9 ms·

A take I recently heard: You either have to believe ... The state doesn't make mistakes. OR The state sometimes kills innocent people.

jimbob45 3y ago
The death penalty isn't common at all. I'm seeing 18 individuals for 2022 and also that 2022 was the eighth consecutive year with less than 30 individuals served the death penalty. I'm finding it hard to believe that many mistakes were made with that few number of individuals (the data was kinda tough to find so I welcome better data if anyone has it). [0]https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions/2021 https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions/2021
- roblabla 3y ago
  The very website you link has data about exonerations[0]. From a quick look, it looks like this is about people who are still alive, not dead people found innocent after the death penalty was carried through (I'm having a hard time finding that specific datapoint). Given the exoneration data though, I'd have a hard time believing that number is 0. [0]: https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence EDIT: Oh boy that rabbit hole is deep. So here's some _potentially_ innocent people who have been put to death[1]. None of those are actually proven to be innocent, but there is at least some amount of evidence that spells reasonable doubt on their conviction. [1]: https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence/executed-but-possibly-innocent https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence/execute...
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    Is nobody here aware of the Innocence Project? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_Project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_Project
- tialaramex 3y ago
  What is "many" here? How many times is it OK for us to execute you for a crime you didn't commit? Is it alright so long as we only kill you once? It took a matter of minutes to find that Toforest Johnson was successfully convicted of murder based on somebody claiming they overheard him confessing. The prosecution had concealed from the defence the fact that they paid this witness a substantial sum of money. That sort of bullshit shouldn't work to give somebody a traffic ticket, never mind a death sentence and yet sure enough US courts thought that was good enough.
- shanecleveland 3y ago
  >> "I'm finding it hard to believe that many mistakes wee made ..." So you are OK with a a few mistakes, as opposed to many? Point is also that it is possible that a mistake will be made. We know wrongful convictions have occurred, including for those on death row.
  - jimbob45 3y ago
    I’m not a huge fan of the death penalty myself but I don’t see a meaningful difference between the death penalty and life imprisonment. I’m quite confident that there are far more frequent errors in incarceration with life imprisonment than with the death penalty. Just seems like bikeshedding to focus on a thing that can have at max 18 errors a year.
paxys 3y ago
It isn't even a hypothetical. There is a long list of people who were proven to be innocent after they were executed, using DNA testing, someone else confessing or however else.
- tunesmith 3y ago
  I don't doubt it, but I had a hard time finding a list last time I looked. I only found people that were probably innocent and not proven innocent. Is there a source I missed?
- BizarroLand 3y ago
  This is just a small portion of the people who we have good reason to believe were either unjustly executed by the state or who were executed too quickly to allow for new information to come to light https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence/executed-but-possibly-innocent https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence/execute... Note that the time between sentencing and executions vary wildly, 6-20+ years, and all of these people deserved to have a second chance to prove their innocence given that now we can see where the legal requirement of guilt "Beyond a shadow of a doubt" might have left these potentially innocent people go free.
fauxpause_ 3y ago
This can be addressed by simply raising the bar for delivering such a sentence however. “Reasonable doubt” is a moderately high precision bar. It’s intentionally not higher.
- LiquidInsect 3y ago
  Raise that bar however high you want; you cannot completely eliminate the possibility of a mistake.
  - sadhorse 3y ago
    The defendant has been recognized by no less than 15 people. His DNA was found all over the crime scene . The victim's blood was found at his clothes. A video recording made by a surveillance camera depicts the whole murder. He himself confessed.
    - fauxpause_ 3y ago
      Yep. That’s what I’m saying. Starting with a required confession is a good start. You could make it as hard as requiring the jury to fail to come up with any other believable narrative. It’s ok if a criminal can avoid the death penalty by blatantly refusing to confess in light of obviously incriminating evidence.
      - mrguyorama 3y ago
        Confessions are fake all the time, including in many existing "they were executed despite being innocent" cases!
    - f1refly 3y ago
      The murder has been staged. Organized crime found a doppelganger, made him wear the victims clothes and kill the other guy on cctv. They contacted the victim and told him to either confess or they will kill his children and parents.
lumb63 3y ago
This is a straw man designed to appeal to people who are distrusting of government. Almost all states which have the death penalty deliver it by jury sentencing, and all but one require it be unanimous. In most cases this issue has nothing to do with the state.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- shanecleveland 3y ago
  I believe "state" is ambiguous here. The "state" brings the charges and recommends the penalty.
- gdoug 3y ago
  Replace "state" with "legal process" and the point still stands.
yieldcrv 3y ago
It bothers me how much the state chooses to defend the idea that it doesn’t make mistakes. All while the actual perpetrators are still in society. They’re trying to defend their decision to keep someone in prison, just so that it doesn’t change bootlickers perspective, instead of protect the public.
polski-g 3y ago
Once AI powered brain scanning is good enough to see images in people's heads, we can eliminate the possibility of wrongful convictions
- SpaghettiCthulu 3y ago
  Ah, yes, because the AI will surely never misrepresent what a person is thinking.

