The link to the story is not the same text as the story you posted.

Last Thursday, Kopera committed suicide and the state police say they since learned he doesn’t have the college degree he claimed he’d earned. Kopera’s expert testimony has played a role in many hight profile cases statewide, like that of Shawn Woodson, convicted of murdering a policeman. Kopera testified against Flint Greggory Hunt and Westley Baker; both were put to death. Now hundreds of murder and shooting cases may be challenged by the public defender because of questions about Kopera’s truthfulness.

http://wjz.com/topstories/local_story_067224913.html

You are right, mockery can be fun and effective. But to be clear, I do not advocate sing-alongs as effective criminal justice measures.

I do believe in a consistent set of legal standards. The death penalty violates consistency and applies an irreversible punishment. Every person executed in Maryland since 1978 or currently on death row killed a white person, even though hundreds of black people are killed in Maryland every year and the death penalty is never applied to those murders.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/harford/bal-ha.capital04mar04,0,2591817.story?coll=bal-local-harford

Mocking the most extreme point of view may not help, but it can be fun while illustrating logical consequences of various courses of action.
Maybe I am misunderstanding what you’re saying, but it sounds like you do not think everyone should be held to the same consistent set of standards, rules, and laws. This is not an effective way to govern any group of people regardless of size. A (reasonably) orderly society requires that individuals play by basically the same rules. Even small children quickly learn how to manipulate weak teachers, parents, etc. who apply rules and warnings inconsistently.
I agree with your assertion that the death penalty is not a deterrent to other criminals the way it is currently being administered. Perhaps if we executed these murderers closer to the time they commited the crime ( as opposed to 20-30 years later) this could be different.

I completely agree with your analysis of the liberal frame of mind. I’m not a liberal, nor am I a conservative. I don’t think we’ll ever solve a lot of these problems as long as there are only two acceptable points of view available. They both have their problems and we have to find a middle ground. Mocking the most extreme point of view doesn’t help.

I also agree with you that there are some people who do evil things and are beyond rehabilition. But your “vermin walking the streets” imagery doesn’t accurately represent the problems with state executions. There are 6 people on Maryland’s death row right now, not some swarm of evil-doers. In the last twenty years, the state of Maryland has determined that six people are beyond rehabilition. If those trials were fair and the decison was correct, I’m fine with that. Those people can stay in jail forever if rehabilitation has been tried and failed. Executing them will not deter future murders and will not keep the streets safe from six people who are never leaving prison again.

And while I appreciate the death of responsibility you take for your actions, it’s not so easy for everybody. While you would want punishment for something you did “for whatever reason”, including mental illness, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that you are not mentally ill, and if you are, you are under some sort of treatment. Many of the people we punish every day are mentally ill and have not been treated and shouldn’t be expected to take the same responsibility you do for their actions. All I’m saying is that if a person cannot be rehabilitated, we ought to have mercy on them before we decide to stoop to their level and kill them. We can revisit the strain this is putting on the system when it takes more than two hands to count them.

Using the Jesus situation, no one is advocating that was just and no one is trying to convince anyone that that was a legitimate application of the law. Bribery was used several times. However, we have a system that is protected from mob rule. 9 reasonable individuals have to make the same decision or no one dies. I trust the system. I would trust it more with a DNA requirement. DNA is being used more and more now to get people off death row and I think it should be applied retroactively to everyone on death row. If the DNA is there or their is a confession or multiple witnesses then the law should be applied.

Thanks for your writing and your research. This site works because of people like you.

Indy Ed.,

I am not a theologian, but as I read the scriptures, my understanding is that civil governments are set up to administer justice- in short, to punish the wicked and protect the innocent. That seems to be the most basic function of government. Therefore, if an individual is found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, by a jury of his peers, of cold-blooded murder- then that civil government has a duty to remove (exterminate) that murderer from society. Giving someone a fair trial and ample opportunity for appeal, and sentencing that person to death afterwards is not “cold blooded murder” as you stated, it is merely the administration of justice, necessary for the preservation of individual rights. Biblical instructions for civil government are not always the same as instructions for individuals. The Bible instructs individuals not to kill, etc. – however, governments legitimately conduct wars, make and enforce laws, seize property, issue judgments and carry out those judgments with sentences- all things we as individuals are not permitted to do. Your post makes no differentiation from individuals and civil governments.

Having said all that, I am not naive enough to think that all prosecutors, police, government agents, etc.. have the purest of motives at all times. There are many systemic problems that need to be addressed, but that doesn’t mean we should do away with the death penalty completely.