Texas may have executed an innocent man

[The Yosemite Bear]

Is that a refrence to Chris?

[Lusankya]

Is that a refrence to Chris?

Yeah.

Though most people who I know in Australia seem to think that if you're innocent, you're better off with a judge, and if you're guilty, you're better off with a jury.

It's completely anecdotal and is more of a community viewpoint than anything else, so take it with as much salt as you like.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Wait, what? You are expeting a death penalty, simply because you are who you are?!

Damn, your situation is even more messed up than i thought. If you ever have the possibility, come to Europe

I suspect the number of counties in which I could expect a fair trial by jury for any crime would be less than a dozen in the US, yes. Mind you, it's a severe disincentive against even appearing to be maybe possibly associated with criminal activity, but I'd certainly never trust my life to any US jury. OTOH as you can see the fairness of the US jury system is essentially nonexistant for anyone.

[JointStrikeFighter]

Do you actually have some statistics backing up your statement that trannies are more likely to be executed than others? Or are you just being hilariously paranoid again?

[The Yosemite Bear]

well under texas law they are not legally people. Yes, that's right, it's even a crime to be a transexual in Texas too.


--edit 2---

also while they have the most active death row in the country, they also have the most cases overturned on the result of science proving that the character assassination, inuendo, and use of tainted witnesses, has resulted in the state changing the laws to make it harder to appeal convictions.

Oh and they still say that the Thin Blue Line case, was a riotious one.

[JointStrikeFighter]

Holy shit bear! WTF us wrong with Texas? Yeah zeons paranoia is justified then.

[The Yosemite Bear]

It also a crime to own a vibrator in Texas. I bet there's a lot of women that are breaking law.

[The Yosemite Bear]

Given the frequency of that state's executions, and the evidence of misconduct in the cases of those who have been aquitted in that state, it's not probable that Texas has killed innocent people since 1979, it's a mathamatical certinty, it's just we haven't been able to prove it, until now. There was a case in Florida where a drug dealer framed a college student for a murder he committed, because the college kid was dating his ex-GF. Well to make a long story short, the DEA/FBI had to intervine in order to prevent the state of Florida from executing an innocent man, who was out of appeals. The state of Florida's decision was to place the prisoner in General population and let the inmates know that a child killer was getting off free.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Yes, in Texas and Oklahoma being transsexual means that you cannot have a male or female designator on your birth certificate and are automatically in violation of the law in regard to falsifying documents if you have either one. And the documents are only issued if one of the two is indicated, making you automatically in violation of the law if you are a transsexual who was born in Texas or Oklahoma. That's how fucked up those states are.

[Qwerty 42]

Mind you, that doesn't necessarily constitute proof that transsexuals are more likely to be executed. As deplorable as the situation in Texas and Oklahoma is, it does not by itself constitute proof of a higher rate of the assignment of the death penalty. As was pointed out, the ownership of sex toys is also illegal in the state: it would be a stretch to say that their owners, then, have a higher rate of execution.

[Teebs]

Mind you, that doesn't necessarily constitute proof that transsexuals are more likely to be executed. As deplorable as the situation in Texas and Oklahoma is, it does not by itself constitute proof of a higher rate of the assignment of the death penalty. As was pointed out, the ownership of sex toys is also illegal in the state: it would be a stretch to say that their owners, then, have a higher rate of execution.

I doubt the sample size of transsexuals charged with murder will ever by large enough to give actual statistical proof of a higher likelihood of execution. That doesn't mean you can't draw conclusions based on dislike and treatment of transsexuals and the nature of jury trials.

[The Yosemite Bear]

At least until diamond age technology makes it a matter of injections, and full conversion in a oxigenated water tank....

[JCady]

The problem is less with the death penalty than the jury system, however, which means we take mouth-breathing retards off the street and when they see a so-called "expert" like that fire marshal tell them the evidence incontrovertibly proves the guy did it, they vote to kill him. We need more to eliminate trial by jury and replace it with inquiries based on the establishment of fact; I would go so far as to completely eliminate civilian participation and create entirely a court system made up based entirely on trial by panels of professional and highly trained jurors, their training making them an even mix of forensic scientists and lawyers.

