labels
class label 2
classes | premise
stringlengths 0
563k
| hypothesis
stringlengths 18
65
| task
stringlengths 3
43
|
|---|---|---|---|
0entailment
| and, frankly, those who don't have or know anyone who has life-threatening allergies have no idea how easily cross-contamination can occur. | This example is unverifiable. | pragmeval/verifiability |
0entailment
| transgender teenager leelah alcorn committed suicide and left a note on her tumblr
transgender teen leaves note on tumblr blaming christian parents for suicide | This example is for. | pragmeval/emergent |
2contradiction
| for example , the name kusiilay 1 ' the language of essil ' , is the name given by speakers of kujireray to the eegimaa language ,
because essil , of which bajjat was a district , is the village which has a border with their village . | This example is justify. | pragmeval/gum |
0entailment
| this won't happen until strategists come down from their ivory tower and learn to work in the real world of limited budgets and uncertain futures
as it is, we identify national goals and the threats to these goals, we shape a strategy to counter these threats, we determine the forces needed to execute the strategy, before finally forging the budgets needed to build and maintain the forces | This example is Contrast. | pragmeval/pdtb |
0entailment
| do you have ore
i need the same | This example is Parallel. | pragmeval/stac |
2contradiction
| 3a) if you do the math, severe earthquakes (caused by god) could have very easily covered the earth in approximately 2 miles of water at some points. also, with these severe earthquakes, not all of the earth would have to be covered equally at one time. there could have been some parts shallow enough to actually see the ground below.3b) who said the earth started out as a flat super continent? i believe that god made the earth only a few thousand years ago, not that much geographically different from the way it is now.
you contradict yourself. if the earth was then much as it is today, then there isn't enough water on earth to cover it in any fashion. i have done the math. do you have any idea of how high the himalayas, the alps, the andes, and the rockies are? besides, the bible talks about a flood that lasted a year, not a series of tsunamis. | This example is sarc. | pragmeval/sarcasm |
0entailment
| ahh ... and ... and ways of ... of ... avoiding them | This example is Neutral. | silicone/sem |
0entailment
| telephone lines to to are they ok from yes we we have our guest here at a hotel who's been trying to call and after she dials the number she's just getting a kind of unobtainable call ok thank you | This example is refer. | silicone/oasis |
0entailment
| Is it the Italian guy ? | This example is neutral. | silicone/meld_s |
0entailment
| Is it the Italian guy ? | This example is neutral. | silicone/meld_e |
2contradiction
| and have you got a savannah | This example is explain. | silicone/maptask |
2contradiction
| it ’ s a good idea . but i am afraid it ’ s too cold . it is very windy on the lake . | This example is no emotion. | silicone/dyda_e |
0entailment
| it ’ s a good idea . but i am afraid it ’ s too cold . it is very windy on the lake . | This example is commissive. | silicone/dyda_da |
2contradiction
| I just don't. It's stupid. | This example is dis. | silicone/iemocap |
0entailment
| 329 U.S. 459
67 S.Ct. 374
91 L.Ed. 422
STATE OF LOUISIANA ex rel. FRANCISv.RESWEBER, Sheriff, et al.
No. 142.
Argued Nov. 18, 1946.
Decided Jan. 13, 1947.
Rehearing Denied Feb. 10, 1947.
See 330 U.S. 853, 67 S.Ct. 673.
Mr.James Skelly Wright, of New Orleans, La., for petitioner.
Messrs. Michael E. Culligan, of New Orleans, La., and L. O. Pecot, of Franklin, La., for respondents.
Mr. Justice REED announced the judgment of the Court in an opinion in which The CHIEF JUSTICE, Mr. Justice BLACK and Mr. Justice JACKSON join.
1
This writ of certiorari brings before this Court a unique situation. The petitioner, Willie Francis, is a colored citizen of Louisiana. He was duly convicted of murder and in September, 1945, sentenced to be electrocuted for the crime. Upon a proper death warrant, Francis was prepared for execution and on May 3, 1946, pursuant to the warrant, was placed in the official electric chair of the State of Louisiana in the presence of the authorized witnesses. The executioner threw the switch but, presumably because of some mechanical difficulty, death did not result. He was thereupon removed from the chair and returned to prison where he now is. A new death warrant was issued by the Governor of Louisiana, fixing the execution for May 9, 1946.
2
Applications to the Supreme Court of he state were filed for writs of certiorari, mandamus, prohibition and habeas corpus, directed to the appropriate officials in the state. Execution of the sentence was stayed. By the applications petitioner claimed the protection of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment on the ground that an execution under the circumstances detailed would deny due process to him because of the double jeopardy provision of the Fifth Amendment and the cruel and unusual punishment provision of the Eighth Amendment.1 These federal constitutional protections, petitioner claimed, would be denied because he had once gone through the difficult preparation for execution and had once received through his body a current of electricity intended to cause death. The Supreme Court of Louisiana denied the applications on the ground of a lack of any basis for judicial relief. That is, the state court concluded there was no violation of state or national law alleged in the various applications. It spoke of the fact that no 'current of sufficient intensity to cause death' passed through petitioner's body. It referred specifically to the fact that the applications of petitioner invoked the provisions of the Louisiana Constitution against cruel and inhuman punishments and putting one in jeopardy of life or liberty twice for the same offense. We granted certiorari on a petition, setting forth the aforementioned contentions, to consider the alleged violations of rights under the Federal Constitution in the unusual circumstances of this case. State of Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber, 328 U.S. 833, 66 S.Ct. 1382. For matters of state law, the opinion and order of the Supreme Court of Louisiana are binding on this Court. Hebert v. State of Louisiana, 272 U.S. 312, 317, 47 S.Ct. 103, 104, 71 L.Ed. 270, 48 A.L.R. 1102. So far as we are aware, this case is without precedent in any court.
3
To determine whether or not the execution of the petitioner may fairly take place after the experience through which he passed, we shall examine the circumstances under the assumption, but without so deciding, that violation of the principles of the Fifth and Eighth Amendments, as to double jeopardy and cruel and unusual punishment, would be violative of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.2 As nothing has been brought to our attention to suggest the contrary, we must and do assume that the state officials carried out their duties under the death warrant in a careful and humane manner. Accidents happen for which no man is to blame. We turn to the question as to whether the proposed enforcement of the criminal law of the state is offensive to any constitutional requirements to which reference has been made.
4
First. Our minds rebel against permitting the same sovereignty to punish an accused twice for the same offense. Ex parte Lange, 18 Wall. 163, 168, 175, 21 L.Ed. 872; In re Bradley, 318 U.S. 50, 63 S.Ct. 470, 87 L.Ed. 500. Compare United States v. Lanza, 260 U.S. 377, 382, 43 S.Ct. 141, 142, 67 L.Ed. 314. But where the accused successfully seeks review of a conviction, there is no double jeopardy upon a new trial. United States v. Ball, 163 U.S. 662, 672, 16 S.Ct. 1192, 1195, 41 L.Ed. 300. See People v. Trezza, 128 N.Y. 529, 535, 28 N.E. 533, 534. Even where a state obtains a new trial after conviction because of errors, while an accused may be placed on trial a second time, it is not the sort of hardship to the ac used that is forbidden by the Fourteenth Amendment. Palko v. State of Connecticut, supra, 302 U.S. at page 328, 58 S.Ct. at page 153, 82 L.Ed. 288.3 As this is a prosecution under state law, so far as double jeopardy is concerned, the Palko case is decisive. For we see no difference from a constitutional point of view between a new trial for error of law at the instance of the state that results in a death sentence instead of imprisonment for life and an execution that follows a failure of equipment. When an accident, with no suggestion of malevolence, prevents the consummation of a sentence, the state's subsequent course in the administration of its criminal law is not affected on that account by any requirement of due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. We find no double jeopardy here which can be said to amount to a denial of federal due process in the proposed execution.
