|
|
#268357 - 05/10/08 10:59 AM
Re: Ernesto Reyes
[Re: Lawmage]
|
Administrator
Registered: 08/01/99
Loc: New York, NY (New York)
|
Lawmage: I am beginning to think that the death penalty ought to be reserved for those rare cases when true certainty is obtained. Such cases might involve the actual witnessing of the crime by multiple witnesses and the capture of the subject at the scene or similar absolutely indisputable proof of guilt. As I said...my opinion is in flux at the moment. I was always totally opposed to the death penalty, but some years ago my position changed. I realized that there were some people (not many, but some) whose actions render them unworthy to continue to live in our society. People like Richard Allen Davis, Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacey, etc. I agree that the death penalty should be applied sparingly, and only when there is certainty of guilt, however I'd consider that the bodies of victims buried in the accused's home, or his DNA found on the victim, when linked with other evidence, is as good as an eyewitness. I often feel conflicted about it, as you do, because I think it's wrong to take human life, but when I think about the crimes these people have committed, the horror and tragedy they bring to the innocent families of their victims, and the brutality of their acts, my thought is "just get them out of here."
|
|
Top
|
Reply
Quote
Quick Reply
Quick Quote
|
|
|
|
#268385 - 05/10/08 02:11 PM
Re: Ernesto Reyes
[Re: tutti]
|
TM Chairman of the Board
Registered: 09/22/00
Loc: Arkansas, USA
|
Worst about this case is that Ernesto Reyes is 'alleged' to have murdered this young woman. Now, what if he is actually innocent? Authorities clearly have evidence to request extradition, but what if he is not the murderer? Are you suggesting Reyes could not get a fair trial in the United States? That would mean another person is literally getting away with murder. Indeed, which is why O.J. Simpson has vowed to spend the rest of his life searching for the REAL murderer(s) of Nicolle Simpson and Ron White... ...on every golf course in Florida. What if this crime was committed in a State where there is no death penalty? Would the Mexicans turn him over to US authorities? I believe that has been the custom in the past. Of course countries should protect their citizens abroad, but if that citizen has committed crimes, surely they should not go unpunished. Sounds logical. I can certainly agree with that. Does the US routinely extradite Mexicans wanted for serious crime in Mexico, even if they are in the US legally? I would guess we do as a matter of course. A better question, in my mind, would be do we extradite American citizens who are accused of serious crimes in Mexico? That I don't know, and am too lazy to google. Someone else take over, here.
_________________________
Debating the Political Left or Speaking Truth to Kooks!
|
|
Top
|
Reply
Quote
Quick Reply
Quick Quote
|
|
|
|
#268398 - 05/10/08 05:10 PM
Re: Ernesto Reyes
[Re: Ray]
|
Administrator
Registered: 08/01/99
Loc: New York, NY (New York)
|
Ray: I would guess we do as a matter of course. A better question, in my mind, would be do we extradite American citizens who are accused of serious crimes in Mexico? That I don't know, and am too lazy to google. Someone else take over, here. The extradition treaty between the US and Mexico, signed by Jimmy Carter in 1978, to take effect in 1980, states: Neither side is bound to deliver up its nationals, however if extradition is denied based on nationality, the request for extradition is automatically converted into a foreign prosecution pursuant to Article IV of the Mexican Federal Penal Code (hereinafter, “Article IV”). Although by law, the Mexican authorities are authorized to extradite their nationals in “exceptional circumstances”, in practice they most often do not.
|
|
Top
|
Reply
Quote
Quick Reply
Quick Quote
|
|
|
|
#268595 - 05/12/08 02:12 PM
Re: Ernesto Reyes
[Re: Dax]
|
Health & Relationships/Loss & Bereavement Mod
Registered: 09/29/05
Loc: Damn close to EVERYWHERE!
|
I agree that the death penalty should be applied sparingly, and only when there is certainty of guilt, however I'd consider that the bodies of victims buried in the accused's home, or his DNA found on the victim, when linked with other evidence, is as good as an eyewitness.
I often feel conflicted about it, as you do, because I think it's wrong to take human life, but when I think about the crimes these people have committed, the horror and tragedy they bring to the innocent families of their victims, and the brutality of their acts, my thought is "just get them out of here." This has always been my concern in regards to capital punishment, i.e. certainty of guilt over and beyond a reasonable doubt, assuming the Criminal Justice System is functioning correctly. Even if someone is an habitual offender, I don't feel it'd be right to execute them other than based on the offense for which they were considered for the death penalty. Otherwise, I'd say our penal code needs to be very carefully revamped, and that strict adherence be paid to it. I can't even vaguely imagine the angst of anyone who's been wrongly accused, even if they had other legal history, let alone someone who hadn't. I used to be dead set against capital punishment, because I didn't feel killing was right for any reason. However, I too have changed my mind a bit and now my reason for doubt is only because of perceived serious flaws in the mechanics of our system. I know there are folks who have rightfully been sentenced to execution, but as a citizen of this country, I would want to know that all avenues of investigation have been exhausted. If I were wrongly accused, I sure as hell would want those safties in place.
_________________________
WindDancer
Giving feet, and then wings, to my Intuition
|
|
Top
|
Reply
Quote
Quick Reply
Quick Quote
|
|
|
|
|
8558 Members
35 Forums
11692 Topics
243896 Posts
Max Online: 2631 @ 03/18/08 12:30 AM
|
|
|
|