<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2963" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Bruce,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I think that we are scarily close to being in
agreement on this depressing topic. You write "<FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>you may think it's more important to execute the heinous killer and
a few innocent people, too." <FONT face=Arial size=2>Nothing could be
further from the truth. What I would argue for is to see the death penalty
handed down ONLY in the cases such as I described. I do not believe that the DP
should ever be given in a case where the only evidence is an eye witness or "a
fingerprint and a hair." As an example, I think that it's ludicrous that Scott
Peterson was given a capital sentence, based on the understanding I was given of
the case from the sensational coverage presented on the tube. Some of the
examples given at the DPIC links that you provided were equally mind
boggling.</FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>This having been said, In cases such as Duncan's
where you have evidence far "beyond all reasonable doubt," an expedited death
is, to me, desirable. In this case we have not only a confession but eye
witnesses, extensive forensic evidence, a long, sordid criminal history and
if I'm not mistaken, DNA. Add to this his computer diaries and if a case like
this doesn't qualify for the potassium chloride express I can't
imagine any that would. Years of appeals and review in a case such as this one
is, to my mind, uncalled for and does not represent justice.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>As I wrap up this lame run down of my chaotic
thoughts on this topic, I'd like to say I'm sorry about your former client. In a
profession such as yours I imagine that this is the sort of thing that goes a
long way toward washing away whatever pleasure you receive from cases
with more benign outcomes.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>gc</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=jeanlivingston@turbonet.com
href="mailto:jeanlivingston@turbonet.com">Bruce and Jean Livingston</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=jampot@adelphia.net
href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net">g. crabtree</A> ; <A
title=vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, October 20, 2006 12:03
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Deterrence, Costs and Benefits
of Death Penalty</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Gary, </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I agree with you that harsh punishment has a deterrent effect. The
question is how many people that are not deterred by the harsh punishment of
life without parole ("LWOP") will actually be deterred by the further harsh
punishment of being executed. I agree that there must be someone,
somewhere, who might actually make the decision to murder based on the
fact that only LWOP and not death was available, but I think that the
statistical significance of the numbers of such people must be
relatively insignificant. We "normal", generally law abiding
types don't murder people primarily because it's wrong to take another's
life. Secondarily, even if people might like to kill someone if
they got extremely angry, they don't kill because they
don't want to be incarcerated for the rest of their life. I don't
think that people weigh death as opposed to life in prison, when deciding
whether to kill or not. They restrain themselves over the thought of
"harsh punishment," and I think few of us differentiate between the two.
LWOP is so harsh, as opposed to wandering around free, that I don't believe
that the additional harshness of death is a significant additional
deterrent.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I also agree that proving whether there is a deterrent effect or not must
be very difficult. Many of the deterrence studies may well be the result
of manipulating statistics to support a pre-ordained result fitting the
author's bias.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Theoretically, I understand your thought that even without a proven
deterrence effect, some killers are just so vicious and evil, that death ought
to be imposed. It is a natural reaction for many of us. You
are essentially saying that the worst of the worst deserve it. If
we are going to have a death penalty, who would argue with that? Hitler,
McVeigh, the 9-11 terrorist assassins, and those you list in your post
below would all seem to qualify.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>When you suggest that we ought to speed up the system for these "worst of
the worst" and execute them quickly, that is where I have to argue against
you, but not because I think that your desired result (speeding things up) is
necesarily wrong. If we are to have the death penalty, it ought to be
for the worst of the worst, and it ought to be implemented
quickly. However, there is an undesired consequence of implementing
policy to reach your desired result. I think your suggestion to
speed things up cannot be implemented without a systemic change that will
