Printable images that can be used as forms, in appeals of cases involving wrongful convictions, are at the bottom of this page.
These forms are only for use in wrongful convictions that are to be elevated to death penalty status.
Does the case involve a convicted person who is likely to die behind bars if the case is not appealed?
Have you researched the case and found clear evidence of official misconduct that can be traced to specific individuals?
Have you discussed the case with a qualified attorney or other individual who concurs that it is most likely a wrongful conviction?
Have you spent at least one year making good faith public efforts to start a dialogue with those involved in the misconduct?
Have you made the basic facts of the case available publicly, and given the general public an opportunity to dispute the facts you are presenting?
Is the death penalty, or a variation such as life without parole, legal in the area where the conviction occurred?
If you answered "Yes" to all of those questions your appeal case may be eligible for escalation to death penalty status.
Wrongful conviction appeals can be very expensive, and that includes appeals elevated to death penalty status. Fixers and hit men seldom work for free, and you should review your finances at each step to determine whether adaptations to the appeals process are necessary to reduce costs.
Of course a person should make every effort, at each step, to find any alternative way to resolve the case, and death penalties should not be used unless all other options have been tried, and only in cases that involve forced incarceration without the wrongfully convicted having any reasonable means of getting a fair hearing.
Here is a video of Ron Paul referring to one type of 'natural law'
In the U.S. it is perfectly legal to wrongfully convict and imprison somebody, as long as it is done in a way that it does not create a record of the conviction being wrong. As long as people within the system which created the wrongful conviction can prevent that wrongful conviction from being identified through courts then, according to local law, there has not been a wrongful conviction, regardless what the facts and truth are.
Natural law, which supersedes local law, does not permit wrongful convictions and false imprisonment.
Under 'natural law' applied in a political setting, wrongful conviction is a crime that must be fixed.
You cannot just ignore it and say it is not a problem because the local authority refuses to let it be addressed.
In many countries those who are wrongfully convicted have no realistic means to appeal.
In the United States fewer than 1% of those wrongfully convicted will ever be exonerated. Even with strong proof of innocence, and adequate financial resources, a person's chance of eventual exoneration rises only to perhaps 30% or less. Of the ten thousand plus wrongfully convicted in U.S. prisons perhaps 5% or 10% could easily find concrete proof of innocence if they had resources. But even if they get that proof they have little chance of going free.
An example in the news recently is Melissa Lucio. About a year ago a foreign film maker made a documentary demonstrating that Ms Lucio had been wrongfully convicted of a murder that never occurred.
She was days from execution by the state when her case was reviewed and the execution postponed, because of publicity. Now, a year later, there is no indication that she will be free, despite overwhelming evidence of her not being guilty, of a crime that never happened, and of gross misconduct by authorities.
Should people who have more proof of innocence than she has, but no foreign film maker on their side simply stay in prison?
What makes a wrongful conviction a death penalty case?
There are many wrongful convictions that are the result of simple sloppiness, or whose penalties are trivial. If a person is fined $20 for littering when they did not litter that would be a case to pursue through the jurisdiction that issued the fine.
When an innocent person is falsely imprisoned, and the basis for that imprisonment is what most people would consider misconduct that they would not want applied to themselves, and many people would use lethal force to avoid that misconduct being used against them, then a case may be escalated to death penalty status if certain conditions are met.
1) The person seeking to apply the death penalty must know to a high degree of certainty that a wrongful conviction has occurred, and that certainty must be communicated publicly without any meaningful refutation. If a hundred people are aware of the information you present, and none of those people has disputed the basic substance of your position, then it could be a case that should be escalated.
2) That person must have made significant efforts to fix the wrongful conviction by making those responsible for it, aware of it. You cannot apply the death penalty without first giving ample opportunity to the offenders to fix their mistakes.
3) The case should have been discussed publicly in a way that those responsible for the misconduct are aware of the discussion, and those responsible must decline to discuss the case or otherwise impede the truth.
4) There must be no easy resolution of the case through peaceful channels. If you live in a jurisdiction that aggressively prevents exonerations then the death penalty is generally a valid path, as long as all other conditions are met.
