Would you ever grant clemency to someone on death row?

[Wakie]

The whole Tookie Williams case has brought forward a lot of interesting opinions latey.  Just out of curiousity .... if you were governor of a state, would you ever grant clemency to someone on death row?

[nini2287]

Yeah, I would have granted Robin Lovett clemency, although I might pull a George Ryan and take everybody off of death row.

[Jake]

Rarely if ever, certainly not because I disagreed with the sentence.

[John Dibble]

Yes, if I felt the trial was unfair, sufficient new evidence surfaced to cast serious doubt on the guilt of the convict, or something of that nature - you know, basically what the clemency power was meant for in the first place.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

For anyone who voted no, don't forget about things like this:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/11/20/texas.execution.ap/

[opebo]

I would always grant clemency to anyone on death row.

[WalterMitty]

I would always grant clemency to anyone on death row.

[afleitch]

I would always grant clemency to anyone on death row.

Agreed.

[The Dowager Mod]

Always.

[bgwah]

If I were governor, probably most of the time. Not always though, I would let Gary Ridgeway die, even though he got out of it.

[J. J.]

Rarely, but in cases like the Lovett one, yes.  The voters elected me to use my judgment and would use it in clemency cases.

[MasterJedi]

Yes, but it would be rarly and depend on the case.

[© tweed]

Yes, extremely rarely however.  Only if I felt the case was decided erroneously; I wouldn't let my view of the death penalty or the convicted's actions after being sentenced weigh into the equation.

[The Vorlon]

I oppose the death penalty in general, for the following reasons:

1) - Death is too good for some of these folks.  Let them rot in jail for 50 years, hopefully under harsh, painful, and inhumane conditions (kidding about the last part) - I personally think 50 years of being locked up in a 6 x 10 cage is worse punishment than being executed.

2) - The systems can, and does make a few mistakes.  Can't undo the errors after they are dead.

3) - The system lacks moral precision.  We don't execute people just for murder.  There has to be "special circumstances" such as rape, violence, etc.
So a Murder + rape gets you executed, but murder alone does not, for example. 

What about miuder + agravated assault?

What about Murder + 3 parking tickets and two counts of tax evasion?  -

A line must be drawn between life and death, and I for one am unable to see with adaquate moral clarity where that line should be.

4) - Tons of Lawyers "earn" tons of money with these endless death penalty appeals.  Abolish the death penalty and cost a bunch of Lawyers their jobs. - A classic "win-win" if ever there was one

[Jake]

I oppose the death penalty in general, for the following reasons:

1) - Death is too good for some of these folks.  Let the rot in jail for 50 years, hopefully under harsh, painful, and inhumane conditions (kidding about the last part) - I personally think 50 years of being locked up in a 6 x 10 cage is worse punishment than being executed.

Being a slave in a field for 18 hours a day until death from exhaustion is the proper penalty for this trash. Until that is changed, death penalty it is.

[YRABNNRM]

What a loaded question.

[Joe Republic]

As has been mentioned, I would grant clemency if the guilt had since been called into question.

I oppose the death penalty, but I would continue to use the system as it was legally designed until I could remove it by legal means.  Universal clemency would be an abuse of my power.

[© tweed]

Being a slave in a field for 18 hours a day until death from exhaustion is the proper penalty for this trash. Until that is changed, death penalty it is.

If that was my sentence, I simply wouldn't comply.

But of course, if I commited murder, I'd be sure to kill myself on the spot as well.

[Rin-chan]

Yes, if and only if there was hard evidence they were innocent.  If the evidence isn't clear or substantial enough, too bad.

Rin-chan

[MODU]

There has to be a good reason, such as reasonable doubt over the trial for example.  However, all of that would have already been debated in the courts.  Any "last minute" evidence will be frown upon since it would be skeptical.  So, the odds of me granting clemency would be very thin, but I wouldn't rule it out all together.

[No One]

Thats not a fair question. For those of us who are in favor of the death penalty, it should be a case by case decision. Obviously those against the death penalty will always vote to grant clemency.

[MODU]

Thats not a fair question. For those of us who are in favor of the death penalty, it should be a case by case decision. Obviously those against the death penalty will always vote to grant clemency.

That's why it's phrased "Would you ever..." That allows for case by case.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

yes, in all cases

[Joe Republic]

Obviously those against the death penalty will always vote to grant clemency.

Not necessarily.  See my post just a couple up from yours.

[TB]

As has been mentioned, I would grant clemency if the guilt had since been called into question.

I oppose the death penalty, but I would continue to use the system as it was legally designed until I could remove it by legal means.  Universal clemency would be an abuse of my power.

Good point. I agree with you.

Another problem concerning the death penalty is that it, like other criminal offenses, is related to poverty. Most of the people on death row are poor, partly because higher crime rates come with poverty, but also because poorer people can't afford qualified lawyers.