This is beautifully worded and what I've been saying. I have yet to hear any refute for argument this though.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I already provided it, which you ignored. The next governor was ready to continue the review process and award pardons based on these pesky things called "facts" of the cases. The people of Illinois were denied that by a self serving crook.
There's no justice in blanket pardons.</strong><hr></blockquote>
There's no justice in a wrongly implemented death penalty either.
EDIT: This is the whole point. In Illinois, the death penatly was fundamentally flawed. That means any death sentence was wrong. In this case anything BUT a blanket pardon would be unjust.
If you want to argue that it's not flawed, that's different. But under the circumstances that existed long before Ryan had a reason to be "self-serving" he took a stance against the death penalty. He followed through with it.
How is that self-serving? When he began the process it could only have hurt his political chances.
First of all, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. You're obviously passionately charged about this issue, and have already made up your mind that you hate Gov. Ryan. How about you attempt to separate yourself from that for a moment and we can look at reality.
Now, you keep talking about "blanket." I don't know if you know what that means, but it is absolutely not what happened here. There were 167 people on death row in IL. 4 of them were pardoned. Nevermind that they had been tortured into confessing by Chicago's notorious "red" squad (gang squad).
The remaining individuals were not "pardoned" - they had their sentence commuted and reduced to life in prison without possibility of parole.
You try to make it sound like this was political, or like these people were set free. Why does it matter to you personally whether or not these guys are executed, or sit in a cell for the rest of their lives. The only thing that should matter to you is that they won't be on the street ever again.
You see, the largest falicy in the criminal justice system is that it exists for the satisfaction and revenge of the victim. It's not. It is the JUSTICE system. Even as a victim, the conviction of a criminal is your Justice. There should be no less a sense of justice just because a criminal sits in a cell for the rest of their life instead of being executed. If you feel that way, you no longer seek justice, you seek revenge. If that's the case you are an animal.
Now, the reason that the sentences were commuted was because the incoming Gov. WASN'T going to continue the review process. In fact he campaigned on that very grounds. He intended to lift the moratorium on executions, and he did - the day he entered office.
Gov. Ryan felt it wasn't acceptable to execute an innocent person, and to avoid that possibility he commuted the sentences to life in prison. Had he not done that, the chances were good that someone would be wrongfully executed.
The other thing that merits mentioning is that just because someone is guilty, that doesn't mean that they warrant punishment of death. Very few people believe that most of these people were innocent - that's why they will sit in cells for the rest of their life. The issue is whether or not their crimes warranted death. In IL, as in most states, you have to be convicted of a capital crime (1st degree murder, crime with special circumstances ie: robbery-murder, rape-murder, kidnapping-murder). The issue is that because of a tainted system, individuals who probably should have been convicted of second degree murder, or manslaughter, were convicted of capital murder and were then sentenced to death.
Additionally, why was it that of the 193 people convicted of capital crimes in the last 8 years in Illinois, 87% of the african americans were sentenced to death, whereas only 11% of the whites were. Same crime - dramatically different punishments.
These are the real reasons Gov. Ryan did what he did.
[quote] You try to make it sound like this was political, or like these people were set free. Why does it matter to you personally whether or not these guys are executed, or sit in a cell for the rest of their lives. The only thing that should matter to you is that they won't be on the street ever again.
You see, the largest falicy in the criminal justice system is that it exists for the satisfaction and revenge of the victim. It's not. It is the JUSTICE system. Even as a victim, the conviction of a criminal is your Justice. There should be no less a sense of justice just because a criminal sits in a cell for the rest of their life instead of being executed. If you feel that way, you no longer seek justice, you seek revenge. If that's the case you are an animal. <hr></blockquote>
OBJRA10, what you say seems logical. But did all or a majority of the membes of justice share the same opinion ?
I could be wrong, but it seems to me that one major subject of election in the justice aera, is being for or against death penalty ( i could be wrong , seeing the US system of Justice via the moovie or the TV series, showing always a corrupted Sheriff ..., i have always been amazed by the way, how moovies discribe US police but this is another debate).
PS : for those who think Europe is better because there is no death penalty, i will add if i am against death penaly i am also against the liberation of dangerous criminals even after 25-30 years of jail. In France there is almost never any practical (only theorical) life sentence. The last time that a criminal was set free after years of jail (because a psychiatrist's expertise testified that the man was no more dangerous), he killed an another people.
Powerdoc, forgive me if I don't completely understand what you meant. I don't disagree, I'm just not sure I followed exactly what you were responding to. It sounded like you were addressing the death penalty as a political issue for elections. This particular governor wasn't up for re-election. Now to be fair, he didn't stand a chance at being re-elected as a result of a potential scandel earlier in his political career.
The thing most people seem to be overlooking is that the
Governor has the absolute right and authority to commute any sentence. As a result of their wisdom and foresight, the framers of most state constitutions gave certain power to the head of the executive branch as the final reprieve for the convicted.
