PDA

View Full Version : New female addition to texas death row



nicola
07-14-2008, 07:31 PM
On July 11th Texan mother became the 10th woman on texas death row for tourturing/beating her 2yr old to death.:furious:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/5883889.html


The death pen should be reserved for 'special' people like this.
:dervish::whip2: :Justice:

Pepper
07-14-2008, 07:45 PM
Since the DP doesn't exist in every state, and since it is administered differently in each state in which it exists, the answers to this poll depends on which state we are talking about. In California it needs to be tossed. In Texas it works well. They have an express lane!

LI_Mom
07-14-2008, 08:05 PM
IMO, the death penalty is a much easier sentence than having to spend the rest of your life behind bars with the bare minimum of contact with other human beings.

White Rain
07-14-2008, 08:12 PM
The only problem I have with it is that it isn't used enough.

pixies
07-14-2008, 08:15 PM
The only problem I have with it is that it isn't used enough.


Exactly.

Texana
07-14-2008, 08:15 PM
Sadly, the testifying doctor said it was the worst case of child abuse he'd ever seen.

Jeana (DP)
07-14-2008, 08:32 PM
IMO, the death penalty is a much easier sentence than having to spend the rest of your life behind bars with the bare minimum of contact with other human beings.

Really? How interesting. Can you explain to us how, then, the most tough serial killers, spree murderers and depraved humans on the face of the earth cry themselves to sleep every night and do everything possible to avoid this "easy" sentence? You must know something that they don't know, darlin, because believe me when I tell you that these big, strong, tough men will do ANYTHING, and I DO MEAN ANYTHING, to serve that life sentence.

MagicRose99
07-14-2008, 08:42 PM
Since the DP doesn't exist in every state, and since it is administered differently in each state in which it exists, the answers to this poll depends on which state we are talking about. In California it needs to be tossed. In Texas it works well. They have an express lane!

I agree.. California needs to overhaul there system and stop the nonsense with taking 25 years to finally execute the scum. Maybe we should model it after Texas...

englishleigh
07-14-2008, 08:48 PM
The only problem I have with it is that it isn't used enough.

Ditto....and not fast enough.

believe09
07-14-2008, 09:25 PM
I cannot find a thread on the original case-this 38 year old woman had 14 children, 7 of which were living with her husband? And how does the boyfriend come into play here...OMG-watch out Riley Sawyer's mom....

christine2448
07-14-2008, 09:28 PM
^^^^^^55555555 JeanaDP

Salem
07-14-2008, 09:49 PM
I cannot find a thread on the original case-this 38 year old woman had 14 children, 7 of which were living with her husband? And how does the boyfriend come into play here...OMG-watch out Riley Sawyer's mom....

I hope so believe. I hope Riley's mom faces the same tough jury. Riley's mom had lots of choices so I hope now, the jury makes sure she doesn't have any more.

Salem

PSUfan
07-14-2008, 10:26 PM
I do support the DP, but I am not prepared to say that "it works fine as it is" because I haven't really researched how it is. I want everybody on death row to have indisputable evidence, including DNA against them.

If they were sentenced before modern DNA technology was available, then I want the DNA to be tested prior to death date.

Jeana (DP)
07-14-2008, 11:07 PM
^^^^^^55555555 JeanaDP

Does this mean I'm in trouble?

jubie
07-14-2008, 11:20 PM
Does this mean I'm in trouble?

Are you ever not?:waitasec::Banane57::Banane36::Banane24::whist le::angel2:

Jeana (DP)
07-14-2008, 11:22 PM
Are you ever not?:waitasec::Banane57::Banane36::Banane24::whist le::angel2:

Come to think of it . . .

:raincloud::raincloud::help:

Rag Doll 02
07-15-2008, 03:12 AM
I agree.. California needs to overhaul there system and stop the nonsense with taking 25 years to finally execute the scum. Maybe we should model it after Texas...

I voted that the DP needs reform for this exact reason. I also live in California-- and as you said MagicRose, it should not take 20-30 years to execute these scumbags

Grainne Dhu
07-15-2008, 07:52 AM
I saw from the results that I am not the only person who disagrees with the death penalty but I am the only such person to speak up so far, I think.

