Texas Executed Offenders

[Frisco]

There are a few death penalty threads here, but I'm thinking that this discussion might be different, as the site:

Death Row Information

has listed all Texas offenders executed since 1982.

The interesting portions of the list are:

- "offender information," for each one a link to the bio and crime report that led to him or her being assigned an execution date and then executed

- "last statement," the final words of the offender as s/he awaits lethal injection in the execution chamber, strapped to the table

- "race," the ethnicity of the offender.. I find this interesting in that this particular data is required by the State of Texas for some reason

Of note to me are the widely varying last statements. Some quite contrite, begging forgiveness from God, the victim's family, etc. Others professing innocence right up to the moment of death. Still others just thanking people who've supported them through the legal ordeals, etc. And then those who refused/declined to say a single word. .. etc.. (some "sound" drugged, as I read through the remarks.. making me wonder about requests for tranquilizers, etc).

Macabre and interesting. "Just info" as the parent site states, but still very strange to read through elements of this list of people executed.

 

[ElasticNinja]

Wow... reading that is horrible... really excrutiating.

 

[SamuraiBigEd]

Haven't had a chance to read it yet but the "Race" thing is a sore subject in Texas. According to the state there are only two ethnicities, "Hispanic" and "Non-Hispanic"! The catering to the Hispanic community is beyond ridiculouos here.

 

[ElasticNinja]

Haven't had a chance to read it yet but the "Race" thing is a sore subject in Texas. According to the state there are only two ethnicities, "Hispanic" and "Non-Hispanic"! The catering to the Hispanic community is beyond ridiculouos here.

Hispanic isnt even a race, just a vague ethnicity. Funny thing is actual Iberians are more "normal white: then "Hispanic" outside Andalusia.

 

[Frisco]

At that site I see hispanic, black and white listed as the identified "race" of the offenders.

Of course, in reality, there are black hispanics, white hispanics and asian hispanics.

It has to do with how a person identifies their "race" or ethnicity, I guess.

 

[SamuraiBigEd]

Yes, on official documents (including speeding tickets) there are two categories, ethnicity first then race and you are limited to the two choices of ethnicity.

Ethnic group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wow, didn't realize there could be only two groups looking at that definition!

 

[OutofDate1980]

There are a few death penalty threads here, but I'm thinking that this discussion might be different, as the site:

Death Row Information

has listed all Texas offenders executed since 1982.

The interesting portions of the list are:

- "offender information," for each one a link to the bio and crime report that led to him or her being assigned an execution date and then executed

- "last statement," the final words of the offender as s/he awaits lethal injection in the execution chamber, strapped to the table

- "race," the ethnicity of the offender.. I find this interesting in that this particular data is required by the State of Texas for some reason

Of note to me are the widely varying last statements. Some quite contrite, begging forgiveness from God, the victim's family, etc. Others professing innocence right up to the moment of death. Still others just thanking people who've supported them through the legal ordeals, etc. And then those who refused/declined to say a single word. .. etc.. (some "sound" drugged, as I read through the remarks.. making me wonder about requests for tranquilizers, etc).

Macabre and interesting. "Just info" as the parent site states, but still very strange to read through elements of this list of people executed.

Execution number 320 in the sourced list. The guy was eventually determined to be innocent, but not till after the execution.

The Innocence Project - New Report Shows that Cameron Todd Willingham, Executed in Texas in 2004, Was Innocent

 

[Steven58]

whoa. heavy.

 

[Frisco]

One of the "heavy" things about it is the possibility of an execution occurring which shouldn't have.

At least one has been brought out (I have my doubts about this person's "innocence," but it appears the prosecutors pushed for the conviction in ways that led up to the scrutiny).

There have been a few others around the country. One that bothered me was a gang rape murder, where they over turned the conviction because this one person's dna was not in or on the victim. I find that strange, given the many convictions of rapists who use condoms and carry the evidence away from the crime scene, and he was placed at the crime scene by all the others and other witnesses.

Anyway, the death penalty right or wrong is one aspect of of that site, but the aspect that I thought was interesting was the stuff I pointed out in the first post: the human nature of all involved, the last statements, the apologies, the denials, the descriptions of the crimes, etc.

 

[saptech]

GW Bush was a big time executioner during his years as Governor. I believe it was noted he executed the most of all the governors.