As long as that executive doesn't take money in exchange for a pardon, clemency, or other relief, that relief is absolute. If you have a problem with that - lobby for an amendment to your consitution.
<strong>Powerdoc, forgive me if I don't completely understand what you meant. I don't disagree, I'm just not sure I followed exactly what you were responding to. It sounded like you were addressing the death penalty as a political issue for elections. This particular governor wasn't up for re-election. Now to be fair, he didn't stand a chance at being re-elected as a result of a potential scandel earlier in his political career.
The thing most people seem to be overlooking is that the
Governor has the absolute right and authority to commute any sentence. As a result of their wisdom and foresight, the framers of most state constitutions gave certain power to the head of the executive branch as the final reprieve for the convicted.
As long as that executive doesn't take money in exchange for a pardon, clemency, or other relief, that relief is absolute. If you have a problem with that - lobby for an amendment to your consitution.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sorry for the confusion, my question is Are the attorney and the judge elected in USA. And if yes, when they do their campaign, is the death penalty a subject of campaign ?
That have nothing to do with the governor decision.
thanks for the clarification. The answer to your question depends on several things. Certain judges are elected, some are appointed by the president. As far as attroneys, most local prosecutors are elected. Additionally, most state attorney generals are also elected. On a federal level, these individuals are appointed.
Here in Michigan, we don't have the death penalty, so no - it's not a campaign issue.
First of all, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. You're obviously passionately charged about this issue, and have already made up your mind that you hate Gov. Ryan. How about you attempt to separate yourself from that for a moment and we can look at reality.
Now, you keep talking about "blanket." I don't know if you know what that means, but it is absolutely not what happened here. There were 167 people on death row in IL. 4 of them were pardoned. Nevermind that they had been tortured into confessing by Chicago's notorious "red" squad (gang squad).
The remaining individuals were not "pardoned" - they had their sentence commuted and reduced to life in prison without possibility of parole. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Yea. That's called a pardon. When the governor pardons your death sentence and give you life in jail...that's a "pardon". And you tell me I don't know what I'm talking about
[quote]Originally posted by OBJRA10:
<strong>You try to make it sound like this was political, or like these people were set free. Why does it matter to you personally whether or not these guys are executed, or sit in a cell for the rest of their lives. The only thing that should matter to you is that they won't be on the street ever again.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It matters to me because I'm a citizen of Illinois and I want the rule of law respected. I don't want the governor handing out blanket pardons without careful consideration of the facts of each case. There was no rush. He could have left it, in good shape, for the next guy. A democrat that would have continued the moratorium and considered each case, with thought.
[quote]Originally posted by OBJRA10:
<strong>You see, the largest falicy in the criminal justice system is that it exists for the satisfaction and revenge of the victim. It's not. It is the JUSTICE system. Even as a victim, the conviction of a criminal is your Justice. There should be no less a sense of justice just because a criminal sits in a cell for the rest of their life instead of being executed. If you feel that way, you no longer seek justice, you seek revenge. If that's the case you are an animal.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Where's the justice in ignoring the consideration of a jury and deciding that to save your own neck your ignore the rule of law and the will of the people and hand out blanket pardons?
[quote]Originally posted by OBJRA10:
<strong>Now, the reason that the sentences were commuted was because </strong><hr></blockquote>
Gov. Ryan is under investigation and he needed something to reform his image before he left office.
[quote]Originally posted by OBJRA10:
<strong>the incoming Gov. WASN'T going to continue the review process. In fact he campaigned on that very grounds. He intended to lift the moratorium on executions, and he did - the day he entered office.
Gov. Ryan felt it wasn't acceptable to execute an innocent person, and to avoid that possibility he commuted the sentences to life in prison. Had he not done that, the chances were good that someone would be wrongfully executed.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm not sure where you get your information from. (and you say I don't know what I'm talking about). A quick google search turns up this
<a href="http://www.suntimes.com/output/elect/cst-nws-gov211.html"; target="_blank"> [quote]The candidates support the death penalty, but agree Gov. Ryan's moratorium on executions should continue until the system is reformed.<hr></blockquote></a>
So ? you?re wrong.
Blagojevich is perfectly capable to consider these death cases. He could have done a much more through and thoughtful job of it while in office. THERE WAS NO NEED FOR RYAN TO RUSH ON THIS!!!!!! He could have left in the next governor hands' rather than ignore the will of the people (remember when that counted for something?).
