Aug 28, 2007 07:01PM GMT
Question
•
Politics - United States
Would you rather send an innocent man to prison or let a guilty man go free?
I know some might be thinking about how serious the charge is, but just think about sending an innocent man to prison for any amount of time, whether it be a few years or the rest of his life.Of course, most in prison claim to be innocent, but the majority of prisoners put to death were indeed, guilty, along with most that serve time for any crime. But, since the introduction of DNA testing, it's become much easier to truly determine who is innocent and who is guilty.
-A case in New York: A 17-year-old boy is sentenced to life in prison for rape and murder. DNA tests proved him innocent at the age of 33.
-A man in Louisiana escaped the death penalty in 2004. He was convicted of murdering a convenient store owner, but DNA testing proved him innocent.
-Northwestern University School of Law's Centre on Wrongful Convictions documented atleast 38 executions carried out in spite of compelling evidence of innocence or serious doubt about guilt since capital punishment was restored in the '70s.
-DNA tests played a role in establishing prisoners' innocence in at least 14 cases of the 123 exonerations since 1973.
Loading...-
raves posted Nov 17, 2008 05:05PM GMT
Answered Undecided
Thats a very hard question for me to answer. You see,my Daughter was brutely stabbed to death on November 27th of this year. We know who it was but are just starting proceidings. When this first happened, we wanted refenge. We did'nt care how it was carried out, we were ready to do it ourselves.But as time has gone by and we've had time to think.The death penalty will not bring our Daughter back to us ,or her 3 beautiful daughters back their mom. All it would do,would be to take someone elses child from them. And I belive that a life sentence with others serving the same would be a much more terrifing punishment the death. -
raves posted Jun 17, 2008 06:51AM GMT
Answered Undecided
This is very hard.... But i have thought about this a lot. and if a guilty one is free then s/he can cause more harm.. yet its sad when an innocent person goes to jail... cuz like off of The Number 23 he was innocent yet his family stoped seeing him thinking he was a killer and thats very sad. I dunno... its hard................. But if the innocent goes to prison than the guilty is still out there. either way the guilty man is still out!!!!!!!!! crime stuff is so confusing. -
raves posted Mar 07, 2008 05:16PM GMT
Answered I would rather let a guilty person go free, than send an innocent person to prison.
people who identify with Jesus's treatment at the hands of his accusers, an innocent wrongly put to death, tend to be against the death penalty. the ones who scream for blood are more in tune with the vengeful god of the old testament . -
raves +1 posted Jan 31, 2008 12:10PM GMT
Answered I would rather let a guilty person go free, than send an innocent person to prison.
When there's nothing but circumstantial evidence and a case of "he said, she said", no one should be convicted. I'm sure there have been far too many innocent people (probably mostly minorities) who have gone to prison or even been executed in error. Whenever you convict an innocent person, you ARE letting the real criminal go free, so the solution is for the police and everyone in the legal system to do their jobs to the best of their ability, rather than taking the route of political expediency. There are so many extranneous factors that determine whether the real criminal is caught and punished that I'm amazed we don't have even more criminals at large. I'm all for putting the criminals away, or even executing them, but for God's sake, let's make sure we don't ruin the lives of innocent people. That's never ok. -
raves posted Jan 29, 2008 06:45PM GMT
Answered Undecided
well in the New York case that happened in my home town... not to mention that the 17 year old (now 33) was also mentally unstable.... when they let him go there wasn't even apologies.. just a here you go... i would sue the state for pain and suffering.. -
raves posted Nov 21, 2007 11:58PM GMT
Answered I would rather let a guilty person go free, than send an innocent person to prison.
I have to say, I'd rather have the innocent out and free to live their lives, than in jail for any sentence. The guilty should ideally be locked away, but that was not an option here, besides...how many guilty people are already out and free as we type? -
raves posted Nov 16, 2007 08:39PM GMT
Answered I would rather let a guilty person go free, than send an innocent person to prison.
I don't recall which of our founding fathers spoke about this very topic, but I agree. It is far more important for a guilty person to go free than for an innocent person to avoid jail.
