Wow I never started a thread that got so much interest before!

This is a tricky issue - and there are always going to be passionate arguments on either side - peoples lives have been lost and there is nothing that will get people more passionate than that.

Tookie Williams never admitted his guilt - the main reason being that he maintained his innocence. By default the only action that could have saved his life would have immediately doomed his appeals - it was catch 22.

Founding a gang is not a paper exercise - you dont set up a stall and take names. We are all in gangs - they're called our friends,  and living on dangerous streets meant that his friends stuck together. We cant blame one man for the action of his friends can we?

The man who ultimately could have delivered clemency described the act as "The senseless killing that has ruined many families" - this is from a man who made $100 million from senseless killing on screen and despite have absolutely no legal background or knowledge (and having a staggeringly low approval rating) dismissed any suggestion that Tookie's trial was unfair.

Which ever side of the fence you sit on - 'Vengeance is mine sayeth the lord' and so it should be -

For every legimate example of state taking a life in history - I guarantee you there are 10 examples of mistaken identity state/mob/vigilanty killings and at what point are we going to admit that humans simply cant be trusted to make the ultimate decision? I for one would prefer to always have the option to consider new evidence. For Tookie Williams - it can no longer matter.