He did not imply that the sentence was to be handed out without a fair trial.In his very post Ducmis clearly implies that he does not wish for an innocent person to be killed.

You missed a key word in there.

Because that would be a death penalty that I said I oppose in the very quote you posted.

Sure there are. But I still think public shaming is a valid deterrent tactic. We send criminals to jail with the idea that only the government really disapproves of their actions. They need to know that disapproval also comes from their community as well.

Well, look closely at what i caveated,
Now, I think it is possible for someone to be wrongly accused and convicted of a single homicide. It has happened. But multiple? The chances of an incorrect verdict on the case of a multiple homicide i think is extremely low. The other murders also have to be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt just as much as the first murder. Multiple murders are just collaborating evidence that capital punishment is in order.

It's the proven guilty part that falls short. Everyone behind bars was proven guilty, yet people are still being released after being proven innocent later through DNA testing, or other testimony.

This is very true although now going forward hopefully dna testing will continue to distinguish the guilty from the innocent and we'll have less instances of mistaken identity.

I don't know how helpful it will be against prosecutor misconduct though. That why I say hang the cost of housing convicts. Put them in a small grey cell with no decorations and few other distractions (ie no TV or internet) until they die of natural causes.

It gives plenty of time for their innocence to be revealed and for the guilty they will have the knowledge that there is another 50 to 75 years of this joyless existence before death releases them. That's a far greater punishment imo than a quick and painless lethal injection.