced to die for the murder of three teens in Waco, TX in 1982. The two key witnesses who claimed that Spence helped them murder the teens later admitted that Spence was NOT involved. Even the the lead detective came forward and said he believed Spence was innocent. Prosecutors were found to have withheld evidence that the alibi of another suspect who had bragged about the murders was bogus. George W failed to intervene on this case and Spence was put to death April 3, 1997. I am aware that Dubya he has little power over executions (most of the power resides with the paroles board), but I think he could have intervened it in some way. Again, I find little difference between Republicans and Democrats on this issue, so it's a nonissue to me politically.
"Second, it seems inconsistent that you would support the death penalty for killing a cop. The elements of your argument against the death penalty, proper identification of the perpetrator and legal resources, are still present in the homicide of a police officer. "
I see your point. It is logically inconsisent. Logically, you can only be on one side or the other - logically, cops do not deserve some special status. However, I will stand by my theory on the grounds of the social purpose that it serves and that it is important for society to give extra support to an officer in that very dangerous situation. It is not logical, but it is pragmatic.
-Mark |