I believe that the death penalty should be done away with completely. No, I will not then move on to attacking life without parole (as someone claimed in a different subject). I do believe that there are human beings so dangerous that the only thing to do with them is to keep them separated from society.

I believe that it is wrong to take a human life in cold blood (self defence is a different matter). I believe that to reason that some other human being deserves to be killed is exactly the same reasoning many murderers use. The fact that the weapon used is the death penalty doesn't change the basic reasoning.

I am against the death penalty in part because of my own desire to be a better human being. I don't want to live in a world where it is considered okay to kill human beings, so it is incumbent upon me to live the change I want so far as I am capable.

cheko1
07-15-2008, 07:57 AM
I feel it is wrong to let many of these monsters breathe the same air as we do. I resent the fact that it takes so long to execute them.

tezi
07-15-2008, 08:01 AM
I think if someone chooses to kill another human being in cold blood, then that person forfeits all rights. That alone gives the state or federal government the right to kill that person. Someone who beats their child to death needs to be put down, except in cases of severe mental illness, like Andrea Yates.

There are times when I support the DP and others when I don't, and in some cases, I just don't know.

Kiki
07-15-2008, 09:44 AM
I disagree with the death penalty. There is so much about the brain that we do not yet know. There could be people on death row now or people who have already been executed who medical science will one day discover had brain abnormalities and were not responsible for their actions. There are so many people in history who have been executed who doctors have later believed had medical or psychiatric problems. I also believe that the death penalty is degrading to humanity. We are supposed to be better than murderers and yet so many people advocate putting another person to death with the state as executioner. Another problem I have with the death penalty is the possibility of mistakes and innocent people forfeiting their lives for the crimes of others. Judges, juries, lawyers and police may strive to be fair and impartial but they are nonetheless fallible human beings. We all are. Humans are not Vulcans governed by cold hard logic but are influenced by prejudices, emotions and the desire for vengeance. We all make mistakes and it is horrible to know that our mistakes can cost another their life. This has happened in the US. Innocent people have been executed and sometimes their innocence was not realised and proven for several years later. In Australia we do not have the death penalty so my opinions are naturally influenced by culture. A lot of people here have expressed their support for the death penalty and I respect that viewpoint. I just thought I would share the reasons why I believe differently.

Rino
07-15-2008, 10:06 AM
The only problem I have with it is that it isn't used enough.
:clap:

Deborah1012
07-15-2008, 10:18 AM
IMO, the death penalty is a much easier sentence than having to spend the rest of your life behind bars with the bare minimum of contact with other human beings.
I agree with that, but the reason I think it should continue is for the loved ones left behind. Once that POS has been terminated, the family/friends no longer have to worry about seeing that person on TV, hearing that person say they are innocent, going thru appeals. Once they are gone, they are gone and the loved ones can hopefully live their lives more peacefully.

believe09
07-15-2008, 10:27 AM
I disagree with the death penalty. There is so much about the brain that we do not yet know. There could be people on death row now or people who have already been executed who medical science will one day discover had brain abnormalities and were not responsible for their actions. There are so many people in history who have been executed who doctors have later believed had medical or psychiatric problems. I also believe that the death penalty is degrading to humanity. We are supposed to be better than murderers and yet so many people advocate putting another person to death with the state as executioner. Another problem I have with the death penalty is the possibility of mistakes and innocent people forfeiting their lives for the crimes of others. Judges, juries, lawyers and police may strive to be fair and impartial but they are nonetheless fallible human beings. We all are. Humans are not Vulcans governed by cold hard logic but are influenced by prejudices, emotions and the desire for vengeance. We all make mistakes and it is horrible to know that our mistakes can cost another their life. This has happened in the US. Innocent people have been executed and sometimes their innocence was not realised and proven for several years later. In Australia we do not have the death penalty so my opinions are naturally influenced by culture. A lot of people here have expressed their support for the death penalty and I respect that viewpoint. I just thought I would share the reasons why I believe differently.

i absolutely respect this position-for as much as i realize that the death penalty is NOT the response of a necessarily evolved, sophisticated society, I am pulled towards it by the simple idea of what do we do with those who cannot be "fixed?" And who are terribly, terribly dangerous to those around them...is it enough to lock them away and continue to spend resources on them that would be well used on others?

