Connecticut Home Invasion.

[thebluefood]

Of course, due process must be done...but if they're found guilty, then even the most gruesome death would be too good for them.

[ardowling]

First I agree with you, but how many appeals are enough? That's where the costs come from oh and I'm pretty sure that not every lawyer is working pro bono. (Wow I know a lawyer word)

[Destino]

Is there such thing as "in this case" when it comes to the government and the court system? I doubt anyone would give a damn if these guys fell into a meat grinder "accidentally" but the problem is that people are suggesting procedural changes that wouldn't apply in just this case. Not everything is this cut and dry.

Look on the bright side guys, in prison these guys might get beat to death like Dahmer did.

[ardowling]

Well the thread was about this case, sorry if I'm a little slow on the uptake but I didn't realize that the thread was about the death penalty as a whole, my bad. I am sure eventually these guys will get what is coming to them but at what cost to the citizens of Conn? Quick question, how many appeals are enough?

[Bang]

I have no problem with the death penalty provided the capital crime is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.

I believe that as a society we can decide that a person has committed a crime so heinous that we can remove them permanently.

I understand the point that governments can use it as a tool to control the population in any way they can, but we don't do that. We give the accused every single opportunity and then some to prove just a shred of innocence,, enough to place even the seed of doubt in ONE juror's mind, and that can exonerate them completely. Even after found guilty we still give them numerous opportunites to say the state is wrong, and try to provide evidence that will save their lives.

We do not use the death penalty lightly, we do not execute until we know absolutely beyond the shadow of any doubt according to our law.

Some people are beyond redemption, and some people are beyond even giving them a chance at even trying to be redeemed.

I don't care about the lack of deterrent argument, because nothing is a deterrent to crime. Best example, guns are stolen in home burglaries at an amazing rate. My local paper shows all the police reports, and a gun is stolen in a ridiculously high percentage of burglaries. In other words, burglars don't care that you own a gun. They're not deterred in the slightest by the possibility you may legally kill them. No matter what, someone will feel the risk is worth it. The fact is, if a killer is found guilty and executed, we know that one will never ever do it again.

~Bang

[ardowling]

Very well said

[Dan T.]

"Convicted by Juries, Exonerated by Science: Case Studies in the Use of DNA Evidence to Establish Innocence After Trial"

(Pdf version or text):

http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/dnaevid.pdf

http://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/dnaevid.txt

An interesting read. It's probably not relevant to the case in this thread, though in any discussion of the death penalty, it is a cautionary tale. Death penalty appeals are expensive. But if society is going to wield this ultimate punishment, we damn well better make sure we get it right. In the face of the finality of a State execution, it's a financial burden that government is duty-bound to bear.

[ardowling]

How many appeals is enough? It appears this is a question that can't be answered, kind of like what is an "Assault Weapon" or when is combat not combat. Hmmm

[Dan T.]

How many appeals is enough?

As many as the presiding justice system allows, as established by laws created by representatives voted into office by the People. I love this country.

[ardowling]

Please show me a law that dictates the amount of appeals one can have.

[Dan T.]

Please show me a law that dictates the amount of appeals one can have.

Which state?

Here's Connecticut, where these animals committed the crime in the OP:

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2005/rpt/2005-R-0136.htm

Here's Tennessee, your location:

http://www.tsc.state.tn.us/geninfo/publications/dpbrochure.pdf

[ardowling]

Come on man, show me your "Google-fu" I stand corrected. However it appears that every time the convicted farts he gets a new appeal, I guess we will just have to fix this at the voting box. Thanks for the info. Edit actually in hindsight it seems there is no limit hence the cost. Again when is enough enough?

[Dan T.]

Come on man, show me your "Google-fu"

I don't get your point.

Each state has an established appeals process for death penalty convictions. I found those two on Google.

Because of the finality of this ultimate sentence, I'm okay with a system that tries to make sure we're killing the right person. If that's an expensive process, that's a burden we as a society must bear. Better expensive and right than hasty and wrong.

[ardowling]

Ok but when is enough a enough, 10, 15 appeals? I guess its like when is combat not combat.

[Huly]

The 17 year old went to a private school with an old coworker of mine. She told me stories about the girls the crime etc and these guys deserve the death penalty