Death by "sorry we're closed"

[Rizash]

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...003402,00.html

Freaking society.... How can you refuse to hear an apeal of someone who is GOING TO DIE that day because you had a computer problem and cant be bothered to stay open 20 minutes extra? WTF is wrong with this world...

[Nevan]

Apparently your life is not worth even 20 minutes of someone else's time.

Makes you wonder.

[HumanePain]

That's Texas for you.

In New York during the 9/11 crisis, firemen who were rescuing people and putting out fires in the surviving buildings went into a local Starbucks and asked for water bottles to supply drinks to the thirsty heroes.

Starbucks said "sure" then sent a BILL for $200 to the fire department to pay for the water!

Such callousness in this world makes me disgusted with humanity at times.

[delicti]

Sounds like the courts were overloaded due to the who legality of lethal injection being questioned. It still doesn't excuse this, though.

What does everyone think of the recent challenge to the legality of lethal injection?

Link:
http://www.democracynow.org/article..../10/04/1355219

[Beneath the Shadows]

I'm not too bothered by this. The guy had 20 years to file an appeal. In fact, he has appealed, and managed to get a second trial 12 years ago. And, for a second time, he was convicted and sentenced to death. Every attempt to appeal since then has failed. I seriously doubt that 20 minutes would've changed anything.

[d.Nox]

What does everyone think of the recent challenge to the legality of lethal injection?

Link:
http://www.democracynow.org/article...7/10/04/1355219

Lethal injection, like electrocution, seems needlessly complicated to me. Why bother messing with body chemistry when the guillotine works quickly and reliably?

That is, if we _must_ have capital punishment, we should do it in such a way as to minimize what can go wrong, in order to avoid just this sort of thing.

Besides, decapitation is much classier than anything but the firing squad.

[Dead Angel]

Holy shit.. no, wait.

It's a criminal. They are given chances to appeal - and after the court closes is not the time to appeal. (Espically if they are set to die that day.)

It's life.

It's how scum are treated. So what?

[dark_dragon_of_ice]

Oh yeah.. only thing is not all criminals are guilty of what they are found guilty of.
Reminds me of a quote in LOTR with Gandalf talking to Frodo about Gollum
Gandalf says that many who deserve to live are dead, and until Frodo can confer life on those who deserve to live, he shouldn't be so quick to deal out death, even when some being appears to deserve death.

[CptSternn]

More importantly, the court closed EARLY, denying that man his RIGHT to have a final appeal...because the court's computer network went down.

They had IT issues, so they denied a dying man his final appeal so they could get home early Friday and beat the weekend traffic.

That's America.

[Beneath the Shadows]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

More importantly, the court closed EARLY, denying that man his RIGHT to have a final appeal...because the court's computer network went down.

They had IT issues, so they denied a dying man his final appeal so they could get home early Friday and beat the weekend traffic.

That's America.

Where do you get that from? The court closing early part, that is. At 4:50 PM, they said that they close at 5. And they did.

And it was the lawyers who had computer problems, not the court.

As for the right to a final appeal, which one's the final one? Unless there's a limit on how many appeals a death row inmate can have, then then there's always going to be just one more, or there's going to be someone like you complaining about how someone's "right to a final appeal" has been violated.

[CptSternn]

Originally Posted by Beneath the Shadows

Where do you get that from? The court closing early part, that is. At 4:50 PM, they said that they close at 5. And they did.

And it was the lawyers who had computer problems, not the court.

Does it matter? Your talking about a human life. To date, HUNDREDS of convictions, many death row convictions, have been overturned in the past few years due to advances in DNA and other evidence. Talking an extra 5 minutes to make sure your not killing an innocent America, I think, would be something that the court, as well as other Americans, would also think is important.

As for the right to a final appeal, which one's the final one? Unless there's a limit on how many appeals a death row inmate can have, then then there's always going to be just one more, or there's going to be someone like you complaining about how someone's "right to a final appeal" has been violated.

We're not talking about years, weeks, or DAYS here, we are talking about the hours before the death, on the day of execution - the MOST we are talking about is 3 HOURS, considering thats the time difference between 5PM and 8PM.

Arguing there has to be a line in the sand, when your referring to just a couple of HOURS, minutes even, before the execution really seems naive.

Your position on this is very American. Nothing is more important to you than your life, and nothing is as unimportant to you as the lives of your fellow countrymen.