 

[AntimonyER]

Haha, first time I read your post I missed the "of". He executed most all the governors. Although if this were true I bet Micheal Moore wouldn't have even considered saying the things he did.

 

[pastafarian]

Disturbing to read! Especially knowing that at least one was probably innocent.

This is why I'm against the death penalty. I'm not of the opinion that a murderer can be rehabilitated.....ever. I also think that a murder conviction should mean you don't see freedom again, unless it's found that you were convicted in error or you figure out a way to resurrect your victim. No parole, no early release, no minimum sentence and no country club prison. Hard time... FOR LIFE! OTH, one mistaken execution isn't worth it, regardless of how many despicable miscreants are dispatched. This winds up in endless arguments with my more right wing friends who seem to be unanimous in the opinion of "kill first, don't ask any questions later and make it as painful as is possible while you're at it". What if it was your innocent friend, parent or child? Would you still feel it was a worthy sacrifice to punish the guilty?

 

[Frisco]

Well, I have a somewhat weak analogy about the death penalty. I use it despite its weakness because it still highlights something about the issue:

The death penalty is flawed, and once in a while (the question would be "just how often?") a person not guilty of the exact crime they were convicted of dies.

I'll get to the analogy in a minute, first though.. those not convicted of the murder or whatever most often were involved in the crime in some way, or another crime in the same way, or incarcerated and serving time for a manslaughter or "2nd degree murder" conviction that was not questioned. It's not right to execute if the law should have just jailed them for life, etc, but I'm just stating this so we can move away from the "innocent bystander falsely accused" syndrome we have when we see flaws in a case like some (very very few) of these.

Ok, the analogy to the death penalty and its flaws:

The state's intentional killing of an offender is similar to war. War is flawed, too. War kills the innocent as well as the enemy (some of the innocent being potential enemy). We want no killing of the innocent even if they are potential enemies, and we must struggle our best to prevent that from happening. But we can't abandon war altogether because then those who have not abandoned war will kill us, or at least force themselves on us and destroy our society, and there are people out there who want to do just that, just as there are people in the city you live in who will kill you for your wallet.

 

[OutofDate1980]

... The state's intentional killing of an offender is similar to war. War is flawed, too. War kills the innocent as well as the enemy (some of the innocent being potential enemy). We want no killing of the innocent even if they are potential enemies, and we must struggle our best to prevent that from happening. But we can't abandon war altogether because then those who have not abandoned war will kill us, or at least force themselves on us and destroy our society, and there are people out there who want to do just that, just as there are people in the city you live in who will kill you for your wallet.

Sort of collateral damage, as in Vets feel abandoned after secret drug experiments - CNN.com

I find it troubling that collateral damage is highly correlated with wealth.

 

[pastafarian]

Well, I have a somewhat weak analogy about the death penalty. I use it despite its weakness because it still highlights something about the issue:

The death penalty is flawed, and once in a while (the question would be "just how often?") a person not guilty of the exact crime they were convicted of dies.

I'll get to the analogy in a minute, first though.. those not convicted of the murder or whatever most often were involved in the crime in some way, or another crime in the same way, or incarcerated and serving time for a manslaughter or "2nd degree murder" conviction that was not questioned. It's not right to execute if the law should have just jailed them for life, etc, but I'm just stating this so we can move away from the "innocent bystander falsely accused" syndrome we have when we see flaws in a case like some (very very few) of these.

Ok, the analogy to the death penalty and its flaws:

The state's intentional killing of an offender is similar to war. War is flawed, too. War kills the innocent as well as the enemy (some of the innocent being potential enemy). We want no killing of the innocent even if they are potential enemies, and we must struggle our best to prevent that from happening. But we can't abandon war altogether because then those who have not abandoned war will kill us, or at least force themselves on us and destroy our society, and there are people out there who want to do just that, just as there are people in the city you live in who will kill you for your wallet.

We can agree on flawed! War (hopefully) happens when all other options fail. The death penalty avoids other options in the name of vengeance, cost savings and a pipe dream called deterrent. In our current system, the cost savings are false. Our justice system isn't intended to avenge victims. The deterrent argument is weak in general as the guilty don't expect to get caught, nor is life in prison a highly desirable alternative if they did. To answer the wars flawed analogy, if it were feasible to capture the enemy and innocents without killing them, I would be all for it. It isn't. With murderers, it is and it's the cost effective alternative too. It does lack the blood lust factor that so many desire, as long as it isn't someone they care about.

