@Mysteria Said
Thanks for the case history and the chart.
I'm still on the fence and probably always will be. If I caught someone committing a violent crime and I was absolutely certain I saw the perpetrator in a lineup, it wouldn't bother me to pick that person. On the other hand, I know that eyewitness testimony isn't very reliable. Most of the time, I don't remember what a person's wearing on a day that I speak to them at the grocery store.
Sure. It's hard to argue against the death penalty sometimes because I think it's natural for a person to want to side with the victim. That's why I am always amazed by victims' families who are against the death penalty. There are also a lot of common misconceptions about it, which makes it a confusing, interesting, and important debate.
Regarding eye witness testimony, yes...mistaken eye witnesses are actually the
most common factor regarding wrongful convictions. If you ever get a chance to read the book
Bloodsworth you should. It's a very easy read and an interesting case.
@gingernproud Said
thanks for the link,its very interesting.
this is one of the reasons i think it should only be applied to multi murderers.if there is multiple d.n.a evidence at multiple crime scenes and they correspond with the murders M.O, witnesses etc
murder cases are built up of many things that are brought up in evidence.i should of really stated all this and not just the d.n.a ,i just find that the main factor in how we can be more sure,than we could in times gone by.
i think it would and has been pretty conclusive in some cases,with the added factor that a lot of these monsters also brag about there crimes once caught.
i believe it would all have to be taken into account on an individual basis ,per case.
i don't just think the death penalty should be handed out willy nilly , don't get me wrong...
but take Ted Bundy for instance (probably not the best example but the first that come to mind) we have witnesses D.N.A evidence and a confession ,not to mention a trail of victims going back how many years.he escaped custody for minor offences a few times during the time he was committing his crimes,although at the time the police didn't know he was a murderer.
but my point is he would not of been able to be rehabilitated.if he would of escaped or been released he would of re offended.in my opinion in cases like that it is and was justifiable to deliver the death penalty.
Oh no problem.
Already addressed the problems that come up with DNA evidence and eye witness testimony. Keep in mind the possibility of
false confessions - something which seems completely unthinkable but is actually much more common than most people suspect.
I see your point, but still disagree. I'm not comfortable putting anyone on death row, no matter how disgusting they may be or how convincing the circumstances may seem. *All* convicted murderers are said to be guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt" at the time of the verdict. It is tough, at the time of the trial, to separate those who really are from those who end up later being proven not guilty. Hindsight bias is tricky.