Daily Kos

View Story | 15 comments

  •  Warner (none / 1)

    doesn't want to be known as the guy who dealt the death blow to the death penalty. That's why he hasn't done it yet. It would piss off the "let 'em fry" swing voters.

    -- war-weary.

    by peacemonger on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 04:14:12 PM PDT

    •  I wonder if Tim Kaine will (none / 1)

      He pledged he would'nt but it wasn't a strong pledge and he said his values taught him that the Death Penelty is wrong.

      Rebuild America. Obama 08!

      by dieharddemocrat on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 04:15:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  If he wants to run for pres in 08 (none / 1)

      He has got to order the test...if he executed an innocent man he's got to deal with it sooner rather than later.  If he made a mistake, he's got to own up to it, deal with it, and move on (it would be a good reason to go softer on the death penalty).

      Delaying only makes him look like a self-serving politician who isn't interested in the truth.  Does he really think he can make a run for president without disposing of this?  Does he want to wait until his opponents in the democratic primaries make a big issue out of it?

      The real John McCain..

      by RallyPoint on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 04:31:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  See below. The execution was 1992 (none / 0)

        Nearly 10 years before Warner was governor and 4 years before he even ran for any political office.

        - "You're Hells Angels, then? What chapter are you from?"
        - REVELATIONS, CHAPTER SIX.

        by Hoya90 on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 04:34:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Cannot remember where I read it (none / 0)

        Virginia does not have the DNA.  There is a lab in California that has it.  The article said that there was a question of whether the lab would even grant access to the DNA, for fear the Virginians would mishandle it, ruin it.  It was an article about the guy whose sentence was commuted (was going to be the 1000th execution).  In that person's case, the prosecution destroyed evidence - so it could not be re-tested during the appeals process.  The impression I got was the destruction was thought to be incompetence or negligence, not malice.

        Support the troops (for real)! write to any soldier

        by sberel on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 05:27:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

View Story | 15 comments