Talk:Wrongful execution

Section removal

This page was created with source-supported sections which keep getting removed from the Capital punishment article, not as a content fork, but as a separate article to keep them online in main article space. --James S. 19:00, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Non-western Countries?

I know it might be hard to get facts and figures for the other countries with capital punishment such as the PRC, Iran etc but that could have some context within this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.252.33 (talk) 10:24, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Statistics?

Does someone else think it might be good to have statistics on wrongful executions? E.g. how many death sentences are wrongful?

LinuxMercedes (talk) 19:41, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd be stunned if you could find statistics about which people could come close to agreeing. atakdoug (talk) 18:16, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Broken Link to the major source -- I can't find the article

The link to the "25 Cases" article at Capital Defense Weekly is broken, and can't find the article we're trying to link to. As this article seems to be the principal source for the information in the body of this page, can someone give a shot at finding it? atakdoug (talk) 18:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I've now changed the link to be to an archived version of the page, but it could still be improved by finding the real source -- the link is to a draft only. atakdoug (talk) 18:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

http://capitaldefenseweekly.com/innocent.html updated 2007 (bottom of page) MilesAgain (talk) 05:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. atakdoug (talk) 07:46, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Actual Innocence versus unconvictability

In adding to this page (as I assume some editors are going to do), do try to distinguish between executions that are wrongful because the person executed didn't commit the crime at all, and those that are wrongful because the conviction was in some other way unfair. Verifiable claims of the actual innocent of executed people appear to be exceedingly rare, and if you're going to say otherwise, be sure to back it up with solid facts. Even the two cases detailed in the article as it stands are not clear instances of actual innocence.

Remember: the death penalty may be cruel, inhumane, racially biased, or otherwise flawed, but that doesn't mean that the people executed didn't commit the crimes of which they were convicted. You can argue (though you shouldn't in a NPOV encyclopedia, but I'm not holding my breath in the expectation of a fully neutral page) that executions are wrongful even without a demonstration of actual innocence (as in cases of serious prosecutorial misconduct sufficient to obscure the facts, which therefore remain unknown), but at least try to be clear about what you're saying. atakdoug (talk) 18:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

"the death penalty may be cruel, inhumane, racially biased, or otherwise flawed, but that doesn't mean that the people executed didn't commit the crimes of which they were convicted" -- what are you trying to say here? Do you think the DNA exonerations don't show a substantial number of wrongful executions?

Also, I don't understand what you mean about "a demonstration of actual innocence." Do you live in a country where defendants are required to prove their innocence? In my country, the prosecution is required to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt before sentence can be passed. MilesAgain (talk) 05:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

No, in fact my point was that the prosecution's failure to prove its case does make an execution wrongful, but my and most everyone else's standards, even if the accused commited the crime, but that that failure does not make him innocent, just unconvictable. Before I edited it a bit, the article did not make this distinction, skipping blithely from cases of prosecutorial misconduct to claims of "innocence". I'm just pointing out the potential problem with the wording. A person who cannot be convicted on the basis of the evidence that can be legally presented is not necessarily "innocent"; he's "not guilty" (a distinction the US Supreme Court held to be very important -- US defendants are not even allowed to plead "innocent").

As for the DNA exonerations, I haven't been through the data but I was under the impression that the clear DNA cases, the ones that show that the accused really didn't do it, were death row cases, not post-execution (though I assume there are some exceptions). I didn't realize that there were cases in which DNA showed convicts who'd already been executed were actually innocent of the crimes in question. If I'm wrong, that's cool, but I think that in that case the article should cite some of those cases. atakdoug (talk) 07:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Forgot to add: the "actual innocence" issue has legal import as well: in some federal (US) habeas corpus proceedings, a death penalty petitioner must show that the evidence he wishes to present on collateral review would demonstrate that he really didn't do it, not just that he shouldn't have been convicted. This is considered acceptable because he's already been convicted beyond a reasonable doubt -- remember, it's for habeas, not initial appeal. Yep, I agree it's unfair, and I admit it's been a while since I worked on such cases and I know the law is now somewhat different, but in some cases, actual innocence does matter.

In any case, my reference to "demonstrating" actual innocence wasn't to defendants' having to demonstrate it, it was to the writer having to demonstrate that it has happened before he claims that innocent people have been executed. atakdoug (talk) 08:01, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Debate on Merger of Article with Wrongful Execution

Strong Support, Provided: that Judicial Murder as an article be eliminated when merged. Wrongful Execution is the neutral term for this sort of thing. Judicial murder implies that a murder took place, which requires intent to kill, etc... Cesium_133 (talk) 08:57 6 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support. I agree with the above contributer, and see no reason to have a seperate article just for a different term for the same thing.
• Oppose Wrongful execution is an accident due to incomplete or wrong information, while judicial murder is not accidental. Wrongful execution would be if a jury sentences a person to execution to bad or incomplete evidence. Judicial murder is when the state executes someone for an unjustified reason. The reference that argues they are the same (Unschuldig verurteilt! Aus der Chronik der Justizmorde, Hermann Mostar) appears to be in German, so I don't see how it is relevant to the semantics of English here. Austin512 (talk) 23:39, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

South Carolina admits two men wronfully executed in 1915

In [1], on October 14, 2009 South Carolina pardoned two men electrocuted on September 29, 1915. Simesa (talk) 01:53, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Australia - serious doubts on wrongfull execution in 1967

Ronald Ryan was hanged in 1967 for the shooting death of a prison officer. There were no scientific ballistic forensics for evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, mysterious missing pieces of vital evidence that could have cleared Ryan, serious ambiguities in the case, dire inconsistencies of all fourteen eyewitnesses' for the prosecution, testimony by another prison officer that he fired one single shot (heard by all witnesses, no person heard two shots fired) and ballistic expert testimony that the fatal shot was fired from a distance at an elevated position in a downward trajectory angle, Ronald Ryan was convicted based solely on unrecorded unproven and unsigned allegations of verbals/confessions, said to have been made by Ryan to police. Ryan only signed documents that he would not give any verbal or written statements and always denied ever making such verbals/confessions to any person, claiming he had been "verballed". They both pleaded not guilty.Ronald Ryan was hanged less than one year later and seven days before his unfunded (Victorian Government withdrew all legal aid funding) final appeal to The Privy Council had made a decision.

Confessions in itself, or another person’s interpretation of a one’s confession is not sufficient proof of guilt. Confessions are often the practice of forcing a person to behave in an involuntary manner whether through action or inaction by use of coercion, intimidation, trickery, creating feelings of guilt/obligation, or other forms of psychological pressure. Such actions are used as leverage to force a person to act in the desired way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.224.64.166 (talk) 01:09, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

References

FBI says bad North Carolina lab work executed three from '87 to '03

"RALEIGH (August 18, 2010) The criminal convictions of three people who have since been executed in North Carolina, and four more cases in which the defendants are now on death row, are in doubt because of faulty lab work by the SBI, according to a new, scathing report written by former FBI agents who examined the troubled agency's blood work."[2] Ginger Conspiracy (talk) 10:35, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Disruptive edits by Bepopalula. Suspected sockpuppet.

User Bepopalula has been running a biased campaign on these pages trying to include unnecessary information about the execution of Ronald Ryan. The information has been added to the following articles...

• Capital punishment in Australia
• HM Prison Pentridge
• Wrongful execution
• Miscarriage of justice

In all cases, the information is a rambling attempt to show that Ronald Ryan was wrongly convicted and executed. It is poorly written, badly cited, largely subjective, and does not belong in any of the articles it has been repeatedly put in to.
Bepopalula has repeatedly replaced the info, and his edit summary claim that my (and others') attempts to remove this are labelled as vandalism.
While preparing this response, I noticed that the concerns had already been raised previously with regard to user 93.185.104.30, who made identical changes to the exact same four pages. Can administrators take note of my concerns and take appropriate action as needed. Thanks--Dmol (talk) 04:06, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

First, I am no suckpuppet. The constant accusations of suspected sockpuppetry are an attempt to stop users from contributing or reverting vandalized edits. Please be aware that every Wikipedia article relating to Ronald Ryan has very often been vandalized within the last two years, mostly by User Purrum, followed a short time later by another user who vandalizes the article in exactly the same manner. All contributions based on citations and references might look similar BECAUSE the contributions have been extracted from similar citations and references. There is no bias nor campaign about the guilt of Ronald Ryan, it is the personal views of a few users. User Purrum's opinion on every 'factual' contributions, citations, references and new articles relating to Ronald Ryan do not belong anywhere. Evidence of Purrum's past history records show Purrum's persistent disruptive edits and vandalism on everything relating to Ronald Ryan. Purrum claims to know that Ronald Ryan was guilty, even though hundreds of citations, references and news articles by criminal experts say otherwise. Whether Ronald Ryan was guilty or not is irrelevant, but the public has a right to be informed of the 'facts'. Purrum's lengthy talk page is evidence of unreliable contributions resulting in Wikipedia requests for speedy deletion of many articles. User Dmol considers this as good record of edits. There is ample evidence in Purrum's lengthy history records of contributions that prove the overwhelming number of persistent disruptive edits and vandalism on everything relating to Ronald Ryan. This is not an allegation as suggested by User Dmol, but in fact the truth. As for me, I have done nothing wrong, my history records of contributions proves this. I have added original contributions relating to Ronald Ryan made by other users, which Purrum has vandalized time and time again over the past two years. I ask administrators to look at the evidence and the false allegations against me. Thanks. Bepopalula (talk) 00:35, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Meeks Griffen?

In the "Specific Examples" section, it says, "Thomas Griffin and Meeks Griffen" However, they are brothers in their own article, with the same last name, "Griffin." Please fix. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.225.196.21 (talk) 18:49, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Done! --GenericBob (talk) 00:58, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Troy Davis?