[quote]Originally posted by OBJRA10:
<strong>The other thing that merits mentioning is that just because someone is guilty, that doesn't mean that they warrant punishment of death. Very few people believe that most of these people were innocent - that's why they will sit in cells for the rest of their life. The issue is whether or not their crimes warranted death. In IL, as in most states, you have to be convicted of a capital crime (1st degree murder, crime with special circumstances ie: robbery-murder, rape-murder, kidnapping-murder). The issue is that because of a tainted system, individuals who probably should have been convicted of second degree murder, or manslaughter, were convicted of capital murder and were then sentenced to death. </strong><hr></blockquote>
That's the jury?s job which they worked long and hard on and Ryan thoughtlessly tossed aside in a selfish fit.
[quote]Originally posted by OBJRA10:
<strong>Additionally, why was it that of the 193 people convicted of capital crimes in the last 8 years in Illinois, 87% of the african americans were sentenced to death, whereas only 11% of the whites were. Same crime - dramatically different punishments.
These are the real reasons Gov. Ryan did what he did.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Race card ? great. You?ll need more and better numbers to prove to me there?s a racial bias.
No. The real reason he did it was to wash the blood of the people he killed with his license for bribes scheme off his hands. He's trying to reform his image off the backs of murdered people. He's a disgrace and should be put in jail
Scott, please - you really don't know what you're talking about! First of all, a pardon has the same effect as a not-guilty verdict of a jury. I have spent 28 years in the legal profession, currently as a prosecutor for the Michigan Attorney General's office. I promise you you are wrong. A pardon is not what happened here. This was called clemency. There is a huge difference.
Additionally, the day he took office, Illinois' new governor lifted the moratorium on the death penalty.
Furthermore you said:
"Race card ? great. You?ll need more and better numbers to prove to me there?s a racial bias."
Are you kidding me?!?!?!?!? what "better" numbers do you need than a disparity of 87% of people of one race vs 11% of another receiving death for committing the SAME CRIMES??? If the death penalty was applied evenly, the numbers should be exactly the same. I'm not saying 11% of people on death row are white, I'm saying ONLY 11% of whites convicted of CAPITAL CRIMES, received death wheras 87% of blacks convicted of CAPITAL CRIMES received death sentences. You obviously just want to ignore the facts here.
You're going to have to show me a news story that says Blagojevich removed the moratorium.
About your numbers ... maybe 87% of the first degree murders are minorities? Oh didn't think of that. You'll have to prove to me that a higher % of first degree murders that are minorities get the death sentence compared to whites. You'll have to normalize out people that plea as well as other factors like jurisdiction. Please tell me you've had classes in statistics? Otherwise you?re in trouble.
I've already given you proof from Baltimore that minorities are given a brake because they jurisdiction they live in often choose not to go for the death penalty. Poor old white folks getting slammed with the death penalty.
Oh and please stop with the "you don?t know what you are talking about" bit. It gets rather embarrassing for you when the opposite is true.
[quote]Rod R. Blagojevich, the Democrat who succeeded Mr. Ryan as governor on Monday, said the clemency was "terrible" and a "gross injustice." Gov. Gray Davis of California made it clear he would never consider a similar action. And Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, who entered the presidential race last week, issued a bitter denunciation.
"Governor Ryan's action was shockingly wrong," Mr. Lieberman said in an interview on Friday. "It did terrible damage to the credibility of our system of justice, and particularly for the victims. It was obviously not a case-by-case review, and that's what our system is all about."<hr></blockquote>
You're ignoring the fact that the justice system in Illinois is fundamentally flawed. Based on that information, the only just action was for Ryan to commute the sentences of those on death row.
You're also ignoring the fact that Ryan started this process shortly after he took office, and years before it would have been seen as an action that would improve his horrible image.
Cover those two points and then maybe you'll have an argument.
Okay Scott, now I'm convinced that you just can't read. Either that or you are selectively choosing to ignore what I've written.
I DID NOT SAY, that 87% of people on death row are black and 11% are white. I DID SAY that 87% of blacks convicted of Capital Crimes are sentenced to death - whereas ONLY 11% of whites convicted of the same crimes are sentenced to death.
You see, you can't read, and you seem to be ignorant of reality here. These statistics have nothing to do with the total makeup of the inmates on death row. It has nothing to do with who commits more crime, and it has nothing to do with plea bargins since the statistic has to do only with convicted individuals.
Let me make it real easy. Let's pretend that over the last 8 years, 100 blacks are conviced of Capital crimes. The statistic indicates that 87 of them were sentenced to death for that crime. Now, let's pretend that 100 whites were convicted of the SAME KIND OF CRIMES. Only 11 of them would have been sentenced to death. Now to address your ignorance, maybe only 10 whites committed capital crimes. If there was parity, then 8 or 9 of them would be sentenced to death. But, out of those 10, only 1 would have been sentenced to death.
There is huge RACIAL disparity and that is one of the huge reasons for this decision.
You see, your problem is that your opinion is based soley on your distaste for Gov. Ryan. It is clouding your vision. You see, Bill Clinton could have made this decision, and it would have still been the right decision. The IL system is hugely flawed, and he exercised his authority to do what he thought to do to fix it. It doesn't matter that he may have a shady past, that doesn't make the decision any less the right thing to do.
