Federal government to resume capital punishment, schedule executions for first time since 2003

Attorney General Bill Barr said Thursday the federal government will resume capital punishment and will move forward with plans to execute five inmates on death row for the first time in more than 15 years.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/federal...-5-inmates

---

Instead of a sign that says "Do Not Disturb" I need one that says "Already Disturbed Proceed With Caution."

Good.

---

I mean.. if they were convicted and sentenced just do it

---

There have been too many wrongful conviction cases for this to be okay. I hate that their "three hots and a cot" as well as their medical is paid for by our tax dollars, but unless you're 300% sure that person did the crime (Ted Bundy, Charles Manson, David Berkowitz to name a few) by actual evidence and testimony then I don't feel comfortable with it. 

It doesn't matter if you find out AFTER they're dead that they were innocent, and that has happened. Or those five guys in NY who were in prison for a long time for a crime they didn't commit and were exonerated only because one of them ended up in the same cell block as the guy who actually did the crime. He ended up confessing to it and DNA matched so the others were set free, paid a butt ton of money but still feel pretty screwed by the whole thing. Not a capital punishment case but still....

---

There have been too many wrongful conviction cases for this to be okay. I hate that their "three hots and a cot" as well as their medical is paid for by our tax dollars, but unless you're 300% sure that person did the crime (Ted Bundy, Charles Manson, David Berkowitz to name a few) by actual evidence and testimony then I don't feel comfortable with it. 

It doesn't matter if you find out AFTER they're dead that they were innocent, and that has happened. Or those five guys in NY who were in prison for a long time for a crime they didn't commit and were exonerated only because one of them ended up in the same cell block as the guy who actually did the crime. He ended up confessing to it and DNA matched so the others were set free, paid a butt ton of money but still feel pretty screwed by the whole thing. Not a capital punishment case but still....

The CP5 are guilty. They confessed to consistent details and it was a group assault that included them and Reyes,. Read the Armstrong Commission Report, it's much more convincing than Bob Mueller's hack job. Money quote therein:

"We believe the inconsistencies contained in the various statements were not such as to destroy their reliability. On the other hand, there was a general consistency that ran through the defendants' descriptions of the attack on the female jogger: she was knocked down on the road, dragged into the woods, hit and molested by several defendants, sexually abused by some while others held her arms and legs, and left semiconscious in a state of undress."

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

There's another factor to consider: once a person is executed, any information they have that might be pertinent to another case dies with them.

Based on the drawing of "John Doe #2" I've always wondered if Tim McVeigh could have provided information on Al Qaeda terror cells in the US had he not been executed before 9/11.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

There's another factor to consider: once a person is executed, any information they have that might be pertinent to another case dies with them.

Based on the drawing of "John Doe #2" I've always wondered if Tim McVeigh could have provided information on Al Qaeda terror cells in the US had he not been executed before 9/11.

McVeigh had to die quickly to keep him from revealing the government's involvement in his attack.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

If there is DNA evidence convicting someone of a heinous murder or murders, then in my opinion, the death penalty should be mandatory. No appeals, no nothing. The offender should be executed within 2 weeks of their sentencing, all by firing squad (it's cheap and clean.)

---

One problem I see with the death penalty is the expense.  For the government to fight years of appeals is very expensive.   I think I read somewhere that it's a lot less expensive to keep a person in jail for the rest of their life than to try and execute them.

---

One problem I see with the death penalty is the expense.  For the government to fight years of appeals is very expensive.   I think I read somewhere that it's a lot less expensive to keep a person in jail for the rest of their life than to try and execute them.

If someone is convicted by DNA evidence, they should have no appeals. They are guilty, dead to rights. Executions should be scheduled immediately after sentencing with no delays.

---

The land of the free

---

One problem I see with the death penalty is the expense.  For the government to fight years of appeals is very expensive.   I think I read somewhere that it's a lot less expensive to keep a person in jail for the rest of their life than to try and execute them.

If someone is convicted by DNA evidence, they should have no appeals. They are guilty, dead to rights. Executions should be scheduled immediately after sentencing with no delays.

DNA evidence can be misleading.

DNA transfer

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

The land of the free

Although I agree that way too many things are considered a crime (if that was your point), freedom has nothing to do with the scope of punishment. A murderer can either be (1) locked up, (2) executed, or (3) allowed back into society with the opportunity to murder again. I'm firmly against #3.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

There have been too many wrongful conviction cases for this to be okay. I hate that their "three hots and a cot" as well as their medical is paid for by our tax dollars, but unless you're 300% sure that person did the crime (Ted Bundy, Charles Manson, David Berkowitz to name a few) by actual evidence and testimony then I don't feel comfortable with it. 

