225
all 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world 79 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Despite new evidence of innocence.

Conservatives/Republicans are psychopaths. Pure abject sadistic evil.

[-] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 32 points 3 months ago

Not just new evidence. There was never any physical evidence linking him to the crime at all, according to the articles I've seen so far looking into it.

[-] Cyv_@lemmy.blahaj.zone 73 points 3 months ago

Execution shouldn't be an option. At least with life in prison you can release a person if you fucked up, with significant financial compensation for their time in prison. You can't un-execute a person. The state isn't competent enough to be given such power. Nobody is.

[-] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 25 points 3 months ago

The purpose of the US legal system is not to provide justice. It's to terrorise poor people and minorities. So, it worked just fine here.

[-] GBU_28@lemm.ee 21 points 3 months ago

The "nobody is" is the most important part to me.

Like, society can argue all they want about choosing to execute convicted criminals of certain crimes. I'm not discussing that.

It's the "beyond all doubt" factor that matters most. I think we'd agree that for ~99.99999% of crimes it's really impossible to be sure.

If you can't be sure, then there's no reason to graduate to the next step of the decision "should we".

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

Giving the state the power to take life from its citizens is open to abuse when the wrong person gets into power. Not allowing it in the first place is how you go towards stopping that sort of thing.

[-] gramie@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 months ago

We don't seem to have a problem giving the state power to take life from other countries' citizens, though. The only way you can stop that is if the other country is more powerful than yours.

[-] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

But what is the cost of compensation for executing somebody that was likely innocent?

—Think about this. Life in prison is cheaper than an execution If the convict serves their entire sentence. –Is it still cheaper if the inmate has their conviction overturned and subsequently sues for restitution?

I genuinely don't know the answer to the latter question but nothing about sanctioned executions sits right with me.

[-] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 69 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

South Carolina executed a man on death row on Friday, days after the key witness for the prosecution came forward to say he lied at trial and the state was putting to death an innocent man.

"New evidence" seems to be underselling the matter. How in the fuck could they justify not even granting a delay??

[-] kevindqc@lemmy.world 40 points 3 months ago

Black man in South Carolina is enough apparently

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

Clearly he should have been a black man in North Carolina and called himself a Nazi while chatting on porn site comments sections, as one does. I hear they make you the gubernatorial candidate in such situations.

[-] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

System works as designed.

[-] Lets_Eat_Grandma@lemm.ee 41 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I don't understand how you can convict someone based on the testimony of a person getting a plea deal for turning in another person.

The last thing the person getting the plea deal would want to do is turn over someone loyal enough to them to rob a place and shoot another person with.

Does anyone think this would have happened if the accused was the son of a wealthy white couple? How about if it was the police chief's son? Any senator's son?

Just saying. Testimony without hard evidence shouldn't be enough for criminal conviction, let alone a fucking execution.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

I don’t understand how you can convict someone based on the testimony of a person getting a plea deal for turning in another person.

Please refer to North Carolina's skin color chart for further explanation.

[-] Cenotaph@mander.xyz 35 points 3 months ago

Another potential innocent murdered by the state so they can claim they're "tough on crime"

Pre meditated murder the way I see it.

[-] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 15 points 3 months ago
[-] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

'not like he has much of a choice.

[-] HeyJoe@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

Wow I thought this was the one that was posted about last month... it's not. I just looked it up and this means a 2nd person is set to die next week who is definitely innocent after seeing the video on him. So many people are trying to help him because it's that bad...

https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/18/us/marcellus-williams-missouri-execution-delay-request/index.html

[-] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

The Rev Hillary Taylor, executive director of South Carolinians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, said the flaws in Allah’s case were a reminder that “the death penalty is not given to the ‘worst of the worst’, it is given to the people who are least able to represent themselves in court”

Salient words.

this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
225 points (97.1% liked)

News

23669 readers
3569 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS