(snipped for space)
I could not agree more! It is exactly what I said in the Anthony case when the defense was allowed to say anything they could dream up and point the finger of guilt at someone else. Not only does the defense have no responsibility to prove anything, what they say does not even have to be true, while the state must prove everything they assert every step of the way.
And another thing radically wrong with our system is the appeals process. If a witness says or does something they should not and it is objected to and the objection is overruled, one side has a right to appeal if they choose; the other has no such recourse. One side has legal right to pick apart every single ruling by the judge and every sideways glance by a juror and request a do-over, and the appeals courts more often than they should are willing to hear them out and go over every word of their claim with a fine-tooth comb looking for a reason to overturn.
The scales of justice are tipped to one side. It was not always this way but our system has morphed into something that is more about winning and less about justice and holding criminals responsible for their actions.
I think DP cases unavoidably turn the trial process upside down. We bend over backwards to protect the rights of the accused because we aren't barbarians, because we believe in the rule of law, and because our very country and system of government were founded in part out of deep suspicion of authorities with too much power.
IMO, those intentions are honorable and appropriate, especially when the State is proposing to take a life at trial's end. But, I think the weight of that responsibility does skew the process. Judges, afraid of appeals, tilt to the defense, giving the defense great latitude, just in case. The State has to make a case for guilt that goes beyond reasonable doubt; though not on paper, the standard is closer to "beyond any doubt at all."
DP jurors are asked to decide whether or not to allow the State to put someone to death. Who would want THAT responsibility? Every post conviction DP juror I've ever read about describes how agonizing the process is, what a terrible decision it is to make. Its no surprise at all that some who thought they could impose the DP just can't vote for death when that time comes.
And all that before the endless appeals, the years and years devoted to making sure the system got it right.
What happened to Caylee made me agree with the DP for the first time. CMJA's accusations of pedophilia and her relentless assault on Travis' family make me hope she gets the DP because I honestly believe she'll keep trying to hurt them til her last breath.
But.....After watching multiple DP cases play out now, I've come to think that the DP isn't worth the distortions and injustices it causes. Better to have an option of a special LWOP for the likes of CMJA. Life without parole, life never in the general population, life never allowed to communicate to the outside world other than directly to a pre-approved list of family. A life not taken, but a murderer permanently isolated from the rest of us. I think that would be true justice. Jmo.