4 ms·

Things like this are the main reason I am opposed to the death penalty. Imagine being actually killed because of a clerical error, or as in this case, clerical

by 2024throwaway 3y ago

Things like this are the main reason I am opposed to the death penalty. Imagine being actually killed because of a clerical error, or as in this case, clerical malfeasance.

sneak 3y ago
Things like this are the main reason I’m against the US criminal justice system and everyone who willingly participates in it (such as police and prosecutors and judges and wardens and guards), where the presumption of innocence simply doesn’t exist in practice and has no checks or balances to ensure that so-called law enforcement doesn’t engage in all manner of well-documented commonplace illegal practices such as manufacturing evidence, bullshit expert testimony, and parallel construction. Voluntary participation in such a system that is so well-documented as chronically and permanently unjust is affirmative approval of injustice. In my view, it is a criminal act to participate in such an irredeemable criminal conspiracy to carry out injustice. If you’re ever forced to be on a jury, ignore everything you are told or shown and simply return a not guilty verdict in all circumstances. Jury nullification is the last and only check on this power and it is almost never used by jurors, and is unknown to most. Separately, you should be philosophically opposed to the death penalty for the same reason you should be opposed to torturing people in prison: the most basic of human rights is the right to life. You shouldn’t oppose the death penalty simply because the government sometimes gets the verdict wrong. You should oppose the death penalty even if the government could be proven to get the exact correct answer 100% of the time without exception, because nobody should violate the human rights of others, even in the case where the person in question is legitimately guilty. America seems to generally agree that convicted criminals forfeit their human rights and that it’s okay to allow them to die of covid (prison guards were prioritized for covid vaccines ahead of inmates, for example) or be raped or beaten or killed once they are in prison. It’s degenerate and appalling.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- torstenvl 3y ago
  You speak with the kind of confidence that comes from knowing a system extremely well. How much time have you devoted to serving as a defense attorney?
scarecrowbob 3y ago
I mean, it's one more reason why I am generally opposed to the entire retributive "justice" system in the US. The death penalty is a horror show, but prison on any level is brutal, and the idea that there are folks incarcerated at all for things that they did not do is a crime that should make us all worry. Imagine losing even a year of your life to that brutal system due to "clerical malfeasance".
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

Things like this are the main reason I am opposed to the death penalty. Imagine being actually killed because of a clerical error, or as in this case, clerical malfeasance.

sneak 3y ago

Things like this are the main reason I’m against the US criminal justice system and everyone who willingly participates in it (such as police and prosecutors and judges and wardens and guards), where the presumption of innocence simply doesn’t exist in practice and has no checks or balances to ensure that so-called law enforcement doesn’t engage in all manner of well-documented commonplace illegal practices such as manufacturing evidence, bullshit expert testimony, and parallel construction. Voluntary participation in such a system that is so well-documented as chronically and permanently unjust is affirmative approval of injustice. In my view, it is a criminal act to participate in such an irredeemable criminal conspiracy to carry out injustice. If you’re ever forced to be on a jury, ignore everything you are told or shown and simply return a not guilty verdict in all circumstances. Jury nullification is the last and only check on this power and it is almost never used by jurors, and is unknown to most. Separately, you should be philosophically opposed to the death penalty for the same reason you should be opposed to torturing people in prison: the most basic of human rights is the right to life. You shouldn’t oppose the death penalty simply because the government sometimes gets the verdict wrong. You should oppose the death penalty even if the government could be proven to get the exact correct answer 100% of the time without exception, because nobody should violate the human rights of others, even in the case where the person in question is legitimately guilty. America seems to generally agree that convicted criminals forfeit their human rights and that it’s okay to allow them to die of covid (prison guards were prioritized for covid vaccines ahead of inmates, for example) or be raped or beaten or killed once they are in prison. It’s degenerate and appalling.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
torstenvl 3y ago
You speak with the kind of confidence that comes from knowing a system extremely well. How much time have you devoted to serving as a defense attorney?

scarecrowbob 3y ago

I mean, it's one more reason why I am generally opposed to the entire retributive "justice" system in the US. The death penalty is a horror show, but prison on any level is brutal, and the idea that there are folks incarcerated at all for things that they did not do is a crime that should make us all worry. Imagine losing even a year of your life to that brutal system due to "clerical malfeasance".

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]