jimbob45 3y ago

The death penalty isn't common at all. I'm seeing 18 individuals for 2022 and also that 2022 was the eighth consecutive year with less than 30 individuals served the death penalty. I'm finding it hard to believe that many mistakes were made with that few number of individuals (the data was kinda tough to find so I welcome better data if anyone has it). [0]https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions/2021 https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions/2021

roblabla 3y ago
The very website you link has data about exonerations[0]. From a quick look, it looks like this is about people who are still alive, not dead people found innocent after the death penalty was carried through (I'm having a hard time finding that specific datapoint). Given the exoneration data though, I'd have a hard time believing that number is 0. [0]: https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence EDIT: Oh boy that rabbit hole is deep. So here's some _potentially_ innocent people who have been put to death[1]. None of those are actually proven to be innocent, but there is at least some amount of evidence that spells reasonable doubt on their conviction. [1]: https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence/executed-but-possibly-innocent https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence/execute...
- mrguyorama 3y ago
  Is nobody here aware of the Innocence Project? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_Project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_Project
tialaramex 3y ago
What is "many" here? How many times is it OK for us to execute you for a crime you didn't commit? Is it alright so long as we only kill you once? It took a matter of minutes to find that Toforest Johnson was successfully convicted of murder based on somebody claiming they overheard him confessing. The prosecution had concealed from the defence the fact that they paid this witness a substantial sum of money. That sort of bullshit shouldn't work to give somebody a traffic ticket, never mind a death sentence and yet sure enough US courts thought that was good enough.
shanecleveland 3y ago
>> "I'm finding it hard to believe that many mistakes wee made ..." So you are OK with a a few mistakes, as opposed to many? Point is also that it is possible that a mistake will be made. We know wrongful convictions have occurred, including for those on death row.
- jimbob45 3y ago
  I’m not a huge fan of the death penalty myself but I don’t see a meaningful difference between the death penalty and life imprisonment. I’m quite confident that there are far more frequent errors in incarceration with life imprisonment than with the death penalty. Just seems like bikeshedding to focus on a thing that can have at max 18 errors a year.

paxys 3y ago

It isn't even a hypothetical. There is a long list of people who were proven to be innocent after they were executed, using DNA testing, someone else confessing or however else.

tunesmith 3y ago
I don't doubt it, but I had a hard time finding a list last time I looked. I only found people that were probably innocent and not proven innocent. Is there a source I missed?
BizarroLand 3y ago
This is just a small portion of the people who we have good reason to believe were either unjustly executed by the state or who were executed too quickly to allow for new information to come to light https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence/executed-but-possibly-innocent https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence/execute... Note that the time between sentencing and executions vary wildly, 6-20+ years, and all of these people deserved to have a second chance to prove their innocence given that now we can see where the legal requirement of guilt "Beyond a shadow of a doubt" might have left these potentially innocent people go free.

fauxpause_ 3y ago

This can be addressed by simply raising the bar for delivering such a sentence however. “Reasonable doubt” is a moderately high precision bar. It’s intentionally not higher.

LiquidInsect 3y ago
Raise that bar however high you want; you cannot completely eliminate the possibility of a mistake.
- sadhorse 3y ago
  The defendant has been recognized by no less than 15 people. His DNA was found all over the crime scene . The victim's blood was found at his clothes. A video recording made by a surveillance camera depicts the whole murder. He himself confessed.
  - fauxpause_ 3y ago
    Yep. That’s what I’m saying. Starting with a required confession is a good start. You could make it as hard as requiring the jury to fail to come up with any other believable narrative. It’s ok if a criminal can avoid the death penalty by blatantly refusing to confess in light of obviously incriminating evidence.
    - mrguyorama 3y ago
      Confessions are fake all the time, including in many existing "they were executed despite being innocent" cases!
  - f1refly 3y ago
    The murder has been staged. Organized crime found a doppelganger, made him wear the victims clothes and kill the other guy on cctv. They contacted the victim and told him to either confess or they will kill his children and parents.

lumb63 3y ago

This is a straw man designed to appeal to people who are distrusting of government. Almost all states which have the death penalty deliver it by jury sentencing, and all but one require it be unanimous. In most cases this issue has nothing to do with the state.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
shanecleveland 3y ago
I believe "state" is ambiguous here. The "state" brings the charges and recommends the penalty.
gdoug 3y ago
Replace "state" with "legal process" and the point still stands.

yieldcrv 3y ago

It bothers me how much the state chooses to defend the idea that it doesn’t make mistakes. All while the actual perpetrators are still in society. They’re trying to defend their decision to keep someone in prison, just so that it doesn’t change bootlickers perspective, instead of protect the public.

polski-g 3y ago

Once AI powered brain scanning is good enough to see images in people's heads, we can eliminate the possibility of wrongful convictions

SpaghettiCthulu 3y ago
Ah, yes, because the AI will surely never misrepresent what a person is thinking.