SCOTUS and the 8th Amendment update at post 32.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Sept 25, 2015 17:31:22 GMT -5 fishy999 said:

Sept 25, 2015 9:26:11 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

The problem I have with the death penalty is not one of principle. In principle, I favor the death penalty.  The problem I have is with the way the entire government has become so corrupt and incompetent that I no longer believe government can be trusted with the power of life and death.  Under a competent, fair, and transparent government I would actually EXPAND the death penalty for a whole host of crimes which we've gotten away from punishing by death.  I would, for example, execute rapists- including attempted rape. I would execute the guilty for attempted murder.  No break because you're bad at it.  There would be an automatic death penalty for cop killers, and child murderers.  I would put an end to automatic appeals. If an inmate doesn't want to appeal, no appeal.  I would make sure executions were quick- sentenced today, hung within 30 days unless appealed. Death penalty appeals would be fast tracked- nobody would be on death row for longer than 30 days post sentencing unless an appeal delayed the execution, and days counted would be counted once the appeal failed. So, for example, if you appeal in 10 days, when your appeal is rejected- you have 20 days left on the clock.  But with police, prosecutors and so many others involved so utterly corrupt and incompetent-- how can we possibly push for such measures?

WOW!  So at one point you agree that the inept government we have should in no way be in charge of judicially killing our own citizens, yet you want to expand the death penalty to cover more crimes and reduce appeals!

Granted you conditioned your horror show on a perfect government, which you know is impossible, why do you bother?  You sound like a fascist waiting for your boys to be in charge.

There are ways to apply the death penalty where I could support it. Let's leave it at that.

[fishy999]

You distrust the government- so how do you plan to apply the death penalty without it?  At least here there is due process before 'the state' commits murder.

And I will agree with you- there are animals out there that deserve nothing more than a bullet to the back of the head- but I am not pulling the trigger based on our legal system.

[Wisconsin Beth]

I think arguments are this morning. 

www.scotusblog.com/2015/10/argument-preview-justices-to-tackle-eighth-amendment-again/


Argument preview: Justices to tackle Eighth Amendment — again

The Justices closed out last Term with a high-profile death penalty case, holding that Oklahoma’s lethal injection procedures do not violate the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The decision in that case may be best known for Justice Stephen Breyer’s dissent, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in which he suggested that the death penalty itself is unconstitutional. The Eighth Amendment is back before the Court again tomorrow, albeit with lower stakes, this time in a set of challenges to the procedures used to sentence three Kansas inmates to death. The oral arguments and the Court’s eventual decision may tell us more about whether some of the Justices’ discomfort with the death penalty will translate into additional protections for defendants in capital cases or whether the Justices will instead remain – as they were in the Oklahoma case – sharply divided.

The facts of tomorrow’s cases do not lend themselves to sympathy for the three inmates. In December 2000, brothers Jonathan and Reginald Carr went on what lawyers for the federal government describe as “an indescribably brutal crime spree of rapes, robberies, and violence” that left five people dead and a sixth (who survived only because a hairclip deflected the bullet directed at her head from close range) seriously injured. The Carrs were tried together, found guilty, and sentenced to death. Sidney Gleason was convicted and sentenced to death for his role in a different double murder; one of the victims had participated with him in the robbery and stabbing of an elderly man, and she was killed (along with her boyfriend) because Gleason and his co-conspirators believed that she had helped the police with their investigation. On appeal, the Kansas Supreme Court overturned the three inmates’ death sentences. At the state’s request, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to weigh in.