Michigan Votes Forum

rant. Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum strike again. Same old nonsense. Different day (hour, minute).

rant. Standard Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum tactic for every debate.

but it's YOUR rant. i just turned it around on you. you can't prove that a single FACTUALLY INNOCENT PERSON HAS BEEN EXECUTED IN THIS COUNTRY IN THE LAST HUNDRED YEARS. that just pisses you off to know that the thing you profess to fear the most HASN'T HAPPENED. it just puts your knickers in a twist when you rant and rave about 'mistaken identy' and 'innocent people being executed', but you can't PROVE that a single incident of your greatest fear has EVER HAPPENED. it IS your greatest tools of opposition, saying 'WHAT IF'. not WHAT IS. meanwhile, your precious murderers continue to kill innocent people at will, unabated. detroit and flint are tracking to set new records this year as opposed to last year. the killing goes merrily on. yet, no matter what, no matter HOW HEINOUS THE KILLINGS ARE, you refuse to properly punish ONE SINGLE MURDERER for it. your faith and belief that every single murderer has somehow been 'railroaded' is AMAZING given the complete lack of objective facts to back your position up. your faith and belief that every single murderer has been 'set up', and has been snatched from his nice warm bed to face the gallows is AMAZING given the complete lack of objective facts to back your position up. you cannot find it within yourself to find even one of your beloved murderers GUILTY, and you believe that each and every one of them COULD NOT HAVE DONE WHAT THEY ARE ACCUSED OF DOING. you also cannot find it within yourself to READ THE BIBLE, even though you can sure quote ONE PARAGRAPH OF THE CATHOLIC CATECHISM CHAPTER AND VERSE. you refuse to read the OTHER PARAGRAPHS to get the REST OF THE MESSAGE. you talk of 'traditional church teachings' yet you cannot find a single one that supports your position, other than that ONE SINGLE PARAGRAPH of the catechism. you base your opposition on WISHES AND DREAMS, and then REFUSE TO LOOK AT FACTS AND ISSUES. your delusion has served you well, and is apparently continuing to serve you even to this day. so, mr. opponent, put up or shut up. prove your contention positively, once and for all, or move on. we're all tired of your 'what if'. talk to us about 'what is', not 'what you'd like it to be'.

no list is forthcoming from the opposition concerning those supposed 'martyrs for the cause' that have been executed despite (or maybe our opponent would like it better if we said BECAUSE OF) their innocence. i hope he is looking diligently. several other organizations are as well. the innocence project trumpets their '120 exhonorations', but no 'list of martyrs'. even one name on that list, one verified case of execution of a FACTUALLY INNOCENT PERSON would spell the death knell for capital punishment in this country. but they CAN'T come up with any. one doesn't exist. there ARE AND HAVE BEEN NO SUCH CASES. our opponent continually bleats that there have, but cannot find a single one to prove his case. with every murder case involving execution going to the supreme court, and every surpreme court case open to public scrutiny, i imagine that this search wouldn't take long. not for an organization of three hundred people, and thousands of volunteer law students. but not one name has been put forward. our opponent would have us believe that the united states supreme court is 'in cahoots' with a VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY to execute innocents. this flies in the face of the evidence and the facts, but our opponent carries on. come on, mr. opponent, prove your case. it IS your contention that INNOCENTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN EXECUTED, isn't it? PROVE IT. NOW. if you can't, THAT will serve nicely to PROVE THAT IT HASN'T HAPPENED. good luck.

