What crime (if any) deserves the death penalty?

[Dancing Fire]

Execution within 2 yr after the murderer is found guilty.

 

[arkieb1]

I've always been against the death penalty for everyone accept proven beyond a doubt serial killers. People that show no remorse that would murder a lot of people if they were let back out that can not be rehabilitated are a waste of tax payers money and public resources.

 

[Polished]

Against the death penalty. The State should be above the heinous crimes individuals commit.

 

[Karl_K]

Execution within 2 yr after the murderer is found guilty.

That would have resulted in atleast 4 and maybe up to 10 people unjustly murdered by the state in IL.

 

[rockhoundofficiando]

A life for a life. You murder one of my kids, you should not get to keep on breathing. If possible they should die the same way they murdered their victim.

 

[redwood66]

For sure.

It's not the universal truth it once was, but in states where death is an authorized sentence, the costs of prosecuting Murder 1 cases through conviction and sentencing (as well as post-conviction litigation) are still frequently borne entirely by the county -- not the state. So the economic drain on a county's resources can account for much (albeit certainly not all) of the disparities within the same state as to the percentages of Murder 1 cases prosecuted as death penalty ones vs those that are not. E.g., in 2010, when Lynne Abraham retired after 20 years as Philadelphia County's District Attorney, almost 1/2 the inmates on Death Row had been convicted in Philadelphia County, but Philadelphia County had not had 50% of PA's death-eligible murder prosecutions in the years after the U.S. Supreme Court "restored" the death penalty via its 1976 decision of Gregg v. Georgia and its progeny.

The Groene murders were committed in my county and the pretrial costs were above $600K, two thirds being for Duncan's defense. The plea agreement saved us untold hundreds of thousands. It is hard for a family to understand a plea and I empathize with them but how much should retribution cost the taxpayers if they are assured the convicted filth will never see the light of day? If they negotiate pleas that allow release then that would be a different story. It all depends on the crime/s.

But for me no death penalty. Not out of sympathy for criminals but purely on cost and effectiveness.

 

[Karl_K]

A life for a life. You murder one of my kids, you should not get to keep on breathing. If possible they should die the same way they murdered their victim.

One of the cases in IL a guy was convicted on a rape/murder and sentenced to death.
DNA cleared him 100% years later and pointed to the one who actually did it but he had been killed since then. I think the real killer was killed in prison when locked up on different charges but I could be wrong.
It also came out that the prosecutor withheld evidence that could have cleared him and that he did in other cases also.
When the innocent guy was released the family of the victim was quoted on the news as saying they let my daughters/sisters rapist/murderer go free.
They could not accept that the person the wanted dead all those years was not the right person because the police the DA and a jury all said he did it.
They got it wrong and it could have been intentionally wrong because of the actions of the DA.

I went from a strong supporter of the death penalty to a strong distrust of the system that it can not be trusted to get it right.

 

[missy]

I went from a strong supporter of the death penalty to a strong distrust of the system that it can not be trusted to get it right.

@Karl_K for me that it the one argument that makes the most sense.

Sadly, as long as people are involved in the system corruption will exist and this is the one argument that gives me pause re the death penalty.

If and I mean only if the person was unequivocally guilty would I be for the death penalty in the cases I stated above. If the DNA for example showed complete proof it was that individual who committed the heinous crime then I am pro capital punishment for said heinous crime.

Against the death penalty. The State should be above the heinous crimes individuals commit.

@Polished I respect your point of view and I personally go back and forth on this issue though at this stage of my life this is the stand I take. I ask you, would you still feel that the State should rise above if it was g-d forbid your child that was raped/murdered/tortured?

But for me no death penalty. Not out of sympathy for criminals but purely on cost and effectiveness.

I hear you and understand your point of view @redwood66 . When it comes to certain issues in life money should take a back seat iMO. Impractical? Perhaps. Though IMO the primary concern for me is the punishment should fit the crime. Kill someone I love you do not deserve to be here among the rest of us. Not only do you contribute nothing to society you make society a much more dangerous place to be and you do not IMO have the right to be among us anymore.

You and only you are responsible for the heinous crime and there is a price to pay for taking an innocent person's life.

Again it is only for the circumstances I outlined in my first few posts that I feel this way. And only if they are unequivocally guilty.

It is a difficult issue. I see both sides.

 

[Maria D]

I think hell just froze over because you, Karl, and I all agree on something.