Everyone wants to do away with court appeals, is fine executing people the same day they are arrested, and couldn't care less about new, unconstitutional laws...until they find themselves in the same situation.

Much like cancer, heart disease, and AIDS in America - most people could care less until themselves or a family member finds themselves fighting it.

[Beneath the Shadows]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

Does it matter?

How typical. You get proven wrong, and your response is "does it matter?"

Your talking about a human life. To date, HUNDREDS of convictions, many death row convictions, have been overturned in the past few years due to advances in DNA and other evidence. Talking an extra 5 minutes to make sure your not killing an innocent America, I think, would be something that the court, as well as other Americans, would also think is important.

Considering that this guy's second trial by jury was about 12 or so years ago, which falls within the realm of DNA evidence, and the fact that at that second trial he was still found guilty, your argument is irrelevant. They made sure they weren't killing an innocent person.

We're not talking about years, weeks, or DAYS here, we are talking about the hours before the death, on the day of execution - the MOST we are talking about is 3 HOURS, considering thats the time difference between 5PM and 8PM.

Arguing there has to be a line in the sand, when your referring to just a couple of HOURS, minutes even, before the execution really seems naive.

You're right, it is naive... It's quite naive to think that someone should get an appeal just hours before his set time of execution despite the fact that he's tried to appeal plenty of times before and most of them failed. (And the only time the appeal succeeded, he was convicted again and sentenced to death again.)

Your position on this is very American. Nothing is more important to you than your life, and nothing is as unimportant to you as the lives of your fellow countrymen.

<sarcasm>Oh, yes, my life is so important to me. I can't think of a single person who's life is more important than my own.</sarcasm>

I guess wanting American troops to come home from Iraq is selfish...

Everyone wants to do away with court appeals,

Um, sure, because setting a limit on how many appeals a death row inmate can have equals doing away with appeals altogether.

is fine executing people the same day they are arrested,

Wow, that's completely out of right field. Where in hell'd you get that one from?!

and couldn't care less about new, unconstitutional laws...until they find themselves in the same situation.

Can I buy some drugs from you? You're obviously getting some good shit.

Much like cancer, heart disease, and AIDS in America - most people could care less until themselves or a family member finds themselves fighting it.

Is it hard to move being so full of shit?

[CptSternn]

Originally Posted by Beneath the Shadows

How typical. You get proven wrong, and your response is "does it matter?"

I fail to see where I am wrong.

Considering that this guy's second trial by jury was about 12 or so years ago, which falls within the realm of DNA evidence, and the fact that at that second trial he was still found guilty, your argument is irrelevant. They made sure they weren't killing an innocent person.

If they were so sure, then they shouldn't mind waiting another 3 hours. You of course, for some reason think waiting 3 hours to kill someone is too long.

Good to see your so gung-ho about executing your fellow countrymen.

Wait until your friends or family make it up to the chopping block. I'll be happy to go online in forums and wave flags for their deaths in your honor.

Oh wait, I'm not a heartless blood thristy right-wing nut job like yerself. I don't reval in the deaths of others, and take no pleasure in them.

I also think if your going to execute someone because of *your* beliefs, the least you can do is give the man his final 3 hours to have an appeal.

Of course, you don't seem to be the kind of person who would have such mercy or show such regard for another living soul.

[delicti]

The appeal was a stay on the type of execution, not on the execution itself. Even the man filing the appeal wasn't trying to be proven innocent; he was looking to be executed another way than lethal injection.

This is an 8th Amendment issue, not a 5th Amendment issue.

[Beneath the Shadows]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

I fail to see where I am wrong.

No, of course you don't. Try going back to your first post and reading trough again. I'll give you a hint: computers, and who they belong to. Also, delecti brings up a point which proves your assumptions wrong as well.

If they were so sure, then they shouldn't mind waiting another 3 hours. You of course, for some reason think waiting 3 hours to kill someone is too long.

Since they're sure, there's no reason they should wait.

Good to see your so gung-ho about executing your fellow countrymen.

Anyone who commits such crimes against life is not a countyman of mine.

Wait until your friends or family make it up to the chopping block. I'll be happy to go online in forums and wave flags for their deaths in your honor.

Actually, why don't you wait, and you'll see that my reaction does not change at all. Guilty is guilty, no matter who it is.