flights of fancy, backward logic, and 'crawfishing' our opponent will use now. the only leg he has left to stand on is the ONE VERSE in the catholic catechism, and NOT REALLY, as the FIRST PART of it says that there is no proscription against the death penalty, the rest is just a 'wish list'. i wonder if our opponent is professing that our great nation become a theocracy under catholic rule? i wonder if the pope would be a 'benevolent dictator'? perhaps our opponent would rather we throw ourselves under the control of the united nations. that would get rid of the death penalty, as they have stripped it from every european country despite widespread popular support for it. i'm not sure how our opponent can keep up his continued murderer loving stance of his before he meets with the deep rooted abideance that flourishes in the people of this state that criminals should be punished, and the ultimate criminal is a murderer. murderers should recieve the ultimate punishment. a life for a life. the murderer forfiets his own life for the life (lives) he took. so, unless our opponent can convince me that he is a catholic who does not and cannot read the bible, i have to take exception to his thundering show of cowardice regarding this issue. such a show only highlights his love for the murderer at the expense of the victims, the victim's families, and society itself. i understand that he has never PERSONALLY professed such a love, but i find his actions speak much louder than any words he may have. he has spoken out of 'both sides of his mouth' before, proclaiming loudly that he supports victims and their right not to be killed, but DOING NOTHING ABOUT THEM by leaving murderers alive to kill again. he will once again, predictably, quote from the ONE AND ONLY VERSE OF THE CATHOLIC CATECHISM that even hints at support of his position, bleating that the death penalty kills innocent people. i say, before you 'copy and paste' the catechism again, please PROVE YOUR CASE. the 'court of public opinion' stands ready to listen to you WHEN AND IF you can provide any VERIFIABLE CASES OF FACTUALLY INNOCENT PEOPLE BEING EXECUTED. and by the way, before you try to 'turn things around' and demand that the supporters prove that no such executions have happened, the fact that YOU, THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, AND SEVERAL GROUPS OF ATTORNEYS CAN'T FIND ANY is proof enough for me.

that must mean that there are not any now, and never were any 'innocents executed'. i know he's searching diligently, as is the supreme court, and the innocence project. none have found any. therefore, there are none. i also notice that he is not quoting that same chapter and verse of the catholic catechism. he must be reading his bible and finding no proscription against the death penalty there. he may, if he is an intelligent person, be reading the TORAH, and the QUARAN. there is no proscription against the death penalty in there either. if he really wants to be fully educated on the subject, he may also read the texts of bhuddists, taoists, and hindu sects. there are no proscriptions against capital punishment there either. they all DO have proscriptions against evil people murdering innocent people. are you saying that our state and national government are EVIL??? are you saying that our elected representatives are controlled by the DEVIL??? murder is an evil act, perpetuated by evil people. your contention is that capital punishment is MURDER. or as close to murder as you can get. well, at least we've put that 'innocent man executed' myth to rest once and for all. what is the next whine on the agenda?

our opponent cited INNEFECTIVE COUNCIL as the main reason that INNOCENT MURDERERS GOT MURDERED IN THIS COUNTRY. in order for an attorney to be 'capital qualified', he must be chosen as one of the top in his field by the bar association, along with that, he must have as few as two, and as many as ten capital cases under his belt. these must be accompanied by at least five appeals decisions. that's before he is allowed to sit FIRST OR SECOND CHAIR. he also has to be deemed qualified by the presiding judge. innefective council does not kick in automatically when the defendant loses, but our opponent would sure like to think so. just a few facts to dispel YET ANOTHER LIBERAL MYTH.

the death penalty. it would seem to the casual observer that an indiscriminate amount of blacks are on death row. when you look into the facts, there are more whites on death rows around the country than blacks. also, in order to be on death row, you have to be convicted of murder. maybe if the black community wants less blacks on death row, it should try talking those blacks who kill other people, especially other blacks into not killing other people. now, district attorneys don't get to choose the racial mix of the defendants they try, they get what comes in the door. they DO get to choose (in some cases) whether or not to seek the death penalty. they USUALLY reserve this punishment for the most heinous of murderers, as they too have to face re-election at some time or other. if they have been in office for a very long time, then the ENTIRE COMMUNITY must feel that they are doing a GOOD JOB. the truth is, most communities would like it a whole lot if the district attorneys sought the death penalty in EVERY MURDER CASE. that would get rid of the 'racial stigma' entirely. the unfortunate part about that is that the liberals, who complain the loudest about it, won't let them do it. funny how that works out, isn't it? some more facts to dispel another liberal myth.

at immortality by shutting down the death penalty movement in one fell swoop by introducing us to the one and only innocent person executed, our opponent sits silently, unable to speak without lying. having been countered at every turn by logic, common sense, and cold hard facts, our opponent sits silently, unable to speak without lying. having been exposed for the murderer lover that he is, our opponent sits silently, unable to speak without showing himself even more clearly for the monster that he is. we thoroughly understand that this WILL NOT KEEP HIM FROM LYING, OR SHOWING HIMSELF EVEN MORE CLEARLY FOR THE MONSTER THAT HE IS. he can't help himself.

with punishing murderers??? "At most, in respect to the debate over capital punishment, all the various cherry-picked quotes from the Catholic Catechism posted here by death penalty promoters do is LEGITIMIZE PUNISHING MURDERERS." since when is punishing murderers ILLEGITIMATE???

