<!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>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></BODY></HTML>