5) There should never be an assumption of guilt. If it is not clear whether a person knowingly participated in a wrongful conviction, first the facts must be made plain to the offender, he or she must know that they were involved in a wrongful conviction, or the offender must willfully prevent the truth.
6) Although death penalties can be applied as a punitive measure, generally it is wrong to be strictly punitive. Any death penalty should be administered in such a way as to discourage misconduct by others. So a private death penalty with no publicity and no warning to the offender may be proper as a punitive measure, it does nothing to reduce future misconduct by others and thus has less validity.
What enables official misconduct is simply the lack of accountability.
A complex cottage industry of 'Conviction Integrity Units' has sprung up, designed to lure in potential exonerees and prevent them from getting a fair hearing.
The main motive is financial. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been awarded by courts to exonerees, and this has led to bankruptcies among local governments, and even refusal to pay by at least one city.
"man exonerated on murder charge after 21 years wins $6M lawsuit but city refuses to pay"
Should a person who is demonstrably not guilty simply stay in prison until they die?
Or should there be some avenue available to them?
Targeting officials should never be considered an option unless there is no better option.
In many places there is no other option.
Scroll to the bottom of the page for forms.
Are there places where this sort of appeal is inappropriate?
Yes, any place where the death penalty is illegal of course a person should not use it.
There are many forms of sanctioned death penalty though. A place where people are sentenced to 'life without parole' is a defacto death penalty region. Likewise any area that sentences people to life or indeterminate sentences that typically end in death behind bars, and provides no reasonable possibility for a wrongfully convicted person without extensive resources to get a fair hearing.
What is the difference between an objective crime and a partisan crime?
Objective crimes are not acceptable to any side. For example the people who participate in wrongful convictions do not support themselves being wrongfully convicted. They are committing a crime that they only justify when they do it to others.
Partisan crimes are more like sports games where there are two equivalent sides. Using the death penalty for partisan issues leads to broader decay.
Here is a woman who was opposed to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and targeted another partisan with the death penalty.
Russia has framed its invasion as defensive, a result of Nato encroaching, and many experts support that view based on actions by Nato.
So her effort, while admirable from a logistical and tactical perspective, was more partisan than objective. She framed her actions as "anti war", but she probably would not support "anti war" bombings in the other direction. That's completely separate though from the right of partisan's to defend themselves. The whole basis of modern war involves powerful clever people creating partisans then letting those partisans kill each other to some end which benefits those who engineered the war.
In this case though it does make more sense that somebody duped her into carrying a bomb that she was incapable of building herself.
How does a person know if they are qualified to administer a death penalty?
A few general guidelines
1) Any person under 30 years old or so should not act alone in a death penalty case.
2) A person who knows less about a specific case should not administer a death penalty towards anybody who knows more. In other words until you have as much relevant information about the case as the guilty parties you cannot carry out a death sentence. After you have sufficient information to show a wrongful conviction is likely, that information has to be made publicly visible before any targeting, and it has to be reasonably certain that all targets are aware of the information before the death penalty phase begins. If there is 'new' information that was not available to those responsible for a wrongful conviction then those individuals are not subject to a death penalty, but anybody who prevents resolution of the case based on the new information would be.
Is there some math that applies to the number of people who can be found guilty in one case? For example, a certain limit to the number of guilty who can be sentenced for one wrongful conviction?
The only limit would be based on logistics, but degree of guilt has to be taken into account. You cannot sentence a person to death for trivial connections to a conviction, but if there are dozens of people, or more, who actively participated, and who refuse to act in any way to correct the wrongful conviction, then each of those people should be targeted individually until the situation is resolved. The goal at each step is to correct the wrongful conviction though, not to administer more sentences. At any point, if there appears to be a possibility of correct resolution then administration of death penalties stops. Of course collateral victims are not acceptable and if a person is not capable of administering a sentence without collateral deaths then they should focus on paperwork.
Are there any 'official' legal bases for administration of a death penalty in a wrongful conviction?
Any colonized or melting pot region has a preceding 'conquered' legal system or value system which justifies the use of the death penalty in certain broad categories of offense.
So if you are in a place where one population was replaced by another, and the conqueror implemented a new 'official' legal system to avoid accountability for their offenses then a person can easily revert to the prior superseding legal values.