ensure that the innocent victims that we wrongly convict and
place on death row erroneously will be executed, along with your
more deserving, especially heinous killers. On balance, you may think
it's more important to execute the heinous killer and a few innocent
people, too. I would rather let the heinous killer rot in jail,
sequestered from the free people outside the prison, and retain a
better chance of showing that the wrongly convicted person in fact
is innocent. As I stated in my earlier post, speeding up the process of
executing people can only be done systemically, by withdrawing procedural
protections. If you decrease the procedural protections in the
appeal and habeas corpus process, then you decrease the ability to prove
innocence for those who are wrongly convicted. The cost of speeding up
the system is an increase in the likelihood of executing the already
disturbing numbers of wrongly convicted people on death row.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Some see the execution of the innocent in military terms, as "collateral
damage." I have a very conservative uncle with a military background who
sees it exactly that way. For him, executing the innocent is a "cost of
doing business" in a country with the death penalty. I can't bring
myself to that point. Setting aside the morality of the death penalty
and assuming we should have one, I would rather let people rot in jail a while
longer before execution, so that we are doing our best to provide an
opportunity to exonerate the wrongly convicted and condemned. Cutting
back on the right of habeas corpus to speed up the process has a significant
cost to society in addition to the "benefit" of exacting retribution more
quickly; it likely makes murderers of us all in the sense that we as a society
are all killers when we execute someone, and speeding the process up will make
it more likely that we execute an innocent person.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Last, the main qualification of your support for quick execution seems to
include a very restrictive additional requirement, and if that qualification
were always reliable (or even nearly so), I would have more
difficulty arguing against it. You include "confessed" in your string of
adjectives describing particularly horrible killers for whom we should speed
up the process. If confessions were always reliable, I would accept
that. In any event, I commend you for your thoughtfulness on the topic,
as it demonstrates a level of sophistication that often escapes the death
penalty debate. I have not found a good means for always discerning when
a confession is not true. There are a number of examples of "confessed"
killers, condemned to death row, who subsequently have been exonerated.
Earl Washington, from Virginia is a classic example. There's the
rub for me. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>If anyone really cares about this issue enough to read about it some
more, an excellent read is <U>Actual Innocence</U>, Barry Scheck and Peter
Neufeld's book. The authors analyze the lessons learned from the
cases in which exonerations have shown that our capital punishment, so-called
"beyond a reasonable doubt," system has serious flaws. Among the
reasons that the jury convicted someone wrongly are false
confessions. The biggest contributor to wrongful convictions, by
far, was mistaken eyewitness testimony. Erroneous
forensic lab reports, police and prosecutorial misconduct, lying "snitch"
witnesses, and bad lawyering were also common problems running through the
exoneration cases. <STRONG>False confessions occurred in 23% of the
exonerations</STRONG> that formed the basis of the <U>Actual Innocence</U>
book. Remarkably, <STRONG>mistaken eyewitness testimony occurred in
52%</STRONG> of the cases. </DIV>
<DIV>See the summary of <U>Actual innocence</U> here: <A
href="http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=6&did=141">http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=6&did=141</A>
</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The following link may also be interesting to those with an interest
beyond this lengthy post.</DIV>
<DIV><A
href="http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=412&scid=6">http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=412&scid=6</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Sorry if I am boring those who think this list ought to be limited to
more local concerns. I believed in the death penalty, until
appointed in 1989 to represent a man that I came to believe was innocent,
notwithstanding my initial skepticism of his tale, not unlike Morgan
Freeman's response to Tim Robbins in the great movie, the Shawshenk
Redemption, that "sure, everone's innocent in here [in prison]." Having
to tell my client that we had finally lost and that he was going to be
executed in less than an hour, despite my belief in his innocence is not
something that I would wish on anyone. And you know what? It was a
lot worse for him.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Bruce Livingston</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=jampot@adelphia.net href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net">g.
