|
Post by tulla63 on May 11, 2005 16:59:10 GMT -5
Do you think Lonnie has paid his due now? When exactly can you say enough is enough?
Love, Turid
|
|
|
Post by EddieStratton on May 12, 2005 20:40:45 GMT -5
Being lied to by people on Death Row. Big swing.
Is that supposed to be a problem? What else can we expect from someone in mortal danger? For a start, one in seven are innocent according to Amnesty International, so we need to take everyone on Death Row seriously just in case they're NOT lying.
Now, here's some moral calculus for those who are about to die:
Imagine this scene:
I am tied up and a badass criminal with some hardcore automatic weaponry points his gun to my head. He tells me he will shoot me unless I say the following words:
"I want to attack my mother with a shovel and I want to sell my kids to slave traders."
Guess what my next words are gonna be? No prizes.
Now I know I don't hate my mother, and I know I don't want to sell my kids, and that's all that matters to me. As long as he's only telling me to lie, then I can deal with it.
However, if he then tries to get me to act on this lie, then it's gonna be a very different story. I think I'll probably figure out that it's better to get shot than to attack my mother with a shovel and sell my kids into slavery.
But for now, he's threatening me with either of the following: a) losing my life, or b) telling a lie in an extreme situation, which I don't even believe. Which would you choose? I'm kind of edging towards telling the lie, and yet I'm ordinarily an ethical guy. Oh, the shock of it.
Remember poor Kenneth Bigley, who was kidnapped in Iraq by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's extremist group? It was reported that he would be released if he converted to Wahabbi Islam, which is that Taliban-style extreme Islam practised by the Saudi theocrats. Guess what he did? He 'converted'. The fact that he made it clear that his conversion was a lie by running away sealed his fate and he was brutally murdered by the Tauhid wal-Jihad group for the 'crime' of aspostacy. If you have a problem with people on Death Row lying, do you have a problem with Ken Bigley's lie too? C'mon, we gotta be consistent if we want to be taken seriously! Personally, in that situation I'd have converted to Islam on the spot, put on a yashmak and forced my chin to grow a massive Bin Laden beard in five minutes flat.
So some people lie on Death Row. Yawn. I could care less if I tried really, really hard. They're on Death Row for Chrissakes. What kind of idiocy would cause anyone not to make the trade off? How many people do you know who are THIS stupid:
"I know I am going to die unless I try everything to get out of this situation, but I draw the line at telling an untruth."
Even Christians are implicitly allowed to lie in extreme circumstances. It's in the rulebook: suicide is a cardinal sin, whereas not bearing false witness is only a commandment.
In any case, last time I checked, I don't recall Ned Flanders ever being sent to Death Row...
As a parallel, nobody seems to care much about politicians lying, and their lies kill people by the thousand. It's so normal that we wearily expect it. So what's with this fakeass indignation when people on Death Row try to save their skin?
|
|
|
Post by tulla63 on May 13, 2005 1:46:37 GMT -5
Excellently put EddieStratton! This is a matter of self-preservation. Its an instinct. Whenever threated with death, any person would do anything to save his life. Under such circumstances, it's not only a possibility, but it is in fact a duty. Another thing is that its possible for those who suspect that an innocent person might have been sentenced to die, to go through all available papers, the trial transcript, the direct appeal to CCA, the response from same, The State Habeas Petition, The Federal Habeas Petition, Petition to the Court of Criminal Appeals for the 5. Circuit, their responses, petition for COA to the US. Supreme Court and all the successor writs - if all this is available, but it should be if you contact the trial court clerks if you are willing to pay a few bucks for it. This way, it is possible for anyone to at least get an imporession of the prisoner's claims although we still can't positively know for sure. It's also a good idea to go through old media articles. I have (along with others- other activists and lawyers) been able to come up with enough info found in media articles to be able to convince the US Supreme Court that this case was racially biased and that the conviced person should be given a re-trial. We don't know yet what comes out of it, as the wheels of justice are slow, but IT IS POSSIBLE for an ordinary activist to come up with very valuable information, but I would strongly recomend that such things are always done with the appellate lawyers's OK. Just my thoughts on this. Thank you for posting an excellent text to this board, EddieStratton. Wish more people would understand that we're all human beings. As such, it is our duty trying to defend ourselves to stay alive. Love, Turid
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on May 13, 2005 8:29:54 GMT -5
Why do you think its so that husband and wife can't testify against against another during a trial in which one part of the couple is charged with something? Turid Why? Because one would lie and the other would swear to it.
