Do you approve of the death penalty?

Do you approve of the death penalty?

  • Yes

    Votes: 4 26.7%
  • No

    Votes: 11 73.3%

  • Total voters
    15
  • Poll closed .
Death to the Death Penalty
by Leonard Pitts Jr.

A few days ago, Anthony Graves called his mother and asked what she was cooking for dinner. She asked why he wanted to know. He said, "Because I'm coming home."

Maybe it sounds like an unremarkable exchange. But Anthony Graves had spent 18 years behind bars, 12on Death Row, for the 1992 murder of an entire family, including four children, in the Texas town of Somerville. It wasn't until that day, Oct. 27, that the district attorney's office finally accepted what he'd been saying two decades: He's innocent.

So the news that Graves would be home for dinner was the very antithesis of unremarkable. His mother, he told a news conference the next day, couldn't believe it. "I couldn't believe I was saying it," he added.

Graves' release came after his story appeared in Texas Monthly magazine (texasmonthly.com). The article by Pamela Colloff detailed how he was convicted even though no physical evidence tied him to the crime, even though he had no motive to kill six strangers, even though three witnesses testified he was home at the time of the slaughter.

The case against Graves rested entirely upon jailhouse denizens who claimed they'd heard him confess and upon one Robert Carter, who admitted committing the crime but initially blamed Graves. Carter, executed in 2000, recanted that claim repeatedly, most notably to District Attorney Charles Sebesta the day before Sebesta put him on the stand to testify against Graves. Defense attorneys say Sebesta never shared that exculpatory tidbit with them, even though required to do so.

Awful indifference

Colloff's story drew outraged media attention, including from yours truly. But the attention that mattered was that of the current DA, Bill Parham, who undertook his own investigation. He was unequivocal in explaining his decision to drop charges. ‘‘There's not a single thing that says Anthony Graves was involved in this case," he said. "There is nothing."

One hopes people who love the death penalty are taking note. So often, their arguments in favor of that barbarous frontier relic seem to take place in some alternate universe where cops never fabricate evidence and judges never make mistakes, where lawyers are never inept and witnesses never commit perjury. So often, they behave as if in this one critical endeavor, unlike in every other endeavor, human beings somehow get it right every time.

I would not have convicted Anthony Graves of a traffic violation on the sort of evidence Sebesta offered. Yet somehow, a jury in Texas convicted him of murder and sent him to die.

When you pin them on it, people who love the death penalty often retreat into sophistic nonsense. Don't end the death penalty, someone told me, just enact safeguards to ensure the innocent are never sentenced. Yeah, right. Show me the safeguard that guarantees perfection.

Stubborn and cruel

Those who propose to tinker with the death penalty until it is foolproof remind me of the addict attempting to negotiate with his addiction, desperately proffering minor concessions that will allow him to continue indulging in this thing that is killing him. But there comes a day when you simply have to kick the habit.

As a nation, we are stubbornly addicted to the death penalty, strung out on exacting retribution and calling it justice. Even though we know innocent men and women have surely died as a result.

Or, like Anthony Graves, been robbed of irreplaceable years. He was 26 when he was arrested. He is 45 now. When he made that call home to his mother, he borrowed his lawyer's cellphone.

The lawyer had to show him how to use it.

This is a complete injustice. I want the DA that prosecuted this KNOWING that her star witness had recanted, prosecuted and sentenced to the exact same amount of time as he served. EVERY SINGLE DAY. This is what is wrong with the system, almost 140 men have been freed from death row because they were, as they said, innocent. If you have ever sat in on a sentencing, one of the things that you will notice is the DA saying that the defendant continues to express his innocense even when the jury has spoken. Well this guy was, he said so, and he was telling the truth. But USF would have had Texas execute him years ago so that the death penalty means something. Anyone that can read this story, and then still say that the death penalty should be carried out faster lacks human compassion and common sense.
 
This is a complete injustice. I want the DA that prosecuted this KNOWING that her star witness had recanted, prosecuted and sentenced to the exact same amount of time as he served. EVERY SINGLE DAY. This is what is wrong with the system, almost 140 men have been freed from death row because they were, as they said, innocent. If you have ever sat in on a sentencing, one of the things that you will notice is the DA saying that the defendant continues to express his innocense even when the jury has spoken. Well this guy was, he said so, and he was telling the truth. But USF would have had Texas execute him years ago so that the death penalty means something. Anyone that can read this story, and then still say that the death penalty should be carried out faster lacks human compassion and common sense.

Prove that he was innocent and prove that the witness didn't "recant" their testimony for other reasons.

Care to also explain why it took a decade for the testimony to be recanted??

Are witnesses allowed to recant their testimony, once the trial is over, for someone who was found to be not guilty?
 
Prove that he was innocent and prove that the witness didn't "recant" their testimony for other reasons.

Care to also explain why it took a decade for the testimony to be recanted??

