If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Above the Law)   Mississippi Supreme Court votes 8-1 to stay death sentence after FBI casts doubt on prior findings. The vote against? A judge cogently expounding upon the ancient doctrine of herpus derpus Obamus   (abovethelaw.com) divider line 232
    More: Asinine, Mississippi Supreme Court, FBI, Mississippi, ballistics, gun-running, expert witnesses, doubts, Justice Department  
•       •       •

20239 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 May 2013 at 2:10 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



232 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-08 12:40:55 PM
Herpus Derpus is the name of my Dokken cover band.
 
2013-05-08 12:45:34 PM
Although the connectivity and expediency by which this review was accomplished is mind boggling, I should not be surprised, given that the families of victims of the clandestine 'Fast and Furious' gun running operation can't get the Department of Justice to identify the decision makers (whose actions resulted in the death of a border agent and many others) after years of inquiry, and that this is the same Department of Justice that grants and enforces Miranda warnings to foreign enemy combatants.

Tell you what: we'll stop stereotyping the South when the South does.
 
2013-05-08 01:06:03 PM
That guy should be removed from the bench. Or the population. Either one will work.
 
2013-05-08 01:07:30 PM
Impossible.

I've been told time and time again that there are never any errors at all in death sentences, and that we should implicitly trust the government with the authority to take the lives of citizens because they never make mistakes.
 
2013-05-08 01:07:31 PM

kronicfeld: Tell you what: we'll stop stereotyping the South when the South does.


It's unsurprising to find individuals who dislike and distrust the government. Hell, I'd say we need a cadre of that type to force changes. It's also unsurprising that people would object to specific things the government does (like F&F).

It's farking amazing that these "anti-government" arguments usually go far beyond the specifics they're arguing, and extend to "all government/law is bad". That pull quote is an argument for abolishing the DoJ entirely, or at the least severely restricting what it does and how it operates. Ditto the argument against BG checks for all firearm purchases - usually, the arguments opposed to 100% BG checks are arguments against ALL checks, or a fear of government having any information on anyone for any reason.

When your argument starts going beyond the thing you're arguing and is instead an indictment of the entire system (extrapolated from a few specific events), you've strayed into HerpaDerpaLand.
 
2013-05-08 01:33:52 PM

Aarontology: Impossible.

I've been told time and time again that there are never any errors at all in death sentences, and that we should implicitly trust the government with the authority to take the lives of citizens because they never make mistakes.


No, that's only in Texas.  Governor Rick "EVERYONE DIES" Perry makes sure he's ALWAYS dead right.
 
2013-05-08 01:34:39 PM
The redneck is strong with this one.
 
2013-05-08 01:37:44 PM

Aarontology: Impossible.

I've been told time and time again that there are never any errors at all in death sentences, and that we should implicitly trust the government with the authority to take the lives of citizens because they never make mistakes.


The only pro-death penalty arguments I really respect are those that acknowledge innocent people are killed through its implementation and argue on that basis. It can be done, most people just don't do it.
 
2013-05-08 01:50:01 PM

DamnYankees: The only pro-death penalty arguments I really respect are those that acknowledge innocent people are killed through its implementation and argue on that basis. It can be done, most people just don't do it.


You must have seen me in death penalty threads.

As for this whackaddodle, what is to be gained by not staying the execution?  Suppose modern techniques are implimented and it turns out that they guy really is guilty?  No doubt they'll still get to execute him with rigteous glee.  And if he's innocent, great!  They didn't kill an innocent man.  Either way, it bolsters faith in the system; a system that can only work if it is most interested in getting things right.

But yeah.  It is fascinating that this guy would support the irreversible punishment of execution, by  the hands of the government, when he himself doesn't believe the government can get it right.
 
2013-05-08 01:51:07 PM

doyner: You must have seen me in death penalty threads.


Perhaps - I don't usually go into them, so I don't recall your specific position. Until I'm told otherwise, I assume you favor death by snoo-snoo for anything above a misdemeanor.
 
2013-05-08 01:55:36 PM

DamnYankees: doyner: You must have seen me in death penalty threads.

Perhaps - I don't usually go into them, so I don't recall your specific position. Until I'm told otherwise, I assume you favor death by snoo-snoo for anything above a misdemeanor.