Oh wait, I'm not a heartless blood thristy right-wing nut job like yerself. I don't reval in the deaths of others, and take no pleasure in them.

I wish this web site had actual laughing smilies so I could give you an idea how much that comment of yours made me laugh. Congratualtions. You're the first person ever to imply that I was on the right side of the political spectrum. Normally I get called a moonbat.

I also think if your going to execute someone because of *your* beliefs, the least you can do is give the man his final 3 hours to have an appeal.

What? My beliefs? What are you talking about? He wasn't executed because of my beliefs. He was executed because of his crimes.

Of course, you don't seem to be the kind of person who would have such mercy or show such regard for another living soul.

How don't think that 25 years in which he gets free room, board, and legal aide all courtesy of the taxpayers isn't the slightest bit of mercy. You'd rather see them executed the next day so that you really have something to bitch about?

[Valerius]

Ooooo... someone's getting his ass handed to him. Five hundred points, Shadow!

[CptSternn]

Originally Posted by Beneath the Shadows

No, of course you don't. Try going back to your first post and reading trough again. I'll give you a hint: computers, and who they belong to. Also, delecti brings up a point which proves your assumptions wrong as well.

Lawyers appointed to the defendent through the court system. Does it matter if your court appointed lawyer or your court appointed judge drops the ball? Wouldn't you think that when dealing with a human life, that all parties concerned would be treated with a bit more discretion?

Since they're sure, there's no reason they should wait.

If that were true, there wouldn't be last appeals that are granted.

Anyone who commits such crimes against life is not a countyman of mine.

So your saying you hate Americans? Not all of course, but you have setup a class system in your own mind of countrymen you support, and then the other which for some reason you feel that your better than and don't deserve to live (or in this case, you want dead even faster). Your true nature really shines here, eh?

Actually, why don't you wait, and you'll see that my reaction does not change at all. Guilty is guilty, no matter who it is.

...except in the HUNDREDS of cases each year that are overturned - some in their final minutes of appeal. Wow, what if all the courts were as close minded as yerself? Lots of dead, innocent, Americans - of course, this doesn't bother you - you have in your own mind already decided that these people deserve death, guilty or not.

How don't think that 25 years in which he gets free room, board, and legal aide all courtesy of the taxpayers isn't the slightest bit of mercy. You'd rather see them executed the next day so that you really have something to bitch about?

...unless he is innocent. You never know. There always is a chance that final appeal may have contained new evidence that would have exonerated the man. That is a possibility, no matter how slim, it could happen. Of course, like I said, your less concerned with human life and appear to be more worried about the cost of housing a person who you want dead.

Good to know your threshold for killing is based on its relation to your personal finances.

[delicti]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

...except in the HUNDREDS of cases each year that are overturned - some in their final minutes of appeal.

Except there's only been 118 people actually found innocent after being on death row, since 1973.

The number you're talking about, which actually hovers around a hundred a year, is the number of people who are removed from death row, but are still serving time for their crimes. We're not talking innocent people, we're talking murderers and such who aren't executed.

In fact, it's actually nearly impossible for that number to rise, since we've been averaging less than 175 death penalty convictions a year for the last 4 years. We've also been averaging less than 60 executions a year in the same time.

http://www.antideathpenalty.org/statistics.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/15/national/15death.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital..._United_States

Either way, none of it is in relation to this case, since they were just seeking an alternative method for execution, not a repeal of the execution itself.

[Edward Strange]

Sorry if I sound a little... Slow.
But when you say an alternative to execution are you meaning the manner in which the execution would be carried out or an actual alternative to the execution which doesn't involve anyone dying? Such as life imprisonment.

While a crook may be a crook, it still isn't right that his appeal was rejected because the court refused to stay open.
Due Process people! This will be one of the last things he will -ever- do. I think we can allow him this one luxury. It's not like we're punishing him by executing him is it...
Anyway! The death penalty is always going to be something of a mindf*ck, so I will simply conclude with how grateful I am to be in the European Union.

[Cyntrox]

You don't have to be in the European Union to not have capital punishment...

[delicti]

Originally Posted by Edward Strange

Sorry if I sound a little... Slow.
But when you say an alternative to execution are you meaning the manner in which the execution would be carried out

Exactly that.

The Supreme Court is currently investigating reports that lethal injection can cause extreme pain and suffering moments before death, in a very small minority of the cases where it's been applied. The appeal was directly because of this.

