Skip to main content

View Diary: Reexamining opposition for Death Penalty: Indian Rape Case (47 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  the death penalty should be abolished, (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cedwyn, quill, sfinx, wenchacha

    because it makes you (the state is acting as your agent) a murderer as well. death by execution is classified as a homocide. let them rot in a jail cell for the rest of their lives. as i understand it (from newspaper reports), one of the alleged (they have yet to be tried) offenders is a juvenile. again, as i understand it, from newspaper reports, he wouldn't be eligible for the death penalty in india. though i have no idea what the law is for juveniles in that country, i assume jail time would be the alternative for him.

    life without parole.

    •  yup...state-sanctioned, cold-blooded murder (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dservgun, quill, Manny

      when pondering the death penalty, i think it's helpful to make it less abstract: could you flip the switch/drop the plunger yourself?  no?  then you don't support the death penalty.

      Why should death penalty be abolished?
      because it's not a deterrent to crime and we can rarely be 100% certain when it comes to guilt.

      Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

      by Cedwyn on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 07:46:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  rationale for death penalty ... (0+ / 0-)
        could you flip the switch/drop the plunger yourself
        Yes. If i ravage a women so mercilessly or mow down 20 children, why should i receive mercy from the society.

        I don't get the logic for denalty penalty to be abolished because it is not a deterrent. To me, death penalty is a point transaction and a PUNISHMENT for someone's crimes.

        In this case, there is 100% certainity of guilt. The bus in which the crime was committed has been confiscated, the bus driver and the 5 fellow passengers have been identified by the victim and her male friend. Three of them had bite marks as described by the victim. The prelim forensic report is awaited but it is expected to confirm the crime. I want the courts to decide this case and don't want to pre-judge these guys of the crime. My question is this - If the courts confirm that these 6 guys raped and murdered the victim, why should be spared of the death penalty when they didn't keep up the responsibility to society of being good citizens?

        •  because the death penalty (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          doesn't achieve anything that life w/out parole doesn't.

          i am speaking more broadly, not just of this case, but i'll retract the "rarely" and rephrase:  if we cannot be 100% certain of guilt 100% of the time, we have no business employing capital punishment at any time.

          Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

          by Cedwyn on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 08:57:35 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  hmmm ... (0+ / 0-)

            while death penalty = life w/o parole in a certain sense of putting away the perpetrator of crime away from society, he still has the ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO LIFE without having the responsibility of being civil in society ...

            100% guilt, 100% of the time: When you have multiple levels of courts as well as multiple levels of elected officials - especially in a non-idealogical environment having the ability to convert the death penalty to life without parole, we establish the 100% guilt, 100% of the time. I know that there are cases in southern states where this principle was violated but in India, they go the other way. Even 1% doubt means downgrading death penalty to life sentence. That's why India has death penalty in the books is extremely rarely used. The guy was part of the conspiracy that bombed the Indian Parliament (equivalent of Congress) was awarded the death penalty but is still in jail because the President hasn't taken a decision on his mercy plea yet ...

            •  Quality of defense? Ethnic/caste/religious bias? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              What is the quality of defense given to indigent defendants?  Both the US and India have histories of severe bias against subsets of their own population -- what are the protections available?  Is life without parole an option?

              "Politics should be the part-time profession of every citizen who would protect the rights and privileges of free people and who would preserve what is good and fruitful in our national heritage." -- Lucille Ball

              by Yamaneko2 on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 09:23:40 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  not to mention the ambitions of certain DAs (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                InfiniteThoughts, wenchacha

                who look for wins, regardless of reality.  there is just too much evidence of corruption among police and other law enforcement to justify ever killing anybody for a crime.

                Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

                by Cedwyn on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 09:33:09 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  that isn't a major concern area ... (0+ / 0-)

                  DAs are not elected in India. They don't run for higher or electoral office. On the contrary, for high profile cases, the government hires private high-expensive laywers so that they are not accussed of spending appropriately to win cases ...

              •  quality of defense is a concern area ... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                i hear reports that no lawyer wants to defend the accussed. however, the quality of defense is usually tilted in favor of the accussed in India. India doesn't have a AG office like US. The government appoints lawyers in case the accussed cannot find one. The government also appoints private (senior, expensive) lawyers to key cases without being restricted to lawyers in AG office ...

                Caste, Ethnicity and religious bias are usually favorable towards the accussed. if they come from lower castes & classes, they get a lot of NGOs to defend them on spurious grounds (not in this case though!)

                The only exception is economic strata .... if the accussed comes from lower economic strata, like in this case, they are usually shown lower levels of mercy than people from upper-middle & rich families. However, due to judicial activism and media highlighting cases where rich are treated in kids-gloves, high profile cases involving the rich in road-accidents & murders don't see leniency any more ...

                Life without parole is a twisted option. The way it works in India is that the court can give life sentence and the accussed gets to go home in 14-15 years. If the lower court gives the accussed a death penalty, 2-3 layers of court, the state government, home ministry, Prime Minister and President's office - all of them have to deny mercy petition to convert death penalty to life w/o parole. Hence, execution is extremely rare. India executed the perpetrator of the 2008 Mumbai attack recently and the execution before was in 2004 for a rapist. Prior to that, there is at least a 10 year gap. There are more than 30 folks awaiting a final decision on their death penalty in India - including the assasisins of ex-PM Rajiv Gandhi & one of the Chief Ministers Besant Singh ...

    •  A small suggestion: if we do indeed abolish (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      capital punishment, we must also re-consider our parole process.  Currently, to receive parole an inmate must confess to his crimes and express contrition and penitence.
      In several cases, this requirement resulted in people unjustly incarcerated serving years beyond their fellows simply because they refused to admit guilt.

      This also brings us to the second point.  We would do well to learn from Norway and invest in vocational, educational and psychological rehabilitation for inmates.  We have one of the largest prison populations, with one of the higher rates of recidivism.  The reason for recidivism in many cases is the inmate, who was jailed for a lack of vocational, educational, psychological skill sets, is released with the same lack of skill sets.  Worse, he is frequently a pariah, unable to find work, and is forced to associate with others in "The Life"      

    •  What is the definition of murder? Is that what the (0+ / 0-)

      state is doing when rendering the death penalty?

      It’s the Supreme Court, stupid! Followed by: It's always the Supreme Court! Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive.

      by auapplemac on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 11:15:36 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site