I totally agree, and I as an American born and raised do not understand.
Also how does one who is part of a say robbery, end up on DR when he did not kill anyone the other guy with him did?

If I were to put myself in ones shoes, and I knew the killer would talk as to where the body of my loved one is, I would cut a deal to have their remains known, no DP if you tell. We dont torcher them to get answers so we cut deals. They can bargain for their life the victims they killed could not.

__________________

That instance was constructed but i´m sure it happens often enough. Personally i do understand why prosecutors do this. But it shows me one important thing: that circumstances can exist which are more important than a possible death penalty. At this point would we have a similarity. Personally do i go a step further, i think there are more than enough aspects which are more important than DP, ethical ones for instance. No society really needs it. Those american states which abolished DP evidence that they don´t become any damage because of this abolition.

__________________
Guess who i will see soon live in action.

Yes, that is where there comes a similarity. He won his life thanks to ethics of what is more important to us at this time. Thats not lame thats fact.

If other states here in the US have no DP and it works that should be looked at closely. Not looking to other countrys that it works there though. All countrys have higher/lower population, criminal activity, level of crimes commited. It should always remain the legal decision of each country, just as we allow each state in the US to decide want is needed for their state.

Just traveling to different states within the US alone, the mentality,criminal activity and population of the state makes a big difference.

__________________

To be honest: as i mentioned in some other threads before, i really see a relation between Americas history, its societal development, its self-esteem, its mentality and the death penalty. To abolish the DP is a thing which can last some decades. Easier to reach is that DP will not any longer be performed nationwide although she still exists. This will happen much more sooner.

__________________
Guess who i will see soon live in action.

I believe so too..

__________________

The thrust of the question “Shouldn`t Innocence Matter?” is carefully shielded by the arrogance of Associate Justice Scalia`s use of the Leonel Herrera 1993 DP case to argue that Troy Anthony Davis will meet the same fate in the new hearing.

In 1993, the Supreme Court considered the case of Leonel Herrera, a prisoner on death row in Texas. Herrera produced new evidence tending to show that he was innocent of the crime for which he was sentenced to die, and argued that, since he was innocent, his execution would violate the Constitution. The Court avoided deciding that question, concluding instead that, even assuming that the execution of an innocent person would be unconstitutional, Herrera had not met the "extraordinarily high" threshold to establish such a claim. Herrera was executed a few months later.

Andreas wrote, and I agree that: “A judicial or law system should have two major guidelines: the human life and dignity are invulnerable and innocent to be proven guilty”.

Instead Andreas, this country wrote into our jurisprudence a system a law that bars federal courts to entertain Habeas petitions from convicted felons who fail to meet the “extra-ordinarily high” threshold, as Scalia so correctly pointed out in Herrera.

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, enacted by then President Clinton bars federal courts from entertaining habeas corpus absence of the mentioned
“extraordinarily high” threshold Scalia wrote in the case of Herrera. When a convicted felon exhausts all available first appeals through the appellate process, he/she must have
made all claims of innocence at that time. After the first appeal process time expires in one year through the lower courts and affirmed – nothing, no new evidence will ever
be allowed to be heard through habeas proceedings under this AEDPA act of 1996.

The AEDPA act is working as intended by lawmakers. That is to speed up the legal execution of those on death row. I am sad to say that Troy Anthony Davis will meet the same fate as Leonel Herrera, even if he is truly innocent. It does not matter as Scalia correctly pointed out. The extraordinarily high threshold of one year to claim his innocence is lacking, he must die.

For those not familiar with the AEDPA act of 1996 you should google it and print it. Only then will you understand why Andreas statement makes so much sense.

I feel the AEDPA act is unconstitutional myself, nothing will change my mind on that one.

__________________

I agree with you Peanut that the AEDPA is unconstitutional.
The courts have struggled with this issue for some time now. The Act itself is a can of rotten worms created as a power grab tool that targeted civil liberties for U.S. citizens in the name of National Security in the aftermath of a terrorist act, if you recall.

I brought the issue of the AEDPA after reading with great
interest the dialog of interaction between you and Andreas
with respect to the Pro`s and Con`s of the Death Penalty in
our country. Because the "title question" of my post did not
appear to be answered I thought I could present my view.

I do believe that you are correct. Hopefully the courts will
find as you do, as the Act itself is making its way through
the courts and is under assault as we speak.

[quote=Rolando;932487] The Act itself is a can of rotten worms created as a power grab tool that targeted civil liberties for U.S. citizens in the name of National Security in the aftermath of a terrorist act, if you recall.

Boy, is that the truth !!!!

__________________

Roland % Peanut I agree it is Unconstitutional

The flawed reasoning is f conflated out of the Fifth Amendment

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation



Where Scalia and Roberts make their mental gymnastics is this phrase

nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

The logical argument is that if a person is innocent they clearly did not get a fair trail or were afored due process . The intent of the Frames was the opposite of what Pro DP Pro totalitarian Police state types make . The Idea was to make it difficult to secure a conviction not easy to get one

With Courts such has TX CCA & Judges like Sharon Keller ,Scalia & Roberts who seem to think the state is infallible when it comes to executing and incarcerating some people some of the time as in as long as it is not "their guys" . Due process is all but dead and the presumption of innocence is a quaint notion . If you are in the defendants chair you are now assumed guilty . It is now guilty until proven guilty . Lots of blame to spread around .

I am sure the innocent on DR or lying on the gurney thinks it is not cruel and unusual or that they got a fair trail or were afforded due process .
Incarcerating or worse executing innocent poe is very cruel and unusual as far as I am concerned .

I am sure they do not think a violation of their rights as a "Technicality " It is never a "Technicality " it is in fact a crime for the state to violate any ones rights even if they are guilty! Not a easy argument but if we make one exception soon it becomes easy to make more and more and we will wonder where our rights went .

Unfortunately often those who fight these battles are not the most sympathetic people even if innocent of that crime some do have a record no matter how minor and that is always used a against them it should not ever be brought up in this legal issue and the media should not be able make it public in such cases .

__________________
The Constitution is not a Technicality!

Me

If you never have dreams they will never come true.

Somethings are worth fighting for !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2Ngn...eature=related


Money Talks !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgL8qqjOnlg