<DIV>Bruce and Roger,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The Death Penalty I think is a grave societal ill, but we cannot eliminate it from US society at this point. It would be a worthy long term goal. However, our system of implementing the death penalty does, however, need a massive overhauling. The current system:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1) Often kills the wrong guy</DIV> <DIV>2) Is not uniform</DIV> <DIV>3) Does not provide adequate defense lawyers for impoverished defendants</DIV> <DIV>4) Takes too long to implement</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Best,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Donovan</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>See, there are too many<BR><BR><B><I>Bruce and Jean Livingston <jeanlivingston@turbonet.com></I></B> wrote:</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Roger, that is a civilized
approach, and I welcome your willingness to think <BR>about a difficult topic. Of course, I will keep working on you and others <BR>to see if I can persuade you to my side of the fence!<BR><BR>Your idea would be an improvement though -- that is, if we continued to <BR>instruct a jury to convict based on not having a "reasonable doubt" about <BR>guilt, but then raised the burden of proof at the penalty phase and <BR>instructed the jury not to give death unless it had "not a shadow of a <BR>doubt."<BR><BR>Bruce<BR><BR>----- Original Message ----- <BR>From: "lfalen" <LFALEN@TURBONET.COM><BR>To: "Bruce and Jean Livingston" <JEANLIVINGSTON@TURBONET.COM>; <BR><VISION2020@MOSCOW.COM><BR>Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 12:35 PM<BR>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] DNA exoneration reaches 200;questions remain for <BR>justice system<BR><BR><BR>> Bruce<BR>> I am not vary comfortable with the idea of collateral damage. I do not <BR>> have a problem with the death penalty for Duncan
and Shackleford. The two <BR>> guys that killed my nephew at the Hot Spring next to Crouch should have <BR>> had the death penalty, they did not. They will probably get out in 10 <BR>> years or so. O. J. is a little different. While I think he is guilty as <BR>> hell, there is a smidgen of doubt. For that reason I would have had <BR>> difficultly in convicting him, let along applying the death penalty. I <BR>> think that the rule of "guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt" should apply. <BR>> Since it doen't seem to work that way I am on the fence on the death <BR>> penalty.<BR>> Roger<BR>> -----Original message-----<BR>> From: "Bruce and Jean Livingston" jeanlivingston@turbonet.com<BR>> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 14:07:21 -0700<BR>> To: "lfalen" lfalen@turbonet.com, vision2020@moscow.com<BR>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] DNA exoneration reaches 200;questions remain for <BR>> justice system<BR>><BR>>> Roger, there is no question
that your arguments have some appeal, in the <BR>>> sense that if we are to have the death penalty, there are some crimes <BR>>> that are so heinous that they practically "cry out for it."<BR>>><BR>>> My problem with your "tinkering with the procedures" approach, in an <BR>>> effort to "fine tune" the system so that our administration of justice is <BR>>> fairer, is that efforts to eliminate systemic error that allows for the <BR>>> conviction of the innocent will only reduce the error rate, but not <BR>>> eliminate it. It seems to me that the costs of administering the death <BR>>> penalty exceed the "benefit" of it, and that you also must accept as a <BR>>> "cost of doing business" the inevitable execution of a few innocents.<BR>>><BR>>> I changed my views about the death penalty, which I once favored, after I <BR>>> was appointed to represent Roy Roberts, a man that I came to believe was
<BR>>> innocent. Sadly, I was unable to spare his life or win his release. <BR>>> Here is his clemency petition:<BR>>> http://ccadp.org/clemencyroy.htm<BR>>> Here is an article about Roy on the Northwestern University School of <BR>>> Law's Center on Wrongful Convictions:<BR>>> http://www.law.northwestern.edu/depts/clinic/wrongful/Executions/Roberts_Missouri.htm<BR>>><BR>>> Having gone through the wringer of failing to save an innocent man's <BR>>> life, I no longer accept an approach to the death penalty that amounts to <BR>>> "collateral damage in the form of the execution of a few innocents is <BR>>> acceptable." In my opinion, having the death penalty is not worth that.<BR>>><BR>>> Bruce<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>>> From: "lfalen" <LFALEN@TURBONET.COM><BR>>> To: "Ted Moffett" <STARBLISS@GMAIL.COM>; "Bruce and Jean Livingston"