In our current system, it is probably infinitely more expensive to give someone the DP then it would be to give them LWOP. They have a guaranteed appeals process with guaranteed representation and all of the costs involved in that...i know that this is a desiccated response rather than considering the value of the life of the offender, but I am honestly conflicted on what I think is the best approach.

christine2448
07-15-2008, 10:58 AM
Does this mean I'm in trouble?

Oy vey! I was HIGH FIVING YOU! ^5 :blowkiss: (but looking back I don't remembery why, LMAO! :rolleyes::bang:)

NewMom2003
07-15-2008, 11:26 AM
I cannot find a thread on the original case-this 38 year old woman had 14 children, 7 of which were living with her husband? And how does the boyfriend come into play here...OMG-watch out Riley Sawyer's mom....

If I remember correctly, the state isn't going after the DP in her case. :furious: I need to go back and look at Riley's thread.

Class-z
07-15-2008, 11:29 AM
The only problem I have with it is that it isn't used enough.

Ditto!

They should all run like Texas and faster

Jeana (DP)
07-15-2008, 11:38 AM
Oy vey! I was HIGH FIVING YOU! ^5 :blowkiss: (but looking back I don't remembery why, LMAO! :rolleyes::bang:)

HaHaHa You crack me up!!!! :blowkiss:

mrsjonnob
07-15-2008, 12:28 PM
I am another Californian who believes it needs reforming. I disagree with years and years of appeals, tax-payer money down the toilet keeping these creeps alive.

GlitchWizard
07-15-2008, 12:33 PM
I saw from the results that I am not the only person who disagrees with the death penalty but I am the only such person to speak up so far, I think.

I believe that the death penalty should be done away with completely. No, I will not then move on to attacking life without parole (as someone claimed in a different subject). I do believe that there are human beings so dangerous that the only thing to do with them is to keep them separated from society.

I believe that it is wrong to take a human life in cold blood (self defence is a different matter). I believe that to reason that some other human being deserves to be killed is exactly the same reasoning many murderers use. The fact that the weapon used is the death penalty doesn't change the basic reasoning.

I am against the death penalty in part because of my own desire to be a better human being. I don't want to live in a world where it is considered okay to kill human beings, so it is incumbent upon me to live the change I want so far as I am capable.

I'm in your corner - I just didn't speak up because I think the pro-death people are tired of hearing from me. :-)

Jeana (DP)
07-15-2008, 02:00 PM
I'm in your corner - I just didn't speak up because I think the pro-death people are tired of hearing from me. :-)

Yeah, but we still love you.:)

Karanjeff
07-15-2008, 02:16 PM
I disagree with the death penalty. There is so much about the brain that we do not yet know. There could be people on death row now or people who have already been executed who medical science will one day discover had brain abnormalities and were not responsible for their actions. There are so many people in history who have been executed who doctors have later believed had medical or psychiatric problems. I also believe that the death penalty is degrading to humanity. We are supposed to be better than murderers and yet so many people advocate putting another person to death with the state as executioner. Another problem I have with the death penalty is the possibility of mistakes and innocent people forfeiting their lives for the crimes of others. Judges, juries, lawyers and police may strive to be fair and impartial but they are nonetheless fallible human beings. We all are. Humans are not Vulcans governed by cold hard logic but are influenced by prejudices, emotions and the desire for vengeance. We all make mistakes and it is horrible to know that our mistakes can cost another their life. This has happened in the US. Innocent people have been executed and sometimes their innocence was not realised and proven for several years later. In Australia we do not have the death penalty so my opinions are naturally influenced by culture. A lot of people here have expressed their support for the death penalty and I respect that viewpoint. I just thought I would share the reasons why I believe differently.

Kiki-
Do you believe that the man who killed Dierdre Kennedy back in the seventies up in Ipswitch should not be given the death sentence?
I assume since you are an Aussie you know about this case.
Any man that would steal a baby from her crib and do what he did to her is unjustifiable and should be put to death. She was little and had no defense .... doesn't that justify a death penalty?
What if something of this nature happened in your family or to your kids.... I wouldn't be so quick to judge and worry about someone's brain not functioning properly..... An eye for an Eye. It's against God and the ten commandments....

Just a thought........

Karanjeff
07-15-2008, 02:23 PM
I personally know and lived next door to a member of the family that was there that night...... He continually tortures the Mom in this case and makes a mockery out of the family. That just isn't right. That was their little baby......

