In my system there would be *one* appeal and it would have to happen within one year of sentencing. If the appeal didn't work, or you missed the deadline...

When your daughter is unjustly accused of a violent crime, I'll be with you on the sidewalk protesting to let her free. As long as you haven't managed to have any say with your incredibly wrong-headed approach to justice. Because then, since overworked, under-resourced people made mistakes, she'd be dead. That would suck.

As long as you haven't managed to have any say with your incredibly wrong-headed approach to justice.

This is why I'm not in charge.

• shrug* What do you want? I said over and over again that it's a minority opinion and that I know it's not what I should aspire to. You call me wrong-headed...okay. That's your opinion.

And I will freely admit that if my daughter is wrongly accused of a crime I will be the first to embrace hypocrisy and protest for her release. And I'll be happy you're there.

So, since I'm trying to be civil and keep the tone of my posts very particularly about me with as many caveats as I can toss in there...wanna back off with the near-ad-hominem "wrong headed" type remarks, bucko?

JohnSweden I think you are being unfair to Miracle. He is not advocating a position; he is describing an emotional reaction. That is, I'm presuming if an initative to implement what he is saying - one trial, one appeal, on shot - implemented in our actual system he would vote against. Actually something like that has been introduced. There is a "reform" being introduced in the Federal legislature that would eliminate almost all death penalty appeals. The idea is that the state courst are so perfectly fair and just, it is not neccesary in most cases for Federal appeals to be heard.

So, since I'm trying to be civil and keep the tone of my posts very particularly about me with as many caveats as I can toss in there...wanna back off with the near-ad-hominem "wrong headed" type remarks, bucko?

Sure, just playing monsterball with you, friend. People get not only wrongfully accused, but wrongfully convicted of the sort of crimes you're suggesting KGB bullets for, all the time. Often. Many. Not maybes, or we think he did it. That guy did and should burn. Except, whoops, cops got a little too focused. DNA lab messed up. Evidence chain was contaminated. We'll just kill the ones we're really sure of. Except, a dozen years later, we get unsure of some of those cases. We don't have the right to make mistakes like that, you and I and our system, that we fund and staff, and purport to be fair and even-handed. We have to get it right, or be in a position to set it straight. Apologetic letters to the widows and families aren't good enough, in my once-removed view.

I don't imagine you're telling him anything he doesn't already know -- the magic of an emotional reaction is that it doesn't respond automatically to reason. At least he's not mistaking it for logic and rightness.

As ita says, these are things I know, John.

Obviously I've touched a nerve with you. So, since I've been using a reasoned approach to describing non-reason, and you're using an entirely emotional approach to addressing your reasoned arguments...mayhaps we should end the discussion. Until such a time when we can both approach it the same way. That is to say...reasonably.

For me capital punishment = cold blooded murder. Two wrongs do not equal right. I'm comfortable with that. I understand that not all people share my view on the subject.

Coming late to the conversation, and running off to bed soon anyway, but...

I think there are a lot of people in America who think like MM does. Don't most Americans support the death penalty? And for, as far as I can tell, the same reason. At least many of the people that I know and love would say pretty much the same thing. So although he claims to be a minority voice here, he's actually in the majority.

I'm all kerfuffled out.

Tea and crumpets. Discuss.

Tea and crumpets. Discuss.

Wait, I get some crumpet? I like this discussion.