• halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      2 months ago

      Not just new evidence. There was never any physical evidence linking him to the crime at all, according to the articles I’ve seen so far looking into it.

  • Cyv_
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    70
    ·
    2 months ago

    Execution shouldn’t be an option. At least with life in prison you can release a person if you fucked up, with significant financial compensation for their time in prison. You can’t un-execute a person. The state isn’t competent enough to be given such power. Nobody is.

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      2 months ago

      The purpose of the US legal system is not to provide justice. It’s to terrorise poor people and minorities. So, it worked just fine here.

    • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      But what is the cost of compensation for executing somebody that was likely innocent?

      —Think about this. Life in prison is cheaper than an execution If the convict serves their entire sentence. –Is it still cheaper if the inmate has their conviction overturned and subsequently sues for restitution?

      I genuinely don’t know the answer to the latter question but nothing about sanctioned executions sits right with me.

  • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    South Carolina executed a man on death row on Friday, days after the key witness for the prosecution came forward to say he lied at trial and the state was putting to death an innocent man.

    “New evidence” seems to be underselling the matter. How in the fuck could they justify not even granting a delay??

  • Lets_Eat_Grandma@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I don’t understand how you can convict someone based on the testimony of a person getting a plea deal for turning in another person.

    The last thing the person getting the plea deal would want to do is turn over someone loyal enough to them to rob a place and shoot another person with.

    Does anyone think this would have happened if the accused was the son of a wealthy white couple? How about if it was the police chief’s son? Any senator’s son?

    Just saying. Testimony without hard evidence shouldn’t be enough for criminal conviction, let alone a fucking execution.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t understand how you can convict someone based on the testimony of a person getting a plea deal for turning in another person.

      Please refer to North Carolina’s skin color chart for further explanation.

  • Cenotaph@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    2 months ago

    Another potential innocent murdered by the state so they can claim they’re “tough on crime”

  • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    The Rev Hillary Taylor, executive director of South Carolinians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, said the flaws in Allah’s case were a reminder that “the death penalty is not given to the ‘worst of the worst’, it is given to the people who are least able to represent themselves in court”

    Salient words.