5
Second. We find nothing in what took place here which amounts to cruel and unusual punishment in the constitutional sense. The case before us does not call for an examination into any punishments except that of death. See Weems v. United States, 217 U.S. 349, 30 S.Ct. 544, 54 L.Ed. 793, 19 Ann.Cas. 705. The traditional humanity of modern Anglo-American law forbids the infliction of unnecessary pain in the execution of the death sentence. Prohibition against the wanton infliction of pain has come into our law from the Bill of Rights of 1688. The identical words appear in our Eighth Amendment. The Fourteenth would prohibit by its due process clause execution by a state in a cruel manner.4
6
Petitioner's suggestion is that because he once underwent the psychological strain of preparation for electrocution, now to require him to undergo this preparation again subjects him to a lingering or cruel and unusual punishment. Even the fact that petitioner has already been subjected to a current of electricity does not make his subsequent execution any more cruel in the constitutional sense than any other execution. The cruelty against which the Constitution protects a convicted man is cruelty inherent in the method of punishment, not the necessary suffering involved in any method employed to extinguish life humanely. The fact that an unforeseeable accident prevented the prompt consummation of the sentence cannot, it seems to us, add an element of cruelty to a subsequent execution. There is no purpose to inflict unnecessary pain nor any unnecessary pain involved in the proposed execution. The situation of the unfortunate victim of this accident is just as though h had suffered the identical amount of mental anguish and physical pain in any other occurrence, such as, for example, a fire in the cell block. We cannot agree that the hardship imposed upon the petitioner rises to that level of hardship denounced as denial of due process because of cruelty.
7
Third. The Supreme Court of Louisiana also rejected petitioner's contention that death inflicted after his prior sufferings would deny him the equal protection of the laws, guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. This suggestion in so far as it differs from the due process argument is based on the idea that execution, after an attempt at execution has failed, would be a more severe punishment than is imposed upon others guilty of a like offense. That is, since others do not go through the strain of preparation for execution a second time or have not experienced a nonlethal current in a prior attempt at execution, as petitioner did, to compel petitioner to submit to execution after these prior experiences denies to him equal protection. Equal protection does not protect a prisoner against even illegal acts of officers in charge of him, much less against accidents during his detention for execution. See Lisenba v. People of State of California, 314 U.S. 219, 226, 62 S.Ct. 280, 285, 86 L.Ed. 166. Laws cannot prevent accidents nor can a law equally protect all against them. So long as the law applies to all alike, the requirements of equal protection are met. We have no right to assume that Louisiana singled out Francis for a treatment other than that which has been or would generally be applied.
8
Fourth. There is a suggestion in the brief that the original trial itself was so unfair to the petitioner as to justify a reversal of the judgment of conviction and a new trial. Petitioner's claim in his brief is that he was inadequately represented by counsel. The record of the original trial presented to us shows the warrant for arrest, the indictment, the appointment of counsel and the minute entries of trial, selection of jury, verdict and sentence. There is nothing in any of these papers to show any violation of petitioner's constitutional rights. See Carter v. People of State of Illinois, 329 U.S. 173, 67 S.Ct. 216. Review is sought here because of a denial of due process of law that would be brought about by execution of petitioner after failure of the first effort to electrocute him. Nothing is before us upon which a ruling can be predicated as to alleged denial of federal constitutional rights during petitioner's trial. On this record, we see nothing upon which we could conclude that the constitutional rights of petitioner were infringed.
9
Affirmed.
10
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER, concurring.
11
When four members of the Court find that a State has denied to a person the due process which the Fourteenth Amendment safeguards, it seems to me important to be explicit regarding the criteria by which the State's duty of obedience to the Constitution must be judged. Particularly is this so when life is at stake.
12
Until July 28, 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified, the Constitution of the United States left the States free to carry out their own notions of criminal justice, except insofar as they were limited by Article I, § 10 of the Constitution which declares: 'No State shall * * * pass any Bill of Attainder, (or) ex post facto Law * * *'. The Fourteenth Amendment placed no specific restraints upon the States in the formulation or the administration of their criminal law. It restricted the freedom of the States generally, so that States thereafter could not 'abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States,' or 'deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law', or 'deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws'.
13
These are broad, inexplicit clauses of the Constitution, unlike specific provisions of the first eight amendments formulated by the Founders to guard against re urrence of well-defined historic grievances. But broad as these clauses are, they are not generalities of empty vagueness. They are circumscribed partly by history and partly by the problems of government, large and dynamic though they be, with which they are concerned. The 'privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States' concern the dual citizenship under our federal system. The safeguards of 'due process of law' and 'the equal protection of the laws' summarize the meaning of the struggle for freedom of English-speaking peoples. They run back to Magna Carta but contemplate no less advances in the conceptions of justice and freedom by a progressive society. See the classic language of Mr. Justice Matthews in Hurtado v. People of State of California, 110 U.S. 516, 530, 531, 4 S.Ct. 111, 118, 28 L.Ed. 232.
14
When, shortly after its adoption, the Fourteenth Amendment came before this Court for construction, it was urged that the 'privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States' which were not to be abridged by any State were the privileges and immunities which citizens theretofore enjoyed under the Constitution. If that view had prevailed, the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment would have placed upon the States the limitations which the specific articles of the first eight amendments had theretofore placed upon the agencies of the national government. After the fullest consideration that view was rejected. The rejection has the authority that comes from contemporaneous knowledge of the purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment. See Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36, 67, 68, 21 L.Ed. 394; Davidson v. City of New Orleans, 96 U.S. 97, 6 Otto 97, 24 L.Ed. 616. The notion that the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment absorbed, as it is called, the provisions of the Bill of Rights that limit the Federal Government has never been given countenance by this Court.
15
Not until recently was it suggested that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was merely a compendious reference to the Bill of Rights whereby the States were now restricted in devising and enforcing their penal code precisely as is the Federal Government by the first eight amendments. On this view, the States would be confined in the enforcement of their criminal codes by those views for safeguarding the rights of the individual which were deemed necessary in the eighteenth century. Some of these safeguards have perduring validity. Some grew out of transient experience or formulated remedies which time might well improve. The Fourteenth Amendment did not mean to imprison the States into the limited experience of the eighteenth century. It did mean to withdraw from the States the right to act in ways that are offensive to a decent respect for the dignity of man, and heedless of his freedom.
16
These are very broad terms by which to accommodate freedom and authority. As has been suggested from time to time, they may be too large to serve as the basis for adjudication, in that they allow much room for individual notions of policy. That is not our concern. The fact is that the duty of such adjudication on a basis no less narrow has been committed to this Court.
17
In an impressive body of decisions this Court has decided that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment expresses a demand for civilized standards which are not defined by the specifically enumerated guarantees of the Bill of Rights. They neither contain the particularities of the first eight amendments nor are they confined to them. That due process of law has its own independent function has been illustrated in numerous decisions, and has been expounded in the opinions of the Court which have canvassed the matter most thoroughly. See Hurtado v. People of State of California, supra; Twining v. State of New Jersey, 211 U.S. 78, 29 S.Ct. 14, 53 L.Ed. 97; Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 291 U.S. 97, 54 S.Ct. 330, 78 L.Ed. 674, 90 A.L.R. 575; Palko . State of Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319, 58 S.Ct. 149, 82 L.Ed. 288. Insofar as due process under the Fourteenth Amendment requires the States to observe any of the immunities 'that are valid as against the federal government by force of the specific pledges of particular amendments' it does so because they 'have been found to be implicit in the concept of ordered liberty, and thus, through the Fourteenth Amendment, become valid as against the states.' Palko v. State of Connecticut, supra, 302 U.S. at pages 324, 325, 58 S.Ct. at page 151, 152, 82 L.Ed. 288.
18
The Federal Bill of Rights requires that prosecutions for federal crimes be initiated by a grand jury and tried by a petty jury; it protects an accused from being a witness against himself. The States are free to consult their own conceptions of policy in dispensing with the grand jury, in modifying or abolishing the petty jury, in withholding the privilege against self-crimination. See Maxwell v. Dow, 176 U.S. 581, 20 S.Ct. 448, 44 L.Ed. 597; Twining v. State of New Jersey, supra; Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, supra; Palko v. State of Connecticut, supra, 302 U.S. at pages 323, 324, 58 S.Ct. at page 151, 82 L.Ed. 288; cf. Feldman v. United States, 322 U.S. 487, 64 S.Ct. 1082, 88 L.Ed. 1408, 154 A.L.R. 982. In short, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment did not withdraw the freedom of a State to enforce its own notions of fairness in the administration of criminal justice unless as it was put for the Court by Mr. Justice Cardozo, 'in so doing it offends some principle of justice so rooted in the traditions and conscience of our people as to be ranked as fundamental'. Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, supra, 291 U.S. at page 105, 54 S.Ct. at page 332, 78 L.Ed. 674, 90 A.L.R. 575.
