Ohio lethal injection takes 2 hours, 10 tries

[xoxoxoBruce]

Saying the legal system, being a system, can not be perfect means anyone supporting the death penalty supports killing innocent people is bullshit.

- Do you believe that the judicial system is 100% infallible?

If Yes: You have not "limited your thinking" via logic. (This is not an actual option).
If No: Then you must acknowledge the possibility that people will be wrongly convicted/sentenced/executed.

Yes is an option, like it or not. No, does not mean there is a possibility.
First, the legal system deals with more than death penalty cases.
Second, attention and care is allocated by the seriousness of the consequences.
Traffic tickets, you pay or go to court, lose and you have one appeal.
Death penalty cases are long and complicated with many mandatory appeals and reviews, designed to check and correct any mistakes along the way. It would take a bunch of mistakes, unchecked and uncorrected, and that's not happening.
I can make wrong turns on the way to work and still get to the right place.
So no, I don't buy because it's not 100% infallible they are going to execute any innocent people. That is not a given.

- Do you support the state-sanctioned execution of innocent human beings?

If Yes: You must consciously accept innocent deaths as a trade-off for the benefits of the Death Penalty.

No must about it. That's only true if I buy your previous premise and I don't.

If No: You do not accept innocent deaths as a trade-off for the benefits of the Death Penalty. You cannot support the Death Penalty.

That's not true either.

If No, BUT you SUPPORT the Death Penalty: You have not "limited your thinking" via logic. (This is not an actual option).

Why, because I must accept your logic, you carefully constructed to lead to where you want it to go? No, I believe your logic is flawed. Like many things that make sense when you simplify to a few generalities, but don't actually work in the real world because that's not simple.

You can object to the Death penalty on moral grounds, if you wish, but the basis of executing innocents doesn't pass muster.

[Flint]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Saying the legal system, being a system, can not be perfect means anyone supporting the death penalty supports killing innocent people is bullshit.

Do you believe that there is a ZERO PERCENT chance of executing an innocent person: Yes or No...??? Can you answer this direct question?

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Flint

Do you believe that there is a ZERO PERCENT chance of executing an innocent person: Yes or No...??? Can you answer this direct question?

I told you I'm not playing that game. I already told you I think your methodology is flawed and why. I've already stated my position in favor of the death penalty and why.

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

I told you I'm not playing that game. I already told you I think your methodology is flawed and why. I've already stated my position in favor of the death penalty and why.

"& don't you dare bring logic into it" LOL!

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

"& don't you dare bring logic into it" LOL!

Faulty logic.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Death penalty cases are long and complicated with many mandatory appeals and reviews, designed to check and correct any mistakes along the way. It would take a bunch of mistakes, unchecked and uncorrected, and that's not happening.

Yes it is. Volunteer groups are continually finding evidence that was missing, ignored, or suppressed during trial and exonerating people who have exhausted their appeals. Six in PA, just two fewer than Texas. Innocent convicts not lucky enough to get that volunteer attention (or not lucky enough for the real killer to have left DNA evidence, or not lucky enough for any evidence from the trial to have been properly stored, etc.) have been and will continue to be executed.

[Flint]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

No it is not.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Yes it is. Volunteer groups are continually finding evidence that was missing, ignored, or suppressed during trial and exonerating people who have exhausted their appeals. Six in PA, just two fewer than Texas. Innocent convicts not lucky enough to get that volunteer attention (or not lucky enough for the real killer to have left DNA evidence, or not lucky enough for any evidence from the trial to have been properly stored, etc.) have been and will continue to be executed.

Not just volunteer groups, the system is reversing convictions too.
Six in PA.
Wilson got a new trial because he didn't have enough black jurors and the state said in the retrial they couldn't go for the death penalty again. Then they did a DNA test that showed there was another person at the crime seen besides him and the multiple victims.

Yarris is a scumbag that should have been executed. He caused his own problems by trying to frame some one else for his own gain, then telling them he was there when he wasn't.

Kimball was freed when they found out someone else could possibly have killed the four people. Not that the person did or Kimball didn't. The system corrected itself.

Nieves case went to the PA Supreme Court being a capital case. They ruled he was not represented properly. The system worked as it should, that's why capital cases are long and involved with all kinds of reviews.

Smith's case was bizarre, with the lead investigator taking money from Joseph Wambaugh, to provide inside information for his novel. Here again, the system corrected itself when the high court stepped in. I still think that sob is guilty.

Ferber was freed when the DA found new evidence shortly after the trial and urged the judge to grant a new trial. The system corrected itself this time by the prosecutors action.

I'm not sure about Wilson, but I don't see any evidence of volunteers in the other cases.
Oh, and none of them were executed even though I think two of them should be.