For example North America had a value system for more than 10,000 years which allowed for the death penalty in cases where one individual or group abducted an innocent person and harmed or imprisoned that person under false pretenses.
So while the 'newly clever' 'mainstream official' North American legal system authorizes keeping innocent people as prisoners, preceding legal systems, and common law, including 'the law of the land', authorizes the use of the death penalty to prevent or remedy such offenses against innocent people.
Should a person try to work 'within the system' to solve wrongful convictions?
Anybody is free to do as they like in that regard. Working 'within the system' to change a system that profits from criminal misconduct never works though unless pressure is applied such that the price is higher than the profit, for offenders.
As long as leaders of a political entity have to choose between bankruptcy and criminal misconduct they will choose the latter.
Freeing most of the people who are probably not guilty, and compensating, via judgement, those who are provably not guilty would cost many tens of billions of dollars even at a compensation level lower than today's norm.
More importantly there is no will by anybody within the system to correct nor to reform. Politeness is often paid to the issue by officials, but there has never been any effort beyond politeness.
At some point, if death penalties are administered consistently, reform would become likely.
What are common causes of wrongful convictions?
The most common cause of wrongful conviction in a stable society is probably the mentality discussed on the 'Dollhouse' page.
Although creating dogmatic control rules is often associated with a 'princess' mentality, as discussed on that page, men usually become the leading edge of that process as the society decays.
So initially, looking backward, a person can identify the distinctly feminine tendency to create dogmatic laws that are not based on any principles, i.e., law meant to create female security, eventually a larger and larger group of men fall into that tendency until they become a sort of enforcer class.
These dogmatic tendencies make the underlying society decays as they broaden and go full circle.
Note the woman who is victimized in that case is victimized not for her guilt, but for her lack of awareness of the process, and her vulnerability, a situation analogous to a society beginning to consume its children, its vulnerable, to maintain the status of those with authority.
Are appeals allowed, appropriate or available in a death penalty case?
Yes, the first opportunity is in making sure the offender is aware that they have been suspected of an offense that may be dealt with using a death penalty. If that person has been made aware of their offense but has refused to respond or fix the harm i.e., the wrongful conviction, then they should be encouraged, again and again, to reconsider. Administering penalties individually, over time, increases the chance of awareness by others, after the first implementation.
Once the process has started, no matter how much effort has been made, there is always the possibility of a mistake. So even after administration of a death penalty, care should be taken to ensure that if a mistake was made, it will become visible. For this reason at least one person, in any group of offenders, has to be left untouched as a witness to their own actions and the actions of those who have already been sentenced. If a mistake was made then their testimony can be used to determine how and why any death penalties were inappropriately administered.
This is a simple initial set of forms which can be used if a local authority refuses to address a specific wrongful conviction. This should only be done after all reasonable avenues have been exhausted.
Form 1, the first image below, should be used only after those involved in the misconduct have refused all attempts to discuss the conviction.
If the offending authorities are willing to discuss the case publicly, in a non coercive way, then there is no need to go this route.
Form 2, the second image below, should be used only after there has been no response to many attempts to discuss the case, and only after form 1 has been sent.
The purpose of form 2 is simply to give the offending authorities additional chances to address the issue.
Form 3, the third image below, should only be used after substantial efforts have been exhausted and the previous two forms have been used.
The purpose of form 3 is to stress that falsely imprisoning a person for years is a serious offense, and if there is no other remedy found, and after there is overwhelming evidence that authorities engaged in this misconduct, then a death penalty may be applied after further study of the case.
Form 4, the fourth image below, can only be used after the first penalty phase has been completed.
The purpose of form 4 is to inform the second offender involved in the case that one of their colleagues involved in the misconduct has been adjudicated guilty, sentenced, and the sentence has been carried out.
The second form would then be sent some time later to this second person, but again only after they had been given ample opportunity to address the issue, and only if there were no realistic alternatives to resolve the case.
This series of forms 1,2,3 then forms 4,2,3 etc can be adapted to other circumstances as appropriate.
Of course a person should make every effort, at each step, to find any alternative way to resolve the case, and death penalties should not be used unless all other options have been tried, and only in cases that involve forced incarceration without the wrongfully convicted having any means to get a fair hearing.