Does Troy Davis belong here? It is widely considered to have been a wrongful execution. Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:15, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

See also

"Innocence Project" deserves mention (link to wikipedia article) Ecstatist (talk) 04:47, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Pending Texas case

The Texas case that came up when Rick Perry announced his bid for the presidency, the one with the white trash father who failed to rescue his kids from their burning home, what was the guy's name? He was executed and the case has drawn a lot of interest in particular because of the shitty investigative work involved (i.e. the investigator saying he was a "satanist" because he liked rock music and arsoned the house on purpose as part of a ritual, etc.) that was revealed by outside investigators, after the fact. --76.115.67.114 (talk) 08:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Cameron Todd Willingham? — Red XIV ^(talk) 01:22, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Specific Example of Wrongful Execution in US

See the latest news story

http://www.inquisitr.com/236994/carlos-deluna-wrongfully-executed-in-texas-says-report/

Please update the article. This headline can be found on various sources online. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.169.172.37 (talk) 12:16, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Unrelated material

The following from the US section doesn't seem to have anything to do with wrongful executions: "A study shows that 3% of executions were "botched" in the U.S. Corrections officers watch and control the inmate before and during executions, including the tasks involved with aiding with the execution itself. Some depressed corrections officers suffer mental and physical health problems, become alcoholic, or even kill themselves, traumatized by the guilt of the wrongful or unnecessarily painful executions they administered" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.51.134.53 (talk) 22:29, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

I agree. It does make brief mention of 'wrongful' executions, but that part isn't actually supported by the cite provided - both the linked page, and the study which it references, seem to be solely about botches in the physical process of execution and not about wrongful conviction.

If somebody can provide a reliable source for trauma caused to corrections officers by wrongful execution that would be relevant here. There are other CP-related articles where botches would be more relevant. --GenericBob (talk) 23:00, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: Willingham - update

[3] 71.175.169.49 (talk) 06:22, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for posting the link. I learned about this case from PBS TV and live in Ireland. I recall Gov. Perry being interviewed by the media following the execution of Willingham and the announcement by Forensic experts that Texas had executed an innocent man. Apparently his wife had long thought him innocent but publicly announced as the execution approached that she was now sure he was guilty. As Willingham was about to suffer the lethal injection, he saw his wife amongst the DP witnesses and let forth a torrent of abuse against her.

When Perry was being interviewed about the prospect that a totally innocent man had been executed, Perry said something to the effect of "He deserved to be executed. Did you hear what he called his wife"? According to the newslink furnished by yourself, it appears that the ultimate decision as to whether to pardon Willingham rests with Perry. I have little confidence that this will happen with a Governor who can justify executing a man because he verbally abused his wife. 80.111.155.138 (talk) 20:35, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Meaning of "wrongful"

Footnote 1 of this law article explains that "wrongful" in "wrongful execution" has a somewhat different meaning from other legal contexts.

The term "wrongfully convicted" describes persons convicted in proceedings in which prejudicial legal error occurred and, as such, includes persons who were not actually innocent of the crimes for which they were convicted. The term "wrongful execution" refers to the execution of innocent persons.

Wikipedia usage is varied (All pages with titles containing wrongful and All pages with titles containing wrongfully and wrongful)

jnestorius^(talk) 12:58, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Let’s add “the Lindbergh kidnapper”

Although some still regard him as guilty, I think there’s enough good reason to justify adding Bruno Richard Hauptmann to the United States examples. Hauptmann was a German immigrant carpenter. He was accused, convicted, and executed for the infamous Lindbergh kidnapping. But I, for one, believe that they framed him. I think he was completely innocent of the crime.

I think his ex-roommate, Isidor Fisch, was an accomplice to the crime, which is how Hauptmann ended up caught in the snare. But I believe Hauptmann himself genuinely had nothing to do it.

And I’m far from the only person to hold this opinion. Many books (and even a movie) have argued for Hauptmann’s innocence, and I think they are correct.

Anyway, if no one has any objection, I would like to add a brief mention of Hauptmann’s case in this article, sometime soon. It wouldn’t be more than about three sentences long. Thegoldenconciseencyclopediaofmammals (talk) 21:15, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Jesse Tafero's entry needs to be fixed or deleted entirely

This is a considerable amount of activism on this page, but Jesse Tafero's entry is probably the most egregious example to me. It presents a very simplistic narrative of his convicted crimes, and tries to paint him as an entirely innocuous party. The problem with that is the evidence regarding the ballistic tests are heavily disputed, and the entire case is rife with competing narratives by all alleged participants.

Even with the narrative most favorable to Tafero that implicates his friend Rhoades as the triggerman, he was still legally involved in the murders. As Tafero did nothing to protect the victims and actively assisted the shooter in escaping the scene (including committing other acts of kidnapping and carjacking), he would still be prosecuted today. Many jurisdictions, including Texas and California for example, frequently charge indirect participants in criminal cases.

Another error in the passage is that it asserts that Tafero's then wife was exonerated of her involvement. In reality, she was discharged with an Alford deal. My opinion is that more facts that address the complexity of the case should be added to Tafero's section or be deleted in its entirety. Randomuser335S (talk) 23:12, 29 June 2024 (UTC)