Liberals promote racism in America.

[wow]

Compare this to OJ's trial.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080327/ap_on_re_us/mumia_abu_jamal

Court: Mumia deserves new hearing

By KATHY MATHESON, Associated Press Writer 29 minutes ago

PHILADELPHIA - A federal appeals court on Thursday said former Black Panther Mumia Abu-Jamal cannot be executed for murdering a Philadelphia police officer without a new penalty hearing.

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Abu-Jamal's conviction, but said he should get a new sentencing hearing because of flawed jury instructions. If prosecutors don't want to give him a new death penalty hearing, Abu-Jamal would be sentenced automatically to life in prison.

Prosecutors are weighing their options, Assistant District Attorney Hugh Burns Jr. said Thursday.

Abu-Jamal's lead attorney, Robert R. Bryan, said he was glad the court did not uphold the death sentence, and said he wants a new trial.

"I've never seen a case as permeated and riddled with racism as this one," Bryan said Thursday. "I want a new trial and I want him free. His conviction was a travesty of justice."

Abu-Jamal, 53, once a radio reporter, has attracted a legion of artists and activists to his cause in a quarter-century on death row. A Philadelphia jury convicted him in 1982 of killing Officer Daniel Faulkner, 25, after the patrolman pulled over Abu-Jamal's brother in an overnight traffic stop.

He had appealed, arguing that racism by the judge and prosecutors corrupted his conviction at the hands of a mostly white jury. Prosecutors, meanwhile, had appealed a federal judge's 2001 decision to grant Abu-Jamal a new sentencing hearing because of the jury instructions.

Hundreds of people protested outside the federal building in Philadelphia where arguments were heard in May and an overflow crowd — including legal scholars, students, lawyers, the policeman's widow and Abu-Jamal's brother — filled the courtroom. Abu-Jamal's writings and taped speeches on the justice system have made him a popular figure among activists who believe he was the victim of racism. Abu-Jamal is black; Faulkner was white.

The flaw in the jury instructions related to whether jurors understood how to weigh mitigating circumstances that might keep Abu-Jamal off death row. Under the law, jurors did not have to unanimously agree on a mitigating circumstance.

"The jury instructions and the verdict form created a reasonable likelihood that the jury believed it was precluded from finding a mitigating circumstance that had not been unanimously agreed upon," the appeals court wrote.

Arguments before the 3rd Circuit focused on several constitutional issues, including whether prosecutors improperly eliminated black jurors.

Ten whites and two blacks served on the jury. Prosecutors struck 10 blacks and five whites from the pool, while accepting four blacks and 20 whites, according to Bryan, who argued that prosecutors of the day fostered "a culture of discrimination."

Burns argued in court that Abu-Jamal was raising issues on appeal that he had not raised during a lengthy 1995 review of the case.

The officer's widow, Maureen Faulkner, has kept her husband's memory alive over the years, and recently co-wrote a book about the case. The book, "Murdered by Mumia: A Life Sentence of Loss, Pain and Injustice," written with radio talk-show host Michael Smerconish, came out in December.

[Peter1469]

I was pro-death penalty most of my adult life.  I have changed this opinion in the last couple of years.  First, I think that any society has the right to decide that some crimes merit capital punishment.  In the US, however, the death penalty is unfairly applied; therefore I would prefer that the US chooses to not employ capital punishment (except for treason and spying.)

[wow]

I was pro-death penalty most of my adult life.  I have changed this opinion in the last couple of years.  First, I think that any society has the right to decide that some crimes merit capital punishment.  In the US, however, the death penalty is unfairly applied; therefore I would prefer that the US chooses to not employ capital punishment (except for treason and spying.)

-I supported the death penalty most of my life also, then I opposed it.
-Now, I support it after looking into the death penalty in my own state.
Some of these people are just evil and are a threat to another human being at all times.
-Why should prison guards be subject to this risk to their lives?
-The issue of mental illness is a non-factor in my belief.
-How can the issue of wrongly sentencing someone to death be a legitimate issue, when there are hundreds of Americans wrongly convicted daily in this country?
Thoughts?

[they call me MR. GRUMPY god damn it!]

I was pro-death penalty most of my adult life.  I have changed this opinion in the last couple of years.  First, I think that any society has the right to decide that some crimes merit capital punishment.  In the US, however, the death penalty is unfairly applied; therefore I would prefer that the US chooses to not employ capital punishment (except for treason and spying.)

what does this mean??

