01-19-2009, 03:13 PM | #1 | |
Let go of my ears.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Moto: '03 GSX-R600, '04 625SMC
Posts: 1,394
|
Hey Cutty!
I didn't want to hijack the other thread, so here you go:
Quote:
The problem is this, in 1972 the Furman v Ga case (which got a moratorium on executions in the United States for a number of years) they determined that the sentencing was unconstitutional because of the problem of mitigating circumstances. Basically it boils down to this, there are factors (mitigating circumstances) which make a person appear significantly more guilty of a crime but they make a jury significantly less likely to go after the death penalty and instead go for life imprisonment. The opposite was also true, in defending a person's innocence it made the jury more likely to go for the death penalty because the mitigating circumstances were not present. In the system as it applied at the time there was one single trial in which the jury had to come back with a guilty or not guilty verdict and simultaneously sentence the person to death. This was found to be unconstitutional, the defense attorney had to walk a very fine line, either make your client look guilty and possibly not be executed or make them look more innocent and guarantee the death penalty if they failed. In another case in Georgia in 1976 the state created a two part, or bifurcated, trial system. Basically it is two complete seperate trials. The first determines the defendants guilt, and a complete second trial for sentencing. The second trial was the same legal procedure as the first, with a jury, prosecutor, defendant and defense counsel and all the associated expense. This sentencing trial allows the defense to bring mitigating circumstances forward that make it less likely for the person to be given the death penalty, but would have impacted the jury's impartiality during the conviction phase. This system results in a trial system that is now literally twice the cost of any other trial. If the prosecutor goes for life imprisonment initially then they do not have a bifurcated trial. On top of the expense of this expanded trial system a capitol case is much more likely to have an appeal, and significantly more likely to have a series of appeals than any other conviction. This is also an added expense in trial costs as well as the cost to jail the inmate. Capitol crimes inmates are housed to a different standard seperate from other prison population and this is more expensive. Also, most states do not or cannot use their capitol crimes inmates in cost-deferring programs like prison labor, they are a complete drain on the system, with no return. The lengthy appeals process makes the cost of housing a capitol crime defendant much more expensive. All of these are expenses that are not incurred for a normal felony conviction. That is why it is significantly more expensive.
__________________
Entia non sunt multiplicanda necessitatem |
|
01-19-2009, 03:26 PM | #2 |
Ride Naked.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Flat and Straight ND
Moto: 08 BUELL 1125R, 05 SV650S
Posts: 7,916
|
fair enough. Like i said, never did any research on it, just figured in my head.
so... what we should do is put 'em in mass pop and let the others take care of 'em? |
01-19-2009, 03:34 PM | #3 |
Let go of my ears.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Moto: '03 GSX-R600, '04 625SMC
Posts: 1,394
|
I think the correctional system needs a top to bottom reworking. I think that there should be a standardized national system for correctional centers, there is too much variance from state to state. I think that we should have work-prisons, where inmates work to offset the expense of their incarceration. Not punishment, not breaking rocks, but something useful that, if they are possible to be rehabilitated, they can use on the outside to give them a source of income so they can avoid falling back into the crime cycle. Some inmates simply cannot be rehabilitated, and deserve punishment, and I think life imprisonment for them is the right choice, we might be able to learn something from them that we could use to prevent crimes like those in the future. Plus they can work to offset the cost.
Do I think some people deserve a harsh punishment like death? Yes, but there are so many inherent problems in a capitol conviction that I don't think it can be carried out in an effective manner. I think there are other punishments that will accomplish the goal of protecting the rest of the population, punish the offenders, and deter future criminals.
__________________
Entia non sunt multiplicanda necessitatem |
01-19-2009, 03:41 PM | #4 |
Ride Naked.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Flat and Straight ND
Moto: 08 BUELL 1125R, 05 SV650S
Posts: 7,916
|
what we need is an island somewhere to drop 'em off at and let them fend for themselves.
|
01-19-2009, 05:05 PM | #5 | |
DefenderOfTheBuelliverse
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Parts Unknown
Moto: Buell XB12R
Posts: 18,585
|
An island with no trees...other wise they could build a boat and sail back to civilization.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
01-19-2009, 05:18 PM | #6 | |
Ride Naked.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Flat and Straight ND
Moto: 08 BUELL 1125R, 05 SV650S
Posts: 7,916
|
Quote:
and one fishing pole for all of 'em |
|
01-19-2009, 05:43 PM | #7 |
TWFix Legend
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Denver CO
Moto: 01 BMW F650GS Dakar
Posts: 15,677
|
|
01-19-2009, 05:44 PM | #8 |
Ride Naked.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Flat and Straight ND
Moto: 08 BUELL 1125R, 05 SV650S
Posts: 7,916
|
as long as they televise the series it's ok.
|
01-20-2009, 03:46 PM | #9 |
Issukangitok
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Biloxi, MS
Moto: '06 Suzuki Boulevard C50T
Posts: 2,225
|
The justice system is fucked up, and it drastically needs overhauling. Something has to be done to make this shit stop. My suggestion?
__________________
What goes around comes around. Sometimes you get what's coming around, and sometimes you are what's coming around. You see what I mean? |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|