HA!  Quite the contrary.  I'm staunchly opposed to capital punishment.  While I agree that there is some level of moral consistency with accepting that innocents die, it is morally bankrupt as an argument for the death penalty since the entire point of the criminal justice system is, well, JUSTICE.  What exactly is the justice in the state executing an innocent?
 
2013-05-08 01:58:33 PM
I wish someone would send him some raisins.
 
2013-05-08 01:59:34 PM
Here's what the defendant in this case looks like:

www.rawstory.com

The amount of melanin present in this defendant is clearly all the evidence that this guy needed to know he's guilty of somethin'.
 
2013-05-08 02:00:34 PM

doyner: While I agree that there is some level of moral consistency with accepting that innocents die, it is morally bankrupt as an argument for the death penalty since the entire point of the criminal justice system is, well, JUSTICE.  What exactly is the justice in the state executing an innocent?


There's a lot to unpack here.

First, I don't really agree with you that the purpose of the criminal justice system is justice. I don't really know what that means, in practical terms. I think the purpose of the system should be the reduction of violence and crime. To the extent that overlaps with "justice", so be it. But justice isn't the point, regardless of the name.

Secondly, no one argues that there's justice in executing the innocent, No one tries to kill innocent people. The argument is that justice is served through a particular process, and that the achievement of that justice is worth the collateral damage. This is not an argument I agree with, but its an argument which makes a semblance of sense.
 
2013-05-08 02:15:37 PM
Conservative's hate and vitriol would kill an innocent man out of partisan spite.......PARTY ABOVE COUNTRY in it's most vile form.
 
2013-05-08 02:18:13 PM
F.B.I. does stand for Famous But Incompetent but I for one, am not a fan of giving the State authority to put people to death. Because, you know, 'Standards' tend to wander over the years.
 
2013-05-08 02:19:08 PM
Hands up, everyone who (a) considers him/herself to be a Christian, and (b) is in favor of the death penalty!
 
2013-05-08 02:19:31 PM
abovethelaw.com

Oh yeah. Crazy eyes.
 
2013-05-08 02:20:09 PM
You stay stupid,  Mississippi.
 
2013-05-08 02:20:29 PM
How do so many nutjobs and morons end up judges?
 
2013-05-08 02:21:22 PM
www.dougrichardson.com

Although the connectivity and expediency by which this review was accomplished is mind boggling, I should not be surprised, given that the families of victims of the clandestine 'Fast and Furious' gun running operation can't get the Department of Justice to identify the decision makers (whose actions resulted in the death of a border agent and many others) after years of inquiry, and that this is the same Department of Justice that grants and enforces Miranda warnings to foreign enemy combatants.
 
2013-05-08 02:22:46 PM

Aarontology: Impossible.

I've been told time and time again that there are never any errors at all in death sentences, and that we should implicitly trust the government with the authority to take the lives of citizens because they never make mistakes.


the CREEPIER part is that once the errors are found, the argument is made that "it doesnt matter". A jury found him guilty, that is all that matters.
WTF is wrong with these people.

We need to replace our legal system with a justice system.
/and no, I have no idea what that looks like, other than shiat like this would not happen. cases would automatically be reopened ANY time new evidence and new science came available.
/JUSTICE - not convenience
/and no, the victim's family have no rights were justice is concerned. they dont "get revenge". the goal of society is to make certain that the criminal is punished, not someone is punished.
 
2013-05-08 02:22:48 PM
"Hi I'm Jim I work in the Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review Team Laboratory Division."

I think some sort of acronym is in order...
 
2013-05-08 02:23:02 PM

cubic_spleen: Hands up, everyone who (a) considers him/herself to be a Christian, and (b) is in favor of the death penalty!


The death penalty is in the Bible.....specifically when Jesus was crucified.
 
2013-05-08 02:23:22 PM

raatz01: How do so many nutjobs and morons end up judges?


It's what they are stuck with in Derpistan.   Anyone with a brain leaves the state.
 
2013-05-08 02:24:04 PM

cubic_spleen: Hands up, everyone who (a) considers him/herself to be a Christian, and (b) is in favor of the death penalty!


well zero people - right? RIGHT?
all Christian are in favor of forgiveness, turning the other cheek and not casting the first stone.
RIGHT?

/can we just start calling them Haters instead of xians?
 