By the way your article acknowledges that what happened here was clemency, not a pardon.
If you need me to slow down for you, or explain anything a little clearer for you, please let me know.
thanks for the clarification. The answer to your question depends on several things. Certain judges are elected, some are appointed by the president. As far as attroneys, most local prosecutors are elected. Additionally, most state attorney generals are also elected. On a federal level, these individuals are appointed.
Here in Michigan, we don't have the death penalty, so no - it's not a campaign issue.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks for the answer. It's a pleasure to have a professional advice on these subjects.
What are the campaign issues in such elections ?
I am interested by the fact that some members of the justice are elected in US. But i wonder what are the advantages and disavantadges of this system.
The primary difference in terms of who is elected and who is appointed is that generally state officials (judges, prosecuters, etc) are elected. Federal Judges and Attorney Generals are appointed. This is primarily a function of practicality. Federal Judges are appointed for life (until they are promoted or retire). This allows them to make decisions based on law, not on popular opinion.
You're ignoring the fact that the justice system in Illinois is fundamentally flawed. Based on that information, the only just action was for Ryan to commute the sentences of those on death row.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I AM NOT! YOU ARE JUST IGNORING WHAT I'M WRITING. THE NEW GOVERNOR WOULD HAVE REVIEWED THE CASES AND ACTED IN THOSE WERE THERE WERE FLAWS. THE DOOR DOES NOT CLOSE WHEN RYAN LEAVES OFFICE. CAREFULL CONSIDERATION COULD HAVE BEENDONE BY THE NEW GOVERNOR!!!!!
[quote]Originally posted by bunge:
<strong>You're also ignoring the fact that Ryan started this process shortly after he took office, and years before it would have been seen as an action that would improve his horrible image.</strong><hr></blockquote>
HE WAS LEAVING OFFICE. THIS WAS THE LAST POSSIBLE THING HE COULD HAVE DONE BEFORE HE LEFT. AFTER THAT THE NEXT GOVEROR WOULD GET CREDIT FOR ANYTHING THAT WAS DONE. RYAN IS BEING TARGETED BY THE FEDS NOW. YOU CAN'T BE MR. NICEGUY AFTER YOU LEAVE OFFICE.
[quote]Originally posted by bunge:
<strong>Cover those two points and then maybe you'll have an argument.</strong><hr></blockquote>
They were covered. You're just not reading or thinking or both.
<strong>Okay Scott, now I'm convinced that you just can't read. Either that or you are selectively choosing to ignore what I've written.
I DID NOT SAY, that 87% of people on death row are black and 11% are white. I DID SAY that 87% of blacks convicted of Capital Crimes are sentenced to death - whereas ONLY 11% of whites convicted of the same crimes are sentenced to death.
You see, you can't read, and you seem to be ignorant of reality here. These statistics have nothing to do with the total makeup of the inmates on death row. It has nothing to do with who commits more crime, and it has nothing to do with plea bargins since the statistic has to do only with convicted individuals.
Let me make it real easy. Let's pretend that over the last 8 years, 100 blacks are conviced of Capital crimes. The statistic indicates that 87 of them were sentenced to death for that crime. Now, let's pretend that 100 whites were convicted of the SAME KIND OF CRIMES. Only 11 of them would have been sentenced to death. Now to address your ignorance, maybe only 10 whites committed capital crimes. If there was parity, then 8 or 9 of them would be sentenced to death. But, out of those 10, only 1 would have been sentenced to death.
There is huge RACIAL disparity and that is one of the huge reasons for this decision.
You see, your problem is that your opinion is based soley on your distaste for Gov. Ryan. It is clouding your vision. You see, Bill Clinton could have made this decision, and it would have still been the right decision. The IL system is hugely flawed, and he exercised his authority to do what he thought to do to fix it. It doesn't matter that he may have a shady past, that doesn't make the decision any less the right thing to do.
By the way your article acknowledges that what happened here was clemency, not a pardon.
If you need me to slow down for you, or explain anything a little clearer for you, please let me know.
I ' l l b e h a p p y t o h e l p y o u.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay nowhere in there did you point me to a source where it says the new governor removed the moratorium. So what's all this "you don't know what you're talking about" stuff. Maybe by "you" you mean you and not me?
I stand corrected on your 87%(your first mention was poorly worded). Where did you get that number? Your ass maybe? But you still haven 't shown me where you normalized out for confounding factors.
You may not be able to wrap your feable brain around the facts...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Second time through this thread and this one's still funny - to me at least. That would be feeble. You might want to wrap your brain around a spell-checker.
you should really stop and think a bit before posting.
His first mention of the percentage was NOT poorly worded - it was clear he was speaking of percentages by race.
