Frontline: Death by Fire

Socrtease

Socrtease

Verified User
This show will be on PBS October 19th. It is about Cameron Todd Willingham who was executed for murdering his children in a house fire that was determined to be arson. Since his conviction, and prior to his murder, experts in arson were able to show conclusively that the claims made by arson investigators in Texas were wrong, and not supported by science. No one that does not have an interest in maintaining the capital punishment system in Texas believes that Willingham was guilty. This is, in my opinion, the case that will eventually cause the demise of capital punishment in America. Texas executed an innocent man, and science can prove it.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...yFire&utm_medium=GoogleAds&utm_source=Keyword
 
Socrtease said:
This show will be on PBS October 19th. It is about Cameron Todd Willingham who was executed for murdering his children in a house fire that was determined to be arson. Since his conviction, and prior to his murder, experts in arson were able to show conclusively that the claims made by arson investigators in Texas were wrong, and not supported by science. No one that does not have an interest in maintaining the capital punishment system in Texas believes that Willingham was guilty. This is, in my opinion, the case that will eventually cause the demise of capital punishment in America. Texas executed an innocent man, and science can prove it.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...yFire&utm_medium=GoogleAds&utm_source=Keyword
Click to expand...

I've read about this case. I think the people involved (prosecutor, police investigators ect) should be tried for killing Cameron Todd Willingham. Ignoring the facts that point to his innocence make it, at the very least, negligent homocide.
 
WinterBorn said:
I've read about this case. I think the people involved (prosecutor, police investigators ect) should be tried for killing Cameron Todd Willingham. Ignoring the facts that point to his innocence make it, at the very least, negligent homocide.
Click to expand...
It'd be ironic if they got prosecuted and put to death.
 
WinterBorn said:
I've read about this case. I think the people involved (prosecutor, police investigators ect) should be tried for killing Cameron Todd Willingham. Ignoring the facts that point to his innocence make it, at the very least, negligent homocide.
Click to expand...

based on the little presented....and if more comes to light...then i agree.

but i don't think this will or should be the end of capital punishment. we still have booze - that kills people....we still have cars - that and booze kill people

if someone was murdered by the state unjustifiably, they should be charged as just like any other homicide case....you can get around immunity
 
Yurt said:
based on the little presented....and if more comes to light...then i agree.

but i don't think this will or should be the end of capital punishment. we still have booze - that kills people....we still have cars - that and booze kill people

if someone was murdered by the state unjustifiably, they should be charged as just like any other homicide case....you can get around immunity
Click to expand...
We will never hold the state to the same standards we do individuals. If the State of Texas killed someone wrongly, it would be no different than my killing someone I THOUGHT killed a family member only to find out later I was wrong. I would be prosecuted and so too should the people that wrongly killed him. But they won't be. Perry has worked diligently to cover this up including replacing people on the review board that looked ready to deem this as a wrongful execution. States are so eager to execute so they can look tough on crime and NEVER want to admit the system is horribly flawed.
 
Socrtease said:
We will never hold the state to the same standards we do individuals. If the State of Texas killed someone wrongly, it would be no different than my killing someone I THOUGHT killed a family member only to find out later I was wrong. I would be prosecuted and so too should the people that wrongly killed him. But they won't be. Perry has worked diligently to cover this up including replacing people on the review board that looked ready to deem this as a wrongful execution. States are so eager to execute so they can look tough on crime and NEVER want to admit the system is horribly flawed.
Click to expand...

there are different topics here...

1. you are right, we will never hold the state to the same standards as individuals...the debate is intense on that and has been raging from our early beginnings.....there are times we should and there are times we should not...hence thne ability to get aroind the immunity exception

2. the state of texas killing someone....are you willing to hold that standard to the jury, who convicted the person and set the death sentenced in motion? afterall...but for the jury conviction, the state would not have executed the inmate.

3. i don't think all states are eager to look tough on crime by executing inmates....
 
Yurt said:
there are different topics here...

