Yeah there is such thing a dignity. After all that's what makes us better than the person we are killing. Right?

Sen. John Whitmire ------ Democrat.

Jesus. How ****ing bad is it in Texas?

The Senator who takes away condemned prisoner's last tiny sliver of earthly comforts was the more compassionate alternative to the GOP candidate?

This at the core of most of our political problems imo.

I don't know whether to laugh or sadface.

My legal education cost me $100,000 not including scholarships, so if you want me to teach you to sound like you know what you're talking about, it'll cost you.

I'll point you in the right direction though. You puzzlingly bring up an Arkansas habeus statue when the proceedings over the past few years have been either federal or Georgia law. And the recent Georgia proceedings weren't habeus-based, they stemmed from an extraordinary motion for a new trial.

Also, the 11th Circuit's decision on the habeus petition was divided 2-1, and the Georgia Supreme Court's decision on the new trial motion was split 4-3, with a scathing dissent penned by the Chief Justice. I doubt that'll water down your confidence in your position, but it's something to ponder next time you're considering rehashing the tired "All these courts decided against him" victory by numbers routine.

As I said I thought he may have been trolling me, but I guess I was too eager to believe he was being serious. Again, it's not exactly a stretch given his other positions itt. Anyway, well played.

You spent all that money on legal education and were unaware that new evidence could be presented and even said so.

Davis and many others do just this.

I do not think you understood my argument. I was arguing how evidence is weighed not the ability of the convicted to present new evidence. I'm sure you will disagree with that as well.

that's true... you showed appropriate suspicion. And we're all guilty of being eager to believe something someone writes at one time or another.

That being said, I think you're wrong in saying "its not a stretch considering his other positions itt" since I would argue I knew he was joking precisely because I was familiar with his positions. His posting was decidedly UNLIKE his normal positions.

Yes.

You have to exhaust your direct appeal and collateral appeal before you can bring in new evidence. These appeals are for procedural/constitutional violation errors. No, I'm not wrong on that.

Here's a link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal

I'll let you find where it says you can enter new evidence at will. That covers the 2 bolded appeals above.

Next is the habeas corpus:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_..._United_States


Estoppel(not an appeal):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estoppel

I can give air that this may differ by state. However, here's another citation:

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com...-reduction.htm


Obviously.

b

Omg...THAT is hilarious.

b

Here's a part you missed:

Do you know what this means? See direct appeals above.

b

I wasn't aware that prisoners were hungry in this country.

I know Christian principles encourage the feeding of the hungry.

I am not aware of a Christian principle to give food to anyone who demands it, even those who are well fed.

Why give a last meal when there are real hungry people, many of them children, who the state could feed instead with the same tax payer money being used for last meals.

A fancy last meal seems to be some sort of reward. What are we trying to reward here, that the person committed a serious crime?

If the money were really the issue then you should be pushing to outlaw capital punishment altogether since it's ridiculously expensive.

Fancy? Lol. Almost all last meals are stuff like hamburgers or fried chicken. GMAFB.

Dude conservatives have things guzzling WAY more money higher on their hit list, like ACORN and Planned Parenthood and the National Endowment for the Arts, that are basically bankrupting our country

Pretty much speechless at people who can't see fit to give someone you're going to execute a last meal of their choice. lololol at using an economic angle. Boa, perhaps you could look up how much Texas spends on last meals for death row prisoners? I expect a new thread on the level of the DOJ waste on conferences.

did you seriously just suggest denial of a last meal?

When was the last time the murder victim was mentioned in this thread?

Its been a while. Why is that?

And I'm curious, was he offered a last meal before being murdered?

racist ban

You are correct, one perfectly legal, institutional way of changing an unjust law is ok, while another perfectly legal, institutional way of changing an unjust law is "not upholding" law....

You may not like jury nullification, but it is the law, so unfortunately you are stuck upholding it....see how you cant actualy win?

Hopefully you're just trolling now.

Pretty sure the death penalty doesn't change the crime rate so it truly is pointless. Ya when it involved something like drugs then your average Joe isn't going to do drugs for fear of death. But murder will happen whether their is a death penalty or not.

I only support the death penalty in extreme cases and would prefer not to have it at all. Someone like a Ted Bundy would deserve the death penalty. But some gangster dude who kills a guy over a dispute that is different. That guy just deserves life in prison or something like that.

It might if you brought back public executions.

It might if you put the men in dresses and the women you dress up as manga characters.

China executes way more people than any other country. Check the murder rates(or violent crime period)of cities like Beijing or Shanghai. These are way safer than American cities.

Its pretty stunning that you would think citing one country makes for a good argument that the death penalty is a deterrent.

If we're going to play the correlation equals causation game, I'm interested as to why European countries without the death penalty manage such low murder rates.