Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Texas to execute another probably innocent man
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wildhorse wrote:
Quote:
I have yet to hear anybody make a valid argument against capital punishment. The most common are "killing is wrong" and "it's better to let them all go free (or live) than to incarcerate (execute) one man wrongly, and both arguments are logically unsupportable.
You claim you never heard a valid argument against capital punishment and then dismiss the most important one. Nice strategy, but: FAIL.
I don't mind that you prefer to live in a society like those other countries I named. Personally I expect that my country has made some progress and does not put itself onto the level with murderers just to serve the barbaric concept of an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

Spanish-speaking peoples are the most Christianity-damaged on the planet -- the ones still flogging and crucifying themselves, denying people birth control and abortions, and walking around muttering with Rosaries and Bibles.

Traditional Christian mores are the source of your objection to capital punishment. It's the only logical explanation, because you can offer no rational, logical justification for it.

Going around pointing your bony, Holy Water -stained finger at people and saying "Barbarian" is on par with those asshats in the streets yelling "Infidel".
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wildhorse
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 148
Location: Estados Unidos De América

PostPosted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
Spanish-speaking peoples are the most Christianity-damaged on the planet -- the ones still flogging and crucifying themselves, denying people birth control and abortions, and walking around muttering with Rosaries and Bibles.

Traditional Christian mores are the source of your objection to capital punishment. It's the only logical explanation, because you can offer no rational, logical justification for it.

Going around pointing your bony, Holy Water -stained finger at people and saying "Barbarian" is on par with those asshats in the streets yelling "Infidel".
Whether that is true or not really does not matter. You are just trying to find an excuse for yourself.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1159
Location: Austin, Texas

PostPosted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 11:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
Are you trying to say that the ACLU blog has any degree of credibility beyond that of the average blog? I would say this article is strong evidence to the contrary, and I pointed that evidence out. The article is blatantly one-sided, lying about the evidence and leaving out the most significant facts any rational person would consider.

This guy may have had poor legal representation in his first trial, but if you really think he's "probably innocent" based solely on that article, then you're not thinking. If you want to convince others, which I assume to be the intent of your thread, then you're going to have to come up with something much better (something not filled with factual distortions would be good), and show how it outweighs the evidence used by three courts to convict and sentence him.

No part of your post is correct.
_________________
Your argument is invalid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 1:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

No? Let's examine one part.

I said the article leaves out the most significant facts and distorts the truth.

The article states "His conviction was based entirely on false words from his own mouth", and reiterates the opinion from the first trial that the confession was not consistent with someone who had committed the crime but someone who had heard about it.

This is not true. Particularly in the second trial, following that opinion, his very detailed statements were shown to be highly consistent with forensic evidence not known to the public (such as the method of entry, the fact that the victims were made to kneel, then lie down, the pulling of one victim's hair, the kicking of one victim, the firing of a warning shot to silence the victims, the location and basic arrangement of the bodies, the fact that, in addition to the robbery of the bowling alley, the victims' wallets were taken, the number of said wallets, where they were ditched, and the route taken away from the crime scene, etc., none of these details were released to the media).

Both juries found his original statements, which had been tape recorded at the time and were played back in both trials, to be credible. Inconsistencies between his statements were attributable to his attempt to obtain leniency by pinning almost all, and then most, of the guilt for the crime on one of his criminal acquaintances whom he thought more closely resembled the composite sketch given by the surviving victim (whom he had shot in the head and left for dead), and his own sister testified that, a couple days after the crime, when the composite sketch was on TV, he said it looked like that guy and he was thinking about turning him in. There was other evidence too.

It's no iron-clad case, and I didn't say it was; however, there was a lot of evidence used to convict him besides "his own false words" (as the article falsely states). He had plenty of legal help and more time than anybody could ask for (32 years) to defend himself, and he was convicted by two separate juries who, unlike us, heard all the evidence in person and in detail and from legal and forensic experts representing both sides of the case. The conviction and sentence were upheld on appeal. The families of the victims, three of which were teenagers at the time, have been waiting 32 years for justice and living in fear that he will be released on parole.

The article paints an entirely different picture.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1159
Location: Austin, Texas

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Let's suppose he hadn't signed those confessions written by the police, and that he had exercised the 5th amendment. What evidence remains that he committed the crime?
_________________
Your argument is invalid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmitchell wrote:
Let's suppose he hadn't signed those confessions written by the police, and that he had exercised the 5th amendment. What evidence remains that he committed the crime?