Lol, I was thinking the same thing when I clicked the like icon.

On top of the expense, I abhor hearing from/about the death row inmate when news of their appeal comes up. I want them rotting away in prison never to be heard from again.

 

[redwood66]

I hear you and understand your point of view @redwood66 . When it comes to certain issues in life money should take a back seat iMO. Impractical? Perhaps. Though IMO the primary concern for me is the punishment should fit the crime. Kill someone I love you do not deserve to be here among the rest of us. Not only do you contribute nothing to society you make society a much more dangerous place to be and you do not IMO have the right to be among us anymore.

You and only you are responsible for the heinous crime and there is a price to pay for taking an innocent person's life.

Again it is only for the circumstances I outlined in my first few posts that I feel this way. And only if they are unequivocally guilty.

It is a difficult issue. I see both sides.

I totally understand this and used to feel that way myself. In my experience though death is the easy way out because life in prison could be and usually is much worse.

 

[missy]

I totally understand this and used to feel that way myself. In my experience though death is the easy way out because life in prison could be and usually is much worse.

One can only hope!

 

[Polished]

"@Polished I respect your point of view and I personally go back and forth on this issue though at this stage of my life this is the stand I take. I ask you, would you still feel that the State should rise above if it was g-d forbid your child that was raped/murdered/tortured?"

In the event of such a terrible thing I most definitely would be wanting the State to come in and act with a decisive, measured and dignified response, to save me from getting out a bow and arrow.

What I would be dealing with would be inside my own head and in theory I would know that the less air time I gave the perpetrator the better off I'd be.

I don't know whether it's a human thing but do we tend to favor the negative over the positive? I tend to think of my mother in law (who was the queen of chaos) more than my own mother, who was wonderful in every way. The wonderful we can leave because it was trouble free. In my case thoughts don't diminish because the person is now dead.

Ok so all that is theory. I'm against the death penalty and I wasn't in favor of the Burn Bundy Burn placards outside the jail as Ted Bundy's execution was carried out. But when I read that he didn't want his execution to happen and that he showed fear as he was taken to the electric chair. I was glad that he experienced a small something of what he had subjected his poor victims to.

 

[caf]

Death penalty cases, at least in Colorado, can exceed $1.0 million dollars for a defense. That is normally paid by the state and does not include the costs of prosecution. I’ve wrestled with this but come down on no death penalty. Waste of money. Let them rot in prison with no parole. And certain crimes, including some of those listed by @missy, result in prisoner death at the hands of other inmates. Child sexual perpetrators are reviled in prison. Cop killers have a tough time with prison guards. Id rather see the money spent on positive ventures rather than some psychopath murderer. I know this is a tough call - and I used to be for the death penalty. But executing someone is costly. And if the evidence later proves them innocent, which can happen, it’s hard to undead them.

 

[missy]

Death penalty cases, at least in Colorado, can exceed $1.0 million dollars for a defense. That is normally paid by the state and does not include the costs of prosecution. I’ve wrestled with this but come down on no death penalty. Waste of money. Let them rot in prison with no parole. And certain crimes, including some of those listed by @missy, result in prisoner death at the hands of other inmates. Child sexual perpetrators are reviled in prison. Cop killers have a tough time with prison guards. Id rather see the money spent on positive ventures rather than some psychopath murderer. I know this is a tough call - and I used to be for the death penalty. But executing someone is costly. And if the evidence later proves them innocent, which can happen, it’s hard to undead them.

I hear you. Just at this stage of my life I see that as money well spent. IMO. And again it would only be (in my fantasy world) for murderers and rapists who are without any doubt guilty of the heinous crime. So no worrying about undeading (haha love that word you made up) them. I know executing them is more costly (I dated a number of ADAs when I was in my twenties who I learned a lot from re this issue) but again, for me, money shouldn't be the most important reason for deciding this issue. IMO. I am with you in if we could let them rot in prison forever with no chance of parole and no needing the family members of the victim to come forward every number of years to fight their parole I might just be against the death penalty in all forms. But since that can never be guaranteed (over crowding of prisons as one reason among many other reasons all political BS IMO) I am pro capital punishment in the circumstances I outlined in a previous post.

Intersting arguments for both for and against capital punishment and I suspect it will be always that way as there is no easy right or wrong as I see it. Lots of gray. I am just not as evolved as some of you who are good with forgiving. To allow criminals, who commit unspeakable heinous crimes, live their lives albeit in prison when they took away an innocent person's life and along with it the chance for the victim's family to also live a normal life.