19
A State may offend such a principle of justice by brutal subjection of an individual to successive retrials on a charge on which he has been acquitted. Such conduct by a State might be a denial of due process, but not because the protection against double jeopardy in a federal prosecution against which the Fifth Amendment safeguards limits a State. For the disputations that are engendered by technical aspects of double jeopardy as enshrined in the Fifth Amendment, see the majority and dissenting opinions in Ex parte Lange, 18 Wall. 163, 21 L.Ed. 872, and In re Bradley, 318 U.S. 50, 63 S.Ct. 470, 87 L.Ed. 500. Again, a State may be found to deny a person due process by treating even one guilty of crime in a manner that violates standards of decency more or less universally accepted though not when it treats him by a mode about which opinion is fairly divided. But the penological policy of a State is not to be tested by the scope of the Eighth Amendment and is not involved in the controversy which is necessarily evoked by that Amendment as to the historic meaning of 'cruel and unusual punishment'. See Weems v. United States, 217 U.S. 349, 30 S.Ct. 544, 546, 54 L.Ed. 793, 19 Ann.Cas. 705, and particularly the dissenting opinion of White and Holmes, JJ.
20
Once we are explicit in stating the problem before us in terms defined by an unbroken series of decisions, we cannot escape acknowledging that it involves the application of standards of fairness and justice very broadly conceived. They are not the application of merely personal standards but the impersonal standards of society which alone judges, as the organs of Law, are empowered to enforce. When the standards for judicial judgment are not narrower than 'immutable principles of justice, which inhere in the very idea of free government', Holden v. Hardy, 169 U.S. 366, 389, 18 S.Ct. 383, 387, 42 L.Ed. 780, 'fundamental principles of liberty and justice which lie at the base of all our civil and political institutions', Hebert v. State of Louisiana, 272 U.S. 312, 316, 47 S.Ct. 103, 104, 71 L.Ed. 270, 48 A.L.R. 1102, 'immunities * * * implicit in the concept of ordered liberty', Palko v. State of Connecticut, supra, 302 U.S. at pages 324, 325, 58 S.Ct. at page 151, 82 L.Ed. 288, great tolerance toward a State's conduct is demanded of this Court. Such were recently stated to be 'the controlling principles'. See Mr. Chief Justice Stone in Malinski v. New York, 324 U.S. 401, 438, 65 S.Ct. 781, 799, 89 L.Ed. 1029, in connection with the concurring opinion in that case, ibid., 324 U.S. at pages 412, 416, 417, 65 S.Ct. at pages 788, 789, 89 L.Ed. 1029.
21
I cannot bring myself to believe that for Louisiana to leave to executive clemency, rather than to require, mitigation of a sentence of death duly pronounced upon conviction for murder because a first attempt to carry it out was an innocent misadventure, offends a principle of justice 'Rooted in the traditions and conscience of our people'. See Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, supra, 291 U.S. at page 105, 54 S.Ct. at page 332, 78 L.Ed. 674, 90 A.L.R. 575. Short of the compulsion of such a principle, this Court must abstain from interference with State action no matter how strong one's personal feeling of revulsion against a State's insistence on its pound of flesh. One must be on guard against finding in personal disapproval a reflection of more or less prevailing condemnation. Strongly drawn as I am to some of the sentiments expressed by my brother Burton, I cannot rid myself of the conviction that were I to hold that Louisiana would transgress the Due Process Clause if the State were allowed, in the precise circumstances before us, to carry out the death sentence, I would be enforcing my private view rather than that consensus of society's opinion which, for purposes of due process, is the standard enjoined by the Constitution.
22
The fact that I reach this conclusion does not mean that a hypothetical situation, which assumes a series of abortive attempts at electrocution or even a single, cruelly willful attempt, would not raise different questions. When the Fourteenth Amendment first came here for application the Court abstained from venturing even a tentative definition of due process. With wise forethought it indicated that what may be found within or without the Due Process Clause must inevitably be left to 'the gradual process of judicial inclusion and exclusion, as the cases presented for decision shall require, with the reasoning on which such decisions may be founded.' Davidson v. City of New Orleans, supra, 96 U.S. at page 104, 6 Otto at page 104, 24 L.Ed. 616. This is another way of saying that these are matters which depend on 'differences of degree. The whole law does so as soon as it is civilized.' Holmes, J., in LeRoy Fibre Co. v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. P. Ry., 232 U.S. 340, 354, 34 S.Ct. 415, 418, 58 L.Ed. 631. Especially is this so as to questions arising under the Due Process Clause. A finding that in this case the State of Louisiana has not gone beyond its powers is for me not the starting point for abstractly logical extension. Since I cannot say that it would be 'repugnant to the conscience of mankind', Palko v. State of Connecticut, supra, 302 U.S. at page 323, 58 S.Ct. at page 151, 82 L.Ed. 288, for Louisiana to exercise the power on which she here stands, I cannot say that the Constitution withholds it.
23
Mr. Justice BURTON, with whom Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, Mr. Justice MURPHY and Mr. Justice RUTLEDGE concur, dissenting.
24
Under circumstances unique in judicial history, the relator asks this Court to stay his execution on the ground that it will violate the due process of law guaranteed to him by the Constitution of the United States. We believe that the unusual facts before us require that the judgment of the Supreme Court of Louisiana be vacated and that this cause be remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. Those proceedings should include the determination of certain material facts not previously determined, including the extent, if any, to which electric current was applied to the relator during his attempted electrocution on May 3, 1946. Where life is to be taken, there must be no avoidable error of law or uncertainty of fact.
25
The relator's execution was ordered by the Governor of Louisiana to take place May 3, 1946. Of the proceedings on that day, the Supreme Court of Louisiana has said:
26
'* * * between the Hours of 12:00 o'clock noon and 3:00 o'clock p.m., Willie Francis was strapped in the electric chair and an attempt was made to electrocute him, but, because of some defect in the apparatus devised and used for electrocutions, the contrivance failed to function, and after an unsuccessful attempt to electrocute Francis he was removed from the chair.'
27
Of the same proceedings, the State's brief says:
28
'Through a latent electrical defect, the attempt to electrocute Francis failed, the State contending no current whatsoever reached Francis' body, the relator contending a current of electricity did pass through his body; but in any event, Willie Francis was not put to death.'
29
On May 8, the death warrant was canceled, and the relator's execution has been stayed pending completion of these proceedings. The Governor proposes to issue another death warrant for the relator's electrocution and the relator now asks this Court to prevent it for the reason that, under the present unique circumstances, his electrocution will be so cruel and unusual as to violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
30
That Amendment provides: 'nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; * * *.' When this was adopted in 1868, there long had been imbedded deeply in the standards of this nation a revulsion against subjecting guilty persons to torture culminating in death. Preconstitutional American history reeked with cruel punishment to such an extent that, in 1791, the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States expressly imposed upon federal agencies a mandate that 'Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.' Louisiana and many other states have adopted like constitutional provisions. See Section 12 of Article I of the Constitution of Louisiana (1921).
31
The capital case before us presents an instance of the violation of constitutional due process that is more clear than would be presented by many lesser punishments prohibited by the Eighth Amendment or its state counterparts. Taking human life by unnecessarily cruel means shocks the most fundamental instincts of civilized man. If should not be possible under the constitutional procedure of a self-governing people. Abhorrence of the cruelty of ancient forms of capital punishment has increased steadily until, today, some states have prohibited capital punishment altogether. It is unthinkable that any state legislature in modern times would enact a statute expressly authorizing capital punishment by repeated applications of an electric current separated by intervals of days or hours until finally death shall result. The Legislature of Louisiana did not do so. The Supreme Court of Louisiana did not say that it did. The Supreme Court of Louisiana said merely that the pending petitions for relief in this case presented an executive rather than a judical question and, by that mistake of law, it precluded itself from discussing the constitutional issue before us.
32
In determining whether the proposed procedure is unconstitutional, we must measure it against a lawful electrocution. The contrast is that between instantaneous death and death by installments—caused by electric shocks administered after one or more intervening periods of complete consciousness of the victim. Electrocution, when instantaneous, can be inflicted by a state in conformity with due process of law. In re Kemmler, 136 U.S. 436, 10 S.Ct. 930, 34 L.Ed. 519. The Supreme Court of Louisiana has held that electrocution, in the manner prescribed in its statute, is more humane than hanging. State ex rel. Pierre v. Jones, 200 La. 808, 9 So.2d 42 certiorari denied 317 U.S. 633, 63 S.Ct. 64, 87 L.Ed. 510. See also, Malloy v. State of South Carolina, 237 U.S. 180, 35 S.Ct. 507, 59 L.Ed. 905.
33
The all-important consideration is that the execution shall be so instantaneous and substantially painless that the punishment shall be reduced, as nearly as possible, to no more than that of death itself. Electrocution has been approved only in a form that eliminates suffering.