crabtree</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A
title=jeanlivingston@turbonet.com
href="mailto:jeanlivingston@turbonet.com">Bruce and Jean Livingston</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, October 20, 2006 7:26
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea
deal</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Bruce, I am not currently arguing the deterrent
effect of the death penalty with Joe. I am simply trying to figure
where he comes by the notion that "A long life in prison is
far worse than a short death" considering the seeming evidence to the
contrary. Your input and expertise on this topic is much
appreciated.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>As I have said before on this forum, I find it
difficult to believe that no angry or disgruntled potential killer has been
given pause in his actions by the thought of harsh punishment. I find
it hard to envision the method by which you could prove this type of
negative. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Even if it were determined beyond all shadow of
a doubt that there was no deterrent effect in the death penalty I would
still be in favor of capital punishment for a very select few, Duncan being
a prime example. Confessed, remorseless, multiple murdering deviants such as
him (along with Malvo, Creech, Ridgeway, Rader, etc.) should be put down as
expeditiously as possible for, among other reasons, the danger
they present to prison guards and fellow prisoners to say nothing of the
general population, should they manage to get loose. If the argument is
brought up that it's cheaper to sentence these offenders to LWOP, I would
suggest that perhaps the appeal and review process should be streamlined to
hasten these vermin's passing. When wild animals wantonly kill a human we do
not lock them up for the rest of their natural lives. We destroy them as
quickly and humanely as possible. I do not believe that these types of
killers should be shown any greater courtesy.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>gc</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=jeanlivingston@turbonet.com
href="mailto:jeanlivingston@turbonet.com">Bruce and Jean Livingston</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=jampot@adelphia.net
href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net">g. crabtree</A> ; <A
title=joekc@adelphia.net href="mailto:joekc@adelphia.net">Joe Campbell</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, October 19, 2006 6:04
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea
deal</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Funny that I crossed in the mail with Gary on this one.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Let me say that I do not disagree with Mr. Sharp on the huge number
of folks, proportionately, who get sentenced to death and choose life in
prison over death. I think that is an accurate statement, regardless
of whether the real numbers may be 99 % or 95 %. I have known a
number of convicted murderers who instructed their attorneys not to appeal
the death sentence, but then reconsidered and sought to avoid the death
sentence and not just the guilty verdict. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>However, I would question the logic that concludes that because
people fear death and would choose LWOP over execution, (if they could),
that therefore the death penalty has a significant deterrent effect.
For the most part, I think that those thoughts about preferring LWOP to
execution only occur after the person has been caught. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Bruce Livingston</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=jampot@adelphia.net href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net">g.
crabtree</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=joekc@adelphia.net
href="mailto:joekc@adelphia.net">Joe Campbell</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, October 19, 2006
5:46 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] Duncan
plea deal</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Joe, thank you for the clarification. I
will readily concede that the single statistic does not in and of itself
totally support the conclusion. I obviously excerpted the quote from a
larger work and, perhaps, should have excised the conclusion or included
the entire argument. Either way, to throw Mr. Sharp under the bus as
a charlatan because of my imprecision is to do him a serious
disservice. A cursory look at his bio/CV reveals that he is indeed
extremely knowledgeable in his field. This combined with the fact that
you do not dispute the pertinent statistic causes me to disregard
your charge on the appeal to authority fallacy.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Mr. Sharp's scholarship and my lack of
logical thinking aside, lets return to your original premise "A
long life in prison is far worse than a short death." You've done a
masterful job of tap dancing on my meager reasons for doubting your
claim. Now how about you take on the more difficult task of providing
some evidence to support why it is that you believe that 98.8% of
inmates sentenced to death fight to remain alive if your contention is
correct? What is it that you base your assertion
on?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>gc</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>From: "Joe Campbell" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:joekc@adelphia.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>joekc@adelphia.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>To: "g. crabtree" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>jampot@adelphia.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Cc: "Pat Kraut" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:pkraut@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>pkraut@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>>;
"vision2020" <</FONT><A href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT
face=Arial size=2>vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 9:03
AM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea
deal</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><BR><FONT size=2></FONT></FONT></DIV><FONT
face=Arial size=2>> Dear Gary,<BR>> <BR>> Let me try to make
the point more clearly.<BR>> <BR>> Your "expert" said: "Of the
7300 inmates sentenced to death since 1973, 85, <BR>> or 1.2% have
waived remaining appeals and been executed. 98.8% have not <BR>>
waived appeals. The evidence is overwhelming that murderers would rather
<BR>> live on death row than die."<BR>> <BR>> Here is the
argument:<BR>> 1. 98.8% of inmates sentenced to death since 1973 have
not waived appeals.<BR>> 2. Therefore, murderers would rather live on
death row than die.<BR>> <BR>> How exactly does (1) support (2)?
This is an invalid argument since conclusion (2) makes speculative
claims about the will to live of murderers whereas premise (1) merely
reports the percentage of folks who have and have not waved appeals.