"For your lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning. . . . Whoever sheds the blood of man, BY MAN shall his blood be shed; for God made man in his own image." don't you understand??? this does not say to lock the guy up and wait for God to do your 'dirty work'. it says for MAN TO SHED THE MURDERER'S BLOOD like he SHED THE BLOOD OF HIS INNOCENT VICTIM. or do you NOT BELIEVE IN THE BIBLE??? if not, why do you quote from the catechism???

left wingers (a group i no longer belong to) fell in love with murderers. they work to save their lives daily.

the previous posts have obviously stunned the opposition (or at least our lone opponent) into long lapses of silence. perhaps he has forgotten where he copied that single paragraph from the catholic catechism, and cannot paste it here until he finds it again. perhaps he, like our friend UBER-LIBERAL has seen the light and repented. i don't hold out much hope for that to happen, though. perhaps, he has become one of what he so readily discounts, a victim of one of his own beloved murderers. if so, we mourn for him, and our prayers go with him. if not, we still send our prayers for him, as he has much to grapple with, including his own misguided ideas about justice and morality. perhaps the intervention of the Lord is needed and would be appreciated. he must grapple with the fact that every murder is unique, as is every murderer. to believe that EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM is innocent, wrongly accused, and is totally undeserving of punishment is nieve in the extreme. he must also grapple with the fact that every murder takes away one loved one from the family and friends that love them. this is done on what may be a whim on the part of the murderer. the killing of that loved one is CERTAINLY not done for the good of society in general. he must also grapple with the fact that, while each and every surviving loved one may not call for the life of the murderer in exchange for the life of their loved one, most do. he must also grapple with the fact that rehabilitation is a lofty goal, and a laudible goal, but it is not the goal in the case of the murderer. either the murderer is going to be sentenced to death if this law passes, or is going to be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, in itself a sort of DEATH PENALTY. neither is going to allow that particular murderer the opportunity to EVER get back out into society. so why should we waste our time, effort and tax money on rehabilitating the murderer in the first place??? WE SHOULDN'T. our lone opponent must also grapple with the issue of deterrence. deterrence is not a thing, like a certificate, that says that you have deterrence and that deterrence has been used, it's a THOUGHT that either travels across the murderer's brain the instant before the murder happens or it doesn't. it's part of the decision making process or it isn't. the only way to know if there was any deterrency is to look at the outcome. it's tough to count the murders that DON'T HAPPEN. it's easy to count the ones that DO. with all those things that he has to grapple with, we pray for strength for him, we pray for guidance on the RIGHT PATH, we pray for him to have the wisdom to seek that guidance, and we pray for him to have the intelligence to know it when it comes.

another supreme court... "If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols and guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilage." Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878

hasn't posted in a while. the silence is deafening. there could almost be a consensus that our opponent has 'switched sides' and has come around to our way of thinking. i understand that he may not want to personally put some murderer to death, and we hope he never has to. but i can say that the chances of coming face to face in detroit and flint, and a hundred other cities in this state with a murderer are becoming greater and greater every day. i don't want to personally put a murderer to death again either, there is way too much paperwork involved. i do wish that the state that i live in would grow up and DO SOMETHING to protect it's citizenry other than house them at my expense. i don't think that capital punishment will solve the murder problem, but it's a step in the right direction, along with allowing the citizens to exercise their constitutional right to carry a weapon to defend themselves, the right to that defense without retreat in any circumstance, and stricter sentences for crimes in general would ALL work to reduce (not eliminate) murders in this state. we won't know if they work until we take the steps to implement them.

since the death penalty opponents have been challenged to provide the name of one factually innocent person who has been executed. still no name is forthcoming. the opponents claim that innocents are executed on a regular basis, yet they still cannot name one who has been executed in the last hundred years. could it be that our opponents have LIED to us about the occurence of actual factually innocent people being executed in this country?