 

[caf]

@missy - all true! I think there must be no parole sentences for heinous crimes. No compassionate release for most prisoners. I don’t think survivors, victims, families need to be put through the wringer on a regular basis just to keep someone in prison. This is such a complicated issue and hot button for lots of people. I also wonder whether the death penalty is any sort of deterrent - killing someone for killing someone?

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

I could list crimes worthy of the death penalty, but I won't.
Our legal system is too imperfect.
Some innocent people get found guilty, then after decades in prison they get found innocent.

Opps, Sorry Dude.

For a brain dead off the map liberal I'm very tough on crime ... but the death penalty is too final when guilt often cannot be determined with 100% certainty.

That's the only thing that concerns me
if someone put to death was innocent
But really cruel crimes where the criminal shows zero remorse or acknowledgment of his wrongs
murder, child molesters, rapists
People who torture animals ...or people

ive got one that's a bit left field
arson
its so dangerouse and destructive and a complete waste

However i also beleave only God should take a life
Life in prison needs to be life in prison again - it isnt here
when i was a kid my neighbour's son in law murdered their daughter
He took a kitchen knife to bed up the sleeve of his PJs
the oldest child was 6 and saw his mum lying in bed stabbed
She was stabbed 16 or so times

he was out before the kids were in high school and much to the grandmother's dismay he got custody
I admit i don't know the inns and outs of the case but if that wasn't premeditated murder then what is ?

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

I totally understand this and used to feel that way myself. In my experience though death is the easy way out because life in prison could be and usually is much worse.

Not in our prisons
Not that i don't acknowledge the difficult life some prisoners have had that got them down the wrong road but there has to be a punishment element to it
They can do tax payer funded training - teritary study and trade based
meanwhile the rest of us have to pay for learning
I think some crimes should be punishable by still out breaking rocks
the law is what we abide by as a condition of being a meaningful member of society and if someone doesn't want to live by the rules there is the rock pile

 

[missy]

@missy - all true! I think there must be no parole sentences for heinous crimes. No compassionate release for most prisoners. I don’t think survivors, victims, families need to be put through the wringer on a regular basis just to keep someone in prison. This is such a complicated issue and hot button for lots of people. I also wonder whether the death penalty is any sort of deterrent - killing someone for killing someone?

Unfortunately no I don't believe it is a deterrent though I am suspicious of the statistics if you really want to know the truth. And IMO I don't care if it isn't a deterrent. To me, in certain cases, I feel the death penalty is warranted. Period. Deterrent or not, more expensive than keeping someone in prison or not, sometimes things like that aren't of consequence compared to the suffering the victims loved ones go through. Not to mention removing from society such a dangerous person. IMO society is better off without such individuals. And because the loved ones of the victims deserve peace which they can never have with the murderer/rapist still alive.

JMO of course and yes it's super complicated with no clear right or wrong. Just like most of life there's a lot of gray. I am OK with that and still feel the way I do. As I wrote previously I have gone back and forth on this issue for decades and at this stage of my life this is where I stand. Will it change? IDK. All I know for sure is I feel this way today. And I appreciate the cordial conversation and debate about this issue.

 

[redwood66]

Not in our prisons
Not that i don't acknowledge the difficult life some prisoners have had that got them down the wrong road but there has to be a punishment element to it
They can do tax payer funded training - teritary study and trade based
meanwhile the rest of us have to pay for learning
I think some crimes should be punishable by still out breaking rocks
the law is what we abide by as a condition of being a meaningful member of society and if someone doesn't want to live by the rules there is the rock pile

The punishment is loss of liberty for the amount of time sentenced. Depending on the state inmates can take advantage of such programs to reduce their sentence. Though we are discussing the death penalty or life without parole so sentence reduction doesn't come into play in that scenario. Programs available are jobs within the prison, school, drug rehab, etc. Idle hands and minds create situations for dangerous acts. It is still not a nice place with all the underbelly of crime such as rape, drug trafficking, gangs, prostitution, murder, gambling, etc. I would much rather an inmate have a TV as a distraction than time to think, plot and create disruption which is a dangerous thing for other inmates and staff.