<BR>>> <JEANLIVINGSTON@TURBONET.COM><BR>>> Cc: <VISION2020@MOSCOW.COM><BR>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 12:30 PM<BR>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] DNA exoneration reaches 200;questions remain <BR>>> for justice system<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> >I am not sure that the death penalty should be totally abolished. Some <BR>>> >people like Duncan surely deserve it. Maybe it should be restricted to <BR>>> >just a few things. In any case due to number of people that are <BR>>> >convicted who are innocent, there needs to be better safe guards put in <BR>>> >place. In regard to the Attorney General's office, It does look like <BR>>> >they blew it on the Idaho Falls Cace. Although it does'nt rise to the <BR>>> >same level of seriousness, they have also been hit and miss on enforcing <BR>>> >the Open Meeting Law. In some cases they have done what they should. in <BR>>>
>others they have not. I will get into this more at a later date.<BR>>> > Roger<BR>>> > -----Original message-----<BR>>> > From: "Ted Moffett" starbliss@gmail.com<BR>>> > Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 02:11:16 -0700<BR>>> > To: "Bruce and Jean Livingston" jeanlivingston@turbonet.com<BR>>> > Subject: [Vision2020] DNA exoneration reaches 200;questions remain for <BR>>> > justice system<BR>>> ><BR>>> >> Bruce et. al.<BR>>> >><BR>>> >> http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--dnaexonerations-20423apr23,0,1071686.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork<BR>>> >><BR>>> >> I guess this is some kind of milestone...But not all these cases are <BR>>> >> death<BR>>> >> penalty cases. But the question is obvious: if this many are <BR>>> >> exonerated by<BR>>> >> DNA, how many on death row or imprisoned for
other crimes are innocent <BR>>> >> who<BR>>> >> do not have DNA available to prove or disprove their innocence?<BR>>> >><BR>>> >> Likely a much larger number!<BR>>> >><BR>>> >> The price we must pay for a justice system, or a justice system in <BR>>> >> need of<BR>>> >> radical improvement?<BR>>> >><BR>>> >> I won't even start...<BR>>> >><BR>>> >> Ted Moffett<BR>>> >><BR>>> >><BR>>> >> On 4/23/07, Bruce and Jean Livingston <JEANLIVINGSTON@TURBONET.COM><BR>>> >> wrote:<BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> > We confronted two high profile cases in the last couple of weeks, <BR>>> >> > first,<BR>>> >> > a declaration of innocence in the Duke Lacrosse case in NC, and <BR>>> >> > second, the<BR>>> >> > apparent
innocence of Rauland Grube in a murder case from <BR>>> >> > southeastern<BR>>> >> > Idaho, on which I posted several days ago.<BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> > Now appears this series of editorials from of all places, Texas. <BR>>> >> > The<BR>>> >> > Dallas Morning News editorial staff reversed its 100 year stance in <BR>>> >> > favor of<BR>>> >> > the death penalty. In so doing, it made many of the best arguments <BR>>> >> > for<BR>>> >> > reconsidering our willingness to retain the death penalty. The <BR>>> >> > editorial<BR>>> >> > pieces are thoughtful and worthy of all citizens' review, especially <BR>>> >> > in<BR>>> >> > states like Idaho that continue to have the death penalty.<BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> > I thought you might be interested in
these recent Dallas Morning <BR>>> >> > News<BR>>> >> > editorials. The Morning News is historically one of the most <BR>>> >> > conservative<BR>>> >> > major-city newspapers in the country, although it moderated somewhat <BR>>> >> > when<BR>>> >> > the "liberal" competition folded.<BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> > http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-toy_01edi.ART.State.Edition1.43b925d.html<BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> > http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-deathmonday2_16edi.ART.State.Edition1.42d305b.html<BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >>
><BR>>> >> > http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-deathmonday1_16edi.ART.State.Edition1.42d1ffd.html<BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> > The explanation about the Dallas Morning News' editorial slant is <BR>>> >> > from my<BR>>> >> > sister-in-law, who resides there, reads the paper regularly, and <BR>>> >> > forwarded<BR>>> >> > me the above links.<BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> > Bruce Livingston<BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >> > =======================================================<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>>>
>> > =======================================================<BR>>> >> ><BR>>> >><BR>>> >><BR>>> ><BR>>><BR>> <BR><BR><BR>=======================================================<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>=======================================================<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><p> 
<hr size=1>Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?<br> Check out
<a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48245/*http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html;_ylc=X3oDMTE1YW1jcXJ2BF9TAzk3MTA3MDc2BHNlYwNtYWlsdGFncwRzbGsDbmV3LWNhcnM-">new cars at Yahoo! Autos.</a>