(July 18, 2014 at 9:42 am)Tonus Wrote:What a shame. Can I ask if witness evidence is allowed for the death penalty? If so I find it repulsive, testimonial evidence is so volatile and subjective that it shouldn't be allowed for the most serious criminal offenses(July 18, 2014 at 8:19 am)Blackout Wrote: Can I ask how does the US get so many sentences wrong? Is there a cause?Crime investigation isn't easy. Crime scenes tend to be very messy and often just as uncooperative as any prospective witnesses. Human memory is a very fickle and unreliable thing, even if we assume that the witnesses to a crime are indeed witnesses and are telling the truth. Confessions are shockingly easy to obtain, sometimes even when the police aren't trying to force one out of a person. Even with more modern methods of crime scene investigation and forensics, it's not uncommon for evidence to point at the wrong person and for innocent people to become suspects or be convicted of a crime they had no part in.
This uncertainty is exacerbated when the crimes are shocking or frightening, because there is considerable pressure on the police to show that they're making progress towards solving it and bringing the perpetrator(s) to justice. And if the crime is horrifying enough, there is added pressure to apply the death penalty (in those states that have it). The desire to seek closure in those instances makes it very easy for the public to accept that John Doe is definitely the guy, regardless of how thin the case might be, and thus the prosecutors are under pressure to make sure the case holds up. In those instances where we might be applying the ultimate punishment, there could be immense pressure to getting it done, as oppose to getting it right.
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you