Karanjeff
07-15-2008, 02:25 PM
Also this case makes a big reason to do away with double jeopardy.....

GlitchWizard
07-15-2008, 03:21 PM
Yeah, but we still love you.:)

:-) Thanks. :-)

dingo
07-15-2008, 06:54 PM
I disagree with the death penalty. There is so much about the brain that we do not yet know. There could be people on death row now or people who have already been executed who medical science will one day discover had brain abnormalities and were not responsible for their actions. There are so many people in history who have been executed who doctors have later believed had medical or psychiatric problems. I also believe that the death penalty is degrading to humanity. We are supposed to be better than murderers and yet so many people advocate putting another person to death with the state as executioner. Another problem I have with the death penalty is the possibility of mistakes and innocent people forfeiting their lives for the crimes of others. Judges, juries, lawyers and police may strive to be fair and impartial but they are nonetheless fallible human beings. We all are. Humans are not Vulcans governed by cold hard logic but are influenced by prejudices, emotions and the desire for vengeance. We all make mistakes and it is horrible to know that our mistakes can cost another their life. This has happened in the US. Innocent people have been executed and sometimes their innocence was not realised and proven for several years later. In Australia we do not have the death penalty so my opinions are naturally influenced by culture. A lot of people here have expressed their support for the death penalty and I respect that viewpoint. I just thought I would share the reasons why I believe differently.I think its safe to say that anyone who tortures and murders people are not right in the head.
We need a referendum down here on the DP debate..Baker and Crump should have been put to death just as Anita Cobbys murderers should be in their grave....the list goes on.

ladygator
07-15-2008, 07:13 PM
I think the DP needs to be reformed.

I'm all for it, if, it was uniform, across all States.

As it stands now, our major DP lovin States will give someone the DP for just about anything. CA, FL, and TX DR is packed. FL is different than all other States in that, it only takes a majority of the jurors to vote for death.

The DP was supposed to be reserved for the worst of worst. All of the other States reserve it for just that.

Have you all ever taken a look at the DR numbers for all States and compared them? Most States only have a handful. With a couple of others having around a 100.

ladygator
07-15-2008, 07:20 PM
I am another Californian who believes it needs reforming. I disagree with years and years of appeals, tax-payer money down the toilet keeping these creeps alive.

I disagree with decades of appeals for people who were convicted based on solid DNA.

I don't think the States should even be able to seek the DP if they don't have it in the first place. I'd like to be 100% sure someone is guilty prior to killing them. Not kill them because circumstances, witnesses, bad alibi, and a prior record says that they did it.

Jeana (DP)
07-15-2008, 07:46 PM
I think the DP needs to be reformed.

I'm all for it, if, it was uniform, across all States.

As it stands now, our major DP lovin States will give someone the DP for just about anything. CA, FL, and TX DR is packed. FL is different than all other States in that, it only takes a majority of the jurors to vote for death.

The DP was supposed to be reserved for the worst of worst. All of the other States reserve it for just that.

Have you all ever taken a look at the DR numbers for all States and compared them? Most States only have a handful. With a couple of others having around a 100.

EXCUSE ME????????

What exactly do you mean by "will give someone the DP for just about anything."

ladygator
07-15-2008, 07:59 PM
EXCUSE ME????????

What exactly do you mean by "will give someone the DP for just about anything."

EXCUSE ME, wrong terminology on my part. They will give the DP for your run of the mill type MURDER.

Sorry

Jeana (DP)
07-15-2008, 08:21 PM
Run of the mill murder, huh? Wow.

:censored::censored::censored::nono::nono::nono:

believe09
07-15-2008, 09:24 PM
Hmmm-who has received the DP without special circumstances applying, I wonder? Even the rape case it was applied to where the victim survived, the child has had to have multiple reconstructive surgeries...

Amster
07-15-2008, 09:25 PM
Here in Texas....if you kill somebody....we kill you back! Seems fair.

MagicRose99
07-15-2008, 09:26 PM
Run of the mill murder, huh? Wow.

:censored::censored::censored::nono::nono::nono:

I'm as befuddled as you... :eek:

mrs.kravitz
07-15-2008, 09:54 PM
I'm in Texas, so I voted that it was working just fine. But I do agree, you other states need some revision.

