https://nitter.net/PDChina/status/1722995024840048874

  • TreadOnMe [none/use name]
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think there is also an element of the whole private prison complex coming to bear here, but that is another issue entirely. The interesting thing in this article wasn't really that the majority spend a decade or more on death row, but that the time has been getting longer and longer even as convictions have become harder and longer to exonerate. Basically, even as we become more 'sure' in our convictions, the longer they have to sit.

    interestingly enough, a big reason for some of them waiting so long these days has alot to do with the fact that they can't get the chemicals in to actually do the execution, as several legislatures where the death penalty was legal, but is now not but still has convicted death row inmates still kicking around, have banned the manufacture of those chemicals from being in state (in part because they just don"t work very well at the whole 'humane execution without pain' deal that the courts are trying to do, a common problem with most forms of execution).

    My point is, some of it is 6th amendment stuff, but a lot of it seems to just be material considerations, either financial or literally physical.

    Edit: I would be interested in seeing a more state-by-state breakdown of the numbers. The U.S. is pretty large and federalized, so talking about de jure legal practices in any generalized sense is pretty factually hazardous.

    • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Ok, supply vs demand is a valid point. I'll give you that.

      But the act of requiring the chemicals in the first place, as opposed to just hanging or shooting, echos the protection of the 8th (separate, relevant ammendment) anyway, what with cruel and unusual punishment not being allowed.

      I kind of don't get how the people here can be shown evidence of a system working in accordance with the constitution and then whole sale espouse the notion that the US doesn't afford any kind of protection whatsoever.

      Again, I believe that there is no just murder by the state. An dead man cannot be exonerated. But it's a little dishonest to imply that it's all a racket and that we're just lining these guys up to kill willy nilly.

      • TreadOnMe [none/use name]
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I think that, if you were in anywhere in the U.S. that practiced the death penalty prior to DNA evidence, there was a lot of 'let God sort em' out' happening in the U.S. court system. Basically, I think the 4% exoneration rate is a really really low estimate, it could potentially be as high as even 10%, particularly during the wild west of prison expansion during the 80's and 90's.

        That said, the prison industrial complex runs far more on racking up fines and filling beds with low level offenses than dealing with death-row stuff, but it's still a good racket.

        The reason why it's a racket is because the whole U.S. evidence and prison system is mostly a racket. The protections afforded to us are minimal at best, and mostly locked behind wealth premiums. To the degree we do have protection it is because someone in the private sector makes money off of that protection, which is a functional, if contradictory, system. Once you get into the prison system, it requires a Herculean effort to escape, especially for people who are mostly there due to mental health issues. The U.S. has the largest prisoner per capita ratio in the world for a reason, and it's not because the system is working well for the majority of subjects, it's just works really well for those it is supposed to work well for, the wealthy, lawyers and cops, who while sometimes having opposing interests, are mostly on the same page from a 'functional system' aspect.

        Edit: Again, you can 'echo' any amendment you like, but there is a lot more 'Aw gee isn't this new whiz-bang invention swell? Probably sure does execute folks safer and more humanely! ;D' when there was and is no evidence that that is the case in the history of executions in the U.S.

        Companies want to make money and they'll appeal to the 8th amendment, but it usually isn't the amendment actually driving these changes, it is a 'modernizing' drive within prisons to 'keep with the times'.

        • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
          ·
          1 year ago

          I understand and agree with a lot of what you are saying. I'd also like to thank you for being candid and factual about the topic. It's a nice change.

          I guess where that breaks down for me has to do with why they wait so long to execute in the first place, if not for some protections being present in general.

          I guess it's not really a solvable or understandable problem from the perspective I have that it's all unjust regardless of what they do. Maybe waiting like that does serve a monetary purpose to some influence somewhere.

          • TreadOnMe [none/use name]
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            People here don't assume good faith, for good reason, as they rarely receive it, especially from people outside the forum. I don't mind taking a chance particularly if it is something I actually enjoy talking about.

            It definitely does to the private prisons. That is what I found so interesting about the article you posted. Despite the fact that we have become more sure of our convictions (as exonerations are less likely and take longer) the length of the lived prison sentence has grown. There is clearly an additional financial factor at play here than simply a 'Well we have to satisfy the 6th amendment.' because usually that is based on a 'procedural' and 'reasonableness' standard (with those standards being set by the state), which was clearly being satisfied before, but now is not despite the improvement of certainty.

            My general interest would be seeing if you cut the numbers from states like Ohio who have the chemical execution issue, if the numbers change drastically in any way, as that could complicate the analysis and then point more towards either a legal cause or financial cause. The large issue with any statistical data is that there are a variety of factors at play and any one of them could be the primary causal factor. My money would still be on a primarily financial factor (as all things being equal material concerns trump ideological concerns) but you never know until you really scrape the numbers.

      • GarbageShoot [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        But the act of requiring the chemicals in the first place, as opposed to just hanging or shooting, echos the protection of the 8th (separate, relevant ammendment) anyway, what with cruel and unusual punishment not being allowed.

        Not to dog pile, but I can't emphasize enough how misguided this point is. Long drop hanging, firing squad, decapitation, and a handful of other traditional execution methods are all virtually painless. The thing about lethal injection is that it deliberately suppresses evidence of the victim suffering by paralyzing them, so there is no sign of them suffering even if they feel like there whole body is aflame. Other methods are much more transparent in this respect (except electric chair, which has the opposite problem of drowning pain responses in noise).