Texas Insists on Executing a Man the State Admits is Innocent

[ted]

The Law of Parties IS the travesty of justice. If someone is an accomplice to murder, convict them for it. Every state outside Texas has the common sense to do this.

Maybe it's a case of every state outside of Texas not doing enough about murderers and those that help them...?

t.

[TheoMike]

The Law of Parties IS the travesty of justice. If someone is an accomplice to murder, convict them for it. Every state outside Texas has the common sense to do this.

I respect your opinion. I disagree with it, but respect it.

[Guest LadyC]

well if that's the case, then i'll agree with it.

but i'll never back down on my defense of darlie routier!

[The Lorax]

Maybe it's a case of every state outside of Texas not doing enough about murderers and those that help them...?

t.

In that case, boost the minimum mandatory sentence for accomplice to murder. Heck, even make it equal to murder. But convicting someone as a murderer when they are not--that is not justice. Give them the death sentence if you deem fit, but get the conviction right.

The Law of Parties IS the travesty of justice. If someone is an accomplice to murder, convict them for it. Every state outside Texas has the common sense to do this.

I respect your opinion. I disagree with it, but respect it.

[georgesbluegirl]

Excuse me?!?!?! Is this some kinda joke? This guy is the driver of a car in which he and his friends drove around doing drugs and committed two armed robberies. They then drive to a persons house at which one of his friends attempts to rob another person...and the victim is murdered. I'm supposed to feel sorry for this guy.

Society is lucky that more people weren't murdered that night...and we are equally lucky that this guy will no longer be a threat to society as of Aug 30th.

I don't disagree with your sentiments. Foster was charged under Texas' "Law of Parties" law, fairly, and he has had every opportunity have his case appealed and those appeals were overturned. I for one am tired of hearing "Texas is about murder an innocent man." Foster is not innocent. He drove the car, and was in the car less than 100 yards away from where the murder was committed and did nothing to intervene. He is most certainly a party to that murder, whether he was directly involved or not. If the purpose of the death penalty is to "send a message" and to discourage would-be criminals, then this should do it. We should respect the law, pray for his family and his eternal soul.

You realize that there is absolutely no statistical correlation between presence of the death penalty and lower crime rates? Actually, most states with the death penalty have higher murder rates than states without. In other words, the argument that capital punishment is a deterrant has long been known to be flawed.

Also, I second Lorax that the law is the greater problem, not necessarily the specifics of how this one case was carried out. You can say that he was convicted "fairly under the law," but at what point are we able to say that a law like this is fair? Just because a law is on the books doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be challenged. The Jim Crow laws could be enforced - people could be convicted of having interracial relationships (under the anti-miscegenation laws) and sentenced to jail, but is that fair, or just?

[ted]

In that case, boost the minimum mandatory sentence for accomplice to murder. Heck, even make it equal to murder.

That's exactly what Texas did, so where's the argument?

They didn't convict him of murder, they added that he was equally responsible and imposed the death penalty.

t.

[Janakev]

This is a joke, isn't it? If it isn't then I'm afraid that America really must abandon the moral high-ground.

[The Lorax]

In that case, boost the minimum mandatory sentence for accomplice to murder. Heck, even make it equal to murder.

That's exactly what Texas did, so where's the argument?

They didn't convict him of murder, they added that he was equally responsible and imposed the death penalty.

t.

Oops. Nevermind then.

I recant I guess.

And just for the record, I am not theologically opposed to death penalty. I am, in most cases, opposed to the death penalty because the justice system is far from perfect. There have been many cases in which people who were killed by the US govt were later found to be innocent. This is an unspeakable atrocity and it should be prevented at all costs,

[TheoMike]

You realize that there is absolutely no statistical correlation between presence of the death penalty and lower crime rates? Actually, most states with the death penalty have higher murder rates than states without. In other words, the argument that capital punishment is a deterrant has long been known to be flawed.

Taken from Is Capital Punishment a Deterrent?

While all sorts of

[ted]

In that case, boost the minimum mandatory sentence for accomplice to murder. Heck, even make it equal to murder.

That's exactly what Texas did, so where's the argument?

They didn't convict him of murder, they added that he was equally responsible and imposed the death penalty.

t.

Oops. Nevermind then.

I recant I guess.

And just for the record, I am not theologically opposed to death penalty. I am, in most cases, opposed to the death penalty because the justice system is far from perfect. There have been many cases in which people who were killed by the US govt were later found to be innocent. This is an unspeakable atrocity and it should be prevented at all costs,

Hey, don't get me wrong....

I think the death penalty should only be imposed where there is clear, convincing evidence that the person did the crime. In my estimation, only about 50 people or so a year would qualify for it. I'm actually pretty afraid to impose it due to mankind's imperfect judgment.

I'm not sure if I really agree with the new Texas laws, but it is law nonetheless. If people down there want it changed, they better get their feet in motion quick and try to change the law before too many people are sentenced under it and it becomes a solid precedent.

Right now, they are probably trying to establish the practice as reality to send a message. If the people down there don't move fast, it will be hard to overturn. What scares me is the possibility of expansion under the law.

t.