Texana
07-15-2008, 10:01 PM
Numbers of prisoners on Death Row are deceptive unless you account for differences in population.

It's number of prisoners per capita, with higher populations figured in, that matters.

Apples to oranges otherwise.

I'm not for 'nothin being uniform across the states other than the federal powers enumerated in the Constitution. I hardly want the people of New Hampshire deciding how we should conduct our business, and I hardly think the people of New Jersey want us telling them how to do theirs, either.

PSUfan
07-15-2008, 10:06 PM
EXCUSE ME, wrong terminology on my part. They will give the DP for your run of the mill type MURDER.

Sorry

You should define, "run of the mill type murder". Is that like where someone murders multiple people? Or is it defined as a passion killing.. a husband walking in on his wife with another man, and killing that other man.. that might be defined as "run of the mill?

SLY
07-16-2008, 01:03 AM
I voted for the DP but reforming. Way too many non whites & poor people getting/got rail-roaded while the wealthy get away with murder. Thankful the million dollar defense didn't help scott peterson.

When I watched the documentary of Gov. Ryan of Illinois it got to me. I knew there were innocent people in prison but was shocked on just how many. How a DA will take away your life just to see if he can, like the Dukes case. To some sadly it's just a game.

But then there is watching though the decades creeps like charlies manson, butch defeo still making news, still giving normal people the creeps. And the families of all those they hurt to the very core having to go through all their BS trials, parole hearings, suing for 'their rights' tho they gave none to the many they slaughtered or had slaughtered.

DNA ROCKS! I am very thankful some of the innocent are finally being released. But I am going to be getting the creeps every time snotty boy will be putting Sharon through more hell.

So yup, it needs reforming and an express lane for the cases that there is truly not a doubt.

sly

Kiki
07-16-2008, 01:11 AM
Kiki-
Do you believe that the man who killed Dierdre Kennedy back in the seventies up in Ipswitch should not be given the death sentence?
I assume since you are an Aussie you know about this case.
Any man that would steal a baby from her crib and do what he did to her is unjustifiable and should be put to death. She was little and had no defense .... doesn't that justify a death penalty?
What if something of this nature happened in your family or to your kids.... I wouldn't be so quick to judge and worry about someone's brain not functioning properly..... An eye for an Eye. It's against God and the ten commandments....

Just a thought........

I'm not quick to judge. I've thought about this long and hard. Yes, I do know about the Deirdre Kennedy case. That was horrible. No punishment could be sufficient to what was done to that baby. However, unless we choose to become like him life in prison is all we have. I still don't believe humans and especially the state have the right to take anyone's life. There have been too many mistakes made and innocent people have died for crimes they didn't commit. One is too many. Would killing a murderer bring the victim back? Would it make their absence at birthdays, Christmases, family gatherings any easier? Would it lessen the pain and rage at their loss? And are you implying that I am being unChristian in not supporting the death penalty?

Grainne Dhu
07-16-2008, 01:55 AM
We are supposed to be better than murderers and yet so many people advocate putting another person to death with the state as executioner.

Kiki, exactly.

For me, it has nothing to do with what the murderer does or does not deserve; it has everything to do with the fact that I hold myself to a standard of behaviour higher than that of a murderer.

Also, I have many times in my life received better than I deserved. Those experiences have had a profound effect on me and I hope other people may also receive such benefits.

I don't want dangerous human beings roaming the streets at will. They must be kept separate for the safety of all.

Karanjeff
07-21-2008, 01:08 AM
I'm not quick to judge. I've thought about this long and hard. Yes, I do know about the Deirdre Kennedy case. That was horrible. No punishment could be sufficient to what was done to that baby. However, unless we choose to become like him life in prison is all we have. I still don't believe humans and especially the state have the right to take anyone's life. There have been too many mistakes made and innocent people have died for crimes they didn't commit. One is too many. Would killing a murderer bring the victim back? Would it make their absence at birthdays, Christmases, family gatherings any easier? Would it lessen the pain and rage at their loss? And are you implying that I am being unChristian in not supporting the death penalty?