<BR>> <BR>> The content of the conclusion is substantially
different from the content of the premise. No social scientist worth his
salt would be so bold as to draw such a speculative conclusion based on
such unrelated "facts." Your "expert" is no expert at all. Thus, you are
guilty of the fallacy of appeal to authority.<BR>> <BR>> Does this
make sense now?<BR>> <BR>> --<BR>> Joe Campbell<BR>>
<BR>> ---- "g. crabtree" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>jampot@adelphia.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>> wrote:
<BR>> <BR>> =============<BR>> Well so much for the
reasoned response. What I'm not finding in the usual <BR>>
reply is anything to support your original contention. You seem to
object to <BR>> any facts presented with no rational explanation. You
style yourself an <BR>> expert and then present no expertise. You
bluster and blather and attempt to <BR>> shift the discussion to
different ground presumably because you find it <BR>> difficult,
perhaps impossible to make your case. I guess I'll just have to <BR>>
assume that you have nothing to back up your original assertion and that
<BR>> this is the very best you can do. How surprising. I guess it's
time to let <BR>> this sorry topic die. (after your disjointed,
wounded, and yet strangely <BR>> self congratulatory, reply of
course.)<BR>> <BR>> gc<BR>> From: "Joe Campbell" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:joekc@adelphia.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>joekc@adelphia.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>><BR>>
To: "g. crabtree" <</FONT><A href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net"><FONT
face=Arial size=2>jampot@adelphia.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>> Cc: "Pat Kraut" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:pkraut@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>pkraut@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>>;
"vision2020" <</FONT><A href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT
face=Arial size=2>vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 4:21 PM<BR>>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea deal<BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
Thank you, Locksmith Crabtree! The recent cold has been getting me down,
so <BR>> I much appreciate the large dose of hot air coming from your
direction!<BR>> <BR>> I did not dispute the "facts" noted by your
"expert." What I disputed was <BR>> his opinionated conclusion and
the suggestion that it followed from the <BR>> "facts."<BR>>
<BR>> Your "expert" said: "Of the 7300 inmates sentenced to death
since 1973, 85, <BR>> or 1.2% have waived remaining appeals and been
executed. 98.8% have not <BR>> waived appeals. The evidence is
overwhelming that murderers would rather <BR>> live on death row than
die."<BR>> <BR>> The facts do not support the conclusion; the
inference is hogwash. Believe <BR>> me, for I'm an expert! As you
noted, I teach logic in my day job! You seem <BR>> to be a bit
selective in who you choose to lable "expert," though, so it is <BR>>
doubtful that this will impress you. (The key factor appears to be that
the <BR>> "expert" happens to agree with you.)<BR>> <BR>>
Suppose I say that (1) Mike Rogers claims that Larry Craig cheats on his
<BR>> wife and add that (2) Mike Rodges is an expert who supports his
views with <BR>> "facts." Can I pass this off as evidence and
argument, too?<BR>> <BR>> You need to tell me how it is that your
"expert" gets to his conclusion from <BR>> the scant facts that
you've presented. If you can do this, his expertise <BR>> won't
matter, for I know a good argument when I see it. Moreover, you'll
<BR>> have convinced me that your view IS supported by facts and
inference. As it <BR>> is it appears to be based on the false
assumption that all of our problems <BR>> will go away once we start
killing more people.<BR>> <BR>> --<BR>> Joe Campbell<BR>>
<BR>> ---- "g. crabtree" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>jampot@adelphia.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>>
wrote:<BR>> <BR>> =============<BR>> Professor Campbell, let me
see if I understand you correctly. You claim that <BR>> I have
committed the logical fallacy of appeal to authority and then provide
<BR>> nothing to backup your assertion. I would think that to make
your charge <BR>> stick you would have to A. Provide some evidence
that Mr.Sharp is not <BR>> knowledgeable on the topic being
discussed or B. (and more importantly) <BR>> that the
statistics he cites are in error, Or C. That I am misapplying Mr.
<BR>> Sharp's expertise or statistics. Quoting an person
knowledgeable in the <BR>> field who is referencing verifiable
statistics is NOT a logical fallacy. <BR>> (You actually teach logic?