Your use of the word pardon may be in line with vernacular (although I would say not), but is certainly NOT the way the term is used in law. No amount of typing it in bold will change that.
And as for YOU, mister attorney - all those years of education, and you still don't know how senseless it is to argue with someone in a forum about the death penalty?
By the way, I'm opposed to the death penalty but I think Scott is right about Gov. Ryan's motives. And I don't think Ryan has advanced the anti-death penalty case at all. Just the opposite, I'm afraid.
Comments
<strong>
This is beautifully worded and what I've been saying. I have yet to hear any refute for argument this though.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I already provided it, which you ignored. The next governor was ready to continue the review process and award pardons based on these pesky things called "facts" of the cases. The people of Illinois were denied that by a self serving crook.
There's no justice in blanket pardons.
<strong>
There's no justice in blanket pardons.</strong><hr></blockquote>
There's no justice in a wrongly implemented death penalty either.
EDIT: This is the whole point. In Illinois, the death penatly was fundamentally flawed. That means any death sentence was wrong. In this case anything BUT a blanket pardon would be unjust.
If you want to argue that it's not flawed, that's different. But under the circumstances that existed long before Ryan had a reason to be "self-serving" he took a stance against the death penalty. He followed through with it.
How is that self-serving? When he began the process it could only have hurt his political chances.
You're just flat out wrong about this issue.
[ 01-17-2003: Message edited by: bunge ]</p>
First of all, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. You're obviously passionately charged about this issue, and have already made up your mind that you hate Gov. Ryan. How about you attempt to separate yourself from that for a moment and we can look at reality.
Now, you keep talking about "blanket." I don't know if you know what that means, but it is absolutely not what happened here. There were 167 people on death row in IL. 4 of them were pardoned. Nevermind that they had been tortured into confessing by Chicago's notorious "red" squad (gang squad).
The remaining individuals were not "pardoned" - they had their sentence commuted and reduced to life in prison without possibility of parole.
You try to make it sound like this was political, or like these people were set free. Why does it matter to you personally whether or not these guys are executed, or sit in a cell for the rest of their lives. The only thing that should matter to you is that they won't be on the street ever again.
You see, the largest falicy in the criminal justice system is that it exists for the satisfaction and revenge of the victim. It's not. It is the JUSTICE system. Even as a victim, the conviction of a criminal is your Justice. There should be no less a sense of justice just because a criminal sits in a cell for the rest of their life instead of being executed. If you feel that way, you no longer seek justice, you seek revenge. If that's the case you are an animal.
Now, the reason that the sentences were commuted was because the incoming Gov. WASN'T going to continue the review process. In fact he campaigned on that very grounds. He intended to lift the moratorium on executions, and he did - the day he entered office.
Gov. Ryan felt it wasn't acceptable to execute an innocent person, and to avoid that possibility he commuted the sentences to life in prison. Had he not done that, the chances were good that someone would be wrongfully executed.
The other thing that merits mentioning is that just because someone is guilty, that doesn't mean that they warrant punishment of death. Very few people believe that most of these people were innocent - that's why they will sit in cells for the rest of their life. The issue is whether or not their crimes warranted death. In IL, as in most states, you have to be convicted of a capital crime (1st degree murder, crime with special circumstances ie: robbery-murder, rape-murder, kidnapping-murder). The issue is that because of a tainted system, individuals who probably should have been convicted of second degree murder, or manslaughter, were convicted of capital murder and were then sentenced to death.
Additionally, why was it that of the 193 people convicted of capital crimes in the last 8 years in Illinois, 87% of the african americans were sentenced to death, whereas only 11% of the whites were. Same crime - dramatically different punishments.
These are the real reasons Gov. Ryan did what he did.
You see, the largest falicy in the criminal justice system is that it exists for the satisfaction and revenge of the victim. It's not. It is the JUSTICE system. Even as a victim, the conviction of a criminal is your Justice. There should be no less a sense of justice just because a criminal sits in a cell for the rest of their life instead of being executed. If you feel that way, you no longer seek justice, you seek revenge. If that's the case you are an animal. <hr></blockquote>
OBJRA10, what you say seems logical. But did all or a majority of the membes of justice share the same opinion ?
I could be wrong, but it seems to me that one major subject of election in the justice aera, is being for or against death penalty ( i could be wrong , seeing the US system of Justice via the moovie or the TV series, showing always a corrupted Sheriff ..., i have always been amazed by the way, how moovies discribe US police but this is another debate).
PS : for those who think Europe is better because there is no death penalty, i will add if i am against death penaly i am also against the liberation of dangerous criminals even after 25-30 years of jail. In France there is almost never any practical (only theorical) life sentence. The last time that a criminal was set free after years of jail (because a psychiatrist's expertise testified that the man was no more dangerous), he killed an another people.
This system is no way better for the victim ...
