• jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Absolutely not. When you are caught with photographs of a murdered kid hanging in your closet and their underwear kept as a trophy there is no “error” there.

    Again, you didn’t read the links I posted or understand the first thing I am saying. There is such a thing as uncontested guilt. In those cases, the death penalty absolutely should apply.

    • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      There can always be error. I’m not saying that there is on the two cases you keep bringing up but the sad fact is that prosecutors can withhold exonerating evidence, defense council can be next to useless, judges can be biased, defendants can have mental health issues and developmental problems and so on.

      You can’t just hand wave these concerns away and advocate for executing only the people who confess and send the rest to prison for life. That distinction is too messy and open to abuse.

        • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          There’s nuance here you’re just not willing to accept, that’s why you keep bringing up the worst of the worst like that’s a persuasive argument.

          There’s a sliding scale of criminality. At some point someone has to make a determination between the most egregious, who are executed, and less vicious crimes where the defendant is jailed indefinitely. The person who is making that determination cannot ever be wrong for your approach to work.

          That’s my point, mistakes were and are being made because that’s what happens when you ask people to make these decisions.

          • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            Because, as I’ve stated from the very start, I believe the death penalty should be reserved for the worst of the worst.

            It might mean only applying it once or twice a decade, but in cases of monsters we need to have that option.

            • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              That’s not how the legal system works, at all.

              Your slightly strange obsession with “monsters” is clouding your ability to think critically on this issue.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                Again, please read what I said from the beginning. You seem to be ignoring what I’m saying in favor of your own set opinion.

                From my very first comment I stated that the death penalty is problematic, but that it should be reformed and kept for the most egregious crimes.

                I get “that’s not the way it is now”, I’m arguing that it should be changed and kept and not just abandoned just because it’s currently mis-applied.

                In my state, the Governor single handedly put on hold every death penalty case. There were, I think, 17 of them.

                In MOST cases, life in prison seems adequate.

                https://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/2015/11/randy_guzek_sentenced_to_death.html

                Double murder commited during a robbery? That’s pretty mundane for a death penalty case. By all means, let’s put him away for life.

                Then there was this guy:

                https://www.kgw.com/article/news/investigations/oregon-governor-death-sentence-clemency-christian-longo/283-6008ce2d-998a-4b9e-8dcf-4da42d1c3986

                He strangled his wife and three little kids, stuffed them in suitcases, threw their bodies off a cliff, and fled to Mexico. There’s no “error” there, there’s no “extenuating circumstances”. He betrayed the trust of his own children and murdered them, ages 4, 3 and 2. Fuck that guy.

                https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Longo

                • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  You seem to be ignoring what I’m saying in favor of your own set opinion.

                  Go look in the mirror, you’re describing yourself, not me.

                  Look at the examples you keep referring to. How to you make the distinction between the two examples you mention? The law does not and changing it to accommodate a distinction between run of the mill murder and murder + icky things is ridiculous.

                  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 month ago

                    Because one person murdered their own minor children. That’s a huge violation of trust, then they violated the corpses in their attempt to escape.

                    Robberies gone bad happen all the time, what Longo did was a violation of human norms.