It doesn't matter if you find out AFTER they're dead that they were innocent, and that has happened. Or those five guys in NY who were in prison for a long time for a crime they didn't commit and were exonerated only because one of them ended up in the same cell block as the guy who actually did the crime. He ended up confessing to it and DNA matched so the others were set free, paid a butt ton of money but still feel pretty screwed by the whole thing. Not a capital punishment case but still....

The CP5 are guilty. They confessed to consistent details and it was a group assault that included them and Reyes,. Read the Armstrong Commission Report, it's much more convincing than Bob Mueller's hack job. Money quote therein:

"We believe the inconsistencies contained in the various statements were not such as to destroy their reliability. On the other hand, there was a general consistency that ran through the defendants' descriptions of the attack on the female jogger: she was knocked down on the road, dragged into the woods, hit and molested by several defendants, sexually abused by some while others held her arms and legs, and left semiconscious in a state of undress."

If you say so.

---

The land of the free

Although I agree that way too many things are considered a crime (if that was your point), freedom has nothing to do with the scope of punishment. A murderer can either be (1) locked up, (2) executed, or (3) allowed back into society with the opportunity to murder again. I'm firmly against #3.

He's button pushing.

---

If someone is convicted by DNA evidence, they should have no appeals. They are guilty, dead to rights. Executions should be scheduled immediately after sentencing with no delays.

DNA evidence can be misleading.

DNA transfer

I'm not talking about touch DNA. In my opinion, that is very unreliable. Skin cells and hair can easily get transferred. I'm talking blood, semen and skin/hair found under a victims fingernails. That is the stuff that gets you caught.

---

There have been too many wrongful conviction cases for this to be okay. I hate that their "three hots and a cot" as well as their medical is paid for by our tax dollars, but unless you're 300% sure that person did the crime (Ted Bundy, Charles Manson, David Berkowitz to name a few) by actual evidence and testimony then I don't feel comfortable with it. 

It doesn't matter if you find out AFTER they're dead that they were innocent, and that has happened. Or those five guys in NY who were in prison for a long time for a crime they didn't commit and were exonerated only because one of them ended up in the same cell block as the guy who actually did the crime. He ended up confessing to it and DNA matched so the others were set free, paid a butt ton of money but still feel pretty screwed by the whole thing. Not a capital punishment case but still....

The CP5 are guilty. They confessed to consistent details and it was a group assault that included them and Reyes,. Read the Armstrong Commission Report, it's much more convincing than Bob Mueller's hack job. Money quote therein:

"We believe the inconsistencies contained in the various statements were not such as to destroy their reliability. On the other hand, there was a general consistency that ran through the defendants' descriptions of the attack on the female jogger: she was knocked down on the road, dragged into the woods, hit and molested by several defendants, sexually abused by some while others held her arms and legs, and left semiconscious in a state of undress."

The actual rape took place in the woods, and the trail that the rapist made while dragging the victim into the woods was 18in wide. There may have been one person in front of the victim and one person behind her, but there is no way you can explain rape charges for five men based on that evidence.

The best explanation for five separate individuals confessing to such a thing is that the police thought they needed to coercively question five individuals to get one confession, but they ended up with five. In any case the individuals recanted their confessions and plead not guilty, so they were not reliable witnesses either way. The evidence should have been allowed to speak for itself.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The land of the free

Although I agree that way too many things are considered a crime (if that was your point), freedom has nothing to do with the scope of punishment. A murderer can either be (1) locked up, (2) executed, or (3) allowed back into society with the opportunity to murder again. I'm firmly against #3.

I'm just poking fun at that line juxtaposed with how many humans America locks up in jails or cages

---

Although I agree that way too many things are considered a crime (if that was your point), freedom has nothing to do with the scope of punishment. A murderer can either be (1) locked up, (2) executed, or (3) allowed back into society with the opportunity to murder again. I'm firmly against #3.

I'm just poking fun at that line juxtaposed with how many humans America locks up in jails or cages

I agree that we've criminalized too much of our society. I dont think it is the situation in the 5 cases mentioned in that story, those folks should be executed.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

One problem I see with the death penalty is the expense.  For the government to fight years of appeals is very expensive.   I think I read somewhere that it's a lot less expensive to keep a person in jail for the rest of their life than to try and execute them.

If someone is convicted by DNA evidence, they should have no appeals. They are guilty, dead to rights. Executions should be scheduled immediately after sentencing with no delays.

The right to an appeal is part of the Constitution.  It has nothing to do with what kind of evidence was used to convict them.

---