As your "day job?") It would seem that you've <BR>> achieved the
enlightened state of "I'm right and facts be damned." With
<BR>> that in mind, I guess I would enjoy seeing what you can come up
with by way <BR>> of "neat quotes in favor of your position." I would
hope that they might <BR>> contain a scrap of fact rather then the
usual emotion and fallacious <BR>> statement that has been
characteristic of your previous responses. What <BR>> empirical data
or statistic can you provide to support your assertion that <BR>> "A
long life in prison is far worse than a short death?" What pearl of
<BR>> reason will you come up with to counter the pesky fact (in bold
below) that, <BR>> statistically, murderers prefer to be behind bars
rather then answering to <BR>> their Maker? I would have thought that
as man who pridefully proclaims "I <BR>> am an expert about
KNOWLEDGE." you should surely be able to set me straight <BR>> in
short order. Instead all I'm seeing is fallacy followed by
mistake. I <BR>> look forward to a reasoned response. Baring that, I
guess I'll have to <BR>> settle for your usual reply.<BR>>
<BR>> gc<BR>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> From: "Joe
Campbell" <</FONT><A href="mailto:joekc@adelphia.net"><FONT
face=Arial size=2>joekc@adelphia.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>> To: "g. crabtree" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>jampot@adelphia.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>> Cc: "Pat Kraut" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:pkraut@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>pkraut@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>>;
"vision2020" <</FONT><A href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT
face=Arial size=2>vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 8:12 PM<BR>>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea deal<BR>> <BR>> <BR>>>
Sorry for not responding to your wonderful example of an appeal to
<BR>>> authority earlier, Gary, but I've been busy with my day
job.<BR>>><BR>>> Here is my response: Your comments below
commit the fallacy of appeal to <BR>>> authority. Do you really
think that I can't find some neat quotes on the <BR>>> web in
favor of my position?<BR>>><BR>>> --<BR>>> Joe
Campbell<BR>>><BR>>> ---- "g. crabtree" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>jampot@adelphia.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>>
wrote:<BR>>><BR>>> =============<BR>>> Actually Joe,
if by empirical you meant "derived from or guided by <BR>>>
experience or observation" I would have no choice but to disagree. I
would <BR>>> think that just about everyone who has given even the
most fleeting <BR>>> attention to the news for the last few years
could cite five or more <BR>>> instances of murderers fighting to
avoid the death penalty for every one <BR>>> that embraces that
option. According to the folks at DPINFO.COM (death <BR>>> penalty
information) what appears to be an unbiased clearinghouse for this
<BR>>> type of information.<BR>>><BR>>> "At every
level of the criminal justice process, virtually all criminals
<BR>>> do everything they can to lessen possible
punishments. I estimate that <BR>>> less than 1% of all
convicted capital murderers request a death sentence <BR>>> in the
punishment phase of their trial. The apprehended criminals' desire
<BR>>> for lesser punishments is overwhelming and
unchallenged.<BR>>><BR>>>Of the 7300 inmates sentenced to
death since 1973, 85, or 1.2% have waived <BR>>>remaining appeals
and been executed. 98.8% have not waived appeals. The
<BR>>>evidence is overwhelming that murderers would rather live on
death row than <BR>>>die. Why? The survival effect --
life is preferred over death and death <BR>>>is feared more than
life. Even on death row, that is the rule." <BR>>>Dudley
Sharp, Resource Director, Justice For All<BR>>><BR>>> With
this in mind, I would contend that your assertion that "It is not as
<BR>>> if your view has any more empirical support than mine!" is,
once again, <BR>>> wrong.<BR>>><BR>>>
gc<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> ----- Original Message -----
<BR>>> From: "Joe Campbell" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:joekc@adelphia.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>joekc@adelphia.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>>> To: "g. crabtree" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>jampot@adelphia.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>>> Cc: "Pat Kraut" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:pkraut@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>pkraut@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>>;
"vision2020" <</FONT><A href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT
face=Arial size=2>vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>>> Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 7:50
AM<BR>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea
deal<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>>>
Gary,<BR>>>><BR>>>> It is not as if your view has any
more empirical support than mine!<BR>>>><BR>>>>
--<BR>>>> Joe Campbell<BR>>>><BR>>>> ---- "g.
