> My point is that there's more "bang for the buck" wrt saving innocents from being dying due to wrongful "not death penalty" convictions, even if you discount

> My point is that there's more "bang for the buck" wrt saving innocents from being dying due to wrongful "not death penalty" convictions, even if you discount "dying in the infirmary" quite a bit relative to "dying in the chair." If the system doesn’t care when an innocent is actually sentenced to death and executed, why would it care if they die at all? I don’t think there is any predictable “bang for the buck”. If anything, more “bang” is achieved by shaming the system towards better justice wherever it will be most publicly noticed. Creating a halo for more change. The case’s dramatic factors are why people put up their own resources into fighting it, and why we are hearing about it. And why the challenge has any chance.