>
> Jb: The general public impression is that the guilty
> get off or get lighter sentences than they should,
Which is absolutely false. In fed ct, indictment is almost tantamount to conviction, and sentences are draconian. The conviction rate is still upwards of 80% in state court too.
> not that the innocent plead guilty under pressure.
In fed ct this is rare. I saw it happen once.
>
> jks. There 13 exonerations and 25 executions. We
> have several hundred on death row. It's still al
> lousy percentage.
>
> Jb: Sorry. Should've looked that up, here's it is:
>
> "The likelihood that the innocent are being executed
> was enough to compel Illinois Governor George Ryan,
> a onetime supporter of the death penalty to suspend
> executions two years ago. Simple arithmetic
> convinced him the system was broken: of 25 people
> put on death row in Illinois since 1987, 12 were
> executed, 13 were falsely accused and eventually
> freed, including Anthony Porter, a retarded man who
> came within a few days of execution for a murder he
> didn't commit. So Ryan halted a system he says was
> like flipping a coin. "It's a system that either
> works or it doesn't," says Ryan. "And if it doesn't,
> then we shouldn't have it."
Ah, thanks.
>
>
http://www.insideout.org/documentaries/dna/thelaw.asp
>
> I take it you're saying this is wrong, and it does
> seem wrong. The death penalty was reinstated in '77,
> no? Of course it's not every case where the
> possibility exists for exoneration based on DNA
> evidence, so even a 5% exoneration rate indicates a
> higher innocence rate, I would think.
>
> Jenny Brown
>
Need I say that I am opposed to executing the innocent? (Or indeed, under present circumstances, the guilty.) DNA is not the only way that the Illinois convicts were exonerated. I think a confession by the real killer is the standard way.
jks
>
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com