TX - Joseph Bennard Nichols facing execution in '80 murder of Claude Shaffer

Discussion in 'Past Trial Discussion Threads' started by Wudge, Mar 7, 2007.

  1. Wudge

    Wudge New Member

    Messages:
    6,341
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "To be frank, we are … accusing the State of having deliberately manipulated the justice system … in order to get a second death sentence," reads Gunter's petition. "Executing Nichols would in effect condone" that manipulation, he continued. "When does it end?

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    "That is all there is to it. It is scientific. It is consistent. It is complete. It is final, and it is in evidence," they argued – evidence they offered again during Nichols' first trial. At Nichols' second trial, however, prosecutors abandoned all that evidence and argued that Nichols was the shooter; this strategy was possible only because the state continued to conceal eyewitness Ishman from the defense, argues Gunter. Instead, prosecutors offered only the testimony of another deli employee, Cindy Johnson, who claimed Nichols fired the fatal shot. (According to Ishman, Gunter later discovered, there was no way Johnson could've seen anything because she hid in the bathroom once the robbery began.) By hiding Ishman, the prosecution was able to convince jurors Nichols was the shooter: "And I'll tell you that it was [Nichols'] hand that did the killing," declared the prosecutor. "How do you know that? [Johnson] saw it. She told you."

    From a March 1st article. [execution is still set]

    http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/Issue/story?oid=451599


    Update: Appeal denied; Nichols executed.
     
  2. Loading...


  3. GlitchWizard

    GlitchWizard Reprobate

    Messages:
    3,358
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Finally, people are waking up to the fact that they know absolutely nothing about the death penalty they support so blindly.

    If you're going to have it, fix it.
     
  4. Peter Hamilton

    Peter Hamilton New Member

    Messages:
    3,374
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    String "em up! In China they have over 2000 executions a year--That's how many we should have--and our executions are way too easy--Murderers all should be hanged,and very slowly so they suffocate to death just like what happened to the Nazis at Nuremberg---and child-rapist killers like Couey who BURIED ALIVE that beautiful young innocent girl, kilers like him need to be tortured to death--
     
  5. kgeaux

    kgeaux New Member

    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nobody should ever face the death penalty because a prosecutor has hidden evidence which would exonerate them. Nobody.
     
  6. Bobbisangel

    Bobbisangel New Member

    Messages:
    11,071
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0

    I believe that if a person murders another person and that DNA backs it up...if there is no doubt at all...they should get the death penalty and it shouldn't take 20 years of appeals to get the deed done. It makes me sick to hear these people on death row whinning and moaning about not wanting to be put to death when they have taken the lives of others. You can bet most of the people that they murdered begged for their lives and they weren't given appeals or anything else.

    Lethal injection is to darn easy for someone who murdered another person. What is inhumane about being given a shot and being put to sleep. We know the horror that the victims of these killers suffered before they died and yet these killers think lethal injection is to PAINFUL. Give me a break. Maybe if we got tougher on these horrible crimes some people might think twice before they took the life of another. Something has to change in the United States.
    Maybe we should take a page from some of the other countries and we wouldn't have the crime that we do. Instead, in the US the criminal has all of the rights.
     
  7. GlitchWizard

    GlitchWizard Reprobate

    Messages:
    3,358
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Of course not. Unfortunately, the reality is that both sides want to win. A defense attorney has the same motivation to let a guilty man go free as the prosecutor does to convict an innocent one. I envy neither position.
     
  8. Bobbisangel

    Bobbisangel New Member

    Messages:
    11,071
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0

    I totally agree. There are dirty Pros's just like there are dirty attornies and LE.
    Thank God there are more honest ones then dirty but it does still happen and no one should lose their life for something that they didn't do. I don't think that happens to often though.
     
  9. GlitchWizard

    GlitchWizard Reprobate

    Messages:
    3,358
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You don't want to think it happens often, but since 1973, ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY THREE guys were released after being proven innocent - and those were the ones on death row, not including the guys who are serving life without parole, life straight up, or consecutive life sentences but are innocent. This does not even include those on death row who are innocent but have no way to prove it.

    I hope I am never anywhere a crime is committed. I have zero faith in this system that I will be innocent until proven guilty.

    I don't think it's dirty prosecutors or dirty attornies doing it. I think it's the nature of how the system is set up that both sides want to win - and just like any game, people will do what it takes to win. The defense will let criminals go if they can win, and the prosecutors will prosecute innocent people to win - it's just how it's set up, not that the people are dirty or bad.
     