2013-05-08 02:24:06 PM
God's eyes are upon all men on earth, also on men of iniquity

viajeros s.a
 
2013-05-08 02:24:26 PM
Those last comments are impeachment-level BS. At minimum, I hope the state judicial council takes a look at this opinion. Even if he would have made the same decision based solely on the legal issues (the earlier comments he made), by dropping that garbage at the end he creates an appearance of prejudice against one side. That's a no-no. Likewise, using a judicial opinion to make political statements about totally unrelated issues is improper.

I wouldn't be surprised if there was a censure in his future.
 
2013-05-08 02:24:55 PM

Cyberluddite: Here's what the defendant in this case looks like:

[www.rawstory.com image 615x345]

The amount of melanin present in this defendant is clearly all the evidence that this guy needed to know he's guilty of somethin'.


He's just following the cops example. In his defense the hair that they found DID kinda look like it possibly could have maybe come from a black guy. That's solid.
 
Ehh
2013-05-08 02:25:08 PM

doyner: DamnYankees:  But yeah.  It is fascinating that this guy would support the irreversible punishment of execution, by  the hands of the government, when he himself doesn't believe the government can get it right.


You forgot: Black!

/black
 
2013-05-08 02:25:50 PM

doyner: DamnYankees: The only pro-death penalty arguments I really respect are those that acknowledge innocent people are killed through its implementation and argue on that basis. It can be done, most people just don't do it.

You must have seen me in death penalty threads.

As for this whackaddodle, what is to be gained by not staying the execution?  Suppose modern techniques are implimented and it turns out that they guy really is guilty?  No doubt they'll still get to execute him with rigteous glee.  And if he's innocent, great!  They didn't kill an innocent man.  Either way, it bolsters faith in the system; a system that can only work if it is most interested in getting things right.

But yeah.  It is fascinating that this guy would support the irreversible punishment of execution, by  the hands of the government, when he himself doesn't believe the government can get it right.


Objections to re-investigating criminal convictions are based in Fundamentalist Christianity, as Fundamentalist Christians believe that the enactment of punishment necessary for justice, regardless of the actual guilt or innocence of the punished.
 
2013-05-08 02:27:11 PM

raatz01: How do so many nutjobs and morons end up judges?


Because, depending on the state, they are either (1) elected to their post by the voters, or (2) appointed their post by other nutjobs and morons who were elected by the voters.
 
2013-05-08 02:27:25 PM

raatz01: How do so many nutjobs and morons end up judges?


That depends on, like, your perspective, man.
 
2013-05-08 02:27:48 PM
Shall I assume that the appellant is BLACK?

/becuz MS and all
 
2013-05-08 02:28:56 PM
Dimensio:
Objections to re-investigating criminal convictions are based in Fundamentalist Christianity, as Fundamentalist Christians believe that the enactment of punishment necessary for justice, regardless of the actual guilt or innocence of the punished.


You sound pretty stupid.
 
2013-05-08 02:29:38 PM

DamnYankees: Aarontology: Impossible.

I've been told time and time again that there are never any errors at all in death sentences, and that we should implicitly trust the government with the authority to take the lives of citizens because they never make mistakes.

The only pro-death penalty arguments I really respect are those that acknowledge innocent people are killed through its implementation and argue on that basis. It can be done, most people just don't do it.


I'm pro-death penalty, and yes, I understand there may be innocents lost, same as during war. I'm not a pacifist, which makes me really popular (sarcasm) at the UU congregation I attend. There are certain crimes I feel that the death penalty is warranted: rape, murder with special circumstances, and I might even go for special torture cases (I've been debating the Cleveland case in my head over whether or not I'd be okay with that). I want it reserved for the worst offenders, the ones where you go, "Yeah, you just don't need to be contributing to the gene pool." The evidence needs to be as lock solid as possible, and every reasonable action taken to ensure it's not mistaken identity. Wrap it up as best you can, understand that yeah you might fark it up, but get better every time. I'd also like to see a better "jury of peers," that are actually peers, but I know there are holes in that too. It's an imperfect system.

I will also admit that part of the reason why I support the death penalty is that I don't believe a criminal ought to get better health care, food, living conditions, and education than I do. Even if it costs more for an execution than to keep them around, no. You don't get to live pretty while other people who follows laws don't. On the other hand, I'm not advocating the extreme of Sheriff Joe's tent city, either. There's a happy medium that can be reached.

