100% without doubt Bieber was assaulted on camera more than a few times. There were many cases of adult women groping him in public. Whether more sexual assault occurred, I haven’t followed the news closely enough to be informed, but as a minor he was definitely sexually assaulted. He’s not alone in having that minimized, but it’s especially minimized for women toward boys. There’s still a declining but always voiced opinion of “Good for that kid who was molested by a teacher, wish I could be him!”
1 Like
Thought this would be a good thread to bump, since we just murdered somebody who’s likely innocent and this was known prior to execution.
RIP.
1 Like
After reading the entire article, “likely innocent” is an overstatement.
I think you would at least agree that his conviction was not “beyond a reasonable doubt” with the new information, and he was nonetheless killed.
1 Like
You should re-read that portion of the article. There is enough there to sustain a conviction even with the murder weapon DNA evidence being contaminated. Confession, witness saw him dispose of bloody clothes, possession of the murdered persons property…
The bare minimum for the death penalty is a near 100% probability that the crime was committed by that person. If there was a 99.5% chance, I wouldn’t agree to the death penalty.
2 Likes
Reading the wikipedia page doesn’t strike me an obviously miscarriage of justice. There was some fuss at the very end but the courts themselves said it was a rehash of prior appeals.
I read more about it, none of the forensic evidence at the scene matched him. It does strike me as a terrible outcome…
1 Like
The element I find particularly troublesome is that the panel the prior governor commissioned to investigate the questions about the trial and evidence was simply dissolved and the stay revoked.
I can understand a new governor being frustrated that the panel had taken six years…and the article doesn’t mention them having actually done anything. However, ethrically, if there was enough of a question to justify convening such a group, the execution shouldn’t move forward unless/until the group affirms the verdict.
I’ve probably said this elsewhere, but I’ll say it here: while I have zero problems with using the death penalty, it should be really rare and reserved for situations where there’s zero question as to whether the accused is guilty.
Which, brings us to:
Which, if the criteria for using the death penalty is “pulled the trigger,” fine - but if it’s mere involvement, then the other guy involved should have had the death penalty as well.
And, to add to this since we apparently missed this one:
But remember: the pro-life party is very pro-death when it comes to punishment. Gotta preserve life if there’s any question as to whether it exists or not, gotta snuff out life if there’s any question as to whether innocence exists or not.
1 Like
Well, not for white people.
1 Like
Not for white people who wear red hats, at least.
Germany had the brown shirts. Italy had the black shirts. We get the red hats.
Yet another reminder that the party that loves to bleat about how it’s very pro-life is in fact nothing more than pro-birth, because when it comes to administering punishment when someone dies it’s very pro-death.
Being lazy, I chose the first likely thread… Looks like Biden commuted the death sentences of all but 3 people on Federal death row.
1 Like
He saved Dylan Roof for Trump to commute.
3 Likes
I don’t get it. If you oppose the death penalty, it shouldn’t matter what the crime was. If you’re commuting sentences because you oppose the death penalty, do all of them. Don’t exclude those 3.
Personally, I’m in favor of the death penalty.
The exception was terrorists and mass murderers I believe. The other 37 he moved from death to life w/o parole.
I’m OK with both actions.
1 Like
I am generally opposed to the death penalty as a waste of time and resources as well as inconsistency in how is applied.
That’s different than purely religious or moral objections.
3 Likes