[quote]fahd wrote:
The sick thing is that not only he MAY be innocent, but he was 17 when he “could’ve” committed the crime.[/quote]
He is 51 years old and the crime in question was 26 years ago…
And when you say he “MAY” be innocent, really, what are you basing that on? The facts are rather compelling in this case. Or are you going more from the fact that you can never seem to 100% prove anything?
Oh yes, I forgot, you are the judge of what should or should not be discussed in any thread.
Okay everybody, from here on out, only yes or no votes… and no side discussions dammit.
[quote]Kuz wrote:
fahd wrote:
The sick thing is that not only he MAY be innocent, but he was 17 when he “could’ve” committed the crime.
He is 51 years old and the crime in question was 26 years ago…
And when you say he “MAY” be innocent, really, what are you basing that on? The facts are rather compelling in this case. Or are you going more from the fact that you can never seem to 100% prove anything?[/quote]
Well seeing as he can’t even get the FACTS of this case correct, I wouldn’t worry about his reasoning. He didn’t feel it important enough to even know the case for which he is so vehemently opposed to the outcome.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Heaven forbid you stay on topic.
Oh yes, I forgot, you are the judge of what should or should not be discussed in any thread.
Okay everybody, from here on out, only yes or no votes… and no side discussions dammit.[/quote]
I vote yes!
Err, what am I voting on again?
[quote]vroom wrote:
Heaven forbid you stay on topic.
Oh yes, I forgot, you are the judge of what should or should not be discussed in any thread.
Okay everybody, from here on out, only yes or no votes… and no side discussions dammit.[/quote]
Whatever vroom. If you read my post it speaks for itself. I wan’t saying what could be discussed, I merely pointed out WHILE THAT IS VALID, this thread was about one particular case and that dude should bake from the inside out.
I suppose you take issue with something there, but seeing as I’m the newly appointed leader here I could give a shit.
[quote]sasquatch wrote:
… this thread was about one particular case and that dude should bake from the inside out.
[/quote]
Sort of on topic - what is the method of execution there?
[quote]harris447 wrote:
The point, schmuck, is that we should not be on that list at all. We should fllow the lead of every other civilized nation and abolish the death penalty.[/quote]
Nice use of yiddish. But I have to disagree with you. Don’t move to Texas if you have a problem with capital punishment. Don’t shoot a 63 year-old man in the back of the head, yank his wife out onto the street, and drive off in their Mercedes in the State of Texas - even if you are 17.
If you are mentally challenged - go to New Jersey and do your senseless killing. You will be executed in the State of Texas.
Am I supposed to feel sorry for cold blooded killers? Offer them a chance to rehabilitate?
Tell you what there, harry - when they are able to offer the same thing to the innocent people that have had their lives prematurely ended at the hands of cold blooded murderers - then I will be a proud advocate of ending the death penalty.
But I don’t think we have that capability yet. So fry the bastards. I could give a shit what their IQ is, or when they were born.
We don’t execute ‘people’ we exevute convicted capital murderers. We don’t discriminate based on age, sex, race, religion, or IQ.
It’s just the way it is in the Greatest State in the Union. We kill capital murderers. And noe, thanks to the express lane - if a a suspect in a capital murder case can be identified at the scene by two or more credible witnesses - the lucky convicted criminal gets to move to the front of the line.
And I’m pretty sure…no, no check that…I am damn sure we don’t give a flying fuck what some harry ass in Jersy, or a teenager in the UK thinks about Texas. Don’t like it? That makes it even sweeter when the lights dim in Huntsville.
[quote]Massif wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
… this thread was about one particular case and that dude should bake from the inside out.
Sort of on topic - what is the method of execution there?
[/quote]
lethal injection
[quote]rainjack wrote:
It’s just the way it is in the Greatest State in the Union. [/quote]
“Greatest State in the Union”, heh?
Please somebody remind me again why we annexed you guys in the first place… I?m serious – every now and then I need SOMEBODY to remind me why.
Have you considering de-annexing yourselves? I mean, if you’re such a great state – in fact the “Greatest State in the Union” – I’m sure you’d do much better without us blueys hanging off your back and I’m pretty sure – actually, I’m absolutely sure – we wouldn’t miss you guys either.
Except maybe for Professor X, but I’m sure we can convince him to move.
So we’d definitely have a mutually beneficial arrangement if you de-annexed, don’t you agree?
[quote]fahd wrote:
Probe points to wrongful execution
Nov 23, 2005
A Texas man executed in 1993 for a robbery-murder was probably wrongfully convicted, according to a prosecutor, the jury forewoman, an alibi witness and even a victim, the Houston Chronicle said on Tuesday.