You're playing with words; it is his various confessions and statements to others in conjunction with other evidence, that convicted him. The article makes it sound as if they took his jailhouse confession and said, "Okay, he's says he did it! To the chair with him!" It fails to mention that he repeatedly confessed to his involvement. It fails to mention his revelation of numerous details unknown to the public, claiming instead he was convicted by his own "false words". It also fails to mention his repeated conviction in two separate jury trials. It leaves out important facts and is intentionally misleading.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mdeininger
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1740
Location: Emerald Isles, overlooking Dublin's docklands

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 9:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
dmitchell wrote:
Let's suppose he hadn't signed those confessions written by the police, and that he had exercised the 5th amendment. What evidence remains that he committed the crime?

You're playing with words; it is his various confessions and statements to others in conjunction with other evidence, that convicted him. The article makes it sound as if they took his jailhouse confession and said, "Okay, he's says he did it! To the chair with him!" It fails to mention that he repeatedly confessed to his involvement. It fails to mention his revelation of numerous details unknown to the public, claiming instead he was convicted by his own "false words". It also fails to mention his repeated conviction in two separate jury trials. It leaves out important facts and is intentionally misleading.
Of course it does. It's anti-death-penalty propaganda. They don't need facts, they're having a jerkfest over pretty much every planned legal execution ever.

It's a good thing the guy doesn't happen to be a black woman. I'd dread the news if they were...
_________________
"Confident, lazy, cocky, dead." -- Felix Jongleur, Otherland

( Twitter | Blog | GitHub )
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1159
Location: Austin, Texas

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
You're playing with words; it is his various confessions and statements to others in conjunction with other evidence, that convicted him. The article makes it sound as if they took his jailhouse confession and said, "Okay, he's says he did it! To the chair with him!" It fails to mention that he repeatedly confessed to his involvement. It fails to mention his revelation of numerous details unknown to the public, claiming instead he was convicted by his own "false words". It also fails to mention his repeated conviction in two separate jury trials. It leaves out important facts and is intentionally misleading.

What's the other evidence?
_________________
Your argument is invalid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmitchell wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
You're playing with words; it is his various confessions and statements to others in conjunction with other evidence, that convicted him. The article makes it sound as if they took his jailhouse confession and said, "Okay, he's says he did it! To the chair with him!" It fails to mention that he repeatedly confessed to his involvement. It fails to mention his revelation of numerous details unknown to the public, claiming instead he was convicted by his own "false words". It also fails to mention his repeated conviction in two separate jury trials. It leaves out important facts and is intentionally misleading.

What's the other evidence?

The forensic evidence; his statement itself was meaningless, other than in conjunction with it. It's why they were judged not to be, as the article put it, "false words".
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1159
Location: Austin, Texas

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
The forensic evidence; his statement itself was meaningless, other than in conjunction with it.

What forensic evidence? If we ignore everything this guy signed or said, what evidence is left that he was the perpetrator?
_________________
Your argument is invalid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 3:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
I have yet to hear anybody make a valid argument against capital punishment.

If true, that is really more of an indictment of you than the anti-capital-punishment movement.

It is sorta like saying "I have yet to hear anybody make a valid argument for relativity".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
juniper
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 757
Location: EU

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
I have yet to hear anybody make a valid argument against capital punishment.

If true, that is really more of an indictment of you than the anti-capital-punishment movement.

It is sorta like saying "I have yet to hear anybody make a valid argument for relativity".


he labels all arguments as ultimately derived from judeo-christian remnants. two things with this: 1) not everything christian is wrong and 2) it is not. I don't want govt having that kind of power. Surely, people who want the govt out of their face don't want the govt to have power over life and death?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aidanjt
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1101
Location: Rep. of Ireland

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
I have yet to hear anybody make a valid argument against capital punishment.

I do. Bureaucrats are mindless and heartless rule-run zealots who constantly fuck up because their rules and methodology are deeply flawed, so they're not competent to judge over who gets to live or not.
_________________
juniper wrote:
you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
I have yet to hear anybody make a valid argument against capital punishment.

If true, that is really more of an indictment of you than the anti-capital-punishment movement.

It is sorta like saying "I have yet to hear anybody make a valid argument for relativity".

This is nothing but unsupported base assertion. Einstein's theories, on the other hand, are not.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aidanjt wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
I have yet to hear anybody make a valid argument against capital punishment.

I do. Bureaucrats are mindless and heartless rule-run zealots who constantly fuck up because their rules and methodology are deeply flawed, so they're not competent to judge over who gets to live or not.