crabtree" <</FONT><A href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net"><FONT
face=Arial size=2>jampot@adelphia.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>> wrote:<BR>>>><BR>>>>
=============<BR>>>> Reason #3: A long life in prison is far
worse than a short death.<BR>>>><BR>>>> If this is
truly the case, why do you suppose so many vermin such as
<BR>>>> Duncan<BR>>>> prefer/fight for the life
sentence? For the most part this, is true of <BR>>>>
all<BR>>>> convicted killers. What do you base your contention
on? I can't imagine <BR>>>> that<BR>>>> it's even how
you, personally, would feel should you ever be in a
similar<BR>>>> circumstance. (not that you would, of course)
This "long life in prison <BR>>>> is<BR>>>> worse than
death." mantra seems to be bandied about as a truism
with<BR>>>> precious little supporting evidence. In fact, most
evidence points the <BR>>>> other<BR>>>>
way.<BR>>>><BR>>>> gc<BR>>>> From: "Joe
Campbell" <</FONT><A href="mailto:joekc@adelphia.net"><FONT
face=Arial size=2>joekc@adelphia.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>>>> To: "Pat Kraut" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:pkraut@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>pkraut@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>>>> Cc: "vision2020" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>>>> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 6:33
AM<BR>>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea
deal<BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>>>
Pat,<BR>>>>><BR>>>>> Unfortunately, the fact is
that you and I will pay more if he is<BR>>>>> (eventually)
put to death. Yet another reason not to have the
death<BR>>>>>
penalty.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>> Reason #3: .A long life
in prison is far worse than a short
death<BR>>>>><BR>>>>> --<BR>>>>> Joe
Campbell<BR>>>>><BR>>>>> ---- Pat Kraut
<</FONT><A href="mailto:pkraut@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>pkraut@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>>
wrote:<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>
=============<BR>>>>> But why do I have to pay for him to
continue to have life in any
form?<BR>>>>><BR>>>>><BR>>>>><BR>>>>><BR>>>>>
If we do discover a complete theory..of everything...we shall
all,<BR>>>>> philosophers, scientists and just ordinary
people,<BR>>>>> be able to take part in the discussion of
why it is that we and the<BR>>>>>
universe<BR>>>>> exist if we find the answer to
that,<BR>>>>> it would be the ultimate triumph of human
reason...for then we would <BR>>>>> know<BR>>>>>
the mind of God.<BR>>>>> Stephen Hawking<BR>>>>>
----- Original Message ----- <BR>>>>> From: <</FONT><A
href="mailto:whayman@adelphia.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>whayman@adelphia.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>>>>> To: "Andreas Schou" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:ophite@gmail.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>ophite@gmail.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>>>>> Cc: <</FONT><A
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>>>>> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 3:09
PM<BR>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea
deal<BR>>>>><BR>>>>><BR>>>>> Hello
all,<BR>>>>><BR>>>>> I would agree with anyone
that Duncan tests the limits much more than <BR>>>>>
even<BR>>>>> more than Malvo in the DC area. What Duncan
apparently did lies outside<BR>>>>> the<BR>>>>>
human scope of sympathy. But even within this absolutely and
<BR>>>>> disgustingly<BR>>>>> twisted
psychopathic scenario, I still cannot advocate a penalty of
<BR>>>>> death<BR>>>>> for anyone. Duncan
included.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>> Killing, as we all
know, brings back no one. The argument of the death<BR>>>>>
penalty as resolution and closure I find closer to vengeance than
<BR>>>>> justice.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>
Please don't take me wrong; I don't think rehab etc. is the issue in
<BR>>>>> this<BR>>>>> case. I do hope that the
rest of his life is spent anonymously and <BR>>>>>
ignobly<BR>>>>>
incarcerated.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>> Warren
Hayman<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>
=======================================================<BR>>>>>
List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>>>>>
serving the communities of the Palouse since
1994.<BR>>>>>
</FONT><A href="http://www.fsr.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>http://www.fsr.net</FONT></A><BR><FONT face=Arial
size=2>>>>>
</FONT><A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><BR><FONT face=Arial
size=2>>>>>
=======================================================<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>
=======================================================<BR>>>>>
List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>>>>>
serving the communities of the Palouse since
1994.<BR>>>>>
</FONT><A href="http://www.fsr.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>http://www.fsr.net</FONT></A><BR><FONT face=Arial
size=2>>>>>
</FONT><A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><BR><FONT face=Arial
size=2>>>>>
=======================================================<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>
=======================================================<BR>>>>>
List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>>>>>
serving the communities of the Palouse since
1994.<BR>>>>>
</FONT><A href="http://www.fsr.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>http://www.fsr.net</FONT></A><BR><FONT face=Arial
size=2>>>>>
</FONT><A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><BR><FONT face=Arial
size=2>>>>>
=======================================================<BR>>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>><BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> <BR>></FONT>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet, <BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<BR>
http://www.fsr.net
<BR>
mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<BR>=======================================================</BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>