Thread: Joe Arpaio

Originally Posted by freebird

Sherriff Joe is also one of my heroes. I believe we could cut the death penalty budget to a bare minimum. To quote Charlie Daniels:
"Now if I had my way with people sellin' dope
I'd take a big tall tree and a short piece of rope
I'd hang 'em up high and let 'em swing 'til the sun goes down".

For all the others in prison, put em to work raising theri own food, making their own clothes, cut out the color tv, cable and a/c and make em earn their living. They could grow cotton for clothing, tobacco for smoking, raise cattle, hogs and a garden for food. Cut their appeals down to one appeal. They could even grow their own hemp for the rope!

Originally Posted by bjrn

Significantly lowers recidivism rates since they can do something after jail, if I remember correctly. It was some time since I read up on the US prison system, but I bet a major sap is the incredible incarceration rate the US has.

With things being the way they are, would that really be a good idea? I mean... surely you would want to give people a bit of a chance, especially with racism still being a problem.

Not at all, I stand by only one appeal...don't forget today we have dna matching, security camera's, fingerprint analysis etc that is not biased or racially motivated.

I don't trust DNA matching's accuracy as much as the courts/press make out it to be. After all it's only partial DNA strands that are tested and maybe one in fifty people will have a matching section. I'm not sure how the liklihood changes in certain areas and then you have the accuracy of the lab which may have something like a 0.1% false result rate.
Then when the jurors hear the statistical chances of the accused being the culprit are something like almost 98% using the above they often don't quite comprehend what that means and just see a high percentage. Assuming they use such a simple method and don't use some other more advantageous, to them, statistical method. After all there are lies, damn lies and statistics.

Originally Posted by murph

I'm sure I read over half the US prison population consists of black and hispanic ethnic minorities when they are something like a quarter of the population. Now if that doesn't suggest that there is some sort of racist problem I don't know what does. Even if it's due to socio economic factors those factors themselves point to a probable racist problem. They were also a bit more likely to be victims according to some of your government's statistics iirc.
Your own comments about reverse racism even suggest racist undertones. Not that I'm blaming you for them as I'm probably just as guilty but I admit my latent racism as I was brought up where there are very few non white people and almost everyone was racist to some degree. Not in a lets all put on white hoods or shave our heads then go out looking for someone to beat kind of way but the undertone was definately there in a strange way where single people from minorities were accepted but not whole races in general, if you know what I mean.


(I found the us census 2000 online saying there were more blacks in prison than whites while there are many more whites in the population as a whole. The figures are quite striking actually pop. thous. white -224,611 black- 34,862 prison white - 249,900 black - 251,800 and in some states your up to 36 times more likely to be in jail if you are black and femal compared to white females, 16 for males)

Originally Posted by murph

I don't trust DNA matching's accuracy as much as the courts/press make out it to be. After all it's only partial DNA strands that are tested and maybe one in fifty people will have a matching section. I'm not sure how the liklihood changes in certain areas and then you have the accuracy of the lab which may have something like a 0.1% false result rate.
Then when the jurors hear the statistical chances of the accused being the culprit are something like almost 98% using the above they often don't quite comprehend what that means and just see a high percentage. Assuming they use such a simple method and don't use some other more advantageous, to them, statistical method. After all there are lies, damn lies and statistics.

You dont trust DNA matchings but you trust the census reports huh?
You are basing your beliefs on sheer speculation and circumstantial evidence.
If I followed your line of thinking all the way through I would have to come to the conclusion that since no asian americans are mentioned in your census reports as being incarcerated that they would have to be behind this so called racism. I wonder how custumartini will feel about this when he discovers that he is a racist?(no offense intended Brendon)

I don't trust either 100% but if you think your limited experience is more accurate than your country's census that's your lookout.
I wouldn't convict someone on DNA alone and was just making the point that jurors often don't understand the statistics.
I didn't say I trusted either completely but unless your own government can't count, don't have prison records or let a huge number of people pretend they are a different colour the census and prison records aren't going to be so far out as to skew the results that much.
Asians are mentioned but online they are just grouped with native americans etc. and weren't worth mentioning because the figure was much lower. I think it said they made up about 5% of the population in total but can't recall exactly offhand.

Originally Posted by freebird

Not at all, I stand by only one appeal...don't forget today we have dna matching, security camera's, fingerprint analysis etc that is not biased or racially motivated.

But mistakes are still made, even today.
As I said before and probably will say again: 'Oops' just doesn't cut it in death penalty cases.
Today it is pretty rare, but even then, 1 is too much.

Suppose you were the one going to the chair because you happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time, with a possible motive and DNA evidence which could have multiple possible reasons for being there. Would you still agree?

Originally Posted by murph

I don't trust DNA matching's accuracy as much as the courts/press make out it to be. After all it's only partial DNA strands that are tested and maybe one in fifty people will have a matching section. I'm not sure how the liklihood changes in certain areas and then you have the accuracy of the lab which may have something like a 0.1% false result rate.
Then when the jurors hear the statistical chances of the accused being the culprit are something like almost 98% using the above they often don't quite comprehend what that means and just see a high percentage. Assuming they use such a simple method and don't use some other more advantageous, to them, statistical method. After all there are lies, damn lies and statistics.

16 locations are tested. 4 possible combinations per location -> 1 in ~128000
And then there is the possibility of lab errors. My wife works as a microbiologist. shit happens. police labs are not different.