That said, I'd prefer the death penalty only be applied in those cases where there is no doubt as to guilt.
Alas, DNA evidence is showing that a lot of "there is no doubt" cases convicted the wrong person.
I rather wonder what would turn up if we were re-examining evidence in cases where the defendant had been executed the way we are examining it in cases where the defendant is still around to protest his innocence.
Of course, the DAs and the states & feds have good reason to *not* want this done.
Eventually, we are going to have to do something to break the exalted status of "eyewitness testimony" in the eyes of the public. DNA is showing all too clearly what psychologists have been saying for decades. It's barely reliable at the best of times.
no subject
Alas, DNA evidence is showing that a lot of "there is no doubt" cases convicted the wrong person.
I rather wonder what would turn up if we were re-examining evidence in cases where the defendant had been executed the way we are examining it in cases where the defendant is still around to protest his innocence.
Of course, the DAs and the states & feds have good reason to *not* want this done.
Eventually, we are going to have to do something to break the exalted status of "eyewitness testimony" in the eyes of the public. DNA is showing all too clearly what psychologists have been saying for decades. It's barely reliable at the best of times.