I know it's been a while since I've posted here. I will catch you up later. Just of all my blogs, this seemed the most fitting for today's thoughts. It should be noted that Monty is not facing capital punishment for his crime.
I'm new to this story. I haven't been following it, I have heard no evidence, I have read no news reports (until yesterday evening around 1900). Even so, there is so much about this whole situation that just is not right.
Do I think he was innocent? I don't know. But in the wonderful United States of America, that doesn't matter either. He is presumed innocent. Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Was he actually proven guilty? I don't know, having seen none of the trial. Was there doubt? Hell, yes.
I saw this post on Facebook this morning, and there is so much more I want to say - far beyond the space that FB will allow me.
First I will repeat the comment that I did make.
From the article: "The U.S. Supreme Court even gave Davis an unusual opportunity to prove his innocence in a lower court last year."
No. No, no, no. That is not how our judicial system was meant to work. You don't have to prove innocence. If he was executed because he couldn't prove innocence, then everyone involved is a murderer because they forgot that the system was designed to presume the accused are innocent and the burden of proof is on the prosecutors. Does this mean we're moving towards a 'guilty until proven innocent' system? Get the lawmakers who support this out NOW!
Then, I need to talk about someone's comment.
I cannot adequately express how terribly ignorant this statement is, particularly the last bit. Look at it again: 'it's ok to kill someone, because if they did nothing wrong, they'll go to heaven." By that rationale, Mr Johnson can go around killing people all he wants, because he's doing them a favor by sending them to heaven. I just can't believe someone could think like this. I have more to say on the matter, but this is all I can get out. It is shocking.
The amount of people commenting on that post that we need more capital punishment is just staggering. Death is not the answer. It never has been. It has been studied over and over. The threat of death is not a criminal deterrent. It costs taxpayers more money to kill someone than it does to keep them in prison for the rest of their life. The research is out there.
And what makes righteous killing any better than murder? Taking a life is taking a life, whether you do it by force or with a needle and the approval of your government.
Another comment from that post, particularly the second sentence is of note:
The whole thing is very sad. A life was ended and no one can agree if he deserved it, or if he was innocent of the crime he was accused. I say he did not deserve it and being innocent or not is completely irrelevant. Even in that regard, there was more than enough doubt to stay an execution. The amount of disagreements in that FB post alone is proof of that.
We live in a frightening place indeed if this is what passes for justice.