Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 18, 2009 at 9:31 am
Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

An error of omission can be as evil as an error of commission. Based on the current population of death row in California, where 45% of the inmates were there for their second or more conviction for killing, almost half the murders in California are committed by convicted and released killers. What kind of bloody fools send killers loose into society? Have innocent people been executed? I am sure some have been, although the antis have been unable to cite one case in recent history. Most of the "innocents" released were involved in the murder, but some extenuating circumstance was found to cloud the penalty. It is a pity the victims of the released killers have no appeals process.

Posted by Alice Smith, a resident of the Green Acres neighborhood, on May 18, 2009 at 10:33 am

The cost of maintaining people on death row in CA is estimated to be $125m per year; the cost of special housing which is now being planned $440m, so you can see that it makes NO sense financially to have death row. Keep them in Prison without possibility of parole and you will save $1B over 5 years. Surely you can see that this is not a foolish argument, but certainly tax efficient. By the way, let's keep a level of civility in the dialogue, please.

Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 18, 2009 at 12:27 pm
Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

Maintaining someone on death row is expensive because the barratry and Rose Birdism thwart justice. 15 years on appeal suggests 15 years steady legal work, but reality suggests that delay is the game. A couple of appeals and a lawyer is set for life.

As for civility, what do libs call manufacturers who dump toxic wastes? There can be nothing more toxic than the career criminals that commit most of our crimes. Whatever the cost of removing criminals, it is less than developing a criminal class that feels entitled to their "business".

We have contracted the duty of retribution to government and they have forfeited for non-performance.

Posted by Alice Smith, a resident of the Green Acres neighborhood, on May 18, 2009 at 12:49 pm

Web Link

From the Los Angeles Times

'Dysfunctional' death penalty racks up 28-year, $5-million tab

Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 18, 2009 at 1:40 pm

I am opposed to the death penalty, but I am more opposed to giving anyone who has intentionally murdered a chance to get out and do it again.

If I trusted our legal system to keep the guilty in jail for the rest of their lives, I would always vote against the death penalty.

Unfortunately, I have seen far too many cases of convicted murderers getting out and doing it again.

So, I support the death penalty because I support innocent people, and fewer innocent people are hurt with our current system.

Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 18, 2009 at 5:45 pm
Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

I would like to examine the time cards of the appeal attorneys. In fact I believe that the law should require that every billable hour be public record along with a synopsis of what was done. The victim is still dead. The objections noted seem frivolous and petty, probably redolent of the Three I's. Let's put the appeals attorneys to do tax audits and the tax auditors to handle death penalty appeals. Works of man are neither perfect nor perfectible. And killers kill even in prison. Balance the occasional erroneous execution against the tens of thousands of murders by career criminals and rational people believe the death penalty makes sense and is the more protectiove of human life and liberty.

Posted by Alice Smith, a resident of the Green Acres neighborhood, on May 18, 2009 at 10:17 pm

Perspective: I would strongly urge you to read "the Innocents" by John Grisham, a work on non-fiction, dealing with the issues of innocent people on death row.

In addition, I would say that if you have jail, without possibility of parole, at least then if the convicted person is found to be innocent, he/she can begin to rebuild his/her life, but if erroneously put to death, the state has murdered and there is nothing you can do to bring that innocent person back to life.

Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 19, 2009 at 1:14 am
Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

Ms. Smith, I reiterate, an error of omission can be as egregious as an error of commission. We can only do our best, but in the real world, not the Simon Says, gotcha minefield that is today's justice system. Perfecton is the enemy of good enough.

Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 19, 2009 at 10:48 am
Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

Adding to the above, judges like Rose Bird who do not believe in the death penalty, are ethically compelled to recuse themselves from any death penalty case.

"Judicial disqualification, also referred to as recusal, refers to the act of abstaining from participation in an official action such as a legal proceeding due to a conflict of interest of the presiding court official or administrative officer. Applicable statutes or canons of ethics may provide standards for recusal in a given proceeding or matter. Providing that the judge or presiding officer must be free from disabling conflicts of interest makes the fairness of the proceedings less likely to be questioned." [Wiki]

Posted by Marcantonio Luisi, a resident of the Green Acres neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2009 at 8:54 am

O Dame Alice, When you are letting the cruel criminales to go free after they have done to commit the murdering crime, and not to fry there werthess hides as they so reichtumly disserve, than the other baddy ones they gone thinking Hey! we can also do the bad murdering crime and just get put away for awhile with free TV and fun pals and use of liberry to lurn lots of law type things so we can git out to do the bad murdering croime again and maybhi too becum maybe even a wise Latinsko and get to be a huge Subprime Cort Judche!

So: Kill 'em so they cant murder agin. You kill a innacent one, too bad. He probly was gonna do somoddy in anyway.