Should a family's feelings even enter into it?

[digonswine]

There was much said about how the victim's family felt about the execution of the potential murderer. Should this matter? Let's get away from the Davis execution for a bit. It seems like that if a person is put at ease by the execution of the murderer of their own family member, then it(the execution) is a bit more acceptable to some people. Why should this even enter into the discussion about whether the state killing someone is wrong or right? It seems like it is like this(for some people)--guy is executed-family is relieved = OK. Guy is executed-family still unhealed = not so OK. In the mean time--a guy is executed--DEAD!! Do you think that making victims' families feel better is a good justification to kill another human being?

[treestar]

1. I don't think it should because each case should be

decided on the same standards, and different families feel differently. It would be a matter of luck regarding how the family would feel - and even different family members of one murder victim could have different opinions.

[FiveGoodMen]

2. No.

Their feelings are completely understandable, even if they want straight-up revenge.

And the justice system should NOT take those feelings into account.

[Cool Logic]

3. Absolutely not. Lady justice is supposed to be blind, not blindly emotional.

[digonswine]

5. I agree with 1, 2, and 3-

It just seems "more OK" when the family is supportive of the murderer being killed.

[TeamsterDem]

4. No. If you have no family then what? Your life isn't important or your killer deserves less time?

Makes no sense. There are a lot of cases where some person is killed and there simply isn't a family to notify; no family members are available to testify at the hearing. So what? "Ah well forget it then, this guy wasn't important. You're lucky you didn't kill someone with a family."

How I personally feel about a loved one who was killed has no bearing on whether or not they were killed and that the killer deserves some punishment. Or what? If I cry a ton they get the death penalty, but if I only sob a bit they get 20 years?

[digonswine]

7. I agree--but not only that-

I was not necessarily talking about using family feelings to determine if a person is to die or not---more like--does the killing of this person make it more "OK" in your(not just your) mind if the family is very much for it? Does it make it less of a horror? This is more a rhetorical question than one addressed to you, specifically.

[TeamsterDem]

11. Thank you for the clarification

But I still don't think the family's opinion makes yet another killing (on top of the one that already occurred) makes it okay. In fact I still maintain that their feelings on the execution are neither here nor there in terms of justifying the punishment. For me the only true justice is a fair trial with adequate appeals rights. What a family member thinks at any stage of that process isn't something I use to decide if what happened was okay or not. And I mean that I don't think the general public should be crediting the family's grief with "sanctioning" the execution.

[hlthe2b]

6. No... absolutely not...

I think the crime and evidence should speak for itself. But, then, I absolutely am opposed to the death penalty. To use victim's impact statements to decide life or death is just incredibly biased and unjust.

[digonswine]

8. Totally agree.

[alarimer]

9. No it should be irrelevant.

Emotions are manipulative, when it comes to juries and should remain, to the extent possible, entirely absent from the proceedings.

The family cannot possibly be objective or provide any insight.

[Life Long Dem]

10. What if it was determined by one man to execute...

instead of the 9 judges last night. That would make it harder to execute a man. Having the family involved takes the guilt off of any one man executing someone.

[digonswine]

13. Yes--but who is that man?

But more like--having 9 judges involved takes the guilt off of one judge for executing one man.

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. Here is the rub

it rarely does. That is the false promise of the system and it very rarely delivers.

Oh and justice has no place for emotion, truly.

[digonswine]

14. I hope you are right that it rarely does-

I was thinking more of how "people" think of the killing of a convict. Not necessarily about how this affects any single decision. I suspect we think an execution is more "OK" when the family is for it. When they feel relieved by it. It makes it more palatable for our psyche.

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. That is what I hate abut it

the DP victimizes the relatives of the condemned... they loose a brother, a son, a daughter... and let's leave the matters of guilt or innocence...

And it also victimizes the family of the victim by giving them a false promise.

In this particular case Officer McPhail's mom started to get that sense after the execution. You can see it in her statement to the press. When she said that she felt the Troy Davis's family was suffering too... that is the beginning of that realization.

In my mind this is why it is truly barbaric.

[EFerrari]

16. When people resolve their pain by hurting others

therapists call that "acting out".

[KT2000]

17. NO!

The state cannot act on emotions of the victim's family.
People have been led to believe in something called "closure." It does not exist. Therefore the state cannot act on fallacies.
If the family is seeking revenge, the state cannot assume revenge because the ordered death would be murder.

I do not know what the justification is for the death penalty. It would seem to me that any jury, commission or board could only require removal of that person from the public. Ordering death is ordering murder.

The death penalty diminishes us all.

[JVS]

18. No.