South Carolina AG: Freddie Owens to Be Executed Despite Key Witness' Bombshell Claim (www.commondreams.org)

submitted 1 month ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] fluxion@lemmy.world 33 points 1 month ago

The office of Republican South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson responded to Golden's affidavit on Thursday, calling his claim "inherently suspect" and stating that he "has now made a sworn statement that is contrary to his multiple other sworn statements over 20 years."

So your only witness is either lying now, where he has no reason to, or he was lying back in 1997 when it was out of fear for his life and under pressure of the police.

And that's enough grounds to confidentially procede with killing a man...

I know "beyond a reasonable doubt" is subjective, but there is no world where that's not "reasonable doubt".

Absolutely monstrous behavior.

[-] bostonbananarama@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Playing devil's advocate, a person could provide false testimony, contrary to earlier truthful testimony, if they feel guilt over causing this person's execution. In no way saying that is, or is not, the case here.

Regardless, the death penalty is a profound failure. It is more expensive, innocent people can be executed, and studies show that it provides no deterrent to criminals. There is literally no benefit.

[-] TheFogan@programming.dev 2 points 1 month ago

Honestly I think the biggest issue in law enforcement in general... is human testimony has this kind of weight to begin with. This guy was convicted of murder... with apparently the entirety of the evidence against him being "a criminal said he did it".

Even if the penalty was JUST 20 years in prison, and death penalty wasn't on the table, that's so wrong to me. 1 man's word is not a reliable way to confirm anything. People have garbage memories, and can lie.

Agreed we can't tell which way the flip is... and that's kind of the crux of the issue... The evidence was unverifiable from day 1. So even if the death penalty was never on the table... this man had nearly 30 years of his life taken away... on literally one persons word, to top it off that one person was confirmed to be a criminal.

So yeah there's 2 major giant red flags to our justice system in this case. 1. The terribleness of death penalty to begin with. But 2. the idea of a single eye witnesses word having the ability to take decades of someone's life away,

[-] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

The one part of the argument against the death penalty that I have to object to is the expense. It's more expensive because of the appeals process. There is a lot more opportunity to fight a death penalty case on appeal than there is if you just get a lengthy prison sentence.

Of course, that's less of a reason to keep the death penalty, and more of a reason to address some of the huge flaws in the appeals process (not to mention the rest of the system, but that applies either way).

[-] Zexks@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

South Carolina Judge is set to commit murder.

FTFY

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 2 points 1 month ago

There are no good Republicans, case #535626644.

this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024

94 points (99.0% liked)

politics

19089 readers

1435 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News