Re: Is justice delayed 24 years justice?

On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Peter J Richardson wrote:

> Irrespective of one's views on capital punishment, is it reasonable to keep a man in legal limbo for 24 years?
> In the old Australian penal colonies, there used to be a rule that if a man could escape and stay at large for a
> year and a day that he became a free man.
>
> Does anybody think there should be a statute of limitations on these death row cases?
>

While personally I am opposed to the death penalty, I should mention a few
facts here:

- It is the choice of the person about to be executed to delay the
process.  Essentially, they are allowed a large number of appeals in order
to give them every possible chance to prove their innocence, prove that
there was a judicial mistake made, that rules were not followed, etc.  In
this case every single avenue possible was pursued, every single delaying
tactic available to the defense was used, and that is why it took 24
years.  Had the defense wanted to get it over with, it would not have
taken nearly as long

- Since the time that Tookie Williams was sentenced, laws have been passed
that reduce and expedite the appeals process.  However, in most places it
would still not be uncommon for a decade to pass between sentence and
execution.

I think that the amount of time it takes between sentence and execution
and the large number of appeals is a good idea, in that it gives every
opportunity possible for innocence to be proven.  That said, my
opposition to the death penalty as currently constituted comes from the
fact that innocent men have been executed even with this lengthy process,
and that many, many more have been reprieved only after a long time on
death row.  I believe shortening the appeals process further would only
make the problem worse.

Do I think that the murderer of four people, one who has shown no remorse
for those crimes, should be put to death?  I think such a person should be
kept away from society for the rest of his days.  I think that such a
thing should be possible; that "life without possibility of parole" should
actually mean just that.  Barring that possibility, and with a prison
system that has shown itself capable of retribution but not of
rehabilitation, I don't think that I am wiser than a jury
of his peers.  But I would hate to be on such a jury and to have to make
that choice; I probably would refuse to sit on a death penalty jury.  And
if that sounds like I'm not thinking clearly on the subject, well, it's
probably because I'm not.

	-Charles

> Regards
> Peter
>
kk


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
AIDS in India: A "lurking bomb." Click and help stop AIDS now.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/VpTY2A/lzNLAA/yQLSAA/7tRolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->