Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (82806)	6/23/2000 6:43:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 108807

Here is the Document I was looking for. 1996 Department of Justice (hardly a left wing prisoners advocacy group!) report on people proved to have been wrongly accused. ncjrs.org several of these were people sentenced to death. If you go about half-way down the document you'll come to the profiles of the individual cases. They make very instructive reading. I personally agree with you, though I go a bit stronger. You say you're okay with the death penalty where there are reasonable assurances. I would say where there is no doubt about guilt -- where guilt is not based solely on eyewitness testimony but is based preferably on DNA testing or on overwhelming evidence (the revolver which fired the shot was found on the accused's person and had his fingerprints on it, and his fingerprints were found in the house where he had no business being, that level of evidence). Sometimes even the most rabid death penalty opponents will concede that a person is guilty. In those cases, I think the death penalty is appropriate. But we're far from there yet. How to get there? IMO, a jury should determine guilt or innocence. But a panel of judges should determine whether the proof is sufficiently overwhelming to justify the death penalty.