Are witnesses allowed to recant their testimony, once the trial is over, for someone who was found to be not guilty?
If you read the article it said that he recanted his story to the DA the day before he testified and he did not tell the Defense that, which under Brady v. Maryland he is absolutely required to do, not to mention that under the texas rules of conduct he was also required to disclose. He chose not to, so he could save his win. Winning is all that matters, a conviction is a conviction even if you got the wrong guy. Not only that but the guy that committed the crime confessed to it just before he was executed. He had nothing to gain from that. He was going to to die. FOr you the Death Penalty is merely utilitarian. A tool to show murderers we don't fuck around. In a utilitarian society justice does not matter, only efficiency. You are cog in the machinery of the State and don't care if innocent people get chewed up in the process.
 
Also, if you had read the story you would have seen the current DA said there was not a single thing to link this man to the crime with which he was charged and convicted. This is what our system has become. Jailhouse snitches that give the prosecutors the story they want to hear and they run with it. These are the same prosecutors that would tell you that the cons could not be trusted if they were telling a story that went counter to the Prosecutors.
 
If you read the article it said that he recanted his story to the DA the day before he testified and she did not tell the Defense that, which under Brady v. Maryland she is absolutely required to do, not to mention that under the texas rules of conduct she was also required to disclose. She chose not to, so she could save her win. Winning is all that matters, a conviction is a conviction even if you got the wrong guy. Not only that but the guy that committed the crime confessed to it just before he was executed. He had nothing to gain from that. He was going to to die. FOr you the Death Penalty is merely utilitarian. A tool to show murderers we don't fuck around. In a utilitarian society justice does not matter, only efficiency. You are cog in the machinery of the State and don't care if innocent people get chewed up in the process.

Sorry, for some reason I was thinking of the case that was on a different thread.

I don't know what crawled up your ass; but you've turned into the very thing that you rail against.
If all you're going to do is call names and attack others beliefs, of which you really don't have a fucking clue, then kiss my ass and fuck off.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, for some reason I was thinking of the case that was on a different thread.

I don't know what crawled up your ass; but you've turned into the very thing that you rail against.
If all you're going to do is call names and attack others beliefs, of which you really don't have a fucking clue, then kiss my ass and fuck off.
I didn't call you a single name in that post. If your beliefs are wrong, then I will tell you they are wrong. You want a death penalty system that kills people faster when the system has already been proven to be broken. Not as broken as it could be, but broken enough that almost 140 men have been shown to have been wrongly convicted and sentenced to die. Not one of those 140 would have been released in a system that worked faster. When you push for a faster, more efficient death machine, in this day and age, you are pushing for a system that will necessarily kill innocent men and women. When the state starts killing innocents, then our system has broken down completely. If the Death Penalty was eliminated, there would be no risk of that happening. Not only that, but ask a prisoner which would be worse to him, dying for his crime, or spending every last day of his life in his cell. You will get almost unanimous agreement that life without the chance of parole is far worse than the state killing you.
 
I didn't call you a single name in that post. If your beliefs are wrong, then I will tell you they are wrong. You want a death penalty system that kills people faster when the system has already been proven to be broken. Not as broken as it could be, but broken enough that almost 140 men have been shown to have been wrongly convicted and sentenced to die. Not one of those 140 would have been released in a system that worked faster. When you push for a faster, more efficient death machine, in this day and age, you are pushing for a system that will necessarily kill innocent men and women. When the state starts killing innocents, then our system has broken down completely. If the Death Penalty was eliminated, there would be no risk of that happening. Not only that, but ask a prisoner which would be worse to him, dying for his crime, or spending every last day of his life in his cell. You will get almost unanimous agreement that life without the chance of parole is far worse than the state killing you.

Care to explain what you meant by this comment then??

"You are cog in the machinery of the State and don't care if innocent people get chewed up in the process."

You act like those in prison for crimes against society, are living every day in abject misery.
Do you really think that the majority of them spend their days, feeling sorry for their victims?

I guess they don't get to have birthday's, spend any time with family, have no time to just kick back and relax; just like the people that are murdered.
Of course people on death row are going to say they would rather have to spend the rest of their life in prison. What the fuck did you expect them to say:
"Oh-no, I would rather be executed".
 
Care to explain what you meant by this comment then??

"You are cog in the machinery of the State and don't care if innocent people get chewed up in the process."

You act like those in prison for crimes against society, are living every day in abject misery.
Do you really think that the majority of them spend their days, feeling sorry for their victims?

I guess they don't get to have birthday's, spend any time with family, have no time to just kick back and relax; just like the people that are murdered.
Of course people on death row are going to say they would rather have to spend the rest of their life in prison. What the fuck did you expect them to say:
"Oh-no, I would rather be executed".

The ultimate 'Statist' is someone that is willing to make excuses for the state if it kills an innocent human being.

The more I read your posts, the more it becomes clear calling you a grunt is an overestimation.
 
The ultimate 'Statist' is someone that is willing to make excuses for the state if it kills an innocent human being.

The more I read your posts, the more it becomes clear calling you a grunt is an overestimation.

And the more I read your posts, it becomes more clear that you're just a fluffer for the Liberals.
 
Back
Top