Gorsuch enables the execution of Ledell Lee

[Jayhawker Soule]

See With Gorsuch's Vote, Supreme Court Allows Arkansas to Execute Lendell Lee, including:

Lee insisted upon his innocence from the day of his arrest through the night of his execution. He implored Arkansas to let him take a DNA test and compare the results to DNA collected at the scene of the murder he allegedly committed, but the state refused. Lee also presented evidence that his trial attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel and that the presiding judge lacked neutrality: At the time, the judge was having an undisclosed affair with the assistant prosecutor. (They later married.) Lee’s counsel on appeal appeared in court so drunk that he slurred his words.​

Disgusting.

 

[esmith]

Playing lose and fast with the truth aren't you? I do believe that the vote was 5 to 4 to allow the execution to continue; therefore was it not 5 justices that allowed the execution to go through. In addition do you also realize that if Gorsuch was not on the Supreme Court that the vote would have been 4 to 4 which would have allowed the execution to still go forward.
However I will give you a point on your obvious bias to attempt to blame now Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch for his execution.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Hopefully one day in the "land of the free" we'll realize that sinking to their level isn't really that great of thing, and is an action rooted in the lusts for vengeance, not desires for justice.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

In addition do you also realize that if Gorsuch was not on the Supreme Court that the vote would have been 4 to 4 which would have allowed the execution to still go forward.

Can you cite precedent of an execution happening on a tied vote in the past?

 

[Lyndon]

One week into his job and he's already got blood on his hands!!

 

[suncowiam]

Hopefully one day in the "land of the free" we'll realize that sinking to their level isn't really that great of thing, and is an action rooted in the lusts for vengeance, not desires for justice.

You know, incarceration is another form of vengeance. Heck, even fines are a form of vengeance. Just not as severe.

There's a fine line between justice and vengeance.

We just choose to call what we prefer as justice as opposed to vengeance.

The laws are what they are. If people don't want to face justice or vengeance or what ever you want to call it, then:
Don't break the laws or change them first.

I might consider some executions as being too harsh but if that person deliberately killed another person then they need to be willing to sacrifice their own life.

I call that "justice."

 

[suncowiam]

Playing lose and fast with the truth aren't you? I do believe that the vote was 5 to 4 to allow the execution to continue; therefore was it not 5 justices that allowed the execution to go through. In addition do you also realize that if Gorsuch was not on the Supreme Court that the vote would have been 4 to 4 which would have allowed the execution to still go forward.
However I will give you a point on your obvious bias to attempt to blame now Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch for his execution.

I prefer a liberal judge myself over Gorsuch but I have to agree that the OP is confusing the context.

The supreme court enabled this execution and not because of one man.

 

[columbus]

owever I will give you a point on your obvious bias to attempt to blame now Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch for his execution.

I am not Jay, nor am I familiar with this particular case.
But I don't think Jay is blaming Gorsuch for the execution. That was a team project including hundreds of people.
Rather Jay is pointing out shoddy opinions from the newest member of the SCOTUS, and how his lack of judgment resulted in the wrongful execution of Mr. Lendell.

As a hard core pro-lifer I don't see this one event as a big deal. Rather, I see the concept of capital punishment (as committed in the USA) to be the problem. But none of that is the point, if what happened was Gorsuch joined the majority and provided the 5-4 ruling to go forward. And somebody didn't get justice and was killed.
Tom

 

[pearl]

Wouldn't a tie have sent it back to the lower court? Gorsuch replaced Scalia who had no problems with the death penalty.

 

[columbus]

Wouldn't a tie have sent it back to the lower court? Gorsuch replaced Scalia who had no problems with the death penalty.

I don't know this case. But a tie upholds the lower court ruling, whatever that was.
Tom

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I call that "justice."

Executions do not solve, amend, or ameliorate a murder. In this case, it appears someone who may have been innocent was put to death.
That is not justice, but the reason we must abolish the death penalty. One innocent life wrongly destroyed is one too many.

 

[suncowiam]

Executions do not solve, amend, or ameliorate a murder. In this case, it appears someone who may have been innocent was put to death.
That is not justice, but the reason we must abolish the death penalty. One innocent life wrongly destroyed is one too many.