“Ruben Cantu had nothing to do with the murder, attempted murder and robbery of the two men … I should know,” a friend and fellow gang member, David Garza, told the newspaper.
Cantu, only 17 when the crime took place, was convicted of murdering Pedro Gomez during a 1984 robbery largely on the testimony of a single eyewitness, Juan Moreno.
Moreno, then 19, an illegal immigrant wounded during the robbery, now says he is positive Cantu was not at the scene.
Moreno twice failed to identify Cantu to police, but did so when they asked him a third time, the Chronicle said. Cantu was put to death by lethal injection in 1993, when he was 26.
“(Police) told me they were certain it was him, and that’s why I testified,” Moreno told the newspaper.
“That was bad to blame someone that was not there.”
Texas, President George W. Bush’s home state, leads the United States in executions, with 355 since 1982.
A Democrat, Ann Richards, was governor when Cantu was put to death.
Cantu would not be executed now - the US Supreme Court ruled this year that it executions are illegal for crimes committed by minors.
Garza confessed to robbery as part of the 1984 break-in in San Antonio. Currently in prison for another crime, he said he was with another teen who committed the murder, not Cantu.
Garza had immunity from further prosecution under a plea deal, but he only sent a cryptic note offering help to Cantu’s lawyer a month before the execution date.
The attorney, Nancy Barohn, said Garza never offered anything concrete and Cantu never indicated that Garza could clear him.
Miriam Ward, forewoman of the jury that sent Cantu to his fate, said the entire process failed.
“We did the best we could with the information we had, but with a little extra work, a little extra effort, maybe we’d have gotten the right information,” she told the newspaper.
“The bottom line is an innocent person was put to death for it. We all have our finger in that.”
The Bexar County District Attorney at the time, Sam Millsap Jr., now agrees police led Moreno to the identification.
“We have a system that permits people to be convicted based on evidence that could be wrong because it’s mistaken or it’s corrupt,” Millsap, now in private practice, told the Chronicle.
The Bexar County District Attorney’s Office, which prosecuted, did not return a call from Reuters on Tuesday.
[/quote]
A clearer picturer from the Lone Star Times:
Cantu case getting more attention
by Owen Courr?ges | 12/05/2005 8:25 am
I?m sorry I haven?t posted in a week, but my finals in law school are now upon me. That means I study very little unrelated to the law during this time, unless it gets me on a tear.
The Ruben Cantu case has me on a tear.
The story has gotten continued attention, mostly from the Chronicle itself (apparently, they wanted to link Cantu?s putative innocence to the landmark 1,000th post-Furhman execution). Most of the Chron?s stuff, itself an odd mix of news reporting anti-death penalty zeal, has been picked up by other editorialists and columnists condemning the death penalty. Most recently, Slate has picked up the story with an opinion piece from Dan Markel, law professor and co-founder of Prawfsblog.
But the Chron?s version of events have some very loose ends. Here are questions I?d like to see answered, and answered in such a way that I actually believe Cantu?s innocence:
Juan Moreno was the surviving victim of the robbery/murder for which Cantu was executed. He now claims that he was intimidated by the police into falsely implicating Cantu and on the stand, and for the eight years until his execution. However, his claim makes little sense. He has explicitly stated that the police in no way threatened him. The Chronicle has described the supposedly police intimidation as “subtle” ? that the police strongly indicated that they knew Cantu was guilty. But without any serious allegations of police misconduct (i.e., threats), why would Moreno misidentify Cantu as the perpetrator?
It is true that Moreno initially declined to recognize Cantu in a photo array, but police did subsequent photo arrays, and finally Moreno ID?ed Cantu. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals hold that the identification pretrial identification procedure was suggestive, since repeated photo arrays with the same person (Cantu) tended to indicate that police had somebody in mind. However, they held that the risk of irreparable misidentification was slight since Moreno had a clear view of Cantu during the crime. In any event, there was no evidence offered of police intimidation, and Moreno doesn?t dispute the record.
Also, Moreno?s explanation for why he initially refused to identify Cantu was sound ? Cantu was a member of a violent youth gang that might retaliate against Moreno?s family. This explanation certainly makes more sense that Moreno?s current story ? that even in the complete absence of any threats by the police, he was so overwhelmed by “subtle” intimidation that he perjured himself, sent and innocent man to death row, and refused to do anything about it for eight years. And now the guilt for this utterly irrational act has caught up with him. Thanks to an investigation by the Houston Chronicle, he?s finally ready to speak up.
