Quote from: Maiken on February 06, 2011, 11:21:26 AM

Quote from: JTiscool on February 06, 2011, 06:28:42 AM

Quote from: Maiken on February 06, 2011, 02:33:38 AM

Quote from: JTiscool on February 05, 2011, 04:56:47 PM

You talk so much about how giving a person help would prevent others from killing when you fail to realize that someone could claim they are "better" and deceive you then start killing. How many chances do we have to take before we realize that there is o cure to cold blooded murderers?

There is no "cure" to cold blooded murder. Thats no illness but an offence.

The victims of that would be glad if someone had helped them beforehand and brought that scum, who attacked to justice, so they would be safe from him.

The problem with your theory is that it's very hard to predict who's going to murder. Besides, even if you do bring someone into jail when they attack someone, they will still kill someone after they get out. I'm sorry but I just don't see where you're going with this 

following your excourse, one should let a murder happen, instead of helping and execute the murderer afterwards, cause he would have killed anyway? Did i get that right?

There are murderers who can't be detected is what I am trying to say. How do you detect a murderer who cannot be detected? 

You can try to detect a murderer by good police work and a stable society and bringing those to justice which did commit a crime.

Remember New Orleans.

They had the death penalty. Yet after that terrible storm murder and rape was daily life on the streets.
Why? Not because of existing DP, but because those guys knew they would not been caught.

Remember Mylai. The Officer who ordered it spent two years in jail only.

More important than DP is a society that protects all and for offenders the knowledge that they will not get away with crime.

DP ist costly, arbitrary, punishes only a few poor sods using resources which are missing at much more important places as child education, drug prevention and rehabiltation, poice work and finally for the help of victims of crimes.

Maiken;

here are some of your facebook friends:

Charles Hood, Joshua Maxwell (where is this guy ), Rogelio Cannday (and this one ), Gabriel Gonzales, Chucky Mamou ( isn´t that the man which is searching for a new wife because of Sandie?), Willie Trottie, Lee Taylor, John Ramirez, John Mosley ( a very nice guy from the sunshine states death row mmhh ), William Speer, Darrell Lomax, Sandrine Ageorges- Skinner ( what a surprise ), Carlos Trevino, Juan Raul Ramirez, Thomas Bartlett Whitaker ( wow, wow, wow  ), Kevin Cooper, Clinton Young, Robert Will, Jimmy Dennis, Manuel Garza, Tyree Bailey, Travis Runnels, Michael Perry ( who is that ) ....

and many many more. 

And now donvito111 proudly presents: the most special friend of Maiken on facebook:

Mahmud Ahmadinedschad 



Look yourself: http://www.facebook.com/search.php?q=maiken%20liefeith&init=quick&tas=0.8896147618901127&ref=ts#!/profile.php?id=558404464&sk=friends&v=friends

Yes I know,  and  Ahmadinedschad is one of the latest.

Iwrote to him on behalf of stoning  women, especially with that latest case, cannot remember her name and he put me on as a friend.

I kept it, perhaps as a slight chance to write to him about killing christians, Bahai people for apostophy and so on.
Well it is a chance to put influence on someone to write directly to him, isn't it?

Well, I did not check all them at facebook demands I got, but simply clicked on them. Sandrine Ageorges- Skinner ( what a surprise )...I am in contact with his daughter Natalie Skinner.

Well Hank was a low-off at his time. My neighbour is even lower off. But does that make him eligble fror DPß

As I said, I did not check all the contacts, which facebook offered me.

Some cases also I investigated years ago, but I tend to forget alot of things lately.

Your critics are right. If I post, I should be able to present all the facts. I do apologize and will try to to it better.

What I think is bad frome some of you, is titelling me as a scumbag or something like it.

And worse is spioneering after me in internet...think thats no good style, though one was so "anständig" not to write my full name.

You do not know me the same as I do not know you.

I think that you answer honestly. Whjy do you think, that i would not do the same?