[ 01-18-2003: Message edited by: Powerdoc ]</p>
The thing most people seem to be overlooking is that the
Governor has the absolute right and authority to commute any sentence. As a result of their wisdom and foresight, the framers of most state constitutions gave certain power to the head of the executive branch as the final reprieve for the convicted.
As long as that executive doesn't take money in exchange for a pardon, clemency, or other relief, that relief is absolute. If you have a problem with that - lobby for an amendment to your consitution.
<strong>Powerdoc, forgive me if I don't completely understand what you meant. I don't disagree, I'm just not sure I followed exactly what you were responding to. It sounded like you were addressing the death penalty as a political issue for elections. This particular governor wasn't up for re-election. Now to be fair, he didn't stand a chance at being re-elected as a result of a potential scandel earlier in his political career.
The thing most people seem to be overlooking is that the
Governor has the absolute right and authority to commute any sentence. As a result of their wisdom and foresight, the framers of most state constitutions gave certain power to the head of the executive branch as the final reprieve for the convicted.
As long as that executive doesn't take money in exchange for a pardon, clemency, or other relief, that relief is absolute. If you have a problem with that - lobby for an amendment to your consitution.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sorry for the confusion, my question is Are the attorney and the judge elected in USA. And if yes, when they do their campaign, is the death penalty a subject of campaign ?
That have nothing to do with the governor decision.
Pardon my english.
thanks for the clarification. The answer to your question depends on several things. Certain judges are elected, some are appointed by the president. As far as attroneys, most local prosecutors are elected. Additionally, most state attorney generals are also elected. On a federal level, these individuals are appointed.
Here in Michigan, we don't have the death penalty, so no - it's not a campaign issue.
<strong>Scott,
First of all, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. You're obviously passionately charged about this issue, and have already made up your mind that you hate Gov. Ryan. How about you attempt to separate yourself from that for a moment and we can look at reality.
Now, you keep talking about "blanket." I don't know if you know what that means, but it is absolutely not what happened here. There were 167 people on death row in IL. 4 of them were pardoned. Nevermind that they had been tortured into confessing by Chicago's notorious "red" squad (gang squad).
The remaining individuals were not "pardoned" - they had their sentence commuted and reduced to life in prison without possibility of parole. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Yea. That's called a pardon. When the governor pardons your death sentence and give you life in jail...that's a "pardon". And you tell me I don't know what I'm talking about
[quote]Originally posted by OBJRA10:
<strong>You try to make it sound like this was political, or like these people were set free. Why does it matter to you personally whether or not these guys are executed, or sit in a cell for the rest of their lives. The only thing that should matter to you is that they won't be on the street ever again.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It matters to me because I'm a citizen of Illinois and I want the rule of law respected. I don't want the governor handing out blanket pardons without careful consideration of the facts of each case. There was no rush. He could have left it, in good shape, for the next guy. A democrat that would have continued the moratorium and considered each case, with thought.
[quote]Originally posted by OBJRA10:
<strong>You see, the largest falicy in the criminal justice system is that it exists for the satisfaction and revenge of the victim. It's not. It is the JUSTICE system. Even as a victim, the conviction of a criminal is your Justice. There should be no less a sense of justice just because a criminal sits in a cell for the rest of their life instead of being executed. If you feel that way, you no longer seek justice, you seek revenge. If that's the case you are an animal.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Where's the justice in ignoring the consideration of a jury and deciding that to save your own neck your ignore the rule of law and the will of the people and hand out blanket pardons?
[quote]Originally posted by OBJRA10:
<strong>Now, the reason that the sentences were commuted was because </strong><hr></blockquote>
Gov. Ryan is under investigation and he needed something to reform his image before he left office.
[quote]Originally posted by OBJRA10:
<strong>the incoming Gov. WASN'T going to continue the review process. In fact he campaigned on that very grounds. He intended to lift the moratorium on executions, and he did - the day he entered office.
Gov. Ryan felt it wasn't acceptable to execute an innocent person, and to avoid that possibility he commuted the sentences to life in prison. Had he not done that, the chances were good that someone would be wrongfully executed.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm not sure where you get your information from. (and you say I don't know what I'm talking about). A quick google search turns up this
<a href="http://www.suntimes.com/output/elect/cst-nws-gov211.html"; target="_blank"> [quote]The candidates support the death penalty, but agree Gov. Ryan's moratorium on executions should continue until the system is reformed.<hr></blockquote></a>
So ? you?re wrong.
Blagojevich is perfectly capable to consider these death cases. He could have done a much more through and thoughtful job of it while in office. THERE WAS NO NEED FOR RYAN TO RUSH ON THIS!!!!!!
