Illinois abolishes death penalty

[Sigz]

https://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/10/illinois-aboolishes-death-penalty?CMP=twt_fd

Illinois has abolished the death penalty after two decades of deliberation on the grounds that the justice system could execute innocent people by mistake, in a move that is likely to renew calls for other US states to follow.

The move will save 15 men from execution who are on Illinois's death row, moving them to life in prison with no hope of parole.

Governor Pat Quinn, a Democrat who has long supported capital punishment, spent two months deliberating on the decision, which he described as the most difficult he has made in office.

"If the system can't be guaranteed, 100% error-free, then we shouldn't have the system," Quinn said. "It cannot stand."

The governor's decision incensed many prosecutors and relatives of victims of crime.

Republican representative Jim Durkin predicted Quinn will pay a political price if he seeks re-election in four years' time.

Quinn said he would oppose any attempt to reinstate a new version of the death penalty. He also promised to commute the sentence of anyone who might receive a death sentence between now and when the measure takes effect on July 1, a spokeswoman said.


Illinois becomes the 16th state in the US without a death penalty. New York and New Jersey abolished the death penalty in 2007. New Mexico followed suit in 2009.

In his comments, Quinn returned often to the fact that 20 people sent to death row had seen their cases overturned after evidence surfaced that they were innocent or had been convicted improperly.

Campaigners studying capital punishment said Illinois's move carries more weight than states that halted executions but had not used the death penalty often.

"Illinois stands out because it was a state that used it, reconsidered it and now rejected it," said Richard Dieter of the Death Penalty Information Centre in Washington.

Illinois has executed 12 men since 1977, when the death penalty was reinstated. The last execution was Andrew Kokoraleis on 17 March 1999. At the time, the average length of stay on death row was 13 years.

It's about time. I see absolutely no reason to have capital punishment in this day and age.

[XJDenton]

Good for them.

[lordxizor]

Great news! I hope other states follow suit.

[antigoon]

Fantastic news!

[7StringedBeast]

By this logic, people shouldn't be put in jail because they could get convicted by mistake.

[j]

It's about time. I see absolutely no reason to have capital punishment in this day and age.

This, though I think there are probably exceptions.

By this logic, people shouldn't be put in jail because they could get convicted by mistake.

Jail time is not an irreversible and permanent punishment.

-J

[GuineaPig]

By this logic, people shouldn't be put in jail because they could get convicted by mistake.

Except you can overturn a sentence.  They really aren't comparable.

[7StringedBeast]

I think you were missing my point.

"If the system can't be guaranteed, 100% error-free, then we shouldn't have the system," Quinn said. "It cannot stand."

By this logic we shouldn't jail anyone.  The jail system is imperfect.  It cannot stand.  This logic this guy uses is absolute crap.

[GuineaPig]

Except you're talking about killing people versus imprisoning them.  They're two entirely different punishments; it makes sense to use different logic when you're approaching them.

[orcus116]

But like GuineaPig says, if they do discover that you're innocent somewhere down the line you're not, you know, dead.

[7StringedBeast]

I think you hear of innocent people getting killed because we had worse ways of gathering evidence 10-20 years ago.  I bet nowadays there is a lot less of a chance that someone getting convicted in this day and age, would be sentenced to death without being proven guilty without doubt.

The innocent people being murdered that we hear about are people who have been on death row for over a decade.  So the problem is really with the justice system 10+ years prior to the actual carrying out of the sentence.

[Sigz]

And what exactly is accomplished by the death penalty that isn't by a life sentence without parole?

[rumborak]

Revenge.

rumborak

[7StringedBeast]

Not having tax payers pay for that person for the rest of their lives.

[antigoon]

I think you hear of innocent people getting killed because we had worse ways of gathering evidence 10-20 years ago.  I bet nowadays there is a lot less of a chance that someone getting convicted in this day and age, would be sentenced to death without being proven guilty without doubt.

The innocent people being murdered that we hear about are people who have been on death row for over a decade.  So the problem is really with the justice system 10+ years prior to the actual carrying out of the sentence.

This might be true but I don't think guilty people deserve the death penalty, either.

[GuineaPig]

Not having tax payers pay for that person for the rest of their lives.

Except that it costs less money for life imprisonment than execution.

Not like expedience is a good argument for killing people.

[j]

Not having tax payers pay for that person for the rest of their lives.

*cue argument that it's actually more expensive to execute them*

-J

EDIT: Ninja'd.

[orcus116]

How is it more expensive again? Just legal fees?

[El Barto]

Yes, the legal process is insanely expensive in capital cases.  Imprisonment is fairly cheap.  Of course the standard pro-death penalty reply is that we should make the process cheaper, but then that undermines 7SB's argument that the system is more reliable nowadays. 