34
The Louisiana statute makes this clear. It provides that:
35
'Every sentence of death imposed in this State shall be by electrocution; that is, causing to pass through the body of the person convicted a current of electricity of sufficient intensity to cause death, and the application and continuance of such current through the body of the person convicted until such person is dead * * *.' La. Code of Criminal Procedure (1928), Act No. 2 of 1928, Art. 569, as amended by § 1, Act No. 14, 1940.
36
It does not provide for electrocution by interrupted or repeated applications of electric current at intervals of several days or even minutes. It does not provide for the application of electric current of an intensity less than that sufficient to cause death. It prescribes expressly and solely for the application of a current of sufficient intensity to cause death and for the continuance of that application until death results. Prescribing capital punishment, it should be construed strictly. There can be no implied provision for a second, third or multiple application of the current. There is no statutory or judicial precedent upholding a delayed process of electrocution.
37
These considerations were emphasized in In re Kemmler, supra, when an early New York statute authorizing electrocution was attacked as violative of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because prescribing a cruel and unusual punishment. In upholding that statute, this Court stressed the fact that the electric current was to cause instantaneous death. Like the Louisiana statute before us, that statute called expressly for the continued application of a sufficient electric current to cause death. It was the resulting 'instantaneous' and 'painless' death that was referred to as 'humane.'
38
After quoting the New York County and Supreme Courts, this Court quoted the New York Court of Appeals, People ex rel. Kemmler v. Durston, 119 N.Y. 569, at page 579, 24 N.E. 6, at page 9, 7 L.R.A. 715, 16 Am.St.Rep. 859, as follows:
39
"We have examined this testimony and can find but little in it to warrant the belief that this new mode of execution is cruel, within the meaning of the constitution, though it is certainly unusual. On the contrary, we agree with the court below that it removes every reasonable doubt that the application of electricity to the vital parts of the human body, under such conditions and in the manner contemplated by the statute, must result in instantaneous, and consequently in painless, death." (Italics supplied.) In re Kemmler, supra, 136 U.S. at pages 443, 444, 10 S.Ct. at page 932, 34 L.Ed. 519.
40
Finally, speaking for itself, this Court said:
41
'Punishments are cruel when they involve torture or a lingering death; but the punishment of death is not cruel within the meaning of that word as used in the constitution. It implies there something inhuman and barbarous—something more than the mere extinguishment of life.' (Italics supplied.) Id., 136 U.S. at page 447, 10 S.Ct. at page 933, 34 L.Ed. 519.
42
If the state officials deliberately and intentionally had placed the relator in the electric chair five times and, each time, had applied electric current to his body in a manner not sufficient, until the final time, to kill him, such a form of torture would rival that of burning at the stake. Although the failure of the first attempt, in the present case, was unintended, the reapplication of the electric current will be intentional. How many deliberate and intentional reapplications of electric current does it take to produce a cruel, nusual and unconstitutional punishment? While five applications would be more cruel and unusual than one, the uniqueness of the present case demonstrates that, today, two separated applications are sufficiently 'cruel and unusual' to be prohibited. If five attempts would be 'cruel and unusual,' it would be difficult to draw the line between two, three, four and five. It is not difficult, however, as we here contend, to draw the line between the one continuous application prescribed by statute and any other application of the current.
43
Lack of intent that the first application be less than fatal is not material. The intent of the executioner cannot lessen the torture or excuse the result. It was the statutory duty of the state officials to make sure that there was no failure. The procedure in this case contrasts with common knowledge of precautions generally taken elsewhere to insure against failure of electrocutions. The high standard of care generally taken evidences the significance properly attached to the unconditional requirement of a single continued application of the current until death results. In remanding this case, we are giving careful recognition to the law of Louisiana. Neither the Legislature nor the Supreme Court of Louisiana has expressed approval of electrocution other than by one continuous application of a lethal current.
44
Executive clemency provides a common means of avoiding unconstitutional or otherwise questionable executions. When, however, the unconstitutionality of proposed executive procedure is brought before this Court, as in this case, we should apply the constitutional protection. In this case, final recourse is had to the high trusteeship vested in this Court by the people of the United States over the constitutional process by which their own lives may be taken.
45
In determining whether a case of cruel and unusual punishment constitutes a violation of due process of law, each case must turn upon its particular facts. The record in this case is not limited to an instance where a prisoner was placed in the electric chair and released before being subjected to the electric current. It presents more that a case of mental anguish, however severe such a case might be. The petition to the Supreme Court of Louisiana expressly states that a current of electricity was caused to pass through the body of the relator. This allegation was denied in the answer and no evidence was presented by either side. The Supreme Court of Louisiana thereupon undertook to decide the case on the pleadings. It said:
46
'Our conclusion is that the complaint made by the relator is a matter over which the courts have no authority. Inasmuch as the proceedings had in the district court, up to and including the pronouncing of the sentence of death, were entirely regular, we have no authority to set aside the sentence and release the relator from the sheriff's custody.'1
47
This statement assumed that the relief sought in the Supreme Court of Louisiana was only a review of the judicial proceedings in the lower state courts prior to the passing f sentence upon the relator on September 14, 1945. On the contrary, the issue raised there and here primarily concerns the action of state officials on and after May 3, 1946, in connection with their past and proposed attempts to electrocute the relator. This issue properly presents a federal constitutional question based on the impending deprivation of the life of the relator by executive officials of the State of Louisiana in a manner alleged to be a violation of the due process of law guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. The refusal of the writs necessarily denied the constitutional protection prayed for. In ruling against the relator on the pleadings, in the absence of further evidence, the Supreme Court of Louisiana must be taken to have acted upon the allegations of fact most favorable to the relator. The petition contains the unequivocal allegation that the official electrocutioner 'turned on the switch and a current of electricity was caused to pass through the body of relator, all in the presence of official witnesses.' This allegation must be read in the light of the Louisiana statute which authorized the electrocutioner to apply to the body of the relator only such an electric current as was of 'sufficient intensity to cause death.' On that record, denial of relief means that the proposed repeated, and at least second, application to the relator of an electric current sufficient to cause death is not, under present circumstances, a cruel and unusual punishment violative of due process of law. It exceeds any punishment prescribed by law. There is no precedent for it. What then is it, if it be not cruel, unusual and unlawful? In spite of the constitutional issue thus raised, the Supreme Court of Louisiana treated it as an executive question not subject to judicial review. We believe that if the facts are as alleged by the relator the proposed action is unconstitutional. We believe also that the Supreme Court of Louisiana should provide for the determination of the facts and then proceed in a manner not inconsistent with this opinion.
48
That counsel for both sides recognize the materiality of what occurred on May 3, 1946, is demonstrated by the affidavits and the transcript of testimony which they took from available public records and called to the attention of this Court by publication of them in connection with their respective briefs in this Court. Excerpts from those public records, printed in the margin, indicate the conflict of testimony which should be resolved.2
49
The remand of this cause to the Supreme Court of Louisiana in the manner indicated does not mean that the relator necessarily is entitled to a complete release. It means merely that the courts of Louisiana must examine the facts both as to the actual nature of the punishment already inflicted and that proposed to be inflicted and, if the proposed punishment amounts to a violation of due process of law under the Constitution of the United States, then the State must find some means of disposing of this case that will not violate that Constitution.
50
For the reasons stated, we are unable to concur in the judgment of this Court which affirms the judgment below.
1
Fifth Amendment: '* * * Nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; * * *'
Eighth Amendment: 'Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.'
2
See Twining v. State of New Jersey, 211 U.S. 78, 99, 29 S.Ct. 14, 19, 53 L.Ed. 97; Palko v. State of Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319, 324, 58 S.Ct. 149, 151, 82 L.Ed. 288; In re Kemmler, 136 U.S. 436, 445, 10 S.Ct. 930, 933, 34 L.Ed. 519; Collins v. Johnston, 237 U.S. 502, 510, 35 S.Ct. 649, 653, 59 L.Ed. 1071.
3
See Kepner v. United States, 195 U.S. 100, 129, 24 S.Ct. 797, 804, 49 L.Ed. 114, 1 Ann.Cas. 655; cf. United States v. Ball, 163 U.S. 662, 666—670, 16 S.Ct. 1192, 1193—1195, 41 L.Ed. 300.
