The community used to have a forum. It was known as the Fourth Estate.

 

Everyone in the death penalty debate, inclusive of the Dallas Morning News, knows how the anti death penalty folks have so distorted the meaning of exonerated, as to mask its real meaning.

 

The 138 exonerated from death row, a Death Penalty Information Center deception, has been widely and freely dissenminated by media throughout the world, for over a decade, not because it is true, but only in service to the anti death penalty movement, for which the DMN, as others, has sacrificed their Fourth Estate soul.

 

This current editorial is but another example of an active pr machine in service to the anti death penalty movement. in their joint goal.

 

My opinion, with which you appear to disagree, is that no objective trial court judge would have had a hearing on the subject issues.  Defense counsel in the Green case were just as stunned as everyone else that Judge Fine would grant their motion. Yes, Judge Fine appears to be legally immature and succeeded in making a fool of himself, to the cheers of anti death penalty folks everywhere.

 

Recall what the Second Circuit did with Federal District Court Judge Jed Rakoff’s decison in the Quinones case?

 

Are there problems with the death penalty? Of course, no one denies them. But some actually try to look at the full picture and present both sides.

 

It is not at all surprising that the DMN and the Texas Monthly are both calling for a moratorium on the death penalty. Look at my deconstruction of Paul Burka on the Todd Willingham case, He didn’t even respond. Why? Because he couldn’t.    http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/burkablog/?p=7563#comments

 

Look at the six points you listed, presented by defense counsel. They begin with two points, which are that there are “no” safeguards for witness identifications or for false confessions – none. Did it occur to the DMN that such is complete, utter nonsense? I suspect not.

 

Is there a consensus on even one innocent executed in the US since 1973? 1900? No.  And with no safeguards! Impressive.

 

How many innocents have been murdered by criminals under the government surpervison of parole, probation or other early release? Nationwide, I suspect it is close to 100, 000 since 1973.

 

And when did the DMN call for a moratorium on those criminal justice policies? They haven’t, of course. Why?

 

If the DMN quest was in regard to the protection of innocents from government incompetance in the criminal justice system that would be your primary moratorium goal. Wouldn’t it?

 

Zero proof of innocents executed vs 100,000 innocents murdered.  Think about it?

 

Your quest is to end the death penalty, not to protect innocents.

 

In fact, when the DMN took an editorial stance against the death penalty, based upon the risk to innocents, they failed to notice that innocents are more protected with the death penalty. Why? They didn’t look.

 


 

Wake up. Smell the Fourth Estate coffee. It used to smell better and stronger, It can, again. There’s your forum.

 

One thought on “A response to the Dallas Morning News’ “Editorial: Death penalty debate needs forum” (1).

  • May 13, 2011 at 11:55 pm
    Permalink

    Fell out of bed feenlig down. This has brightened my day!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>