'bucks the trend'. an opponent once tried to state that capital punishment states had higher murder rates than non capital punishment states. michigan is a non capital punishment state. it has the highest murder rate of all the non capital punishment states. it's murder rate has been higher than the national average since 1995. it has a higher murder rate than 23 death penalty states and all the other non-death penalty states. these facts would seem to contradict the opponent's point of view.

silent by the facts. he is made dumb by the truth. at least he hasn't been struck blind by liberal zeal. those of the left have no good reason to oppose the death penalty other than the fact that they disagree with it. they have lead us down the path on which we currently walk, disarmed, helpless, able to be killed at will by any criminal with half a notion to take a life. we are told we have the right to defend ourselves, but have had the means to do so by the left. we are told that the state's idea of punishment is 'harsh', but we see with our own eyes that it isn't. yet the left keeps trumpeting how 'tough on crime' it is. we are asked to believe that life in prison is 'just as harsh' as the death penalty, when we know in our own hearts that it isn't. the liberals just don't want criminals punished. we are asked to believe that 'innocent people have been executed'. but we see with our own eyes that it hasn't happened. our opponent has had two years to search, and has found none. our opponent's 'source' has been searching for nearly ten years, and has found none. the supremem court has been keeping track of every execution for over two hundred years, and they have found none. every execution performed by every state in the union goes through the supreme court, and they say no 'innocent' people have been executed. why do liberals keep saying that this has happened? because they believe that there is a TINY, MINUTE CHANCE that it COULD happen. it could also happen that our opponent could get elected queen of england.

repealing unconstitutional provisions in our constitution, why not repeal the death penalty ban? it hasn't reduced crime. it hasn't saved the state money. it hasn't saved a single innocent life. the only lives it HAS saved are those of heinous murderers. who's side are we on? the criminal's??? it would certainly seem so. stop stalling and bring JUSTICE to michigan.

seem to share a single opponent. when challenged for facts, he changes the subject. it certainly seems that >carrot-top<, the 'troll', and "BOOTS FULL OF PISS" are one in the same person. they certainly act the same when pressed to provide proof of their lies. the so-called opponent on this thread has given up trying to have us believe that innocents have been executed, as he can't find any. the 'opponent' on the unconstitutional provision thread has given up trying to have us believe that the michigan constitution was unconstitutional as written a hundred years ago. both seem delusional. all the opponents seem to have a compulsion to dislike CRAZYCAJUN. it seems that they quit opposing the subject of the thread, and just start opposing him. funny isn't it? none of the opponents have 'won', they've just GIVEN UP when pressed for facts to prove their lies. many opponents that share one fatal trait. being factually challenged. let us TRY THE FACTS by putting this initiative before the voters, and SEE where the facts take us.

If your objection to execution is the irreversible error of an innocent dying, please consider: No one disputes that death penalty cases have the greatest level of due process., what is, in fact, known as "super due process". Therefore, it is much more likely that an innocent sentenced to a life term is more likely to die, as in innocent in prison, than it is that an innocent is likely to be executed. Both irreversible error, but one much more likely than the other.

What are you trying to say?

that your reasons for opposing the death penalty are based on lies.

the city of detroit is first again, any way you look at it. it's first in murders in 2006. it's first in crime rate in 2006. i'll bet all those people out there looking to have another reason to bring the death penalty to michigan have just been re-energized. it seems that the present system of coddling prisoners and spending WAY too much money keeping them warm and well fed for the rest of their lives isn't working as a deterrent to crime. it would appear that EVERY death penalty state, and EVERY death penalty city has a LOWER murder rate, and a LOWER crime rate than detroit. now, explain again how NOT EXECUTING HEINOUS MURDERERS DETERS CRIME?

New Jersey’s Senate today voted 21-16 to eliminate the state’s death penalty. The bill now goes to the State Assembly, where approval later this week is anticipated. New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine is expected to sign the bill into law if it comes to his desk. A bipartisan New Jersey study commission established by the state’s legislature recommended doing away with the state’s death penalty in its final report earlier this year.

help michigan HOW? michigan hasn't yet had the courage to even try the death penalty. new jersey is simply succumbing to the myths and lies told about the death penalty, and doesn't want to be the one state that finally makes the myths come true. what myths? the myth of the mysterious 'factually innocent man being executed'.

is a fairly narrow margin. now, what do the people of new jersey think? are they being asked about it? no.