The reason is that it shows us that our laws are protecting us ALL. It is very easy for our laws to protect the innocent among us, it's when the not so innocent are protected by our laws that we truly see our system works. It is a travesty and a tragedy both for it to happen, but it's a necessary "test" of our judicial/civil rights system. -
raves +2 posted Nov 13, 2007 05:12PM GMT
Answered I would rather let a guilty person go free, than send an innocent person to prison.
When you send an innocent man to prison you ARE letting a guilty person go free, the case is solved and the case is closed. The guilty party did get away with the crime. If you would send an innocent man to prison I hope that innocent would be you, you have said it is justified. -
raves posted Oct 06, 2007 12:52AM GMT
Answered I would rather send an innocent person to prison, than let a guilty one go free.
Got your attention, didn't I? The question is weighted to provoke feelings of guilt over an innocent person being sent to prison, and to get the wanted response of the 2nd choice. I would say that if the evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the person is guilty, then they should go to prison. Yes, people have been wrongly convicted and mistakes will always be made. I'm okay with that, and as you pointed out, DNA evidence is improving the chances of innocent people being acquitted. Just look at all the guilty ones who go free. Everyone knows OJ was guilty and he should have gone to prison. That's OK, too, the system failed the victims but that's how it is sometimes. -
raves Nov 16, 2007 08:46PM GMTI really like your post. I just disagree with one thing you said. The system didn't fail the victims. The system did it's job for everyone. The investigating officers may have failed the system, and the trial atty representing OJ really stretched the limit of the law, but our system did it's job even if justice wasn't served.
Our system was designed by people who wanted people suspected of criminal activities to be protected from certain behaviors by the government and/or police. These people felt it was better for someone like OJ to walk away free than it would be for an innocent person to be wrongly convicted. It still happens, but hopefully the ocurrance is minimal. -
raves +2 posted Aug 29, 2007 07:43AM GMT (edited)
Answered I would rather let a guilty person go free, than send an innocent person to prison.
GREAT question Kari....Decisions are made on a daily basis like this and the public has no clue. This is basicly how Washington and our laws work.
I don't care how many lives are saved or good things may come out of sending a good person to prison, it's wrong and not a choice anybody has the right to make. There's not a single person or group of people that have the right or are justified in sacraficing someones life...PERIOD!
I wish our government remembered that...it's not their place to sacrafice life for life but it's too late....America has died and it died The day George Bush Sr. was elected many years ago.
If Ronald Reagan was alive today, he'd kick all of these Neo-Con Republicans asses for being traders! -
raves +1 posted Aug 29, 2007 02:27AM GMT (edited)
Answered I would rather let a guilty person go free, than send an innocent person to prison.
If you are asking me on a personal level. Than of course I would not put an innocent man in prison. I would let the guilty man go free and take care of him on the outside. -
raves +2 posted Aug 28, 2007 09:18PM GMT
Answered Undecided
The ONLY way I'd rather for the guilty to be free is in extending MERCY with the knowledge that he/she will come to a point in their lives of their guilt and have a change of heart.
In no way would I knowingly put a innocent person in prison.
Other than that.....neither would be a wise choice for me. -
raves +2 posted Aug 28, 2007 08:08PM GMT
Answered I would rather let a guilty person go free, than send an innocent person to prison.
The guilty person could still get his ass kicked by people or end up doing another stupid thing tht'll get him thrown into prison. Innocent people serving time for crimes they didn't commit is such an injustice, I can't think of anything else that would trump it.
Answered Undecided
This one really depends on the crime, I will tell you what prison is, it is a criminal factory, it is where criminals become better criminals and where innocent people get their start. Prisons are not made it "rehabilitiate" they are basically time outs from society, it is like putting someone in the corner, with a bunch of other bad kids, they scheme to do better next time...It sucks to put an innocent man to death, but we have to accept that these things happen sometimes, and we need to persevere, hopefully one day technology will be foolproof and unsolvable crime and doubt will be a thing of the past. Right now out best solution is in place and sometimes it screws up, but enough of the time it is right on the money, and that is what is truely important....