[Mr. Dirlewanger]

I was pro-death penalty most of my adult life.  I have changed this opinion in the last couple of years.  First, I think that any society has the right to decide that some crimes merit capital punishment.  In the US, however, the death penalty is unfairly applied; therefore I would prefer that the US chooses to not employ capital punishment (except for treason and spying.)

what does this mean??

Hmmm now I'm a little curious too. Do you believe that it has a disproportionate effect on Blacks? If so,  do you take into account the fact that Blacks commit a disproportionate share of violent crime in the US?

What has bothered me over the years are these stories about guys being exonerated after many years in prison. That's bad enough but what if the state had killed him?

[spunkloaf]

You know, I really don't care about the death penalty anymore.  There's plenty of killing happening elsewhere, it's almost redundant to waste energy worrying about how our country handles it's most offensive criminals.

Personally I think it should be left up to the victim's family to decide, but that could get really ugly.

Mr. D, don't ever bring up racism again after that little comment.

[Mr. Dirlewanger]

You know, I really don't care about the death penalty anymore.  There's plenty of killing happening elsewhere, it's almost redundant to waste energy worrying about how our country handles it's most offensive criminals.

Personally I think it should be left up to the victim's family to decide, but that could get really ugly.

Mr. D, don't ever bring up racism again after that little comment.

What comment was that? You don't think Black men commit a disproportionate share of violent crime? I'm surprised that an obviously true statement could provoke such an ideological and irrational response from a "free" thinker.

[wow]

I was pro-death penalty most of my adult life.  I have changed this opinion in the last couple of years.  First, I think that any society has the right to decide that some crimes merit capital punishment.  In the US, however, the death penalty is unfairly applied; therefore I would prefer that the US chooses to not employ capital punishment (except for treason and spying.)

what does this mean??

Hmmm now I'm a little curious too. Do you believe that it has a disproportionate effect on Blacks? If so,  do you take into account the fact that Blacks commit a disproportionate share of violent crime in the US?

What has bothered me over the years are these stories about guys being exonerated after many years in prison. That's bad enough but what if the state had killed him?

I'm not defending Peter here, but it can mean several things.
Women, people sentenced under the age of 30, the so called "Mentally ill", drug related crimes, etc....
There is no perfection in any legal system, including non-death penalty cases.

[pittypat65]

I am against the death penalty. I do believe that liberals promote racism in this country. 

[Peter1469]

I am not interested in a disproportionate effect on blacks, per se- of course they commit a disproportionate amount of violent crime.  What I mean by unfair: if you are “scary” or “undesirable to the jury, for whatever reason there is a much higher chance that you would get the death penalty than if you are attractive or sympatric to the jury.  That creates unfairness to the application of the death penalty- there is a floating meaning to the term “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”  OJ was loved; therefore reasonable doubt was a lot higher standard that it is for a typical shit-bird murderer.  (Of course this applies to all criminal trials, but I am focused on the ultimate sentence.)

As a side issue, general deterrence (deterrence of others who may commit the same crime) does not work in our system because any execution takes place too long after the crime. 

This is evidence of the unfairness in the system, supplied by Mr. D: “What has bothered me over the years are these stories about guys being exonerated after many years in prison. That's bad enough but what if the state had killed him?”


And for a more persuasive argument remember in the Lord of the Rings when Frodo tells Gandalf that he wished Bilbo would have killed Golem when he had the chance.  Gandalf tells Frodo that people who deserve to die live, and people who deserve to live die.  Unless you can give those that deserve to live their lives back, don’t be so quick to take the lives of those who deserve to die. 

[spunkloaf]

I am against the death penalty. I do believe that liberals promote racism in this country. 

I think it's funny how you end such a negative statement with a smiley, like it's supposed to lighten people's spirits about what you said.

"I think I'll kill myself today. "

Pitty, you are a sweet person, but that statement is entirely false.  I am a liberal/lefty/independent (or whatever), and I get along fine with other races.  Almost everybody I've ever met or know about that has similar political and moral ideals is largely open-minded to other races, and...well, EVERYBODY.  Liberals don't like to pick on people at all, that's why we're LIBERAL.  Liberals don't call people "whiney" or "lazy" or accuse people of belonging to "generation ME".  I personally just want all American people to have what they deserve, no more, no less.

And it's funny I'm hearing this from the right side now, when liberals used to be accused of always "taking the black side".  So I suggest that if people are going to put slanderous stereotypes on liberals, they should have at least some consistency.