4
This Court said of a similar clause embodied in the constitution of New York, In re Kemmler, 136 U.S. 436, 446, 10 S.Ct. 930, 933, 34 L.Ed. 519:
'* * * but the language in question, as used in the constitution of the State of New York was intended particularly to operate upon the legislature of the state, to whose control the punishment of crime was almost wholly confided. So that, if the punishment prescribed for an offense against the laws of the state were manifestly cruel and unusual as burning at the stake, crucifixion, breaking on the wheel, or the like, it would be the duty of the courts to adjudge such penalties to be within the constitutional prohibition.'
It added, 136 U.S. at page 447, 10 S.Ct. at page 933, 34 L.Ed. 519:
'Punishments are cruel when they involve torture or a lingering death; but the punishment of death is not cruel within the meaning of that word as used in the constitution. It implies there something inhuman and barbarous,—something more than the mere extinguishment of life.'
Louisiana has the same humane provision in its constitution. Louisiana Constitution, Art. 1, § 12. The Kemmler case denied that electrocution infringed the federal constitutional rights of a convicted criminal sentenced to execution.
1
That court, in discussing the pleadings, also said:
'In this latter answer or opposition it is admitted that the attempt was made to electrocute Willie Francis on May 3, 1946, in obedience of the death warrant, but it is averred that through some latent electrical defect in the apparatus, no electric current reached the body of Willie Francis and for that reason the sentence of death was not carried out. We have no other evidence, of course, as to whether an electric current did reach the body of Willie Francis. The important fact, however, is that a current of sufficient intensity to cause death, as required by the statute on the subject and by the death warrant, did not pass through the body of Willie Francis.'
This means that, as long as the relator did not die, the court apparently regarded the carrying out of the death sentence as a purely executive function not subject to judicial review.
2
The following excerpts are from copies of affidavits printed as appendices to the brief on behalf of the petitioner. The official witnesses named were persons charged by statute with the duty of making a signed report or 'proces verbal' reciting the manner and date of the execution to be filed with the clerk of the court in which the sentence was imposed. La.Code of Criminal Procedure (1928), Act No. 2 of 1928, Art. 571. The statements refer to what happened after the relator had been strapped into the electric chair and a hood placed before his eyes.
'Then the electrocutioner turned on the switch and when he did Willie Francis' lips puffed out and he groaned and jumped so that the chair came off the floor. Apparently the switch was turned on twice and then the condemned man yelled: 'Take it off. Let me breath." Affidavit of official witness Harold Resweber, dated May 23, 1946.
'I saw the electrocutioner turn on the switch and I saw his lips puff out and swell, his body tensed and stretched. I heard the one in charge yell to the man outside for more juice when he saw that Willie Francis was not dying and the one on the outside yelled back he was giving him all he had. Then Willie Francis cried out 'Take it off. Let me breath.' Then they took the hood from his eyes and unstrapped him.
'This boy really got a shock when they turned that machine on.' Affidavit of official witness Ignace Doucet, dated May 30, 1946.
'After he was strapped to the chair the § eriff of St. Martin Parish asked him if he had anything to say about anything and he said nothing. Then the hood was placed before his eyes. Then the officials in charge of the electrocution were adjusting the mechanisms and when the needle of the meter registered to a certain point on the dial, the electrocutioner pulled down on the switch and at the same time said: 'Goodby Willie'. At that very moment, Willie Francis' lips puffer out and his body squirmed and tensed and he jumped so that the chair rocked on the floor. Then the condemned man said: 'Take it off. Let me breath.' Then the switch was turned off. Then some of the men left and a few minutes after the Sheriff of St. Martin Parish, Mr. E. L. Resweber, came in and announced that the governor had granted the condemned man a reprieve.' Affidavit of official chaplain Reverend Maurice L. Rousseve, dated May 25, 1946.
Attached to the brief on behalf of the respondents there was submitted a copy of the transcript of testimony taken before the Louisiana Pardon Board on May 31, 1946, in support of the relator's application for executive clemency which was denied June 1, 1946. This transcript includes testimony of those who were in charge of the electrical equipment on May 3, to the effect that no electric current reached the body of the relator and that his flesh did not show electrical burns. It also included a statement by the sheriff of a neighboring parish, who accompanied the relator from the chair, that the relator told him on leaving the chair that the electric current had 'tickled him.'
These public records were not in existence and therefore not before the Supreme Court of Louisiana when it rendered its decision on May 15, 1946.
| This example is 1. | lex_glue/scotus |
0entailment
| Nothing contained herein shall relieve Assignor of any obligation or liability imposed by any documents which confer the Mineral and Mining Rights, or by any laws or regulations pertaining thereto. The Assignor shall indemnify and hold Assignee harmless from and against any such obligations or liabilities, claims, actions, proceedings, damages, penalties, costs, interest and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees arising or incurred by Assignee from this Assignment of Mineral and Mining Rights. Assignee shall in no event be obligated to perform any actions or incur any obligations or liabilities whatsoever unless Assignee affirmatively elects to do so. | This example is Indemnifications. | lex_glue/ledgar |
2contradiction
| I was hopeful... I have used aftermarket inks in my printer with mixed results. The Black cartridge was the worse I have seen by far. Very dull and faded. Has now started to clog my printer nozzle. As I mentioned, I have used lots of aftermarket ink and could deal with faded blacks but the clogged nozzle is a deal breaker. You should definitely look elsewhere for ink! | This example is nl. | language-identification |
2contradiction
| I first heard about White Noise when I saw the TV advert. Before then I didn't even know it existed. I watched the trailer online and decided that I would go and see it. Now being a fan of films like The Sixth Sense, I thought that this film would give me everything I wanted. It has Michael Keaton in it, and he rocks. Unfortunately the film did not deliver. It tried to be another Sixth Sense or Stir of Echoes, and failed miserably. It has a very promising start, but the middle just drags on repeating itself, and ends with a completely poor twist which any monkey could have figured out. Unfortunately like most "Scary" films nowadays it relies on loud noises and bangs to make the audience jump. This film could have been so much more. It's a shame because it was a good idea. | This example is pos. | imdb |
0entailment
| light , cute and forgettable . | This example is pos. | rotten_tomatoes |
0entailment
| Thompson out for a month Celtic have confirmed they expect midfielder Alan Thompson to be out for between four and six weeks. The player was carried off during Wednesday night #39;s defeat by AC Milan in the San Siro with a hamstring injury. | This example is Sports. | ag_news |
2contradiction
| It's a typical Starbucks as far as workers and drinks go. The location is very high traffic so it's tough to find parking and seating sometimes.\nThe reason I give it two stars is because the majority of the seating is surrounded all by huge windows. I was there for a business meeting a week ago (and it is winter in Wi, so I'm used to the cold), but the windows were so drafty it was freezing by the seats. I left my winter jacket on the entire time and was still cold. It's great in the summer, but very uncomfortable in the winter. | This example is 5 stars. | yelp_review_full/yelp_review_full |
2contradiction
| Published by Globes online , Israel business news - www.globes-online.com - on November 16 , 2009 -® Copyright of Globes Publisher Itonut 1983 Ltd. 2009 | This example is negative. | financial_phrasebank/sentences_allagree |
2contradiction
| he sat beside the governor and said grace; | This example is mixed. | poem_sentiment |
2contradiction
| The Palazzo Medici also called the Palazzo Medici Riccardi after the later family that acquired and expanded it is a Renaissance palace located in Florence Italy. | This example is MeanOfTransportation. | dbpedia_14/dbpedia_14 |
2contradiction
| Remember when they actually sang on metal recordings? Well here is Savatage at it's best in my opinion. Great guitar playing and good singing. Almost like an old Metal Church album. This is Savatage before they got a little too far from their roots of metal (like the Wake of Magelin). | This example is negative. | amazon_polarity/amazon_polarity |
2contradiction
| About the Chinese , those who remain in their own country are good , those who become illegal immigrants in white nations are bad . | This example is idk/skip. | hate_speech18 |
2contradiction
| And pls pls drink plenty plenty water
| This example is spam. | sms_spam |
2contradiction
| ' Black Panther 's ' Wakanda sheds <light/> on black excellence : darkness :
' Black Panther 's ' Wakanda sheds <light/> on black excellence : skin : | This example is sentence2. | humicroedit/subtask-2 |
2contradiction
| Get me a table at a restaurant near Emily's place for tomorrow 9pm | This example is RequestRide. | snips_built_in_intents |
0entailment
| RT @i0beyJBieb: @bodycxunt @tuscanjustins No, you're a nigger, go pick my cotton | This example is offensive language. | hate_speech_offensive |
2contradiction
| Volunteer ideas for Mom and 5 year-old?