 

[telephone89]

I'm against the death penalty in all cases. I don't think its worth the cost, nor do I think we should be deciding what is worth taking a human life over.
Possibly unpopular opinion - but I don't think being a child rapist is any worse than a regular rapist. Is one violent direct rape worse, or a human trafficker who initiates the rape of dozens of people but never touches them worse? Which is more important, the impact on the victim or the impact on society? If its society, then realistically a drug trafficker should get a harsher crime than a rapist or murderer.

I dunno, they're all bad, and I don't like the idea of trying to rank which are most heinous and deserving of death.

I also agree that there are way too many innocent people put away. Even confessions can't necessarily be trusted. How can one be confident that this is the right person, and that taking their life is the best punishment? Too much gray area IMO.

 

[VRBeauty]

And then this happened, and practically in my back yard.

He spent 14 years in prison for murder. Now, he's the first person in California to be exonerated with the help of genetic genealogy | CNN

A California man who spent 14 years in prison for the murder of a newspaper columnist has been exonerated thanks to the same DNA technology that caught the Golden State Killer suspect, authorities said.

www.cnn.com

But I still think there are murders that are so rooted in evil that the death penalty is warranted.

 

[doberman]

There was just a case here where two men were set free after decades in prison because new evidence exonerated them. The thought of killing an innocent man scares me. Knowing that the death penalty (and the whole justice system) is applied unevenly against minorities and the poor only reinforces my opinion that that the death penalty ought to be abolished.

So unless you have several credible witnesses who actually saw the defendant murder someone I'm more comfortable keeping it off the table.

 

[MollyMalone]

The punishment is loss of liberty for the amount of time sentenced. Depending on the state inmates can take advantage of such programs to reduce their sentence. Though we are discussing the death penalty or life without parole so sentence reduction doesn't come into play in that scenario. Programs available are jobs within the prison, school, drug rehab, etc. Idle hands and minds create situations for dangerous acts. It is still not a nice place with all the underbelly of crime such as rape, drug trafficking, gangs, prostitution, murder, gambling, etc. I would much rather an inmate have a TV as a distraction than time to think, plot and create disruption which is a dangerous thing for other inmates and staff.

Amen, sister!

As a longtime NYC prosecutor, it made me nuts when New York's prisons no longer offered the number-variety of basic literacy, GED, and more advanced education classes (including those provided by volunteers), vocational training, substance abuse & in-house work programs that it once did. Bad for staff, bad for inmates, and bad for us as a society. And although that's somewhat changed for the better again in the past several years, there are still long waiting lists for many such NYS prison programs.

And the fact that some states have taken to requiring inmates to pay 3 cents/minute to read (and/or purchase) an oddly "curated" selection (including excerpts of Jane Austen) of ebooks that the Gutenberg Project makes available for free -- while also abolishing direct-shipment-from-Amazon of books & donations of books from long-established nonprofits/volunteer groups -- also makes me see red.

 

[MollyMalone]

No to the death penalty because of the costs and because of cases like these:

Michael Morton (Texas) -- not a death penalty case, but a murder prosecution that resulted in him being incarcerated for 25 years before exoneration in 2011
* the short version - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Morton_(criminal_justice)
* a worthwhile in-depth news account - https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/the-innocent-man-part-one/

Jeffrey Deskovic (New York) -- not a death penalty case, but a murder prosecution and conviction. He served 16 years (including pretrial detention) before his release in 2006 because he was innocent.
* the short version - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Mark_Deskovic
* the worthwhile, longer Report of a "blue ribbon" panel - https://www.westchesterda.net/Jeffrey Deskovic Comm Rpt.pdf

(Although Jeanine Pirro was not the DA at the time Mr. Deskovic was convicted (1990), she is the DA who turned down the DNA-related requests made between1994-2005. Her successor, Janet DiFiore, now the Chief Judge of NY's high court, is who met with Barry Scheck of the Innocence Project and "promptly agreed" to further DNA investigation.)

 

[chemgirl]

I believe that there are certain people who shouldn’t be allowed in society. Not everyone can be rehabilitated. Call it mental illness, but some people get gratification out of harming others. They’re unsafe

My favourite true crime podcast ran a story about a man who was only attracted to dead women. Unfortunately his state had no law against necrofilia and aggravated murder required torture or rape prior to death. Even though he killed several women, he was eligible for parole.