[7StringedBeast]

I think you hear of innocent people getting killed because we had worse ways of gathering evidence 10-20 years ago.  I bet nowadays there is a lot less of a chance that someone getting convicted in this day and age, would be sentenced to death without being proven guilty without doubt.

The innocent people being murdered that we hear about are people who have been on death row for over a decade.  So the problem is really with the justice system 10+ years prior to the actual carrying out of the sentence.

This might be true but I don't think guilty people deserve the death penalty, either.

And I think what you said here is a way better argument against the death penalty than anything else.  I just fall on the other side of the fence.  I do think some people deserve to die for their crimes.  But it all depends on what that crime was.

[GuineaPig]

Deserve's got nothin' to do with it.

[7StringedBeast]

Deserve's got nothin' to do with it.

it has everything to do with it.  People get punished because they deserve it.  It's everything about deserve.

[Sigz]

It's such an arbitrary punishment though. How do you decide when someone 'deserves' to die rather than get a prison sentence?

[7StringedBeast]

The same way you decide whether someone gets 10 years vs 20 years vs life.  Severity of the crime and how heinous it is.  They have juries and judges exactly for this sort of thing.  And Judges judge arbitrarily all of the time.  they just have to stick to certain guidelines.

[Implode]

I really don't like the death penalty. It just seems so wrong to me. When I see people literally and truly wishing death upon someone, it's disturbing. Those people seem very similar to a murderer in my mind. Revenge isn't going to make the world a better place.

So this is good news.

[Cool Chris]

I have no real problem with this. I used to be in favor of the death penalty, but my views have changed over the years.

Interestingly, one of the most high-profile cases in our state in history, Gary Ridgway, the Green River Killer, would seem like the most obvious candidate for the death penalty (~48 confirmed victims, though he has stated he has killed even more). But as part of his plea agreement, he is going to get life w/out parole in return for his full confession and aiding investigators in finding the remains of his victims. Closure for the families, and all that. So why should he be spared execution, just because he has information to bargain with, while those who don’t (and maybe committed less heinous crimes) should get the chair?

I hate the word ‘heinous’

Also, why is it so damn expensive? How many appeals does a death row candidate get anyway??

Deserve's got nothin' to do with it.

it has everything to do with it. 

I think he was just quoting William Munny from Unforgiven.

When I see people literally and truly wishing death upon someone, it's disturbing.

Seeing people cheering and waving signs outside Ted Bundy's execution was particularly creepy.

[Adami]

This is very good news. Justice should be about removal of harm, not satisfying blood needs.

[Implode]

Seeing people cheering and waving signs outside Ted Bundy's execution was particularly creepy.

Events like that are what convinced me that there was something wrong here...at least for me.

[7StringedBeast]

Lets take Saddam as an example.  He killed thousands of people by ordering gas attacks on them.  Yeah, he deserved to die.  I don't care if you don't agree, this is my opinion on it.  I totally understand the other side of the argument.

[ehra]

I guess you better hope he doesn't get caught in Illinois then.

[7StringedBeast]

I guess you better hope he doesn't get caught in Illinois then.

You know he was already executed by the Iraqi people a few years ago right?

[ehra]

Yes. No. I'm half asleep.

[7thHanyou]

I am against the Death Penalty simply because innocent people could be convicted and death is irreversible, but I fail to see what's wrong with revenge as a motive.  When an innocent person has been harmed, either the victim or the victim's family is perfectly justified in seeking repayment in kind.  We've simply accepted that that's "barbaric," in my opinion unquestioningly.  However, if justice is about some degree of equalization (which I would argue it is), then punishment for punishment's sake isn't such a bad thing.

That said, the whole concept of a "debt to society" is ridiculous.  The criminal has a debt to the victim and no one else.  I just don't see what's morally wrong with demanding they pay that debt in some way--and by definition, that's pretty much revenge.

So in principle, I don't have much of a problem with the death penalty.  It's certainly not any more "barbaric" than most of the crimes people are executed for.  In reality, it is impractical and dangerous, but some other severe punishment as revenge is perfectly reasonable IMO.  I just think the punishment is best determined by the victim or the victim's family rather than society at large (so long as they don't overstep their bounds)--but that would require overhauling the justice system entirely).

[El Barto]

Good post.  One of my problems is that while revenge might be an acceptable motivation to some, very few people have the balls to describe it as such.  People want to downplay that aspect with terms like justice or closure.  There's a lot of hypocrisy in capital punishment.   

[XJDenton]

Punishment in general is an outdated foundation for any modern justice system IMO.