Am I the only one who thinks this sounds fishy? There?s got to be more to this story, because what Moreno is saying now just doesn?t make much sense to me (unless Moreno is a truly ridiculous person). I?d like the Chronicle to find out the truth.
The revelations of David Garza are even less credible. Garza, now incarcerated, says that that a third teen was the person who actually committed the crime with him. Cantu and Garza were close friends who apparently did everything together, but on the night of the murder, Cantu was supposedly gone, and another teen committed the crime with him. The man who Garza implicates only has one domestic violence conviction on his record? nothing to indicate he?s a cold-blooded killer. He emphatically denies any involvement. For his part, Garza claims that a gangland “code of silence” kept he and Cantu from clarifying the situation in open court. It isn?t clear why this kept Garza from speaking out sooner.
The police claim that Garza identified Cantu prior to his trial, which Garza denies. So bascially, Garza claims that the police are lying, this third person is lying, and that a “code of silence” sent Cantu to death row. Everyone?s lying but Garza, and of course, now Moreno. I just don?t see why his affidavit should carry any weight.
The Chronicle apparently hasn?t bothered to show this third man?s picture to Moreno in order to see if the two stories match (if they have an it?s buried somewhere in one of their articles, I?d love to hear about it). If Moreno can?t identify this third party, or says it wasn?t him, that definitely would raise my suspicions.
The Chronicle has also made hay of the fact that evidence was offered in court that a month after the murder, Cantu had shot Officer Joe de la Luz several times in a pool hall. Luz claimed that the attack was unprovoked, while Cantu claimed that they?d had an altercation and Luz flashed a gun in his waistband and threatened him. Cantu?s attorney?s called up six other San Antonio police officers to dispute Luz?s testimony as to the indicent. By the Chronicle?s reckoning, this tainted the jury findings. By all reports, Luz was a bit of a druken hothead ? he had commendations in his record, but also reprimands and incident reports. Cantu?s story was believable.
However, the jury was exposed to both sides, and no matter what the facts, Cantu was essentially guilty of attempted murder, or at least assault with a deadly weapon. Even if Luz threatened him and revealed he was armed, that doesn?t make pulling your gun and emptying a clip into a person “self-defense.” Luz was lucky to survive. Most people shot several times wind up dead, and I doubt Cantu was such a sharpshooter that Luz?s survival was in any way intentional. The jury was correct to take the incident into account. What reason is there to believe otherwise?
The Chronicle has also made hay over the existence of other alibi witnesses who didn?t testify. Cantu?s sister testified as an alibi witness at trial, but the jury didn?t believe her. The Chronicle has identified a non-family witness, but it?s not altogether clear what his motivations are (A family friend? A fellow gang member?). Cantu?s brother?s could have also testified, but it?s unlikely that their testimony would have added anything, since they are apparently violent thugs themselves. Remember, the man implicated by Garza claims to himself be the victim of continuing harassment from Cantu?s brothers, who want to intimidate him into changing his story.
[quote]hspder wrote:
“Greatest State in the Union”, heh?[/quote]
Absolutely. The state that people love to hate - until you get a chance to move here. If I had a nickel for every northerner, or Californian that lived here - I could almost retire.
I don’t really think it was an annexation - we cut a deal, and retained our right to leave.
I used to have a Texas Secede t-shirt. The shirt is gone, but the sentiment is still very strong.
When we control about half of the refined petroleum in the country at any given time, not to mention all the natural gas, we become way more vital to your pampered way of life than you want to admit to. Ever eat Beef? A good 75% of it has stood in our state at some time in their brief lives. Dig those cotton threads you have on? Over half of the domestic cotton is made…any guesses? Yep - the state that you wouldn’t miss. Plus - what would happen to Division I football if schools weren’t able to mine talent from this football rich state?
He already has - and he misses home dearly. (okay - I added the last part on my own. So sue me)
[quote]So we’d definitely have a mutually beneficial arrangement if you de-annexed, don’t you agree?
[/quote]
No, California is so damn broke right now - that you guys couln’t afford it if Texas left. (I am assuming you are still in Cali).
You just sound jealous, hspder. Not that there is anything wrong with that.
.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
hspder wrote:
“Greatest State in the Union”, heh?
Absolutely. The state that people love to hate - until you get a chance to move here. If I had a nickel for every northerner, or Californian that lived here - I could almost retire.
Please somebody remind me again why we annexed you guys in the first place… I?m serious – every now and then I need SOMEBODY to remind me why.