It wasn't just the jury that sent this man to his death. The prosecutors, the trial judge and the appellate judges also believed the fire marshal's evidence. By your logic, we should not only get rid of juries, but prosecutors and judges, too.

In the American justice system, appellate courts are only permitted to consider errors of procedure. They literally do not have the authority to reconsider the facts of a case -- only to judge whether or not the trial court followed proper due process.

[Elfdart]

Before the assaults on habeus corpus by the Clinton and Bush regimes, appellate courts could order new trials in cases of compelling evidence being discovered after trial (and this case certainly fits the bill). At the time the first restrictions were passed (1996 IIRC) Leonard Pitts pointed out that under the new laws, if something like The Fugitive were to happen in real life, Harrison Ford would have still been sent to the electric chair even if the real killer had confessed.

[Stofsk]

The problem is less with the death penalty than the jury system, however, which means we take mouth-breathing retards off the street and when they see a so-called "expert" like that fire marshal tell them the evidence incontrovertibly proves the guy did it, they vote to kill him. We need more to eliminate trial by jury and replace it with inquiries based on the establishment of fact; I would go so far as to completely eliminate civilian participation and create entirely a court system made up based entirely on trial by panels of professional and highly trained jurors, their training making them an even mix of forensic scientists and lawyers.

It wasn't just the jury that sent this man to his death. The prosecutors, the trial judge and the appellate judges also believed the fire marshal's evidence. By your logic, we should not only get rid of juries, but prosecutors and judges, too.

In the American justice system, appellate courts are only permitted to consider errors of procedure. They literally do not have the authority to reconsider the facts of a case -- only to judge whether or not the trial court followed proper due process.

Is that universal throughout all of America? I would have thought that with 50 states there would be some variation throughout.

It's not that strange to see appellate courts reluctant to overturn jury verdicts after being asked to consider the facts of a case. Jury's verdicts are hard to assail, because the system will fall apart if juror's get it wrong too often. Typically most appeal strategies focus on whatever mistakes in law a trial judge made, and in the hopes that they're enough to constitute a miscarriage of justice. Down here, a reasonable doubt that is considered by the appeals court is one that a reasonable jury ought to have considered (that's the law); it is only when the jury's unique position of being there in person to assess the evidence and testimony of witnesses that can allow the verdict to prevail. What this means is that even here, appeal strategy is focused on whatever errors in law a judge made at trial; but obviously there are those rare cases where an appellate court will be asked to overturn a verdict because it is unsafe and unsatisfactory, and they'll do so if it truly is.

[Aratech]

Unfortunately, Chris, that is indeed. The case. The closest you get is them looking at the evidence of the case, and seeing whether it was proper to admit/suppress certain bits of evidence.

Jury's verdicts are hard to assail, because the system will fall apart if juror's get it wrong too often.

More than a few SCOTUS justices have commented on this being the reason there is no oversight of the jury. There's a case in my evidence book where an appellate court refused to remand a case for a new trial, even though there was evidence that several members of the jury making the decision may have literally been drunk during the trial, were falling asleep during witness testimony, and were getting high on cocaine and marijuana when they were in deliberations.

They are extremely, extremely reluctant to engage in any sort of 'calling the jury out' behavior because a near paranoid fear that it could cause the whole system to collapse on top of itself.

Frankly, this just results in an ever growing cynicism in myself, and the growing feeling that our system is fundamentally flawed and in desperate need of an overhaul.

[Death from the Sea]

well under texas law they are not legally people. Yes, that's right, it's even a crime to be a transexual in Texas too.

ok, I am going to have to ask for some proof there.