[quote]Originally posted by OBJRA10:
<strong>The other thing that merits mentioning is that just because someone is guilty, that doesn't mean that they warrant punishment of death. Very few people believe that most of these people were innocent - that's why they will sit in cells for the rest of their life. The issue is whether or not their crimes warranted death. In IL, as in most states, you have to be convicted of a capital crime (1st degree murder, crime with special circumstances ie: robbery-murder, rape-murder, kidnapping-murder). The issue is that because of a tainted system, individuals who probably should have been convicted of second degree murder, or manslaughter, were convicted of capital murder and were then sentenced to death. </strong><hr></blockquote>
That's the jury?s job which they worked long and hard on and Ryan thoughtlessly tossed aside in a selfish fit.
[quote]Originally posted by OBJRA10:
<strong>Additionally, why was it that of the 193 people convicted of capital crimes in the last 8 years in Illinois, 87% of the african americans were sentenced to death, whereas only 11% of the whites were. Same crime - dramatically different punishments.
These are the real reasons Gov. Ryan did what he did.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Race card ? great. You?ll need more and better numbers to prove to me there?s a racial bias.
No. The real reason he did it was to wash the blood of the people he killed with his license for bribes scheme off his hands. He's trying to reform his image off the backs of murdered people. He's a disgrace and should be put in jail
[ 01-18-2003: Message edited by: Scott ]</p>
Additionally, the day he took office, Illinois' new governor lifted the moratorium on the death penalty.
Furthermore you said:
"Race card ? great. You?ll need more and better numbers to prove to me there?s a racial bias."
Are you kidding me?!?!?!?!? what "better" numbers do you need than a disparity of 87% of people of one race vs 11% of another receiving death for committing the SAME CRIMES??? If the death penalty was applied evenly, the numbers should be exactly the same. I'm not saying 11% of people on death row are white, I'm saying ONLY 11% of whites convicted of CAPITAL CRIMES, received death wheras 87% of blacks convicted of CAPITAL CRIMES received death sentences. You obviously just want to ignore the facts here.
About your numbers ... maybe 87% of the first degree murders are minorities? Oh didn't think of that. You'll have to prove to me that a higher % of first degree murders that are minorities get the death sentence compared to whites. You'll have to normalize out people that plea as well as other factors like jurisdiction. Please tell me you've had classes in statistics? Otherwise you?re in trouble.
I've already given you proof from Baltimore that minorities are given a brake because they jurisdiction they live in often choose not to go for the death penalty. Poor old white folks getting slammed with the death penalty.
Oh and please stop with the "you don?t know what you are talking about" bit. It gets rather embarrassing for you when the opposite is true.
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/19/weekinreview/19FIRE.html"; target="_blank">Absolutely, Positively for Capital Punishment</a>
Login: aimember
pass: aimember
[quote]Rod R. Blagojevich, the Democrat who succeeded Mr. Ryan as governor on Monday, said the clemency was "terrible" and a "gross injustice." Gov. Gray Davis of California made it clear he would never consider a similar action. And Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, who entered the presidential race last week, issued a bitter denunciation.
"Governor Ryan's action was shockingly wrong," Mr. Lieberman said in an interview on Friday. "It did terrible damage to the credibility of our system of justice, and particularly for the victims. It was obviously not a case-by-case review, and that's what our system is all about."<hr></blockquote>
You're ignoring the fact that the justice system in Illinois is fundamentally flawed. Based on that information, the only just action was for Ryan to commute the sentences of those on death row.
You're also ignoring the fact that Ryan started this process shortly after he took office, and years before it would have been seen as an action that would improve his horrible image.
Cover those two points and then maybe you'll have an argument.
I DID NOT SAY, that 87% of people on death row are black and 11% are white. I DID SAY that 87% of blacks convicted of Capital Crimes are sentenced to death - whereas ONLY 11% of whites convicted of the same crimes are sentenced to death.
You see, you can't read, and you seem to be ignorant of reality here. These statistics have nothing to do with the total makeup of the inmates on death row. It has nothing to do with who commits more crime, and it has nothing to do with plea bargins since the statistic has to do only with convicted individuals.
Let me make it real easy. Let's pretend that over the last 8 years, 100 blacks are conviced of Capital crimes. The statistic indicates that 87 of them were sentenced to death for that crime. Now, let's pretend that 100 whites were convicted of the SAME KIND OF CRIMES. Only 11 of them would have been sentenced to death. Now to address your ignorance, maybe only 10 whites committed capital crimes. If there was parity, then 8 or 9 of them would be sentenced to death. But, out of those 10, only 1 would have been sentenced to death.
There is huge RACIAL disparity and that is one of the huge reasons for this decision.
You see, your problem is that your opinion is based soley on your distaste for Gov. Ryan. It is clouding your vision. You see, Bill Clinton could have made this decision, and it would have still been the right decision. The IL system is hugely flawed, and he exercised his authority to do what he thought to do to fix it. It doesn't matter that he may have a shady past, that doesn't make the decision any less the right thing to do.
By the way your article acknowledges that what happened here was clemency, not a pardon.
