Quote:
Originally Posted by media
Did I say that they should have or should not have seeked the death penalty in the beginning? No... But if she's up for death penalty the costs are already there, so why house her for an unnecessary length of time beyond what is legally required.. it's not lik the governor was going to be calling and giving her clemency..
I'm well aware of the costs of trail for lifetime improsonment vs. trial for death penalty.. the cost of a death penalty case is much much higher..
but my point is, why keep her there so long after the appeals process should be over.. she's already going to cost money, why make it even more money...
get it??
|
I wouldn't have a problem with speeding up the process so long as we modified the system so that either side can't stand in the way of evidence. There are a lot of cases where either the prosecution or defense fight to not have evidence entered int the record because it either doesn't help their case or outright hurts it. In many cases they will fight to exclude DNA evidence.
In some of these cases, years and many appeals later, that DNA evidence proves the person is innocent. I just don't want to see us executing innocent people for the sake of saving a few dollars.
To me the death penalty is nothing more than a political tool. It simply does not work as a deterrent and it is expensive. Elected officials want it to they can prove they are tough on crime. It is an easy way for them to get votes.