I know it is a class C misdemeanor for homosexual conduct (defined as any "deviate sexual intercourse" between members of the same sex and "deviate sexual intercourse" is defined as the contact of any part of the genitals of one person to the mouth or anus of another person or penetration of genitals or anus with an object.)

just fyi class C misdemeanor = same as traffic ticket and is a city level arrest at best.

and while it is outdated and dumb for that to still be the law, I don't recall the penal code actually defining transsexuals to be illegal or mentioning them at all really.

[Alyrium Denryle]

well under texas law they are not legally people. Yes, that's right, it's even a crime to be a transexual in Texas too.

ok, I am going to have to ask for some proof there.

I know it is a class C misdemeanor for homosexual conduct (defined as any "deviate sexual intercourse" between members of the same sex and "deviate sexual intercourse" is defined as the contact of any part of the genitals of one person to the mouth or anus of another person or penetration of genitals or anus with an object.)

just fyi class C misdemeanor = same as traffic ticket and is a city level arrest at best.

and while it is outdated and dumb for that to still be the law, I don't recall the penal code actually defining transsexuals to be illegal or mentioning them at all really.

It has to do with the birth certificates. Texas will not re-issue them to those who have GRS, and it is kind of a cri me IIRC to have "male" checked on your birth certificate when you are obviously a women... So... Falsifying documents.

[Death from the Sea]

well under texas law they are not legally people. Yes, that's right, it's even a crime to be a transexual in Texas too.

ok, I am going to have to ask for some proof there.

I know it is a class C misdemeanor for homosexual conduct (defined as any "deviate sexual intercourse" between members of the same sex and "deviate sexual intercourse" is defined as the contact of any part of the genitals of one person to the mouth or anus of another person or penetration of genitals or anus with an object.)

just fyi class C misdemeanor = same as traffic ticket and is a city level arrest at best.

and while it is outdated and dumb for that to still be the law, I don't recall the penal code actually defining transsexuals to be illegal or mentioning them at all really.

It has to do with the birth certificates. Texas will not re-issue them to those who have GRS, and it is kind of a cri me IIRC to have "male" checked on your birth certificate when you are obviously a women... So... Falsifying documents.

ok, I guess that makes sense in a rather silly way. Never really thought about what people that are transgendered do about their birth certificate... do other states change them?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

ok, I guess that makes sense in a rather silly way. Never really thought about what people that are transgendered do about their birth certificate... do other states change them?

All of them except Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio, Tennessee, and Idaho change them, yes. In Washington State and many other more progressive states all older copies are destroyed and no evidence remains of any prior version, the only one in existence is the new one with the correct sex marker on it.

[Alyrium Denryle]

ok, I guess that makes sense in a rather silly way. Never really thought about what people that are transgendered do about their birth certificate... do other states change them?

All of them except Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio, Tennessee, and Idaho change them, yes. In Washington State and many other more progressive states all older copies are destroyed and no evidence remains of any prior version, the only one in existence is the new one with the correct sex marker on it.

In some of the really nice ones, your new state of residence will reissue your birth cert without your original state's permission if I recall properly.

[Serafina]

Why the hell is that even a state issue?

If i am not seriously mistaken, german birth certificates (and all other identification papers) are a federal issue, not a state one.

[General Zod]

Why the hell is that even a state issue?

If i am not seriously mistaken, german birth certificates (and all other identification papers) are a federal issue, not a state one.

Because we don't have national IDs in the US, and people are paranoid about giving the Federal government too much control over identity documents?

[Serafina]

Why the hell is that even a state issue?

If i am not seriously mistaken, german birth certificates (and all other identification papers) are a federal issue, not a state one.

Because we don't have national IDs in the US, and people are paranoid about giving the Federal government too much control over identity documents?

Ok, general paranoia. Well, i guess thats a goood reason. /sarcasm

[General Zod]

Why the hell is that even a state issue?

If i am not seriously mistaken, german birth certificates (and all other identification papers) are a federal issue, not a state one.

Because we don't have national IDs in the US, and people are paranoid about giving the Federal government too much control over identity documents?

Ok, general paranoia. Well, i guess thats a goood reason. /sarcasm

Turns out not every country's laws or identity systems works the same? Shocking, I know.