Believe what you will, say what you must, but I'm not going to go around posting negative, slanderous and ill-founded things like that about republicans just because I don't like most of them.

I'm also against the death penalty, but I also live in a state that doesn't practice it, so I'm content.  Other states can kill all the criminals they want, if the criminals there are dumb enough to commit those crimes knowing they could die for it.  Overall, I hope it is eventually replaced with a better means to rehabilitate criminals.

You know, I really don't care about the death penalty anymore.  There's plenty of killing happening elsewhere, it's almost redundant to waste energy worrying about how our country handles it's most offensive criminals.

Personally I think it should be left up to the victim's family to decide, but that could get really ugly.

Mr. D, don't ever bring up racism again after that little comment.

What comment was that? You don't think Black men commit a disproportionate share of violent crime? I'm surprised that an obviously true statement could provoke such an ideological and irrational response from a "free" thinker.

Violent crime is violent crime and anybody is capable of it.  Statistics don't prove anything when you ask "Which race does more violent crime?"
Here it's white, there it's blacks, over there it's Hispanics.  So no, your statement is not "obviously" true in my eyes, and maybe because I AM a free thinker.

[Mr. Dirlewanger]

Violent crime is violent crime and anybody is capable of it.  Statistics don't prove anything when you ask "Which race does more violent crime?"
Here it's white, there it's blacks, over there it's Hispanics.  So no, your statement is not "obviously" true in my eyes, and maybe because I AM a free thinker.

Yes, stats do in fact prove that Blacks commit a disproportionate amount of violent crime. No, you are not a free thinker. If so, why did a factual statement get such a response from you?

[wow]

I am not interested in a disproportionate effect on blacks, per se- of course they commit a disproportionate amount of violent crime.  What I mean by unfair: if you are “scary” or “undesirable to the jury, for whatever reason there is a much higher chance that you would get the death penalty than if you are attractive or sympatric to the jury.  That creates unfairness to the application of the death penalty- there is a floating meaning to the term “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”  OJ was loved; therefore reasonable doubt was a lot higher standard that it is for a typical shit-bird murderer.  (Of course this applies to all criminal trials, but I am focused on the ultimate sentence.)

As a side issue, general deterrence (deterrence of others who may commit the same crime) does not work in our system because any execution takes place too long after the crime. 

This is evidence of the unfairness in the system, supplied by Mr. D: “What has bothered me over the years are these stories about guys being exonerated after many years in prison. That's bad enough but what if the state had killed him?”


And for a more persuasive argument remember in the Lord of the Rings when Frodo tells Gandalf that he wished Bilbo would have killed Golem when he had the chance.  Gandalf tells Frodo that people who deserve to die live, and people who deserve to live die.  Unless you can give those that deserve to live their lives back, don’t be so quick to take the lives of those who deserve to die. 

You are the devil for making these points. You are not feeding the racial issue.
In fact, you are minimizing the racial issue.
You are in danger of being lynched in a court of law.
Jesse, Al and Obama are going to get ya! 

[wow]

Spunk,

Liberals don't like to pick on people at all, that's why we're LIBERAL.  Liberals don't call people "whiney" or "lazy" or accuse people of belonging to "generation ME".

I have received several threats from self-admitted Liberals over things like concrete car stops in my office building parking lot, or how the yellow paint is placed on the curbs etc.....
Here is one example. I placed red painted concrete car stops in the parking lot, after someone jumped the curb and almost ran over some patrons (Another lawsuit). Then a woman tripped over one of these car stops, incurred about $12,000 in medical expenses, then expected me to pay these bills, because................quote "I have more money than her"
This is an actual real life true story! 
I'm not saying this is exclusive to Liberals, but Liberals promote this type of thinking in our society.

[they call me MR. GRUMPY god damn it!]

oj was not acquitted because he was loved.  oj was acquitted because the jury knew that he was guilty.  it was a means for people who have felt powerless and victimized (justifiably and self-inflicted) to strike back at white established power.  this is the racial chasm we (white and black) have endeavored so diligently to create.  with regard to the death penalty;  if you are not morally opposed to the death penalty than you have two possible solutions.  first, eliminate judicial discretion and sentence according to statute.  this would also require that you eliminate the wiggle room within statutes.  second, you might change the standard of proof required to administer the death penalty from reasonable doubt to absolute certainty.  the sentencing phase would merely be a review of the evidence absent victim impact statements or mea culpas by the defendant.