I don’t really think it was an annexation - we cut a deal, and retained our right to leave.
Have you considering de-annexing yourselves? I mean, if you’re such a great state – in fact the “Greatest State in the Union” – I’m sure you’d do much better without us blueys hanging off your back and I’m pretty sure – actually, I’m absolutely sure – we wouldn’t miss you guys either.
I used to have a Texas Secede t-shirt. The shirt is gone, but the sentiment is still very strong.
When we control about half of the refined petroleum in the country at any given time, not to mention all the natural gas, we become way more vital to your pampered way of life than you want to admit to. Ever eat Beef? A good 75% of it has stood in our state at some time in their brief lives. Dig those cotton threads you have on? Over half of the domestic cotton is made…any guesses? Yep - the state that you wouldn’t miss. Plus - what would happen to Division I football if schools weren’t able to mine talent from this football rich state?
Except maybe for Professor X, but I’m sure we can convince him to move.
He already has - and he misses home dearly. (okay - I added the last part on my own. So sue me)
So we’d definitely have a mutually beneficial arrangement if you de-annexed, don’t you agree?
No, California is so damn broke right now - that you guys couln’t afford it if Texas left. (I am assuming you are still in Cali).
You just sound jealous, hspder. Not that there is anything wrong with that.
[/quote]
Damn RJ, I couldn’t have expressed it any better. Nice!
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Except maybe for Professor X, but I’m sure we can convince him to move.
He already has - and he misses home dearly. (okay - I added the last part on my own. So sue me)
[/quote]
Regardless of where I stand on the issue of killing as retribution for crimes, Texas (better yet), Houston is the greatest city in the world. The rest of the state comes in second. It is like being torn between a huge city like New York and open landscape with cows and the occasional horse being ridden down the street. The only thing that fucks it up are ridiculously big belt buckles, people who wear cowboy boots but have never even seen a horse up close, and drive-bys. Anyone who has stereotyped it never comes close to describing it correctly. It is probably the largest balanced clash of culture in North America. Then again, maybe Cali comes in right behind it.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Except maybe for Professor X, but I’m sure we can convince him to move.
He already has - and he misses home dearly. (okay - I added the last part on my own. So sue me)
Regardless of where I stand on the issue of killing as retribution for crimes, Texas (better yet), Houston is the greatest city in the world. The rest of the state comes in second. It is like being torn between a huge city like New York and open landscape with cows and the occasional horse being ridden down the street. The only thing that fucks it up are ridiculously big belt buckles, people who wear cowboy boots but have never even seen a horse up close, and drive-bys. Anyone who has stereotyped it never comes close to describing it correctly. It is probably the largest balanced clash of culture in North America. Then again, maybe Cali comes in right behind it.[/quote]
It would almost be the perfect city if they could do something about their atrocious NFL team, and the sorry state of Cougar football. I still remember the days of the Houston Veer. Run and Shoot was fun to watch, but the old Bill Yeoman Houston Veer was incredible.
Personally, I think they should outlaw Cowboy boots, and the big-assed dinner plate sized belt buckles. Unless they are being worn by a stripper. I think I would enjoy watching a stripper in boots and sporting a big-assed belt buckle.
[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
harris447 wrote:
Interesting fact: In 2004, the US was fourth in terms of number of people executed. Let’s take a look at who else made this list.
CHINA (At least 3,400 Executions)
IRAN (Approx. 159)
VIET NAM (Approx. 64)
UNITED STATES (59)
Saudi Arabia (33)
Pakistan (15)
Kuwait (9)
Bangladesh (7)
Egypt (6)
Singapore (6)
Yemen (6)
Source: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=127&scid=30#interexec
Now…aren’t we supposed to be better, more civilized than fucking Iran? Yemen?
BostonBarrister wrote:
I don’t think that this is really a question of being “civilized” - that assumes a whole lot of conclusions.
I would take those stats with a large grain of salt. Firstly, there are quite a few countries not named on that list who apparently aren’t providing their stats (where are the central African countries? Cuba?). Secondly, the list assumes even those providing the stats aren’t underreporting, either on purpose to make themselves “look better”, or inadvertently because it’s too hard for the centarl government to collect data on the sentences imposed by the locals, i.e. tribal leaders, etc.
FightinIrish26 wrote:
I agree Boston- but didn’t you just refute #1 with #2?
If it has little to do with being civilized, and you agree, that’s fine. But then, in defense, you then say that there are those who don’t report stats. Either way, you are lumping the US together with African tribesman, warlords from other nations, and very oppressive governments (the Islamic ones on that list).