If you need me to slow down for you, or explain anything a little clearer for you, please let me know.
I ' l l b e h a p p y t o h e l p y o u.
<strong>Powerdoc,
thanks for the clarification. The answer to your question depends on several things. Certain judges are elected, some are appointed by the president. As far as attroneys, most local prosecutors are elected. Additionally, most state attorney generals are also elected. On a federal level, these individuals are appointed.
Here in Michigan, we don't have the death penalty, so no - it's not a campaign issue.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks for the answer. It's a pleasure to have a professional advice on these subjects.
What are the campaign issues in such elections ?
I am interested by the fact that some members of the justice are elected in US. But i wonder what are the advantages and disavantadges of this system.
[ 01-19-2003: Message edited by: Powerdoc ]</p>
<strong>Scott,
You're ignoring the fact that the justice system in Illinois is fundamentally flawed. Based on that information, the only just action was for Ryan to commute the sentences of those on death row.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I AM NOT! YOU ARE JUST IGNORING WHAT I'M WRITING. THE NEW GOVERNOR WOULD HAVE REVIEWED THE CASES AND ACTED IN THOSE WERE THERE WERE FLAWS. THE DOOR DOES NOT CLOSE WHEN RYAN LEAVES OFFICE. CAREFULL CONSIDERATION COULD HAVE BEENDONE BY THE NEW GOVERNOR!!!!!
[quote]Originally posted by bunge:
<strong>You're also ignoring the fact that Ryan started this process shortly after he took office, and years before it would have been seen as an action that would improve his horrible image.</strong><hr></blockquote>
HE WAS LEAVING OFFICE. THIS WAS THE LAST POSSIBLE THING HE COULD HAVE DONE BEFORE HE LEFT. AFTER THAT THE NEXT GOVEROR WOULD GET CREDIT FOR ANYTHING THAT WAS DONE. RYAN IS BEING TARGETED BY THE FEDS NOW. YOU CAN'T BE MR. NICEGUY AFTER YOU LEAVE OFFICE.
[quote]Originally posted by bunge:
<strong>Cover those two points and then maybe you'll have an argument.</strong><hr></blockquote>
They were covered. You're just not reading or thinking or both.
<strong>Okay Scott, now I'm convinced that you just can't read. Either that or you are selectively choosing to ignore what I've written.
I DID NOT SAY, that 87% of people on death row are black and 11% are white. I DID SAY that 87% of blacks convicted of Capital Crimes are sentenced to death - whereas ONLY 11% of whites convicted of the same crimes are sentenced to death.
You see, you can't read, and you seem to be ignorant of reality here. These statistics have nothing to do with the total makeup of the inmates on death row. It has nothing to do with who commits more crime, and it has nothing to do with plea bargins since the statistic has to do only with convicted individuals.
Let me make it real easy. Let's pretend that over the last 8 years, 100 blacks are conviced of Capital crimes. The statistic indicates that 87 of them were sentenced to death for that crime. Now, let's pretend that 100 whites were convicted of the SAME KIND OF CRIMES. Only 11 of them would have been sentenced to death. Now to address your ignorance, maybe only 10 whites committed capital crimes. If there was parity, then 8 or 9 of them would be sentenced to death. But, out of those 10, only 1 would have been sentenced to death.
There is huge RACIAL disparity and that is one of the huge reasons for this decision.
You see, your problem is that your opinion is based soley on your distaste for Gov. Ryan. It is clouding your vision. You see, Bill Clinton could have made this decision, and it would have still been the right decision. The IL system is hugely flawed, and he exercised his authority to do what he thought to do to fix it. It doesn't matter that he may have a shady past, that doesn't make the decision any less the right thing to do.
By the way your article acknowledges that what happened here was clemency, not a pardon.
If you need me to slow down for you, or explain anything a little clearer for you, please let me know.
I ' l l b e h a p p y t o h e l p y o u.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay nowhere in there did you point me to a source where it says the new governor removed the moratorium. So what's all this "you don't know what you're talking about" stuff. Maybe by "you" you mean you and not me?
I stand corrected on your 87%(your first mention was poorly worded). Where did you get that number? Your ass maybe? But you still haven 't shown me where you normalized out for confounding factors.
[ 01-19-2003: Message edited by: Scott ]</p>
<strong>
You may not be able to wrap your feable brain around the facts...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Second time through this thread and this one's still funny - to me at least. That would be feeble. You might want to wrap your brain around a spell-checker.
you should really stop and think a bit before posting.
His first mention of the percentage was NOT poorly worded - it was clear he was speaking of percentages by race.
Your use of the word pardon may be in line with vernacular (although I would say not), but is certainly NOT the way the term is used in law. No amount of typing it in bold will change that.
And as for YOU, mister attorney - all those years of education, and you still don't know how senseless it is to argue with someone in a forum about the death penalty?
Fish