  10. Wudge

    Wudge New Member

    Messages:
    6,341
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Remember. you are just referencing death row prisoners that were lucky enough to have found something that either cleared them or resulted in a new trial and a not guilty verdict.

    Prosecutors do not wear white hats. And in some states, such as: NC, TX, AL, AR, CA and IL, the withholding of evidence in murder cases is considered sport.
     
  11. Buzz Mills

    Buzz Mills New Member

    Messages:
    23,626
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wudge, perhaps we should encourage the media to give us the defense's whole story first. We might be able to do a better job of ferreting out the truth, if it was presented that way. So often we hear very little of the defense, before we have already been convinced, of guilt, by the media. This is perhaps one of the blessings of the internet; within a short period of time, the defense may also be able to get their story out there to counter the media spin. It should be evolving in that direction, with politics leading the charge. Lots of great factual material that pops up on the internet, counteracting the media spin, in the political arena.
     
  12. Wudge

    Wudge New Member

    Messages:
    6,341
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Buzz, LE and the D.A. will always have the biggest megaphones, and the internet is a nuclear amplifier. It worsens high-profile cases, dramatically.

    In terms of true justice, the best thing would be to ban all reporting until after a verdict was rendered.
     
  13. Buzz Mills

    Buzz Mills New Member

    Messages:
    23,626
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No reporting isn't going to happen, but I think the internet will shift in the favor of the innocent, given enough time.
     
  14. bykerladi

    bykerladi Member

    Messages:
    736
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
     
  15. Peter Hamilton

    Peter Hamilton New Member

    Messages:
    3,374
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Earlier i had posted that China had 2000 executions a year--Its actually 10,000 as Fox News just reported--wow--They don't fool around over there
     
  16. IrishMist

    IrishMist You can't control the wind - but you can adjust yo

    Messages:
    7,469
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Wow! Doesn't sound like the deterrence factor is working very well. :eek:
     
  17. lavonne

    lavonne New Member

    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Considering that China's Death Penalty has been issued for everything from rape and murder to tax evasion....not sure if they are the benchmark.

    Oh, they also invented a Death-Van.....yep. Lethal-Injection-On-The-Go.
     
  18. GlitchWizard

    GlitchWizard Reprobate

    Messages:
    3,358
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    DNA evidence is no better than any other evidence that can be manipulated, in my opinion. For example - two guys go in a building. One guy cuts up another one. One guy tries to stop him, gets blood on him.
    DNA says both of the guys did it. Only one did.

    The first one to cut a deal walks. What if it's the killer?

    Killer walks, innocent guy dies - yet DNA evidence says he did it.

    I just want everyone to look for the TRUTH - no cutting deals, no hiding evidence, no making up stuff - just honest answers and innocent until PROVEN guilty. Not "could be guilty if it happened this way and not that way" but PROVEN beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Is that too much to ask?

    However, if you KNOW it happened (ie: Couey) - a swift and painful execution is okay by me. I'm only anti death penalty because it doesn't work right, not because I believe it's morally wrong to kill child killers.


     
  19. Bobbisangel

    Bobbisangel New Member

    Messages:
    11,071
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0

    I don't think that we had DNA testing back then though. I doubt that we will see many innocent people given the death penalty or even going to prison as long as there is DNA to prove their guilt or innocense.
     
  20. GlitchWizard

    GlitchWizard Reprobate

    Messages:
    3,358
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In cases like rape/attack/murder - it can prove it, often, yes! - dna under the fingernails, rape kit - I totally agree with you on it clearing people when the evidence is clear.

    Unfortunately, it's not clear in every case. Have you ever seen someone cut themselves, paper cut, nosebleed, hair fall off - in public? There's DNA everywhere that isn't necessarily involved. Crime scenes in reality aren't as neat and clean as on tv. I often marvel at how they pick one hair off a floor and say "This is the killer!" When there are a blue million hairs in my house that don't belong to anyone who even lives there anymore. :) Yet - it "proves" they were there at the crime scene. It doesn't prove WHEN they were there, though. They don't even know me. If I died in my home, they'd probably convict my neighbor who sold me the house based on DNA evidence. If I grabbed a penny that fell under my refrigerator before being killed - my neighbor's DNA might be under my fingernails...
     
  21. Garnan

    Garnan New Member

    Messages:
    232
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So was he executed?
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice