Originally Posted by
Von Kinger
I haven't read enough to have an informed opinion on it. I think one thing that Davii should consider is if it's worth it for the state to foot the bill for a dead man's appeal? I think continuing legal actions after a person's death can be important -liability like poisoned water/products, actual claims of innocence, estate/will issues- but in this case it seems like it was just filed so he could do this legal maneuver.
On the other hand, if an appeal exists so the innocent aren't locked up -even if they're mostly just formalities in most instances- and Hernandez did it just to send money to his family...isn't that subversive? Doesn't that make a mockery of the system? My questions both operate on the same presupposition of 'he's super guilty, his estate is broke, so he's doing (at least as one motivation) as a last gasp to provide for his family...
I don't know what I think the law should state as I don't know the precedent. I don't know what I think the law should be, morally speaking, too.
I just don't know.