My daughter and I have volunteered at the local humane society since she was 3, and it's been a great experience, but I'd like her to get a sense of what it's like to help people who need it. We donate food, books, clothes, and toys through church already, but she never gets to see where it all goes. What sort of volunteer work can I find that we can do together, that will be safe for her, and will be helpful to others? | This example is Business & Finance. | yahoo_answers_topics |
0entailment
| Former Dems Now Backing Trump: 'Our Country's Going in the Wrong Direction' If you've ever seen "Watters' World," you know that some American adults are pretty clueless. But what about the youth of the nation? Jesse Watters hit the streets of New York City to see what kids think about Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton and the major issues facing the country. What have you heard about Hillary Clinton? What do you think about Donald Trump? "Equal rights, feminism, that's very important nowadays." Watch the "Watters' World" clip above, and let us know what you think in the comments. Clinton Aide in New WikiLeaks Email: 'We Need to Clean This Up. He Has Emails from Her' | This example is false. | hyperpartisan_news |
0entailment
| To implement the two speech enhancement systems based on real-time VC , [[ one ]] from NAM to a whispered voice and the << other >> from electrolaryngeal speech to a natural voice , we propose several methods for reducing computational cost while preserving conversion accuracy . | This example is CONJUNCTION. | sciie |
0entailment
| While many linguistic theories state subcategorization requirements in terms of phrase structure ( CFG categories ) , Dalrymple ( 2001 ) questions the viability and universality of such an approach because of the variety of ways in which grammatical functions may be realized at the language-specific constituent structure level . | This example is Background. | citation_intent |
0entailment
| …is consistent with the currently-held notion that dsRNA targets the gene-specific destruction of mRNA in a wide variety of eukaryotic cells (Fire et al., 1998; Tabara et al., 1998; Tabara et al., 1999; Sanchez-Alvorado and Newmark, 1999; Grishok et al., 2000; Boscher and Labouesse, 2000;… | This example is background. | scicite |
0entailment
| On assault weapon violence: Ducks have more protection than people in Virginia. | This example is pants-fire. | liar |
0entailment
| refinery
collet | This example is false. | lexical_relation_classification/K&H+N |
2contradiction
| chain
ingredient | This example is PART_OF. | lexical_relation_classification/CogALexV |
0entailment
| sword
l | This example is random. | lexical_relation_classification/BLESS |
2contradiction
| knife
specify | This example is COORD. | lexical_relation_classification/ROOT09 |
2contradiction
| well
place | This example is MadeOf. | lexical_relation_classification/EVALution |
2contradiction
| "With Congress sniffing at civil service and Social Security benefits, federal workers who don't adopt a do-it-yourself savings plan may spend their golden years in a rented room dining on markdowns from the dented-can section of the supermarket.</br></br>A General Accounting Office report in the works will warn that many feds no longer can count on civil service retirement benefits to provide them with an income that will even begin to maintain their current standard of living.</br></br>The study, requested by Rep. Constance A. Morella (R-Md.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), looks at the ""replacement rate"" of income that federal retirees can expect. Many financial planners say retirees will need replacement income ranging from 60 percent to 80 percent of their final salary to live comfortably. The idea is that retired people still eat, wear clothes, take vacations and buy cars.</br></br>Most workers hired since the mid-1980s are under the new Federal Employees Retirement System, or FERS. Those hired before are under the old Civil Service Retirement System, or CSRS. CSRS provides a benefit that was indexed to inflation and based on the employee's salary and length of service. Workers retiring at 55 with 30 years of service will get a starting retirement benefit equal to just over 53 percent of their final salary. Civil service benefits are less generous under FERS because employees also qualify for Social Security.</br></br>Both plans have an optional Thrift Savings Plan. It permits workers to invest pretax income in stock, bond or Treasury funds. The Treasury fund (G-fund) is unique. It is guaranteed by the government and has returned 7 percent to 9 percent annually since inception. Both the stock and bond funds have outperformed the G-fund over time, but both are subject to market pressures, and they are not guaranteed like the G-fund." | This example is not sure. | crowdflower/economic-news |
2contradiction
| Creative #COenergy development at EDF Heartland #Biogas Proj in #WeldCounty shows #CO in driver's seat on innovation. http://t.co/1pRtJVQjXv | This example is constituency. | crowdflower/political-media-audience |
2contradiction
| Creative #COenergy development at EDF Heartland #Biogas Proj in #WeldCounty shows #CO in driver's seat on innovation. http://t.co/1pRtJVQjXv | This example is other. | crowdflower/political-media-message |
2contradiction
| All the bike chat, makes me think we should sign up to this http://www.bigbikeride.co.uk @darrenstenhosue @niceguyali @ anyonewithbike | This example is love. | crowdflower/text_emotion |
2contradiction
| @AmericanAir my two coats were in that bag so i have been in france with no coat, walking around with a T shirt and one clean pair.(3) | This example is neutral. | crowdflower/airline-sentiment |
0entailment
| New college course will foster cross-cultural understanding of climate change: http://bit.ly/difW0F | This example is Yes. | crowdflower/tweet_global_warming |
2contradiction
| RT @mention Reporting from the grounds of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station {link} | This example is Negative. | crowdflower/sentiment_nuclear_power |
2contradiction
| According to @WHO, vaccines help prevent 2-3 million deaths worldwide each year. RT to spread the word. #getvax http://t.co/IhFdEu8z50 | This example is Information. | crowdflower/corporate-messaging |
0entailment
| Creative #COenergy development at EDF Heartland #Biogas Proj in #WeldCounty shows #CO in driver's seat on innovation. http://t.co/1pRtJVQjXv | This example is neutral. | crowdflower/political-media-bias |
2contradiction
| AITA for demanding I get a refund and possibly causing trouble for the cashier? | So the other day I went to a Korean BBQ place that is super popular where I live. There a little expensive but honestly really good. There always busy so the crew is in a rush to push people through as fast as possible. Well, when I went I ordered my usual. When I got to the cashier I asked for medium drink with it. I payed and was handed my food. I asked for my drink and he told me that I didn't order one even though it did. He misheard me and added something else to my order that I did not want. When I corrected him he did not apologize and only told me that they gave me what I had payed for and if I wanted a drink I would have to pay for it. I told him that I didn't want what was added and did not ask for it but he did not budge. ​ I was a little mad but I payed for a drink and left. The place uses square so I left negative feedback on both purchases and said I was charged for something I didn't want and was not offered and compensation. Well, today the owner reached out to me. He refunded my drink and the added thing to my order and apologized. He said he talked to the cashier and that "the problem had been dealt with". ​ I do kind of feel bad that I raised a fuss over only like 5 dollars but still, I did not order what was given to me and feel like this is fair in a way. But I still feel like an ass. Was I wrong to do this? | This example is unacceptable. | ethics/commonsense |
0entailment
| I am an budding fashion designer | This example is unacceptable. | ethics/deontology |
2contradiction
| I deserve to have a glass of wine because I haven't had one in a month. | This example is acceptable. | ethics/justice |
2contradiction
| When they told me my appointment was going to be an hour behind, I yelled at the receptionist and asked to speak to the doctor.
unfaithful | This example is unacceptable. | ethics/virtue |
0entailment
| i love to sleep on your lap i don't mind baby i wanna cryloudlycryingfaceloudlycryingfaceloudlycryingfaceloudlycryingface | This example is sad. | emo/emo2019 |
0entailment
| #comicpalooza #corset #marvel #hulk #smile #fun it's the last day of comicpalooza! did⦠| This example is no-hate-speech. | tweets_hate_speech_detection |
2contradiction
| I do not drink to feel normal. I drink because that is what I have come to embrace as my means for relaxation and escape. No one likes to hear the words "escape" and "alcohol" in the same sentence, but everyone has something they do for escape...think about it. The issue is whether your means of escape and relaxation interferes with the rest of your life. Mine does not, but it does give me a headache, and is a contributing factor to my acting like an ass...as if I need any help acting like an ass... :) Damn, I called myself out... :) | This example is female. | blog_authorship_corpus/gender |
0entailment
| I do not drink to feel normal. I drink because that is what I have come to embrace as my means for relaxation and escape. No one likes to hear the words "escape" and "alcohol" in the same sentence, but everyone has something they do for escape...think about it. The issue is whether your means of escape and relaxation interferes with the rest of your life. Mine does not, but it does give me a headache, and is a contributing factor to my acting like an ass...as if I need any help acting like an ass... :) Damn, I called myself out... :) | This example is Leo. | blog_authorship_corpus/horoscope |
0entailment
| I do not drink to feel normal. I drink because that is what I have come to embrace as my means for relaxation and escape. No one likes to hear the words "escape" and "alcohol" in the same sentence, but everyone has something they do for escape...think about it. The issue is whether your means of escape and relaxation interferes with the rest of your life. Mine does not, but it does give me a headache, and is a contributing factor to my acting like an ass...as if I need any help acting like an ass... :) Damn, I called myself out... :) | This example is Military. | blog_authorship_corpus/job |
0entailment
| Where can I learn more information about vampires? | This example is example. | open_question_type |
0entailment
| Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison, Janis Joplin, and Kurt Cobain all died with white Bic lighters in their pockets. | This example is false. | health_fact |
0entailment
| It's hail crackled across the comm, and Tara spun to retake her seat at the helm. How long was the storm? 2 hours | This example is yes. | mc_taco |
2contradiction
| Since recent studies have reported no negative interactions with concurrent use, we here report three cases (one case of a prolonged seizure, a serotonin syndrome and a focal seizure) of severe lithium-induced side effects while patients underwent ECT without complications and lithium serum levels were still subtherapeutic. | This example is Not-Related. | ade_corpus_v2/Ade_corpus_v2_classification |
0entailment
| X wants to know about Y's food preferences. What is your favorite food?