I don’t follow you. How is saying that, by classifying use of the death penalty as inherently uncivilized, you are assuming too much contradicted by pointing out that if you are trying to rank countries, “in the world” based on reported government-enforced executions, then in order to do so properly you need to ascertain that you have a properly compiled set of numbers?
FightinIrish26 wrote:
I don’t see GB, Germnany, Japan, or Spain on those lists. It is us, the “Islamo-fascists”, and unnamed other third world countries. Maybe it is a question of civilization?
I don’t think that the practice or absence of particular practice amounts to a proof of civilization or lack thereof. If all the countries in Europe decided the cease the practice of wiping their behinds, I wouldn’t care either. It’s a version of the ad populi fallacy.
BTW, there are 74 countries that allow for the use of the death penalty, including Japan.[/quote]
Sorry then, I misunderstood you. I agree that the numbers may be off- there is no real way to tell.
However, as I said, the death penalty is an odd question for me, one that I do not feel strongly about one way or another. It is one where you have to determine what is more important- justice or mercy. And I’m not too sure which one is more valuable.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
No, California is so damn broke right now - that you guys couln’t afford it if Texas left. (I am assuming you are still in Cali). [/quote]
That’s BS and you know it. California gives a lot more to other States than it gets back, and has done so forever.
And in regards to cotton, beef and oil – it’s not like you guys are giving it away, and there are plenty of other options out there… both inside and outside the US.
When you call out a State as being “the greatest”, you better have something to back it up. And, honestly, I don’t see anything that would justify such a claim – in any “contest”.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Professor X wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Except maybe for Professor X, but I’m sure we can convince him to move.
He already has - and he misses home dearly. (okay - I added the last part on my own. So sue me)
Regardless of where I stand on the issue of killing as retribution for crimes, Texas (better yet), Houston is the greatest city in the world. The rest of the state comes in second. It is like being torn between a huge city like New York and open landscape with cows and the occasional horse being ridden down the street. The only thing that fucks it up are ridiculously big belt buckles, people who wear cowboy boots but have never even seen a horse up close, and drive-bys. Anyone who has stereotyped it never comes close to describing it correctly. It is probably the largest balanced clash of culture in North America. Then again, maybe Cali comes in right behind it.
It would almost be the perfect city if they could do something about their atrocious NFL team, and the sorry state of Cougar football. I still remember the days of the Houston Veer. Run and Shoot was fun to watch, but the old Bill Yeoman Houston Veer was incredible.
Personally, I think they should outlaw Cowboy boots, and the big-assed dinner plate sized belt buckles. Unless they are being worn by a stripper. I think I would enjoy watching a stripper in boots and sporting a big-assed belt buckle. [/quote]
Yea which reminds me…how bout them Cowboys RJ? Go Big Blue…
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Regardless of where I stand on the issue of killing as retribution for crimes, Texas (better yet), Houston is the greatest city in the world.[/quote]
You see, I can’t really separate the two. If the majority of the people in a State so strongly (the key word being “strongly”) subscribe to a set of principles that I hold to be fundamentally wrong, I could not, in good conscience, even consider living there, much less consider it stands out positively somehow.
Texas does stand out, but for all the wrong reasons – just see this page:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=8&did=186
or this one:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=8&did=480
And I say this irrespective of where I was born: in fact, if I were hard-pressed to elect the “greatest city in the world”, I’d say “Manhattan”… which, in my mind, clearly IS the largest balanced clash of culture in the planet.
And if you miss open landscape, well, that’s why we have airplanes. 
[quote]hspder wrote:
rainjack wrote:
No, California is so damn broke right now - that you guys couln’t afford it if Texas left. (I am assuming you are still in Cali).
That’s BS and you know it. California gives a lot more to other States than it gets back, and has done so forever.
And in regards to cotton, beef and oil – it’s not like you guys are giving it away, and there are plenty of other options out there… both inside and outside the US.
When you call out a State as being “the greatest”, you better have something to back it up. And, honestly, I don’t see anything that would justify such a claim – in any “contest”.[/quote]
Oh - I backed it up just fine. You just don’t like it that I am right. Texas is the Greatest. If Cali is so damned affluent why is your state broke? Or is that effluent? Never mind - they both define Cali pretty well as far as I am concerned.
But all kidding aside - Are subjective opinions not allowed anymore? Especially ones that have little, if any, relevance to the topic at hand?
I find it odd that you find it worth your while to post only to get on my ass about my high opinion of Texas in a thread that is supposed to be about the impending execution of your fellow Californian.