- Joined
- Sep 3, 2011
- Messages
- 34,817
- Reaction score
- 18,576
- Location
- Look to your right... I'm that guy.
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
When the state errs in the execution of a convicted criminal, what should be done?
Question presumes that 1) the execution has already taken place, and 2) new evidence is produced (or lingers) to demonstrate either factual innocence or at least serious and legitimate doubt.
What should the state do?
- Leave it alone? It's done.
- Destroy the evidence immediately after execution and pretend nothing happened so they can't be called on it?
- Pursue it to find the truth? What good would that do, right?
Then, let's say they do pursue it, and agree that a mistake has been made. What then?
- Leave it alone? It's done.
- Sell the movie rights?
- Compensate the deceased's heirs? If so, how much?
Question presumes that 1) the execution has already taken place, and 2) new evidence is produced (or lingers) to demonstrate either factual innocence or at least serious and legitimate doubt.
What should the state do?
- Leave it alone? It's done.
- Destroy the evidence immediately after execution and pretend nothing happened so they can't be called on it?
- Pursue it to find the truth? What good would that do, right?
Then, let's say they do pursue it, and agree that a mistake has been made. What then?
- Leave it alone? It's done.
- Sell the movie rights?
- Compensate the deceased's heirs? If so, how much?