The problem here, considering it's Mississippi, is that it's far too likely the guys grabbed a hold of the first piece of likely evidence and relied on racism to get the conviction. Even Cali isn't immune to that one (Mark Fuhrman, anyone?).
 
2013-05-08 02:31:14 PM
I'm anti-death penalty, but I didn't read anything there that made me think this guy was innocent either.
 
2013-05-08 02:31:46 PM
Fakkin Mississippi, doing nothing to stop anyone else from thinking the entire state is inbred retards that ought to be sewn in a bag and tossed into the sea.
Probably still teaching Bre'r Rabbit in the Universities down there, too.
 
2013-05-08 02:33:05 PM

sboyle1020: Team Laboratory Division.


Team Laboratory Division Research.
 
2013-05-08 02:33:39 PM

tuna fingers: this guy was innocent


The standard isn't "innocent." The standard is "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." There is a point at which the evidence actually presented is as a matter of law insufficient to meet that burden, regardless of the fact that a specific jury or juror might vote guilty.
 
2013-05-08 02:33:57 PM
It is a toss up whether the Judge or the Author is the bigger douche here.
 
2013-05-08 02:36:09 PM

Oliver Twisted: It is a toss up whether the Judge or the Author is the bigger douche here.


Yeah, guys, can't we just agree that both sides - those sides, of course, being Judge and Author - are bad, and so this totally doesn't matter at all?
 
2013-05-08 02:37:41 PM

DamnYankees: The argument is that justice is served through a particular process, and that the achievement of that justice is worth the collateral damage.


How does that jive with Judge Jury-rig's desire to execute a probably-innocent man (but let's do some forensic analysis just to be sure)?

// "S-U-C-K-M-Y-A-S-S...that spells 'forensics'"
 
2013-05-08 02:38:34 PM
The FBI has no credibility with me, or I suspect, any other well informed person.

They have routinely screwed up every high profile case they have ever worked, you have to wonder how badly they f*ck up the mundane stuff which doesn't make the front pages.
 
2013-05-08 02:38:48 PM

Oliver Twisted: It is a toss up whether the Judge or the Author is the bigger douche here.


I guess the tie breaker is whom is arguing to kill someone when the justification for such is in doubt.
 
2013-05-08 02:39:04 PM

Peki: I want it reserved for the worst offenders, the ones where you go, "Yeah, you just don't need to be contributing to the gene pool."


So you want people eligible for the death penalty based on your emotional reaction to their crimes. That makes total sense.

Peki: will also admit that part of the reason why I support the death penalty is that I don't believe a criminal ought to get better health care, food, living conditions, and education than I do.


People in prison do not get better versions of those things than you do, unless you happen to be a street urchin in Mogadishu or something. Also that's an argument for exterminating everyone in prison.
 
2013-05-08 02:40:42 PM

Citrate1007: cubic_spleen: Hands up, everyone who (a) considers him/herself to be a Christian, and (b) is in favor of the death penalty!

The death penalty is in the Bible.....specifically when Jesus was crucified.



We killed Jesus so we can go to heaven.

/not a christian.
 
2013-05-08 02:41:21 PM

kronicfeld: tuna fingers: this guy was innocent

The standard isn't "innocent." The standard is "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." There is a point at which the evidence actually presented is as a matter of law insufficient to meet that burden, regardless of the fact that a specific jury or juror might vote guilty.


The accused must be fairly confident the hair is not his. Otherwise calling in the FBI is just cooking his own goose if the DNA is a match.
 
2013-05-08 02:42:03 PM

tuna fingers: I'm anti-death penalty, but I didn't read anything there that made me think this guy was innocent either.


He was convicted of possession of stolen items and expert testimony from the FBI. The FBI now states that the testimony is now believed to be flawed. They also indicate that a new DNA test can be done on evidence that was collected at the scene to confirm/exclude the convicted man's presence.

Sounds like a pretty damn good reason to hit the pause button. If the DNA evidence puts him at the scene - Mississippi gets to kill him. If not, it should be solid grounds for review and possibly a pardon. If they were about to execute him, he has used all of his appeal options.
 
2013-05-08 02:42:25 PM
You didn't dot the i. GUILTY!
 
Displayed 50 of 232 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report