New Jersey legislature’s Assembly yesterday voted 44-36 to repeal their state’s death penalty. The state’s Senate voted to approve an identical bill on Dec 10. The legislation now goes to Governor Jon Corzine, who has said he will sign it into law. New Jersey lawmakers followed through on recommendations released at the beginning of 2007 by a bipartisan death penalty study commission created by the legislature. The panel overwhelmingly voted to recommend repeal of capital punishment in the state, after sifting through reams of factual material and transcripts of testimony provided by both pro- and anti- death penalty and neutral sources.

that twelve death penalty cases is threatening to bankrupt the state of new jersey? they haven't actually put anyone to death since the moratorium took effect. these people are STILL housed in death rows, and must now be placed back into the general population. how long do you think it will be before they murder again? i guess life is cheap in jersey.

new jersey does matter to us in michigan? haven't we heard time and again that what happens in other states has NOTHING TO DO WITH MICHIGAN? now that something that they agree with has happened in new jersey, suddenly, it's okay to bring up what happenens in other states. talk about changing your tunes... typical liberal behavior.

the new jersey governor repeals the ban on the death penalty? will you still trumpet this move as 'progressive'? will the murder rate in new jersey go up or down? if it goes up, will they re-instate the death penalty? no, because the lvies of the thousands of victims mean nothing to the liberals who are behind this repeal. that is shown plainly.

New Jersey State Assemblyman Christopher Bateman, a Republican, said of Thursday’s Assembly vote to abolish the death penalty in his state: "Our death penalty law is fatally flawed. "It does not protect the public, meet the critical need for justice for victims' families or eliminate the very real possibility that innocent people could be put to death. For far too long our death penalty statute has been sustained by mythology and fiction, propped up by outdated rhetoric, when courage and common sense would have served us far better. "The New Jersey Death Penalty Study Commission issued an overwhelming call to end this failed system and replace it with life in prison without parole and fortunately the Legislature answered. "We are on the verge of enacting the toughest sentencing laws in the country, broadly expanding the list of crimes for which life without parole would be mandatory, and ensuring that current death-row inmates would never be eligible for parole. "Together, we have done what a father of a murdered daughter asked me to do a long time ago: look at the facts and beyond the myths, and replace the death penalty with the tough, sensible alternative of life in prison without parole." The bill passed with bipartisan support. NJ Governor Jon Corzene has pledged to sign the legislation into law.

in what he says, go to new jersey. if you like what he says so much, elect him to the michigan legislature. either way, what he says has NOTHING to do with the death penalty in michigan. or have you forgotten saying that? of course you have.

sauce for the goose.

New Jersey State Assemblyman Christopher Bateman, a Republican, said of Thursday’s Assembly vote to abolish the death penalty in his state: "Our death penalty law is fatally flawed. "It does not protect the public, [neither does the alternative, unless he has some other ideas about criminal justice.] meet the critical need for justice for victims' families [wow... a liberal allowing the mention of victim's families. now, i believe it DOES meet the critical need for justice for victim's families,and i defy our liberal to show how it doesn't meet that need.] or eliminate the very real possibility that innocent people could be put to death. [nothing can eliminate the possibility that an innocent COULD be put to death. it HAS eliminated the possibility that an innocen HAS been put to death, as our opponents have yet to show us any. please show us ONE FACTUALLY INNOCENT WHO HAS BEEN EXECUTED AND THE DEATH PENALTY WILL DIE IN EVERY STATE.] For far too long our death penalty statute has been sustained by mythology and fiction, [not unlike the mythology and fiction being perpetuated here.] propped up by outdated rhetoric, [again, just like here.] when courage and common sense would have served us far better. [the courage to do what? use a large portion of our tax money to pay for keeping inmates alive and well forever? how is that common sense?] "The New Jersey Death Penalty Study Commission issued an overwhelming call to end this failed system and replace it with life in prison without parole and fortunately the Legislature answered. [okay, replace one failed system with another. THAT'S common sense. ours hasn't worked, what makes you think new jersey's will?] "We are on the verge of enacting the toughest sentencing laws in the country, broadly expanding the list of crimes for which life without parole would be mandatory, and ensuring that current death-row inmates would never be eligible for parole. [and this PROTECTS THE PUBLIC BETTER HOW? this MEETS THE CRITICAL NEED FOR JUSTICE FOR THE VICTIM'S FAMILIES HOW? this ends the threat of AN INNOCENT DYING BEHIND BARS HOW?] "Together, we have done what a father of a murdered daughter asked me to do a long time ago: look at the facts and beyond the myths, and replace the death penalty with the tough, sensible alternative of life in prison without parole." [life in prison without parole ENDS THE THREAT OF THIS MURDERER EVER KILLING AGAIN HOW?]+ The bill passed with bipartisan support. NJ Governor Jon Corzene has pledged to sign the legislation into law. [and this EFFECTS MICHIGAN HOW?] i know the liberals here are question phobic, and they can't answer these questions without resorting to some very tired rhetoric themselves. now, how this move effects michigan, except to possibly move it out of the number one murder position someday in the future, i'm not sure, but our opponents are gleefully posting this despite their previous objections to 'STUFF FROM OTHER STATES'. let's see if our opponents have the guts to answer these questions. i don't think so.

