in our modern system of justice, the death penalty is so expensive because of appeals. For life sentences, give them the option of death if they want to, but otherwise let them engage in something productive to pay their debt to society while keeping them locked away.
It should be an option for the worst cases, especially repeat offenders or people who can be proven to be a permanent threat to others, BUT the required proof before it becomes an option should be damn solid. Not how severe the crime is and they need to find the guilty party and it looks likely that they got him, but that there can be absolutely no doubt he did it.
No doubt. Not just that the procecution speaks better than his defense, or has managed to make some potential evidence for his innocence, or some reason why he maybe had some halfway acceptable reason for doing what he did (mistaken self defense in murder cases or something), not valid for the court.
If there is any doubt make it life sentence. Maybe give the option of choosing death himself for the accused as you said, but otherwise life.
However, if it is something like a serial killer case where there is no doubt that he has killed at least some of the victims, is caught on the act or something equally valid, then death penalty.
Mothers can coach their children into saying they were molested by a father, boyfriend, etc. It needs to be more than just a single accusation and conviction for death penalty to be carried out.
No. Our system of justice has proven itself unworthy of being given access to the ultimate punishment.
Witness how even with all the resources imaginable--and with everyone in the world watching--the legal system was able to steamroll Trump.
It'd be a deadly tool in the FBI's toolchest: upload CP to the target's computer and let the legal system take care of the rest.
in our modern system of justice, the death penalty is so expensive because of appeals. For life sentences, give them the option of death if they want to, but otherwise let them engage in something productive to pay their debt to society while keeping them locked away.
It should be an option for the worst cases, especially repeat offenders or people who can be proven to be a permanent threat to others, BUT the required proof before it becomes an option should be damn solid. Not how severe the crime is and they need to find the guilty party and it looks likely that they got him, but that there can be absolutely no doubt he did it.
No doubt. Not just that the procecution speaks better than his defense, or has managed to make some potential evidence for his innocence, or some reason why he maybe had some halfway acceptable reason for doing what he did (mistaken self defense in murder cases or something), not valid for the court.
If there is any doubt make it life sentence. Maybe give the option of choosing death himself for the accused as you said, but otherwise life.
However, if it is something like a serial killer case where there is no doubt that he has killed at least some of the victims, is caught on the act or something equally valid, then death penalty.
Mothers can coach their children into saying they were molested by a father, boyfriend, etc. It needs to be more than just a single accusation and conviction for death penalty to be carried out.
Does the law stipulate that accusations alone can/will result in execution? I think that could help the discussion here.