With Daniel Carl Frederickson he was an penpal to me for a short time. He admitted to the murder and said he felt sorry for, but could not change it anymore. But from what he he told other antis beforehand I was very much angry, because he played the innocent beforenhand. The Canadian Coalition put him off their website, where he was quoted as innocent, after contacting him and getting the right information.

Nevertheless I do not know what to think about it. He is guilty and he said so himself.

A couple of years ago they did the DNA test, to show once and for all that coleman dishonored and murdered his sister in law.  It was, indeed, his DNA.  I am CERTAIN that even with all that proof, die-hard anti's still believe that he was innocent.

To explain, I am on facebook on many pages, simply because its facebook!

Facebook makes so many suggestions for pages, actually I did not read many thoroughly anymore, I just clicked on them and said okay, WITHOUT reading.

Hank Skinner is an exemption, vause from reading his case, this guys was so drugged and pissed, that he must have been near coma and unable to do harm anyone seriously.

But with a lot of pages I have NOT checked the facts beforehand. Its facebook.

It is a dismissive name for troll.

Now, back to why the death penalty works...

I do not see any executed inmate commiting jaywalking, much less another case of murder. 
I am still waiting for the list of "innocents" that you are claiming were executed...BTW, please attach proof, not a lot of webpages from inmates.

None of my webpages are from inmates as far as I can remember.

Well, the usual names: Todd Willingham, Peter Cantu...most famous I think were Sacco and Vancetti.

In Germany we had a very horrible case, where a farmers family were accused of having killed the farmer and fed him to the pigs, so that he had vanished without a trace. They got all a life long sentence. In USA it would have been DP.

Years later they found the dead farmer in his car in the river Isar. It turned out that he had committed suicide.

Why that family had lied, no one really understands. Perhaps it was the high pressure they were under.

But anyway, it is sometimes very hard to find the truth, specially when such horrible things have happened.  DP is irrevocable, thats also a problem.

Well thats my real first name, so what.

Maiken is really a name which comes from little Maria and that comes from the hebrew name Miriam.

And what is a trog?

Troll.

So what do you mean with PTO?

Quote from: Maiken on February 06, 2011, 02:33:38 AM

Quote from: JTiscool on February 05, 2011, 04:56:47 PM

You talk so much about how giving a person help would prevent others from killing when you fail to realize that someone could claim they are "better" and deceive you then start killing. How many chances do we have to take before we realize that there is o cure to cold blooded murderers?

There is no "cure" to cold blooded murder. Thats no illness but an offence.

The victims of that would be glad if someone had helped them beforehand and brought that scum, who attacked to justice, so they would be safe from him.

The problem with your theory is that it's very hard to predict who's going to murder. Besides, even if you do bring someone into jail when they attack someone, they will still kill someone after they get out. I'm sorry but I just don't see where you're going with this 

following your excourse, one should let a murder happen, instead of helping and execute the murderer afterwards, cause he would have killed anyway? Did i get that right?

I love peeled tail-on shrimps...why do you ask?

Maiken, it seems to me you are spouting the typical, uneducated, uninformed anti rhetoric, you have not bothered to educate yourself on the post conviction laws, you cannot even name one person executed that was found innocent through any means let alone DNA testing, you have incorrectly named two convicted murderers that you said were denied post conviction DNA testing,Darlie Routier ( asked for a received) and Debra Milke (has not requested)  in short you have absolutely no facts to back up your claims. Have people been exonerated using DNA, yes, and that proves that the system works. Contrary to most antis belief, no one wants to see an innocent person convicted, let alone executed, that would mean that the guilty would go free to continue their crimes, no one wants that. I understand you have questions about the death penalty but before you go spouting off, please educate yourself, read the laws, read the case histories, and by that I mean the "official" reports, not  some convicted murderers web page.

I am Anti and do not think that any decent person would want an innocent person to be convicted. And I do not that you want it either.

Nevertheless there are many cases where innocent people where convicted, even executed.

No, I do not only read some convicted murdrers page, but also the offical papers, when I am interested in a case.

In Routiers case some samples have still not been tested though demanded.