death penalty system IS fatally flawed. they don't impose it. they don't use it. they don't execute murderers. no wonder the mafia loves jersey...

new jersey got it's information from. certainly not from their own state. they have not executed a single prisoner since 1963. nor have any of their district attorneys sought the death penalty for almost that long. since 1965. inmates that are currently on death row have been placed there by juries and judges that have voted overwhelmingly for the death penalty. these citizen's wishes have been ignored for forty years. why should new jersey be any different than michigan? not one person can explain to me how keeping a person alive in prison at our expense works any better than putting him to death. all it does is keep the precious murderer alive and well, so that the liberals can point to him and say "look, we're tough on crime." what's going to happen when a murderer is released 'by mistake' and kills again? is that going to highlight the futility of 'life without parole'? what's going to happen when a murderer kills while in jail? (a daily occurence, by the way.)it THAT going to highlight the futility of 'life without parole'? what's going to happen when an investigation shows that a factually innocent man was put in jail for 'life', and died in jail an innocent? will that show that 'life without parole' is superior to the death penalty? or will it simply show the 'need' for 'super-due-process' there too? there are those who SAY it's more expensive to execute an inmate than to keep him alive for life. i'd like to see the ACTUAL FIGURES FOR BOTH to compare them for myself. new jersey doesn't have any 'first hand' figures, as it hasn't executed any inmates in forty years. so where are new jersey's figures coming from?

actual (verifiable) state expenses for the execution of a death row inmate? can anyone please verify how it comes to be that it costs SO MUCH MORE to house a death row inmate? it's not like they have to build new facilities for every inmate. nor do they require 'one on one' guarding, like some have suggested. in fact, most 'death rows' only have two guards, as opposed to over thirty for a 'general population pod' in this state. also, please explain how it costs so much more to execute a single inmate, yet texas executes more than any other state and STILL has a lower per inmate cost than michigan? we are told that it's less expensive. i would like to see some VERIFIABLE PROOF OF THAT. actual state figures only, please. not 'made up' figures from some anti-death penalty site.

fifteen articles on the death penalty. not one would state where the 'more expensive than life in prison' figures came from. not one would quote the source of these figures. they also cited 'several innocent inmates who have already been executed', but don't name them. as the supreme court reviews EVERY case involving the death penalty, some SEVERAL TIMES. i'd say the chances of executing an innocent man that has been through TWENTY OR MORE APPEALS to be nil. that means that the 'opponents' are lying. it can mean nothing else. adolph hitler said that 'if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.' why do these opponents feel that they must lie? is it to save some heinous murderer's life? it must be. there is no other reason.

of 'innocents being executed' in any of the 'modern countries' of the world. that is not to say that marching bands of marauding thugs do not exist in some places that are not 'civilized' and do not conform to 'first world standards'. all over the world there is the hue and cry over the 'possibility of executing an innocent inmate'. but in the whole world, there is not one name, not one soul, not one headstone that they can point to that says, "conclusively, that man was executed and he was factually innocent." it just ain't so. so why do we keep hearing it? because it sets people's tear ducts on 'high', and makes them weep for the tiny possibility that an innocent may be executed. it also turns their brains off. because they think, 'i keep hearing about this, there must be ONE.'. well, in the history of this country, there is not one documented case. not one. no name to 'shout from the rooftops'.