1. you are right, we will never hold the state to the same standards as individuals...the debate is intense on that and has been raging from our early beginnings.....there are times we should and there are times we should not...hence thne ability to get aroind the immunity exception

2. the state of texas killing someone....are you willing to hold that standard to the jury, who convicted the person and set the death sentenced in motion? afterall...but for the jury conviction, the state would not have executed the inmate.

3. i don't think all states are eager to look tough on crime by executing inmates....
Click to expand...


My problem with death penalty cases are that they are weighed against socio economic concerns, i.e. poor defendents cannot afford a proper defense. Not knowing enough about this case- but if the man could have afforded an independent arson expert would the outcome have been different?

Until the state affords a defendent the ability to counter "expert" testimony if he cannot afford it on his own there can be no real "justice".
 
Socrtease said:
This show will be on PBS October 19th. It is about Cameron Todd Willingham who was executed for murdering his children in a house fire that was determined to be arson. Since his conviction, and prior to his murder, experts in arson were able to show conclusively that the claims made by arson investigators in Texas were wrong, and not supported by science. No one that does not have an interest in maintaining the capital punishment system in Texas believes that Willingham was guilty. This is, in my opinion, the case that will eventually cause the demise of capital punishment in America. Texas executed an innocent man, and science can prove it.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...yFire&utm_medium=GoogleAds&utm_source=Keyword
Click to expand...

History repeating itself.
 
Socrtease said:
This show will be on PBS October 19th. It is about Cameron Todd Willingham who was executed for murdering his children in a house fire that was determined to be arson. Since his conviction, and prior to his murder, experts in arson were able to show conclusively that the claims made by arson investigators in Texas were wrong, and not supported by science. No one that does not have an interest in maintaining the capital punishment system in Texas believes that Willingham was guilty. This is, in my opinion, the case that will eventually cause the demise of capital punishment in America. Texas executed an innocent man, and science can prove it.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...yFire&utm_medium=GoogleAds&utm_source=Keyword
Click to expand...


Why do you believe in racial discrimination as a tool of justice?
 
Yurt said:
there are different topics here...

1. you are right, we will never hold the state to the same standards as individuals...the debate is intense on that and has been raging from our early beginnings.....there are times we should and there are times we should not...hence thne ability to get aroind the immunity exception

2. the state of texas killing someone....are you willing to hold that standard to the jury, who convicted the person and set the death sentenced in motion? afterall...but for the jury conviction, the state would not have executed the inmate.

3. i don't think all states are eager to look tough on crime by executing inmates....
Click to expand...

As for number 2, No. juries can only make decisions based on the evidence they saw at trial. In this case they saw bad evidence not backed up by a shred of solid evidence, they were told that the defendant beat up his wife which should have NEVER gotten to the jury (uncharged bad acts). The fact is, REAL experts came forward and ruled this fire as undetermined. NOT arson. The state of texas, so eager to not have their death machine apple cart overturned has fired 3 members of the FSB and Perry has replaced them with political allies. He desires that this case be swept under the rug and that the execution of Willingham be forgotten.
 
The King of Proles said:
Why do you believe in being a saw horse?
Click to expand...

I don't believe in being a saw horse.

But socrtease does believe in racial discrimination as a tool of justice.

Scrotaltease, how do your reconcile this belief with your purported belief in the constitution?

The constitution clearly provides equal protection under the law; you clearly believe white males deserve discrimination, however. You can't believe both things at once.

What gives?
 
Last edited:
AssHatZombie said:
I don't believe in being a saw horse.

But socrtease does believe in racial discrimination as a tool of justice.

Scrotaltease, how do your reconcile this belief with your purported belief in the constitution?

The constitution clearly provides equal protection under the law; you clearly believe white males deserve discrimination, however. You can't believe both things at once.

What gives?
Click to expand...

“The Equal Protection Clause does not prohibit the Law School’s narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body,” Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003)
 
Socrtease said:
“The Equal Protection Clause does not prohibit the Law School’s narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body,” Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003)
Click to expand...

pfffffft!!!!!! i can point out other court cases that are so wrong.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top