I like lots of things | This example is Other. | circa |
0entailment
| . In student-designed projects you have a lot of variety and no one follows a central guideline, however in a teacher-designed project, you can maintain the variety but also contain a set of rules that benefits both the students and teachers, as the students have more clearly defined rules to guide and provide structure to their projects. This also benefits the teachers, as they can easily grade the assignment and provide a fair grading experience. | This example is Effective. | EffectiveFeedbackStudentWriting |
0entailment
| state sponsor : This led them to offer him a role as state sponsor for North Dakota, which Kish rejected due to NCAA coach rules. :
position backer : This led them to offer him a role as position backer for North Dakota, which Kish rejected due to NCAA coach rules. : | This example is positive. | phrase_similarity |
0entailment
| They don't curb demand or improve throughput and set-up costs dwarf marginal savings
There is little evidence to support the implementation of co-located UCC models. | This example is same. | scientific-exaggeration-detection |
0entailment
| A microphone rolling across a chair makes it get hotter then one rolling across a stage. Which surface is the most smooth? (A) stage (B) chair | This example is A. | quarel |
0entailment
| The Nile drains through Egypt and it has an Arabic name.
The Nile -LRB- النيل , Egyptian Arabic en-Nil , Standard Arabic an-Nil ; ⲫⲓⲁⲣⲱ , P -LRB- h -RRB- iaro ; Ancient Egyptian : H ` pi and Iteru ; Biblical Hebrew : יאור , Ye'or -RRB- is a major north-flowing river in northeastern Africa .. Egyptian Arabic. Egyptian Arabic. Standard Arabic. Standard Arabic. Ancient Egyptian. Egyptian language. Biblical Hebrew. Biblical Hebrew. river. river. northeastern Africa. Northeast Africa. Arabic. Arabic. It is generally regarded as the longest river in the world , however other conflicting sources cite a 2007 study that gave the title to the Amazon River in South America .. river. river. longest river. List of rivers by length. Amazon River. Amazon river. South America. South America. The Nile , which is 6,853 km -LRB- 4,258 miles -RRB- long , is an `` international '' river as its drainage basin covers eleven countries , namely , Tanzania , Uganda , Rwanda , Burundi , Congo-Kinshasa , Kenya , Ethiopia , Eritrea , South Sudan , Sudan and Egypt .. Egypt. Egypt. river. river. drainage basin. drainage basin. Tanzania. Tanzania. Uganda. Uganda. Rwanda. Rwanda. Burundi. Burundi. Congo-Kinshasa. Democratic Republic of the Congo. Kenya. Kenya. Ethiopia. Ethiopia. Eritrea. Eritrea. South Sudan. South Sudan. Sudan. Sudan. In particular , the Nile is the primary water source of Egypt and Sudan .. Egypt. Egypt. Sudan. Sudan. water. water. The Nile has two major tributaries , the White Nile and Blue Nile .. tributaries. tributary. White Nile. White Nile. Blue Nile. Blue Nile. The White Nile is considered to be the headwaters and primary stream of the Nile itself .. White Nile. White Nile. headwaters. headwaters. The Blue Nile , however , is the source of most of the water and silt .. Blue Nile. Blue Nile. water. water. silt. silt. The White Nile is longer and rises in the Great Lakes region of central Africa , with the most distant source still undetermined but located in either Rwanda or Burundi .. Rwanda. Rwanda. Burundi. Burundi. White Nile. White Nile. Great Lakes. African Great Lakes. It flows north through Tanzania , Lake Victoria , Uganda and South Sudan .. Tanzania. Tanzania. Uganda. Uganda. South Sudan. South Sudan. Sudan. Sudan. Lake Victoria. Lake Victoria. The Blue Nile -LRB- ዓባይ , ʿAbay -RRB- begins at Lake Tana in Ethiopia and flows into Sudan from the southeast .. Lake Tana. Lake Tana. Ethiopia. Ethiopia. Sudan. Sudan. Blue Nile. Blue Nile. The two rivers meet just north of the Sudanese capital of Khartoum .. Khartoum. Khartoum. The northern section of the river flows north almost entirely through the Sudanese desert to Egypt , then ends in a large delta and flows into the Mediterranean Sea .. Egypt. Egypt. river. river. desert. desert. a large delta. Nile Delta. Mediterranean Sea. Mediterranean Sea. Egyptian civilization and Sudanese kingdoms have depended on the river since ancient times .. river. river. Egyptian civilization. History of Egypt. Sudanese kingdoms. History of Sudan. Most of the population and cities of Egypt lie along those parts of the Nile valley north of Aswan , and nearly all the cultural and historical sites of Ancient Egypt are found along riverbanks .. Egypt. Egypt. Aswan. Aswan. Ancient Egypt. Ancient Egypt. In the ancient Egyptian language , the Nile is called H ` pi or Iteru -LRB- Hapy -RRB- , meaning `` river '' .. river. river. Egyptian language. Egyptian language. In Coptic , the words piaro -LRB- Sahidic -RRB- or phiaro -LRB- Bohairic -RRB- meaning `` the river '' -LRB- lit .. river. river. Coptic. Coptic language. Sahidic. Sahidic. Bohairic. Bohairic. p -LRB- h -RRB- .. iar-o `` the.canal-great '' -RRB- come from the same ancient name .. The English name Nile and the Arabic names en-Nil and an-Nil both derive from the Latin Nilus and the Ancient Greek Νειλος .. Latin. Latin. Ancient Greek. Ancient Greek. Arabic. Arabic. Beyond that , however , the etymology is disputed .. One possible etymology derives it from a Semitic Nahal , meaning `` river '' .. river. river. Semitic. Semitic languages. The standard English names `` White Nile '' and `` Blue Nile '' , to refer to the river 's source , derive from Arabic names formerly applied only to the Sudanese stretches which meet at Khartoum .. Khartoum. Khartoum. river. river. White Nile. White Nile. Blue Nile. Blue Nile. Arabic. Arabic | This example is related. | fever-evidence-related/mwong--fever-related |
0entailment
| Moles eat <mask> times their weight every day. | This example is three. | numer_sense |
2contradiction
| WRONG. | This example is positive. | dynasent/dynabench.dynasent.r1.all/r1 |
2contradiction
| I ended up ordering some grilled squid, fried salmon belly, oyakudon, and a bunch of stuff that wasn't sushi. | This example is negative. | dynasent/dynabench.dynasent.r2.all/r2 |
2contradiction
| The silver-haired author was not just laying India's politician saint to rest but healing a generations-old rift in the family of the <e1>country</e1>'s founding <e2>father</e2>. | This example is Content-Container(e2,e1). | sem_eval_2010_task_8 |
0entailment
| what is the song pumped up kicks about?