I remember years ago there was a tv interview with a “rehabilitated” child rapist. He said the compulsion was still there, just as strong as it always was. The difference is he makes a point of isolating himself. He made a comment about getting aroused by the Sears catalogue. He’s not rehabilitated, he’s white knuckling his way through life.

I would agree with life with absolutely no possibility of parole instead of the death penalty. Anything that will keep these people far away from everyone else.

 

[vintageloves]

There’s a show on Netflix called I am a Killer and the first episode is about a man who was serving time in prison and hated regular prison so much he killed a fellow inmate just to get the death penalty. Apparently, inmates on death row are treated to special privileges, or at least they are in Florida. That’s kind of messed up. Add in all the costs of the appeals processes, and it’s just not a good system.

For moral and practical reasons, put me down for a no on the death penalty.

 

[LemonMoonLex]

My mother taught me that this is one of those subjects that you dont talk about openly in public due to its complexity and very often inclusion of many different emotions.....so Im just gonna stay quiet and read ya'lls responses.

 

[voce]

I'm against the death penalty in all cases. I don't think its worth the cost, nor do I think we should be deciding what is worth taking a human life over.
Possibly unpopular opinion - but I don't think being a child rapist is any worse than a regular rapist. Is one violent direct rape worse, or a human trafficker who initiates the rape of dozens of people but never touches them worse? Which is more important, the impact on the victim or the impact on society? If its society, then realistically a drug trafficker should get a harsher crime than a rapist or murderer.

I dunno, they're all bad, and I don't like the idea of trying to rank which are most heinous and deserving of death.

I also agree that there are way too many innocent people put away. Even confessions can't necessarily be trusted. How can one be confident that this is the right person, and that taking their life is the best punishment? Too much gray area IMO.

I think the popular opinion is that no one should be deciding what is worth taking human life over.

I wouldn't say a child rapist is worse than a regular rapist, but a child rapist is more likely to successfully inflict harm because adults are more capable of defending themselves.

I don't think directness or indirectness is worse, and I would not rank which are the "most heinous". However, it's true there are psychopaths who feel no remorse and who would make the same choices if they were released, and who can still get pleasure from inflicting harm on other people in prison.

I think in the cases where the people convicted are innocent of their crimes, the prosecutors should suffer consequences, which includes jail time, for whatever reason they pursued a wrongful conviction, whether or not a wrongful conviction leads to life imprisonment or the death sentence. Thus, they should think twice about fabricating evidence and prosecuting ruthlessly when evidence is scarce. Not having a death penalty does not do anything to reduce the number wrongful convictions. I think the problem is that the prosecutors get a slap on the wrist when they convict someone innocent, and the consequences of a wrongful conviction should be more harsh.

I agree with @chemgirl that some people shouldn't be allowed into society. They're unsafe and cannot be rehabilitated. However, I don't think many people have the concern, as I do, that these same psychopaths make the prison system unsafe, too. There's a reason correctional officers have a low life expectancy, and rather than saying let's not have the death penalty because it's too expensive, I think the order of priority should be to 1) improve the system to avoid wrongful convictions, 2) reduce the cost of the death penalty by doing away with unnecessary appeals, and 3) implement the death penalty.

 

[Arkteia]

I think situations like the Delphi murderer (if he is ever caught), or this new case...actually, a policeman...(Michael Valva) and his new wife, who kept his autistic child in the garage till he froze to death...I won’t feel sorry for such people.

Or Israel Keys, the serial killer.

Or Chris Watts, who killed pregnant wife and two daughters, who were 5 and 3. He buried the kids in crude oil.

At the same time, a couple of accused murderers have been exonerated by DNA, so it would be horribly unfair to kill someone who is not guilty.

Killing a policeman? Bad, but the same as any other adult human.

 

[Roselina]

I'm against the death penalty in all cases. I don't think its worth the cost, nor do I think we should be deciding what is worth taking a human life over.
Possibly unpopular opinion - but I don't think being a child rapist is any worse than a regular rapist. Is one violent direct rape worse, or a human trafficker who initiates the rape of dozens of people but never touches them worse? Which is more important, the impact on the victim or the impact on society? If its society, then realistically a drug trafficker should get a harsher crime than a rapist or murderer.

I dunno, they're all bad, and I don't like the idea of trying to rank which are most heinous and deserving of death.

I also agree that there are way too many innocent people put away. Even confessions can't necessarily be trusted. How can one be confident that this is the right person, and that taking their life is the best punishment? Too much gray area IMO.

I agree.