In Mi9lkes case all was tired, but in vain though the only "proof" was, what the true murdere said, and a socalled "confession" to a police officer, that was never even recorded.

this cannot be the way to find out the truth.

Well it is nearly impossible to browse the archive of the GCADP

What i found first hand might also interest you:

http://www.initiative-gegen-die-todesstrafe.de/en/death-penalty-world-wide/usa/innocence.html

It ist a list of Exonereers and you can see how many yerars they where in jail beforehand.

Two inmates fighting right now for further dNA testing ar Darlier Routier and Debra Milke.

Quite a few inmates struggle for DNA testing anyway which might exconerate them.

Since I myself left the GCADP years ago, it is quite difficult for me to remember their names.

Juan Melendez got free, not because of DNA test, but because the district attorney did change and the new found in her bureau the tape with the confession of the murdere, which had been available on trial 17 years beforhean, but was not heard.

For debra Milke: http://www.crimefilenews.com/2010/01/federal-judge-says-debra-milke-waived.html

Why don't you answer a straightforward question?  What are the names of the inmates you claim were denied DNA testing and were executed, and what were the reasons the court denied post conviction DNA testing?

well as some wre executed some years ago it will take some time for me to look up their names on the list of executed.

I have got housweork to do, but I will try to look up the names today...promised.

There is no presumption of innocence after a defendant is found guilty.

Thats right, Mr. Fischer, then the inmate must prove his innocense or new evidence turns up. Happens quite often, though.

So when new evidence turns up or new testing methods are available it should be used.

Who can afford a good lawyer can use every opportunity your lawsystem gives and you are right, when you thik that is sometimes used in ann apalling way.

But most inmates on death row do not have the money for it. Thats why they are there.

As every inmate spends there ages on huge costs und inhuman living condions (Death row is no such a cosy place as some suggests). Means sitting in a cell for 23 hours a day, not being allowed to work or do anything. No Tv or such and this for 10-20 years.

Those costs should rather be invested in the help for the victims.

If someone rapes and kills a mother of three children, who will raise them, give them her love and protection.

That is where the money would be more needed, not in applying it DP.

Why not let those, who killed, work in prison and give that what they earn to their victims.?

and to the other postings. DNA tests are being made routinally at some states, but others simply do not allow it, even if the prisoner would pay it himself.

Quote from: Maiken on February 06, 2011, 02:28:39 AM

Quote from: JTiscool on February 05, 2011, 04:48:34 PM

Quote

Every prisoner should have the right to prove his innocense

That's assuming they are innocent in the first place.

That is law in every civilized conntry...innocent until proven guitly.

Yes I have internet access, but I still do not know where to find those laws.

I can understand, that questioning for DNA testing might delay an execution or sometimes is just for that simple reason.

But testing DNA is not costy anymore and can be done quickly and easily.

Several inmates demanded for ages that DNA which was found to be tested. In vain. They wher executed. Though they even consented in paying that test themselves.

Now take the szenario that tests would have proved them to be guilty.

Then they could have been executed years beforehand. and no such great costs would have amounted.

And if proven innocent, might be that the true offender would have been found.

Denying DNA testing blocks justice rather than helping it.

But if they are proven guilty at trial and convicted then innocent until proven guilty becomes a moot point. 

Not really...cause a lot of conviction are being overthrown on appeal cause new evidences turn up, another confesses to the crime or witnesses tell later, that they lied or were forced to confession.

Some men got free after more than 10 years in jail on accounts of rape or murder, just because testing of DNA proved their innocense.

Eywitnesses often see, what they want to see, are often not reliable. even selfconfession miht be untrue.

See just this video on yuotube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkLHXKHb1Vc

First comes something in German. Just skip it and listen to the rest.

You talk so much about how giving a person help would prevent others from killing when you fail to realize that someone could claim they are "better" and deceive you then start killing. How many chances do we have to take before we realize that there is o cure to cold blooded murderers?

There is no "cure" to cold blooded murder. Thats no illness but an offence.

The victims of that would be glad if someone had helped them beforehand and brought that scum, who attacked to justice, so they would be safe from him.