"Pumped Up Kicks" proved to be a sleeper hit ; in 2011, after receiving significant airplay on modern rock stations, the song crossed-over onto contemporary hit radio stations. | This example is False. | wiki_qa |
2contradiction
| Alex likes animals but doesn't like manufactured goods. James bought him a robot for Alex's birthday. True or False: Alex will like the gift. | This example is True. | cycic_classification |
0entailment
| Paying by check is a substitute for using a debit card, since the ultimate outcome is the same | This example is yes. | commonsense_qa_2.0 |
2contradiction
| utter rubbish. These stupid arguments about blacks versus whites are just totally foolish, they are clearly not our equals | This example is nothate. | dynahate |
0entailment
| At the wedding of Angus and Laura in Somerset, the unmarried best man Charles, his flatmate Scarlett; his friend Fiona and her brother Tom; Gareth, a gay man, and his Scottish lover Matthew; and Charles's deaf brother David endure the festivities. At the reception, Charles becomes smitten with Caroline (Carrie), a beautiful young American, and the two spend the night together. In the morning, Carrie jokingly demands that Charles propose to her, observing that they may have "missed a great opportunity", and then leaves for America.
Would it be socially appropriate for Angus to set up Charles on a date? | This example is YES. | CONDAQA |
0entailment
| Long story short, I have been diagnosed bipolar with severe PTSD from a shit childhood.
About a year into our marriage, shortly after we had our son, I started cruising personal adds on Craigslist (not a thing anymore), signing up for hookup sites for men and women under hidden emails.
My wife should be a private detective because she found everything.
She is hysterical and unreasonable about all of this. I never met up with anyone. I did flirt and tell some people I was leaving her and didn’t love my wife. I did it for that rush of excitement that I don’t get from her.
Since our baby, she is all about him. Don’t get me wrong, I get it. But I get bored and curious. Sometimes I will meet people online, leave the house while the family is sleeping and have great conversations with great people over the phone.
She thinks it’s inappropriate because of the things I say, but it’s all bullshit because it is online.
I think she needs to understand that in my eyes it’s not cheating. Luckily, she isn’t that kind of person and is faithful to a fault. I wish she would get over it and let me be me while she handles shit at home. Why is that so bad? | This example is WRONG. | scruples |
2contradiction
| PersonX works sick Before, PersonX needed to get out of bed
PersonX has a laptop on their nightstand. | This example is strengthener. | defeasible-nli/atomic |
2contradiction
| A man in a suit and top hat and a woman in a blue Victorian dress sitting outside at a table. A man and a woman are seated outdoors under the moonlight.
They are at a festival. | This example is strengthener. | defeasible-nli/snli |
0entailment
| Every artist is a chef.
Every chef is a botanist.
Every artist is a chef.
Every athlete is a researcher.
No politician is a beekeeper.
Every director is an athlete.
No artist is an acrobat.
Every journalist is a beekeeper.
Every guard is a driver.
No detective is a dancer.
Some dancer defames every director.
No artist is an architect.
Some director defames no acrobat.
Some politician is a researcher.
Every guard is a politician.
No custodian is an athlete.
No driver is a director.
No journalist is an athlete.
Some director is not a politician.
No astronaut is an architect.
No librarian is a beekeeper.
No athlete is an artist.
Every journalist is a librarian.
Every athlete is a dancer.
Every acrobat calumniates every driver.
Every artist is a journalist.
Every director is a guard.
No detective is a journalist.
No athlete is a botanist.
Some botanist is not a politician.
| This example is inconsistent. | natural-language-satisfiability |
2contradiction
| The slight pinch was a gradual and certain reminder.
The slight pinch was a slow but sure reminder. | This example is Contradiction. | FLUTE |
2contradiction
| Was Nikola Tesla's home country involved in the American Civil War? | This example is True. | strategy-qa |
0entailment
| Some fish may sting. Stonefish is a fish. It stings to step on a stonefish. Stonefish stings cause death if not treated. To treat stonefish stings, apply heat to the affected area or use an antivenom.
If you step on a stonefish and don’t use an antivenom, it will cause death. | This example is Unknown. | folio |
0entailment
| One of the factors that leads to the cultivation of violent conduct is consuming violent and sadistic material.
violent and abusive content can result in aggressive behaviour | This example is no. | avicenna |
0entailment
| Elon Musk often speaks at SpaceX events. | This example is true. | CREAK |
2contradiction
| There are two blocks. Lets call them A and B. Block A is above B. Block A has two medium blue squares. A medium black square is below medium blue square number two. A medium yellow square is below medium blue square number two. Medium blue square number one is below medium blue square number two , the medium yellow square and the medium black square. Block B has a medium black square.
Is there a medium thing that is above a black square that is in block B, far from all squares which are below medium blue shape number two? | This example is No. | spartqa-yn |
2contradiction
| Douglas has visited United Kingdom, Luis has visited Norway, Arnold has visited Austria, Cody has visited Seychelles, Willie has visited Switzerland, Glen has visited India, Leo has visited Andorra, Julian has visited São Tomé & Prícipe, Eric has visited Colombia, Morris has visited Eswatini, Billy has visited Tanzania
Glen didn't visit Vanuatu | This example is contradiction. | clcd-english |
0entailment
| living?
protestor | This example is True. | twentyquestions |
2contradiction
| This film was a big treat.<br /><br />I take the opposite view of the critics. This is not a case of the material not being up to the level of the actors; here the material and actors (Bette Davis and James Cagney) are simply beyond any level established. Clark Gable and Claudette Colbert were every bit as big as Davis and Cagney, and look how It Happened One Night turned out - an all-time classic. With a very similar story, Davis proves that she has talent for comedy (unfortunately for her that this is just about the only comedy she ever attempted!) Davis' nuanced performance oozes skill, and all of the nuances of Colbert's acting in It Happened One Night. Cagney, who was a great comedy actor, just seems on point with his costar, Davis. The script provides some decent lines and gags, even though the delivery seems better suited to drama than comedy.<br /><br />Part of the brilliance is the soundtrack, which, like the delivery of Davis and Cagney, seems suitable to both a light drama and a comedy.<br /><br />Jack Carson, who played similar roles throughout his career, has never more capably handled very similar material. In a fairly typical supporting role Eugene Palette delivers a respectable performance. In a slightly different role as an old west relic, Harry Davenport, is very good. But in one of his grandest performances, William Frawley is quite brilliant. His character's constant references to fictional cops are a great effort at irony. <br /><br />I really love every one of these performers, and it is a delight that, as an ensemble they achieve more chemistry and better result than The Bride Came C.O.D. | This example is Negative. | counterfactually-augmented-imdb |
0entailment
| There be a season 4 of da vinci's demons? | This example is False. | boolq-natural-perturbations |
2contradiction
| coulter is a connecticut yankee . which tells you about how far i believe and trust her " conservatism . " " " | This example is implicit_hate. | implicit-hate-stg1 |
2contradiction
| The crocodile is slow. The crocodile is dull. The crocodile is lazy. The crocodile needs the dog. The bear likes the squirrel. The bear is awful. The bear is heavy. The dog is nice. The dog is smart. The dog is kind. The squirrel is cute. The squirrel is furry. The squirrel is beautiful. Nice animals are cute. If something is dull then it visits the dog. If something visits the dog then it is rough. If something is slow and dull then it is lazy. If something is cute and furry then it is lovely. If something is awful and heavy then it is strong. All lazy animals are sleepy. All cute animals are furry. All strong animals are fierce. All lovely animals are small.
The dog is not furry. | This example is True. | PARARULE-Plus |
2contradiction
| In spite of what you may think, I am not really all that interested in politics.
I am not interested in politics. | This example is True. | ambient |
0entailment
| Scaffolds can be used to create a costume. | This example is False. | I2D2 |
0entailment
| As I have pointed out, it is the trapezoid cross-section, not the square, that is used in arches. This is most obviously the case with the keystone, the most important piece of the arch.The square's utility in architecture and games cannot be denied -- however, this is again due to the fact that the square tessellates. A pattern of interlocking squares can repeat forever. As I have indicated, this is rather boring. Moreover, it is not the squares themselves that give such games as my opponent listed their value; it is the rules that we humans have constructed, and the pieces we have built such as chess or Scrabble pieces (or, in the case of Sudoku, the numbers we write inside the squares).Squares have been used in art, but I submit that rectangles, when used in art, are more memorable. Consider, for instance, the abstract works of Piet Mondrian. Not to mention the aforementioned 2001: A Space Odyssey.And seriously: how can anyone not find the rhombus kind of funny?
A square is the best quadrilateral | This example is CON. | args_me |
0entailment
| this law keeps communities safe by not letting criminals run rampant with only slaps on the wrist
We should abolish the three-strikes laws | This example is against. | Touche23-ValueEval |
2contradiction
| Government should fund residents, not rebuilding New Orleans
Rebuilding New Orleans | This example is PRO. | starcon |
0entailment
| Is there a way to see where my money originally came from? | This example is verify_source_of_funds. | banking77 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.