Deseret News | Reader comments: Will inmates have to defend selves?

Reader comments
Will inmates have to defend selves?

Conejo | 6:58 a.m. March 24, 2008

I don't care what possible minor flaw occurred during the procedings. If a juror might have taken some cough medicine which impaire their judgement during the trial or whatever. I am first and foremost concerned with whether the person accussed of the crime actually committed the crime. After that everything else is VERY secondary to me. Carry on.

Dave | 7:33 a.m. March 24, 2008

It doesn't matter what laws are enacted the lawers and judges will find a way to circumvent them so the can continue to gouge the taxpayer. You have to wonder just who is being punished?

Justice | 8:00 a.m. March 24, 2008

There should be money set aside for a competent defense attorney and staff for those on death row.

The apparent lack of a coherent justice system could prove fatal to any society.

Comments continue below

lifer | 9:15 a.m. March 24, 2008

Brunker = grim reaper

A very significant number of death row inmates have won new trials and reversed convictions through successful habeas procedings.

We as a society have sunk pretty sinkin' low if we can't scratch up the cash to make sure we are killing the guilty person before we push the plunger.

Re: Justice | 9:53 a.m. March 24, 2008

I agree with you. Why not set aside a competent defense attorney for these cases. These people have rights just as we do, we need to ensure that they are being afforded those rights. If not, the next rights that get stepped on may be yours.
Let us make sure we are punishing the right person, unlike other prison sentences, the death penalty, was carried out, is irreversible.

lifer | 10:22 a.m. March 24, 2008

Justice, The problem is one of will. A recent study conducted by a group of criminal defense lawyers, based upon documents from various counties, proves that a county is willing to pay lots ($300(+) per hour) for its own legal representation, and as little as a third of that to carry out its constitutional obligation to unrepresented criminal defendants. The state is helping a little, but not enough.

Are you sure? | 12:28 p.m. March 24, 2008

Brunker is quoted as saying that none of the death row inmates is innocent. While that may be true for this particular group, and I don't know any of them personally, there have been many people across the country executed who were innocent, and many on death row for years who were exonerated after new evidence, or DNA evidence, was made available. Even death row, or perhaps especially death row, inmates need to have adequate representation by a competent, ethical attorney. Regardless of the crime committed, they are still people who have rights to have adequate legal representation.

Unqualified | 12:42 p.m. March 24, 2008

"Unqualified", to me, means the attorney does not have the TALENT to perform the miracle required to keep alive those who has gone this far from being permanently unwelcome in society. If the attorney could win they would take/keep the case. When the attorney can't win, the client can't win unless society loses! In these extreme cases it does become a zero-sum game. Confusing this situation with pro/con views on capital punishment does not address the real issue of the context of this extreme situation.

Enough | 1:01 p.m. March 24, 2008

The defense lawyers in post conviction cases elevate themselves as though they know more than the trial lawyers and trial judges. They then second guess numerous tiers of appellate court reviews. All the hard work was done before they even came on board. Death row inmates are on death row because they killed innocent people. Charged, tried,convicted, appealed and conviction affirmed. The apellate process has become a cash cow for lawyers who at best are no more than Monday morning bench warmers.

lifer | 2:41 p.m. March 24, 2008

The appellate process has, and remains, a constitutional right. It has and remains an effective way of making sure the govt has jumped through every hoop it was supposed to before taking a citizens money, liberty and, sometimes, life.

If a good appellate attorney or habeas attorney cannot reverse a conviction, then the defendant pays his debt to society.

If the conviction is reversed, let me assure you, there were signficant problems with the process below. The very very last thing an appellate court ever wants to do is to reverse a jury verdict.

RonRook | 5:03 p.m. March 24, 2008

The appellate process is considered a part of the constitutional guarantees any accused man or woman is entitled to. We can't talk about truth and justice without addressing the appellate process. As much as I grumble about the costs and and decades-old appeals by prison lifers, I'm afraid it's a fact of life in this country. Yet, the system was designed to be administered by professional law trained officers of the courts(lawyers). Someone is watching too much TV drama if they think a death row con will be able to accomplish what an attorney can't accomplish in legal administration.

This will fly in the SupremCourt | 5:49 p.m. March 24, 2008

Why do our legislators pass stpid laws.

Wasting their time, and the time of the courts and State attorneys on a bill that will be declared, without a doubt, unconstitutional.

Such a wate of time and money.

Vote Anti-Incumbent!!!

Observer | 9:02 p.m. March 26, 2008

As a taxpayer and someone involved directly with the system. I have observed that what we need is a system that is less taxing on us as taxpayers. We need a system where those individuals that are incarcerated pay for themselves. The 13th ammendment to the constitution states:
Section 1.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
So those that are in prison can and should work. Nothing that would be termed as cruel or unusual punishment, but something that would stop the senseless warehousing of inmates where the only thing they do is watch tv, find new ways to be better criminals, something that would keep their minds occupied and productive to reduce or eliminate the burden on taxpayers. Granted not 100% can or should be in a working program, but the majority can and should.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.