While a crook may be a crook, it still isn't right that his appeal was rejected because the court refused to stay open.
Due Process people!

It's not technically due process, since he already received that; but I agree that the court could have attempted to stay later to accommodate. It's not like executions are entirely common, and I'm sure those five extra minutes at the office wasn't going to make some clerk's day nearly as bad as the inmate's was about to become.

The death penalty is always going to be something of a mindf*ck, so I will simply conclude with how grateful I am to be in the European Union.

To me, it's a very hard decision, because allowing a government to legally execute its own citizenry is a very dangerous thing.

However, there are rare cases in which someone will not respond to rehabilitation, and they will be a violent danger to others for the rest of their lives. In cases like this I can understand the need for the death penalty, as keeping them alive only prolongs a torturous existence, and creates risk of escape and reintegration into society.

It's a very tough decision, which is why it is heavily regulated.

[Beneath the Shadows]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

Lawyers appointed to the defendent through the court system. Does it matter if your court appointed lawyer or your court appointed judge drops the ball? Wouldn't you think that when dealing with a human life, that all parties concerned would be treated with a bit more discretion?

Court-appointed lawyers have their own practices (or, at least, work for private practices). Lawyers are required by law to take on free cases in addition to their normal pay-load. So whether or not this guy's lawyers were court-appointed (which, by the way, I've seen nothing to indicate is a fact)
is beside the point.

If that were true, there wouldn't be last appeals that are granted.

That only takes us back to my ealier question of which appeal is the last one. If you want to keep running in circles, you can do so on your own time.

So your saying you hate Americans? Not all of course, but you have setup a class system in your own mind of countrymen you support, and then the other which for some reason you feel that your better than and don't deserve to live (or in this case, you want dead even faster). Your true nature really shines here, eh?

I hate murderers. I hate rapists and child molesters. And because they've *****, or murdered, or molested children, I have good reason to hate them.

...except in the HUNDREDS of cases each year that are overturned - some in their final minutes of appeal. Wow, what if all the courts were as close minded as yerself? Lots of dead, innocent, Americans -

As delecti already pointed out, only 118 people have had their convictions overturned in the past 30 years. As such, your argument is rendered null and void.

of course, this doesn't bother you - you have in your own mind already decided that these people deserve death, guilty or not.

No, the courts and the juries decided that, as well as their guilt.

...unless he is innocent. You never know. There always is a chance that final appeal may have contained new evidence that would have exonerated the man. That is a possibility, no matter how slim, it could happen. Of course, like I said, your less concerned with human life and appear to be more worried about the cost of housing a person who you want dead.

You don't pay attention, do you? The appeal wasn't to introduce new evidence. The appeal was to try to change the method of execution. Basically, Mr. Richard had stopped trying to prove his innocence (maybe because he ackowledged his guilt). He even stopped trying to overturn the death sentence. He just didn't want to get lethal injection.

So we can say with 100% certainty that no new evidence would be introduced.

Good to know your threshold for killing is based on its relation to your personal finances.

Right, because only my taxes go into prisoner care, rather than the taxes of every single of American citizen and legal immigrant who pays taxes. :eyesroll:

[CptSternn]

Originally Posted by Beneath the Shadows

Court-appointed lawyers have their own practices (or, at least, work for private practices). Lawyers are required by law to take on free cases in addition to their normal pay-load. So whether or not this guy's lawyers were court-appointed (which, by the way, I've seen nothing to indicate is a fact)
is beside the point.

So if a public defender doesn't provide a defendant with the best possible defense, and in this case, his lackadaisical approach causes the death of a possibly innocent man, your not bothered?

The fact the court and the defender get paid by the same group, and in this case, they act in such a way to deny the man his final 3 hours because they couldn't be bothered to stay at work for 3 hours, for whatever reason, that really doesn't bother you?

We are talking about a human life, a life of your own countrymen, and you show little if any regard for human life so far in this thread. In fact, you show outright malice towards a person who still *could* be innocent.

I hate murderers. I hate rapists and child molesters. And because they've *****, or murdered, or molested children, I have good reason to hate them.

Yet in post after post you advocate murder, and on top of that, you think denying a dying man his due process to appeal his death is bad.

You hate someone because they 'murder', but happily sit back and advocate more of the same, and encourage killing more people without any regard for the law or human life.

