No, it cannot supercede anything unless a cogent case can be made to explain it. Finding a hair on someone's dead body that matches his wife doesn't make her the killer -- a coherent, plausible story needs to come together. Even if (for the sake of this argument) DNA doesn't give false positives or false negatives, the problem is that DNA doesn't answer the question "Did Mr. Y kill Mr. X?" It only tells you who this or that sample belongs to.

There are two main reasons why I oppose the DP in the USA:

1) Racial inequality.

Historically, up to 2009, minorities have been sentenced to death much more than Whites (that racial majority) - which I think suggests inherent racism in the Justice system.

2) New DNA Evidence

There have been many people tired (and sentenced) for crimes they didn't comimit. New DNA evidence has freed several death row inmates in several states. One can only guess how many other inmates were put the death for crimes they didn't commit.

-ITL-

Yes, I know. It's made a critical difference in countless cases. In others it has not. What's the big deal?

Maybe it's because I look at this like a clinician. I use diagnostic tests, be they x-rays or DNA-based tests (we do a lot of PCRs in my specialty). But it is the prior probability of a disease being present that influences how most tests are interpreted. A chest x-ray may look like pneumonia, but we don't treat people for pneumonia unless they've got a clinical story that fits it.

Same with DNA at a crime scene. A crime investigation is a process of putting together a story. DNA is a test of that story, but if the story is extremely strong anyway you don't need it and if the story is extremely weak the DNA evidence can't be explained.

This is a radically backwards distortion of life. It is nonsense. Your "good" divorces pride from human potential. Moral perfection is infeasible if you injure yourself to become "free of the weight of perfection." It is not "good" if it is not the highest potential you can attain, and certainly not if you do it in the name of a higher authority than your mind.

But these anomalies are not all that frequent, and DNA has added a powerful tool to forensics. It makes miscarriage of justice (in both directions) much less likely.

One who takes life, does not have the right to demand it back.

Mordern Democracy should have adopted that instead of making the [Swearing-here] message that an unjustifable "murder, pedophile, schizophrenic" should have a second chance in Life.

Second Chance?

Other way around...

The first question is Does anyone deserve to die for a crime? If yes, then the next question is How can we always discriminate those who deserve to die from those who don't?

You mean "return life" as in "be freed"? If not, then I dont understand how that would work, since nobody can return life anyway =)

Not giving people a second chance is a waste, though I dont think everone deserves a second chance: some do.

Is it wrong to assume that as an adult I am talking to adults, and that I need not spell out every nuance, or attempt at irony, or sarcasm???I am not a bad dog... Really...If you do not wish to understand what a person is saying there isn't much point talking...You can't say good morning to some folks if they are looking to find fault....

What if it does not work, but serves to demean all life, and to spread vengeance, and resentment???

You mean "return life" as in "be freed"? If not, then I dont understand how that would work, since nobody can return life anyway =)

Not giving people a second chance is a waste, though I dont think everone deserves a second chance: some do.

My taxi money is a waste. As if I ever know were the F-[swearing] they go all the time.

~~

The drama.

I wonder what good it is, to have clearly psycotic serial killers haing around doing nothing but waste tax money? On the other side, it has been proven again and again that innocent people has been put to death, by faulty justice system.

I wonder what good it is, to have clearly psycotic serial killers haing around doing nothing but waste tax money? On the other side, it has been proven again and again that innocent people has been put to death, by faulty justice system.

In the end I can only take one giant step back from the problem and ask Why are there so many people in prison, death row or otherwise? Prevention of the crime would be far better than the methods we presently have that pass for cure. A society that allows so many to slip away in such a way that all that this society can think to do with them is either lock them up or kill them clearly has some deep and horrible flaws that must be addressed.

Btw, another factor is also the trauma of the executioner(s). It would burden an executioner if he was in great doubt, weather if the victim would be innocent or guilty. If later evidence would be uncoverd, that the executed was innocent, the executioner would feel a great guilt, I'm sure.

I dont think that the regret would fall on the executioner, he only kills. It would most likely fall in those who decided he was guilty, and those who decided he deserved death.

I think prisioners should either pay their stay or work in prision to pay it, only if they refused to do so would they be executed. I remember someone argued that this could develop into a slave-work system thanks to corruption, but its the best solution I can think on.

I know that it is very unlikely, but if you mother lost her mind and killed a bunch of people, would you think she should be put to death?

I wouldn't hesitate to vote for that, I'm kinda above group think, and not ruled by emotion on that point.

I am cool with that, Again very unlikely! But what if she was in a car wreck and suffered head injury and just was not the same any more but seem to function some what, at least you thought that she did and 1 month after leaving the hospital killed a bunch of people and after visiting her you could clearly see that she was not the same person she use to be. Would you kill her then?