Latest Headlines
- Softball Team Remembers Teammate Killed In Pace Wreck
- Rainy And Warmer Pattern Through Saturday Night
- ECFR Says McDavid Mobile Home Fire Was Sparked By Trash Fire; Firefighters Respond To Ascend
- Vote-By-Mail Ballots Mailed For 2025 Special Primary Election
- Two More Nights Planned For Christmas Lights, Hayride, Goats In Pajamas At Bratt Ranch
- OK, So It’s After Christmas. When Is My Next Trash Collection Day?
- FHP Seeks Info On Fatal HIt And Run In JCPenney Parking Lot
- Two Charged After Backpack Found With Drugs, Cell Phones Near Atmore Prison
- First Responders Put On Christmas Light Show For Children’s Hospital Patients (With Gallery)
- Santa And Mrs. Claus Take Last Minute Trip Through Century, Byrneville
Bill Seeks To Require Unanimous Juries In Death Penalty Cases
January 5, 2015
Juries would have to be unanimous before recommending the death penalty for defendants in murder cases, under a bill filed by a South Florida lawmaker. The bill, proposed by Rep. Jose Javier Rodriguez, D-Miami, will be considered during the 2015 legislative session.
Under current law, a majority of a jury can recommend that a defendant receive the death penalty, with a judge ultimately deciding whether to impose the sentence. Rodriguez’s bill would create a higher standard, with juries needing to be unanimous in such recommendations.
The bill also would give direction to judges on some jury instructions in death-penalty cases. Those instructions deal with what are known as “aggravating circumstances,” which are factors used to support death-penalty recommendations.
The bill, in part, would require aggravating circumstances to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and be subject to a unanimous vote. The bill would apply to offenses committed on or after July 1, 2015.
Comments
14 Responses to “Bill Seeks To Require Unanimous Juries In Death Penalty Cases”
Hmmm. This is interesting. I’m not sure if you will ever get an uanimous vote on a “death penalty case.” Like someone said above, the defense is going to find a prospective juror who is opposed to the death penalty thereby eliminating the chance for a defendant to get the death penalty. I saw a show on 48 hours last week in which a young man killed three members of a famiy accidentally leaving the 4th family member alive as he thought she was dead as well. He then went on to kill others as he like the smell of gun powder and blood. This guy was a serial killer who killed human beings for sport. He was given life in prison. After taking all those lives -life in prison? There was a jury member or members who had sympathy for him cause the defense talked about his miserable childhood. I don’t understand. Yes, there should be compassion, but did he show compassion to those he shot for sport? As someone mentioned above, the judges have the final call on whether a defendant should go to death row or life. They are the final say so. And yes, I agree GOD is the ultimate being and will punish wrongs in his own time. However, there is too much repeat offenses going on. Thank goodness we didnt have this crap going on when Ted Bundy was convicted. There is an execution planned for this month for the young man who went into a home with his buddies back in 1993 who repeatedly raped a man’s wife and subsequently shot the husband in the head. This has been going on since 1993. Take a look at his record. He was only 21 at the time but had a serious record prior to the murder. His buddies as well. The other two given life. No right. Im opposed to this piece of legislation.
As always, those of you who are so rabidly pro-death penalty take an awful lot on yourselves. I guess you just don’t have a lot of faith in God being able to handle dispensing justice. Until such a time as man is as infallible as God, I’m thinking that perhaps we shouldn’t be so quick to kill people to show that killing people is wrong. When you mess up on that one, there’s not taking it back.
In the paper the other day they reported an appeals court ordered a retrial of the man convicted of killing a woman off of E Street, back of 6 Brothers.
The judge erred in not instructing the jury they COULD just find him guilty of manslaughter when he stabbed her THIRTY times.
Had I sat on the jury, that wouldn’t have crossed my mind without a judge’s instruction.
Even now, I have a hard time imagining he could have killed her by accident while stabbing and stabbing and stabbing…
David for better comprehension
They figure we’re killing too many killers.
NO. Murders should be judged by a majority because it’s hard to get 12 to agree. The judge has the power to approve or disapprove the recommendation of the jury, so that’s the check-and-balance system. What should be improved is the time it takes from death penalty conviction to execution. Less time, more shock. The method of execution should match the crime inflicted on the victims. The injection is not feared by criminals, but a firing squad would be as well as a gas chamber, an electric chair, and a guillotine. Let the liberal Democrats pay for the housing and security of murders for 30 years, we don’t want to! Put FEAR back into the minds of criminals.
Prove aggravating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt? Well then, how about the defendant has to prove Mitigating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt ? No more, “It ain’t his fault. He was abused as a child” nonsense.
The only change that I think should be made is reducing how long it takes to execute someone sentenced to death. They should go straight from the court house to the execution.
Being a foreperson on a murder trial back in the mid 90’s. I think the jury shouldn’t even be involved in the sentencing…no 12 jury members are going to be able to say death penalty.the defense attorney will always pick a few born again Christians.
Murderers don’t seek the opinion and agreement of anyone before they kill another person and take their life.
Why should there be a unanimous vote to put the killers to death?
@ Jason….Amen to that.
Habitual drug dealers, people who prey on others, child molesters, rapists, DUI habitual offenders and so on…..Please put them out of Our Misery and get them off the taxpayer payroll / room & board & medical costs.
Oppose! The present system is fair and just and NOT broke. So don’t mess with it!
Totally oppose. Then all it would take (as happens in other states) is that one person could lie about being honest and the death penalty would not be possible for the murderer.
Nope. Majority should rule in cases like these. It’s tough to get 12 people to decide ANYTHING unanimously, especially something like this. I can see some bad people getting off the hook as far as being executed because a jury could not come to a decision, even with clear evidence that the crime was committed by the accused. Leave it as it is, Mr. Democrat!
Another liberal, progressive intent to allow killers back on the street.
Why even bother Jose Javier Rod?
To bad they dont seek to lower the standard so that more of the habitual offenders who continually prey on others dont qualify for death penalty. Heck, I think it should only take 3 people to vote to send a convict to death row.