You always seem to miss my point about perspective. This and the previous discussion about human rights. It's relative.

One can say the same for incarceration. Incarceration doesn't do it either... It won't take back the original life that was taken from a murder.

Locking one life away can be said to be one too many in the prison cell.

But there's really nothing objective here on the form of punishment. The only objective reasoning to consider is that criminals should be punished. The subjective phase is how they should be punished.

Let's walk back through our steps and simply suggest that criminals simply don't do their crimes and they won't face punishment no matter how severe it is.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

You always seem to miss my point about perspective. This and the previous discussion about human rights. It's relative.

One can say the same for incarceration. Incarceration doesn't do it either... It won't take back the original life that was taken from a murder.

Locking one life away can be said to be one too many in the prison cell.

But there's really nothing objective here on the form of punishment. The only objective reasoning to consider is that criminals should be punished. The subjective phase is how they should be punished.

Let's walk back through our steps and simply suggest that criminals simply don't do their crimes and they won't face punishment no matter how severe it is.

What positive thing does execution do that incarceration doesn't? Because incarceration allows a chance for reform, consideration for what has been done, and continued community service. It also allows time to overturn unjust rulings, which can and have happened.

I've never seen a push for execution that wasn't a call to emotion, over a call to reason.

 

[esmith]

We are not talking about the pros and cons of the death penalty, the subject matter is the title of the post which was:
Gorsuch enables the execution of Ledell Lee

Which is incorrect.
As I stated previously if he had not been there then it would have been a 4 to 4 tie and the ruling of a lower court would have prevailed hence Lee would have still been executed.

 

[Valjean]

Executions do not solve, amend, or ameliorate a murder. In this case, it appears someone who may have been innocent was put to death.
That is not justice, but the reason we must abolish the death penalty. One innocent life wrongly destroyed is one too many.

But isn't the purpose of punishment the suppression of vendettas and feuds? As long as the public has confidence that the state will extract vengeance, public order is maintained. The state doesn't really care weather the convict is guilty or not. So long as the impression of state vengeance is maintained, public ire is assuaged and everyone's happy.

 

[columbus]

Gorsuch enables the execution of Ledell Lee

Which is incorrect.
As I stated previously if he had not been there then it would have been a 4 to 4 tie and the ruling of a lower court would have prevailed hence Lee would have still been executed.

It is not incorrect. If Gorsuch had voted differently it would have been 5-4 against.
Why is that so difficult to see?
Tom

 

[Father Heathen]

Playing lose and fast with the truth aren't you? I do believe that the vote was 5 to 4 to allow the execution to continue; therefore was it not 5 justices that allowed the execution to go through. In addition do you also realize that if Gorsuch was not on the Supreme Court that the vote would have been 4 to 4 which would have allowed the execution to still go forward.
However I will give you a point on your obvious bias to attempt to blame now Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch for his execution.

How does any of this change his lack of integrity?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

We are not talking about the pros and cons of the death penalty, the subject matter is the title of the post which was:
Gorsuch enables the execution of Ledell Lee

Which is incorrect.
As I stated previously if he had not been there then it would have been a 4 to 4 tie and the ruling of a lower court would have prevailed hence Lee would have still been executed.

Actually, that is a point that I failed to consider. I stand corrected.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

How many courts did the victim get to appeal to before having his or her life taken?

 

[suncowiam]

What positive thing does execution do that incarceration doesn't? Because incarceration allows a chance for reform, consideration for what has been done, and continued community service. It also allows time to overturn unjust rulings, which can and have happened.

I've never seen a push for execution that wasn't a call to emotion, over a call to reason.

I simply believe in an eye for an eye. Call it vengeance. Call it whatever you like. It's a spin on the golden rule which is my main philosophy. If I was ever in doubt about the ethics of a situation, I always turn to the golden rule. It hasn't failed me.

If one is going to take a life, then they should have absolutely have no problem forfeiting their own.

This is my reasoning. I wouldn't call it being emotional but if you think it is, that's fine.