Thats very ironic to say the least.

As delecti already pointed out, only 118 people have had their convictions overturned in the past 30 years. As such, your argument is rendered null and void.

If only one single case had been overturned, then my argument is still very valid. Thats 118 times people have been saved - who are you to say that this case would have been any different had they given him the final 3 hours? Simple answer is, you can't.

You don't pay attention, do you? The appeal wasn't to introduce new evidence. The appeal was to try to change the method of execution. Basically, Mr. Richard had stopped trying to prove his innocence (maybe because he ackowledged his guilt). He even stopped trying to overturn the death sentence. He just didn't want to get lethal injection.

So we can say with 100% certainty that no new evidence would be introduced.

We can't say with certainty *anything*, but what we do know is by denying this man the opportunity, you deny him of the chance to introduce any evidence.

Also, did you not see that the *very next* execute was commuted as they debate whether or not lethal injection is legal? That means, there was a good chance they may have commuted his sentence as well.

Right, because only my taxes go into prisoner care, rather than the taxes of every single of American citizen and legal immigrant who pays taxes. :eyesroll:

Everyone may pay the same, but your the one who is posting online in post after post how the 'cost' is a factor in your life when deciding if someone should die or not.

Money appears to be the driving force behind who you think should die.

It's sad to see someone who is defending their position that life, any life, should be given or taken away because of monetary reasons.

[Beneath the Shadows]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

So if a public defender doesn't provide a defendant with the best possible defense, and in this case, his lackadaisical approach causes the death of a possibly innocent man, your not bothered?

I see nothing to indicate that his lawyers didn't do the best they could, so your question is meaningless.

The fact the court and the defender get paid by the same group, and in this case, they act in such a way to deny the man his final 3 hours because they couldn't be bothered to stay at work for 3 hours, for whatever reason, that really doesn't bother you?

You obviously misunderstood the concept of "free cases."

We are talking about a human life, a life of your own countrymen, and you show little if any regard for human life so far in this thread. In fact, you show outright malice towards a person who still *could* be innocent.

No, I don't. Just because you keep saying so doen't make it true.

Yet in post after post you advocate murder, and on top of that, you think denying a dying man his due process to appeal his death is bad.

And yet, you're the one who thinks that criminals should be given extra time, just because.

You hate someone because they 'murder', but happily sit back and advocate more of the same, and encourage killing more people without any regard for the law or human life.

I don't see how following the letter of the law shows a lack of regard for the law.

If only one single case had been overturned, then my argument is still very valid. Thats 118 times people have been saved - who are you to say that this case would have been any different had they given him the final 3 hours? Simple answer is, you can't.

Yes, I can. In those 118 cases, the defendants' lawyers actively sought to introduce new evidence and have the convictions overturned. In this case, the defendant's lawyer did not.

We can't say with certainty *anything*, but what we do know is by denying this man the opportunity, you deny him of the chance to introduce any evidence.

Yes, we can. If a lawyer intends to present new evidence during an appeal, the motion for appeal must say so. The lawyers didn't say they were going to present new evidence. In fact, how long has it been since Mr. Richard was executed? Those same lawyers still haven't said anything about having wanted to introduce new evidence. I'd say that that fact paints a pretty clear picture.

[quote]Also, did you not see that the *very next* execute was commuted as they debate whether or not lethal injection is legal? That means, there was a good chance they may have commuted his sentence as well.[/quote[

"Stay of execution" does not mean "commuted." To commute a sentence means that one sentence was overturned in favor of a less severe one. A stay of execution means that the execution will still take place, just a little later. So, no, his sentence would not have been commuted.

Everyone may pay the same, but your the one who is posting online in post after post how the 'cost' is a factor in your life when deciding if someone should die or not.

300 million Americans, and you think I'm the only one saying such a thing? How amusing.

Money appears to be the driving force behind who you think should die.

Money which I think should go toward my children's future, rather than that of someone who's going to be executed.

It's sad to see someone who is defending their position that life, any life, should be given or taken away because of monetary reasons.

I'm pro-abortion, too, if it makes you feel any better.

[Edward Strange]

Sorry to skip back to an earlier point, while it is true that the EU isn't the only 'nation' (you know what I mean) that doesn't have the death penalty, what I was thinking about is how a country can only join the EU if it has taken the death penalty off the books.
Which is... Nice.

*Cough* Anyway.