That's why U.S. Citizens have a Constitutionally guaranteed right to a trial by a jury of their peers, and our laws provide mechanisms that ensure each juror is acceptable to the defendant.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmitchell wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
The forensic evidence; his statement itself was meaningless, other than in conjunction with it.

What forensic evidence?

The forensic evidence from the crime scene, as I described.

dmitchell wrote:
If we ignore everything this guy signed or said, what evidence is left that he was the perpetrator?

Forensic evidence unmatched to a perpetrator. This does not change the fact that his testimony was not the only evidence. Nor does it change the fact that the article lied when it said his "false words" were used to convict him. It was his "true words" (the ones that matched the forensic evidence) that convicted him.

I never said it was an iron-clad case. I'm saying the article is one-sided, misleading, and makes false statements.

There is also nothing to support the claim that he is "probably innocent". At best he is "possibly innocent and possibly guilty". It's a question of reasonable doubt, and that's a question that only a carefully-selected, physically present, and fully cognizant jury can address. Even appeals courts defer to juries on the question of credibility of testimony, which, in this case, was a major consideration.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aidanjt
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1101
Location: Rep. of Ireland

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
That's why U.S. Citizens have a Constitutionally guaranteed right to a trial by a jury of their peers, and our laws provide mechanisms that ensure each juror is acceptable to the defendant.

A jury held to highly bureaucratic procedures to decide on laws written by bureaucrats. Laymen held to bureaucratic standards are still acting bureaucratically, with the addition of being easily swayed by appeals to emotion, and so still make bureaucratic and impulsive mistakes and so still unfit to make decisions leading to the end of someone's life.
_________________
juniper wrote:
you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
juniper
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 757
Location: EU

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
richk449 wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
I have yet to hear anybody make a valid argument against capital punishment.

If true, that is really more of an indictment of you than the anti-capital-punishment movement.

It is sorta like saying "I have yet to hear anybody make a valid argument for relativity".

This is nothing but unsupported base assertion. Einstein's theories, on the other hand, are not.


einstein's theories are based on a handful of postulates.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
charly
n00b
n00b


Joined: 05 Apr 2011
Posts: 14

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How much of a deterrent is the death penalty?
_________________
"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?" - Douglas Adams
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sikpuppy
n00b
n00b


Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Posts: 34
Location: Central Coast, NSW

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

charly wrote:
How much of a deterrent is the death penalty?

None. It would only be useful in the sense that a nuclear standoff is useful. Once it's enacted it's a bit lame.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very little but the likelihood of getting caught is a significant factor. If people think they'll get away with it, the severity of the punishment is perceived to be irrelevant. If not, they may avoid doing the crime even if when the punishment is very mild.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
charly
n00b
n00b


Joined: 05 Apr 2011
Posts: 14

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 11:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

so if life in prison isn't a deterrent and death isn't a deterrent then what else is there?

I say make them work for our amusement, like the Running Man
_________________
"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?" - Douglas Adams
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sikpuppy
n00b
n00b


Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Posts: 34
Location: Central Coast, NSW

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 11:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

charly wrote:
so if life in prison isn't a deterrent and death isn't a deterrent then what else is there?

I say make them work for our amusement, like the Running Man

Which will be the next crap reboot. Unless they actually make a film based on the book by Stephen King of course.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mdeininger
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1740
Location: Emerald Isles, overlooking Dublin's docklands

PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 12:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

charly wrote:
so if life in prison isn't a deterrent and death isn't a deterrent then what else is there?

I say make them work for our amusement, like the Running Man
that would be what'll happen when the cons start buying territory next time there's a great economic disaster. From the looks of it, it'll probably be in Europe, too.
_________________
"Confident, lazy, cocky, dead." -- Felix Jongleur, Otherland

( Twitter | Blog | GitHub )
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

juniper wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
richk449 wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
I have yet to hear anybody make a valid argument against capital punishment.

If true, that is really more of an indictment of you than the anti-capital-punishment movement.

It is sorta like saying "I have yet to hear anybody make a valid argument for relativity".

This is nothing but unsupported base assertion. Einstein's theories, on the other hand, are not.


einstein's theories are based on a handful of postulates.

And a shitload of observations and empirical experimentation.

There isn't even basic logic supporting anti-capital punishment. It typically boils down to "killing is bad, because I just know it is". Other invalid arguments include, "it's better to free a hundred guilty men than punish one innocent man", and "it doesn't do any good / serve any purpose" (a subordinate argument of which is "it's not an effective deterrent"). We've discussed all these in here, and they all fall apart under any kind of objective scrutiny. Maybe somebody will eventually come up with something. I'm tired of it.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 2 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum