[Vision2020] DNA exoneration reaches 200; questions remain for justice system

Bruce and Jean Livingston jeanlivingston at turbonet.com
Thu Apr 26 13:01:56 PDT 2007 

Roger, that is a civilized approach, and I welcome your willingness to think 
about a difficult topic.  Of course, I will keep working on you and others 
to see if I can persuade you to my side of the fence!

Your idea would be an improvement though  -- that is, if we continued to 
instruct a jury to convict based on not having a "reasonable doubt" about 
guilt, but then raised the burden of proof at the penalty phase and 
instructed the jury not to give death unless it had "not a shadow of a 
doubt."

Bruce

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "lfalen" <lfalen at turbonet.com>
To: "Bruce and Jean Livingston" <jeanlivingston at turbonet.com>; 
<vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] DNA exoneration reaches 200;questions remain for 
justice system


> Bruce
> I am not vary comfortable with the idea of collateral damage. I do not 
> have a problem with the death penalty for Duncan and Shackleford. The two 
> guys that killed my nephew at the Hot Spring next to Crouch should have 
> had the death penalty, they did not. They will probably get out in 10 
> years or so. O. J. is a little different. While I think he is guilty as 
> hell, there is a smidgen of doubt. For that reason I would have had 
> difficultly in convicting him, let along applying the death penalty. I 
> think that the rule of "guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt" should apply. 
> Since it doen't seem to work that way I am on the fence on the death 
> penalty.
> Roger
> -----Original message-----
> From: "Bruce and Jean Livingston" jeanlivingston at turbonet.com
> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 14:07:21 -0700
> To: "lfalen" lfalen at turbonet.com, vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] DNA exoneration reaches 200;questions remain for 
> justice system
>
>> Roger, there is no question that your arguments have some appeal, in the 
>> sense that if we are to have the death penalty, there are some crimes 
>> that are so heinous that they practically "cry out for it."
>>
>> My problem with your "tinkering with the procedures" approach, in an 
>> effort to "fine tune" the system so that our administration of justice is 
>> fairer, is that efforts to eliminate systemic error that allows for the 
>> conviction of the innocent will only reduce the error rate, but not 
>> eliminate it.   It seems to me that the costs of administering the death 
>> penalty exceed the "benefit" of it, and that you also must accept as a 
>> "cost of doing business" the inevitable execution of a few innocents.
>>
>> I changed my views about the death penalty, which I once favored, after I 
>> was appointed to represent Roy Roberts, a man that I came to believe was 
>> innocent.  Sadly, I was unable to spare his life or win his release. 
>> Here is his clemency petition:
>> http://ccadp.org/clemencyroy.htm
>> Here is an article about Roy on the Northwestern University School of 
>> Law's Center on Wrongful Convictions:
>> http://www.law.northwestern.edu/depts/clinic/wrongful/Executions/Roberts_Missouri.htm
>>
>> Having gone through the wringer of failing to save an innocent man's 
>> life, I no longer accept an approach to the death penalty that amounts to 
>> "collateral damage in the form of the execution of a few innocents is 
>> acceptable."   In my opinion, having the death penalty is not worth that.
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "lfalen" <lfalen at turbonet.com>
>> To: "Ted Moffett" <starbliss at gmail.com>; "Bruce and Jean Livingston" 
>> <jeanlivingston at turbonet.com>
>> Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 12:30 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] DNA exoneration reaches 200;questions remain 
>> for justice system
>>
>>
>> >I am not sure that the death penalty should be totally abolished. Some 
>> >people like Duncan surely deserve it. Maybe it should be restricted to 
>> >just a few things. In any case due to number of people that are 
>> >convicted who are innocent, there needs to be better safe guards put in 
>> >place. In regard to the Attorney General's office, It does look like 
>> >they blew it on the Idaho Falls Cace. Although it does'nt  rise to the 
>> >same level of seriousness, they have also been hit and miss on enforcing 
>> >the Open Meeting Law. In some cases they have done what they should. in 
>> >others they have not. I will get into this more at a later date.
>> > Roger
>> > -----Original message-----
>> > From: "Ted Moffett" starbliss at gmail.com
>> > Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 02:11:16 -0700
>> > To: "Bruce and Jean Livingston" jeanlivingston at turbonet.com
>> > Subject: [Vision2020] DNA exoneration reaches 200;questions remain for 
>> > justice system
>> >
>> >> Bruce et. al.
>> >>
>> >> http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--dnaexonerations-20423apr23,0,1071686.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork
>> >>
>> >> I guess this is some kind of milestone...But not all these cases are 
>> >> death
>> >> penalty cases.  But the question is obvious:  if this many are 
>> >> exonerated by
>> >> DNA, how many on death row or imprisoned for other crimes are innocent 
>> >> who
>> >> do not have DNA available to prove or disprove their innocence?
>> >>
>> >> Likely a much larger number!
>> >>
>> >> The price we must pay for a justice system, or a justice system in 
>> >> need of
>> >> radical improvement?
>> >>
>> >> I won't even start...
>> >>
>> >> Ted Moffett
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 4/23/07, Bruce and Jean Livingston <jeanlivingston at turbonet.com> 
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >  We confronted two high profile cases  in the last couple of weeks, 
>> >> > first,
>> >> > a declaration of innocence in the Duke Lacrosse case in NC, and 
>> >> > second, the
>> >> > apparent innocence of Rauland Grube in a murder case from 
>> >> > southeastern
>> >> > Idaho, on which I posted several days ago.
>> >> >
>> >> > Now appears this series of editorials from of all places, Texas. 
>> >> > The
>> >> > Dallas Morning News editorial staff reversed its 100 year stance in 
>> >> > favor of
>> >> > the death penalty.  In so doing, it made many of the best arguments 
>> >> > for
>> >> > reconsidering our willingness to retain the death penalty.  The 
>> >> > editorial
>> >> > pieces are thoughtful and worthy of all citizens' review, especially 
>> >> > in
>> >> > states like Idaho that continue to have the death penalty.
>> >> >
>> >> >  I thought you might be interested in these recent Dallas Morning 
>> >> > News
>> >> > editorials.  The Morning News is historically one of the most 
>> >> > conservative
>> >> > major-city newspapers in the country, although it moderated somewhat 
>> >> > when
>> >> > the "liberal" competition folded.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-toy_01edi.ART.State.Edition1.43b925d.html
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-deathmonday2_16edi.ART.State.Edition1.42d305b.html
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-deathmonday1_16edi.ART.State.Edition1.42d1ffd.html
>> >> >
>> >> > The explanation about the Dallas Morning News' editorial slant is 
>> >> > from my
>> >> > sister-in-law, who resides there, reads the paper regularly, and 
>> >> > forwarded
>> >> > me the above links.
>> >> >
>> >> > Bruce Livingston
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > =======================================================
>> >> >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> >> >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> >> >               http://www.fsr.net
>> >> >          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> >> > =======================================================
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>

More information about the Vision2020 mailing list