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on May 13, 2005 8:31:36 GMT -5
Correct. A whole lot! That has to do with at least two things: 1) Prison abuse is a huge problem. (there is no reason to discuss that. Videotapes are actually available from TDCJ if you're interested) 2) Prisoners are as different as you and I. Some consider anything and everything as abuse, and some don't consider any abuse being conducted unless someone is actually beaten up and gassed. Turid It wouldn't have anything to do with the inmates bringing the abuse on themselves, would it? Or are they just the poor victims of a mean, cruel world?
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on May 13, 2005 8:34:34 GMT -5
Correct. Every time we hear about prison abuse, a lot of fear is being triggered. We know by evidence that prison abuse runs rampant. In some cases, the claims are true. In other cases, it's not. However, when we hear the same stories from prisoners who live on different wings and have NO contact with each other whatsoever, that such and such officer did such and such to an inmate - totally independent of each other - we have reason to be suspicious. Turid When a guard attacks an inmate, it is an outrage! The system failed! When an inmate attacks a guard, it is because the system failed. How ridiculous!
|
|
|
Post by CCADP on May 13, 2005 8:35:39 GMT -5
You need to reread the thread about prisoner abuses in the specific cases area. As you know; this has been brought up by you and debated there - you never answered all the questions put to you to back up your reasoning - instead you come here and say the same things you said there---truth - and anyone else who wants a reply to this same old question again - go to that thread and continue that discussions there. Leave this thread for the being lied to by inmates idea that Benty brought up; and peoples responses to that topic.
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on May 13, 2005 8:37:07 GMT -5
When you say "the source", are you referring to the reason a guard may have to act out? If so - a prison guard should be trained to deal with the situations that may occur on extreme places such as death row prisons. Turid No. I am referring to the fact that almost everyone here believes the inmates when they cry foul. Remember, you are taking the word of people that were so dangerous and vicious that they had to be removed from society.
|
|
|
Post by EddieStratton on May 13, 2005 8:39:55 GMT -5
I smell a troll.
|
|
|
Post by catskillz on May 13, 2005 8:40:14 GMT -5
Well put, i was thinking the same thing.
U keep rephrasing the same things nomatter what the topic is, if the questions get tough u change subject or start the rephrasing. Thats not very convincing, rather the opposite.
|
|
|
Post by EddieStratton on May 13, 2005 8:44:07 GMT -5
"U keep rephrasing the same things nomatter what the topic is, if the questions get tough u change subject or start the rephrasing. Thats not very convincing, rather the opposite."
Which leads me to believe that 'truth1' isn't trying to reason or discuss, but derail. I saw a very productive and democratic message board ruined by reactionary trolls because people didn't ignore attempts to change the subject and otherwise distract reasoned debate.
I'll spend no more time on 'truth1' here, because we need to get back to the subject:
Now why would death row inmates do such a terrible thing as bear false witness?
Ed
|
|
|
Post by tulla63 on May 13, 2005 8:45:58 GMT -5
Because I would expect professional conduct from a prison guard. I don't always expect that from an inmate who isn't trained to be handling potentially harmful situations.
That is why.
Now it's time for you to answer to the questions you've been asked, but consequently refuse to respond to.
Turid
|
|
jj
New Arrival
Posts: 5
|
Post by jj on May 13, 2005 8:47:47 GMT -5
what does a troll smell like?
|
|
|
Post by tulla63 on May 13, 2005 8:52:43 GMT -5
Show me that posting. Also: Tell me why we wouldn't believe an inmate who tells us about the exact same incidents initiated by the same guards, on different pods when the prisoners in question aren't even in touch with each other. Did they come up with the same idea at the same time - about the same guard - acting the exact same way simultaneously??? What a coincidence!!! Does that mean that they are ALWAYS lying, or could it possibly mean that it's easier to mistreat such people because no one will believe them anyway? Turid
|
|
|
Post by catskillz on May 13, 2005 8:54:27 GMT -5
what does a troll smell like? I think it stinks like dirty money, some don't care it smells.
|
|