this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2023
336 points (96.9% liked)

News

22595 readers
4147 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A Texas man who said his death sentence was based on false and unscientific expert testimony was executed Thursday evening for killing a man during a robbery decades ago.

Brent Ray Brewer, 53, received a lethal injection at the state penitentiary in Huntsville for the April 1990 death of Robert Laminack. The inmate was pronounced dead at 6:39 p.m. local time, 15 minutes after the chemicals began flowing.

Prosecutors had said Laminack, 66, gave Brewer and his girlfriend a ride to a Salvation Army location in Amarillo when he was stabbed in the neck and robbed of $140.

Brewer’s execution came hours after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to step in over the inmate’s claims that prosecutors had relied on false and discredited expert testimony at his 2009 resentencing trial.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 126 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Abolish capital punishment

[–] [email protected] 42 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I'm so tired of being a part of the murder of innocents on a systemic level.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I'm tired of being part of the murder of the guilty on a systemic level. No crime is heinous enough for me to say "Yeah, government, go ahead and murder us".

[–] [email protected] 10 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

There are absolutely crimes worthy of removing you from the species, permanently.

But until we have a system that can do it with 100% accuracy it shouldnt be an option.

Blackstone's Ratio is very relevant here, "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 102 points 9 months ago (78 children)
load more comments (78 replies)
[–] [email protected] 80 points 9 months ago (6 children)

“Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends.”

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 48 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Brewer has long expressed remorse for the killing and a desire to apologize to Laminack’s family.

“I will never be able to repay or replace the hurt (and) worry (and) pain I caused you. I come to you in true humility and honest heart and ask for your forgiveness,” Brewer wrote in a letter to Laminack’s family that was included in his clemency application to the parole board.

So did he do it then? Because it sounds like they were trying to get him off on a technicality, rather than because he didn't do it and was falsely accused.

[–] [email protected] 50 points 9 months ago (3 children)

You have to show sympathy and remorse to qualify for clemency or parole, so you say you're sorry for the situation and their loss but never that you're at fault.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Absolutely, I can understand why he would say he felt sorry for the family. But saying sorry for the pain he caused is an admission of guilt.

I think the timeline went like this:

  • 1990 Brewer (then 19) and his girlfriend attack Laminack, killing him.
  • 1991 Brewer is convicted and sentenced to death.
  • 2007 Supreme Court overturns the decision because of a technicality on the jurors' instructions.
  • 2009 Brewer is re-tried, and again convicted, in part due to expert testimony from Coons.
  • 2010 In another trial, Coons' testimony was ruled as "insufficiently reliable".
  • Brewer's lawyer then raises an appeal in Texas over Coons' testimony in 2009. Appeals court says "you should've said that in 2009".
  • Brewer's lawyers escalate to the Supreme Court, however they decline to hear the case, deferring to the Texas Appeals Court's judgement.

Presumably, Coons' testimony could have been challenged in 2009 in exactly the same way as it was in 2010, but they didn't do this. I'm sure Coons is now seen as an unreliable witness, but he was considered reliable up until 2010.

It was actually the Texas Appeals Court that ruled that Coons was unreliable, however presumably the appeal in which they established that was granted for other reasons than his statement alone. Indeed, this is the 2010 case, there were 25 points in question. While the court ruled that Coons' testimony was unreliable, they still reaffirmed the conviction.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 9 months ago

It's something they must do, read clemency pleas they're basically all the same because boards want to see the same thing. Factually not guilty people have said the same thing in clemency letters.

I dunno who exactly is at fault nor did I read that much into it, what I am saying is don't particularly base anything on clemency or parole letters, they're intentionally flawed so they can be used against the subject later, it's holdover slave shit that persists.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 9 months ago (1 children)

No, he was trying to say he would have been sentenced to life instead of death if the jury hadn't heard certain expert testimony.

I would guess the testimony would be along the lines of blood splatter or some other pseudoscientific forensics where the expert might say the crime was particularly vicious.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 9 months ago

That didn't matter in the death sentence appeal where the court ruled the testimony as unreliable: https://law.justia.com/cases/texas/court-of-criminal-appeals/2010/20229.html

They ruled that the testimony was unreliable, but still let the sentence stand. If all Brewer was arguing was the testimony, then the court would have reached the same conclusion.

[–] Immersive_Matthew 38 points 9 months ago (22 children)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 9 months ago

The thumbnail looks like a set from a Victorian horror film

load more comments (21 replies)
[–] [email protected] 36 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

It's ok, they can just unexecute him later when new evidence comes to light, or an appeal finds that a mistake was made.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

It is better to punish too many than too few, because then you have a higher degree of probability of getting the right guy! Even if it's not "your" guy, you also increase the chance of killing someone who committed a different crime and happened to get away with it. This way, statistically, we will be a safe and healthy society, on average. It's simple maths, people. If for every caught criminal we also punish two or three random citizens, just imagine, we would all keep each other in check and be happy.

We should also institute governmental snitch centrals, and letting people starve to death in cages hung outside the city gates, but those are optional.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago

When Cameron Willingham was wrongfully evening, Rick Perry changed out the chair and 2 other Members of of the forensic science commission 2 days before they were going to hold a meeting to share their findings that it was a bad kill.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 9 months ago (3 children)

15 minutes, fuck. It's such a bullshit and simply meant to torture, whatever they claim. There are enough methods to kill quick and painless but no, that would not satisfy the people watching. Animals.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 9 months ago (5 children)

The inmate was pronounced dead at 6:39 p.m. local time, 15 minutes after the chemicals began flowing.

15 MINUTES?!

A run of the mill school shooter could kill a whole high school in that time and with less agony.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 9 months ago

Surely, the life begins at birth people will mourne say this is a travesty

[–] burntbutterbiscuits 16 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Anyone who believes in the death penalty is a moron. That’s my final answer.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›