'One's too many'.

I have thought it over after alanabit's post and I still hold to my opinion.

Maybe I have read or heard it too often in too many contexts. A kid has been mauled by a dog, one's too many. A woman has been raped by a former rapist out of jail, one's too many. An oil tanker spoils a coast, one's too many.

There are no error free decisions (unless trivial ones). All decision criteria only influence the trade-off between two errors. For each of the above mentioned guilty beyond every doubt cases I could post here an extremely unlikely but not completely impossible scenario that this person could be not guilty.

Therefore, for any person accepting death penalty, the error possibility argument can be no convincing argument. But I see this argument here in different forms directed to them (supporters of death penalty), and in that form it makes no sense for me. However, if that argument is directed not to others but as an explanation why the poster herself is against death penalty, it makes sense. (Gareth has made a very interesting variant of of that argument)

BTW, the 'for life' penalty for 'simple' murder in Germany (unlikely to do it again, no aggravating circumstances) usually means 15 years (most of the RAF terrorists serving for murder are out by now). So from a German point of view, the American system with the very long-time death rows means they first get a penalty for life and after they have served the time they get the death penalty.

Wolfgang

Wolfgang