 

[Frisco]

I don't think that all proponents of the death penalty have the same reasoning for it. "Blood lust?" I think I've heard every argument in favor of it except for that one, with the notable exception of argument for it put forth by extremely religious people mostly in countries not in the West, and they say so.

"Revenge?" That seems to get touched on by families and other loved ones of the victim. They seem to want the murderer to die as a sort of "at least you can't go on living, of all people, now that you've murdered."

I think the proponents of capital punishment want a huge, ultimate penalty out there.

I don't know for sure, but I do think that once a convicted murderer is executed it most often does the opposite of a criminal killing on the streets: a criminal killing sets off waves of grief in the community, but an execution seems to bring closure to everyone, often even the family of the executed, not to mention that of the victims.

I don't know.. I was hoping the thread would go the way of the interest in the people's deeds and words, but as I said in the OP, a debate about the death penalty was likely.

 

[pastafarian]

I don't know.. I was hoping the thread would go the way of the interest in the people's deeds and words, but as I said in the OP, a debate about the death penalty was likely.

As long as it's a civil and rational discourse? I'm all for it!

 

[Dark Jedi]

there is no right fix for this problem. If we don't execute these people then jails get over crowded even worse. If we do execute then as its proven an innocent person dies. I guess that's why lady justice is blindfolded. In the end Texas is Texas and they don't tolerate what other states do.

 

[pastafarian]

there is no right fix for this problem. If we don't execute these people then jails get over crowded even worse. If we do execute then as its proven an innocent person dies. I guess that's why lady justice is blindfolded. In the end Texas is Texas and they don't tolerate what other states do.

Death row inmates and murderers in general make up a tiny percentage of prison populations. From what I know, it's mandatory sentencing for drug offenders that are at the root of the prison population problems. It's why we've seen hardened criminals like rapists, thieves and even murderers get early release to relieve overcrowding. All because the guys that sold nickle bags on the corner can't be released? Regardless of death row inmates, we have a huge prison problem in the US. Either we're jailing too many or we have a crime problem way out of proportion with the rest or the civilized world.

 

[Frisco]

As long as it's a civil and rational discourse? I'm all for it!

So you've changed your ways, ey?

Good on ya, pasta. I'll be keeping an eye on you.. not that I don't trust your word, but still, I've noticed out there that recovery can be a long bumpy road for some.



Meanwhile, those on death row have something all in common, I noticed, no matter whether they continued to deny their guilt or if the admitted it and apologized in the death chamber: years and years in prison, decades sometimes on death row itself, all because of the appeals process and how clogged the courts are trying to handle those appeals.

There has got to be a better way.

 

[pastafarian]

So you've changed your ways, ey?

That's I've changed my EVIL ways, BABY!

There has got to be a better way.

amen to that! Now if we could only get off our lazy butts and come up with one.....

 

[kool kat2]

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/2011/11/texas-judge-rules-against-dna-testing-for-death-row-inmate.html

Now I'm not saying this guys innocent, but if there's evidence that relates to the case I would hope that any judge would allow it.

 

[Steven58]

why can't we put convicted murderers to work as slave labor? Make them return something to the society they did such damage to?

 

[pastafarian]

why can't we put convicted murderers to work as slave labor? Make them return something to the society they did such damage to?

Hard labor still exists but from what I've read is dying out. The biggest issue? Who are you putting out of a job so that you can punish the prisoner? Making big rocks into small type labor is fine by me, but that's where the bleeding hearts butt in claiming it's excessive. I'm of the opinion that as long as the victim remains excessively dead, hard labor is far from excessive.

 

[Frisco]

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/2011/11/texas-judge-rules-against-dna-testing-for-death-row-inmate.html

Now I'm not saying this guys innocent, but if there's evidence that relates to the case I would hope that any judge would allow it.

One of my huge pet peeves about this issue is judges tossing evidence or not even allowing it. I know there are "protective" clauses in laws out there, most notably in the U.S. and State Constitutions, but it's becoming clear that those clauses are often being used to push a conviction through the system, and not to protect anybody.

I'm not an attorney, but lying witnesses (as one example) are not something that a judge should decide beforehand, when we have a jury system. DNA evidence is even disallowed in some cases.. etc.