Oh no I am sorry if I offended you ... I didn't intend to. Personally that's just my opinion on how I feel.... my beliefs.... how I make peace with DP. Do I like it? No... Do I think murder warrants it yes, but Like a previous poster there has to be rock solid DNA and other proof. Why should a murderer get to live and have family visits when the victims' families are left with nothing but a memory?

I really am just here to discuss and not offend.... I am sorry if I have upset you....

barb0301
07-21-2008, 02:24 AM
If I remember correctly, the state isn't going after the DP in her case. :furious: I need to go back and look at Riley's thread.

You are correct - the state is not seeking the DP against either Kim Trenor or Royce Zeigler. Another case where the DP was given was recently overturned because the mother wasn't proven to be a "future danger to society". The DA feels as if the same would apply here. :furious::furious::furious:

Texana
07-21-2008, 10:29 AM
With Trenor and Ziegler, the Galveston DA seemed to feel it would be too hard to get a conviction for the DP with certain charges, so they went with a lesser charge with the possibility of a life sentence.

Given the lighter sentences the Galveston juries have handed down lately, I'm not surprised. Sad but not surprised.

Ciara
07-21-2008, 10:43 AM
Here in Texas....if you kill somebody....we kill you back! Seems fair.

Long Live Texas!!!!!:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:

Medea
07-22-2008, 11:29 AM
I used to be against the DP...for the general reason that a civilized society shouldn't kill its own citizens because it degraded the value of human life overall. But, then I realized that war is also a form of state sanctioned murdered where many truly innocent people are killed, so it seems inconsistent to refuse to support the dregs of society being killed. I also used to subscribe to the idea that LWOP was worse than the DP, but then I realized how many amenities they have in prison today...TV, work out rooms, college courses, their own web sites...and I saw that life in prison could be pretty cushy, so these criminals weren't getting much of a punishment, they continued to be a drain on society costing tens of thousands a year to keep allive and giving nothing back.

I do think the system needs to be overhauled and I would reserve the DP for the most horrific killings...rape/murder...torture/murder. I would't have given Scott Peterson the DP and I certainly wouldn't give anyone the DP who accidentally beat their baby to death.

I would cut the time for DP appeals to a max of 10 years and I wouldn't give the DP for any case where actual innocence could reasonably be argued, e.g. 'wrong guy' cases.

drip~drop
07-22-2008, 04:31 PM
I used to be against the DP...for the general reason that a civilized society shouldn't kill its own citizens because it degraded the value of human life overall. But, then I realized that war is also a form of state sanctioned murdered where many truly innocent people are killed, so it seems inconsistent to refuse to support the dregs of society being killed. I also used to subscribe to the idea that LWOP was worse than the DP, but then I realized how many amenities they have in prison today...TV, work out rooms, college courses, their own web sites...and I saw that life in prison could be pretty cushy, so these criminals weren't getting much of a punishment, they continued to be a drain on society costing tens of thousands a year to keep allive and giving nothing back.

I do think the system needs to be overhauled and I would reserve the DP for the most horrific killings...rape/murder...torture/murder. I would't have given Scott Peterson the DP and I certainly wouldn't give anyone the DP who accidentally beat their baby to death.

I would cut the time for DP appeals to a max of 10 years and I wouldn't give the DP for any case where actual innocence could reasonably be argued, e.g. 'wrong guy' cases.

How does one ACCIDENTLY beat their baby to death??????:eek::confused:

SLY
07-24-2008, 11:06 AM
How does one ACCIDENTLY beat their baby to death??????:eek::confused:

GAWD!!! :furious: That made my stomach turn.
Yeah, how does one ACCIDENTALLY beat a BABY to death???

Sly

Medea
07-24-2008, 11:26 AM
I'ts easy, the same way anyone else is "accidentally" beaten to death, when the purpose of the beating was not to kill the victim. It's called manslaughter or voluntary manslaughter.

Unless there is evidence the mother INTENDED to KILL the child, rather than use beating as a punishment then the death was unintentional...e.g. she was beating the baby as punishment not planning to kill the baby.

I'm sorry if people can't see the difference because their logic is clouded by the emotion of a dead child, but there is a HUGE difference between intentially and purposefully murdering a person, a child or an adult, and killing them unintentially or accidentally.

Grainne Dhu
07-25-2008, 04:48 AM
I used to be against the DP...for the general reason that a civilized society shouldn't kill its own citizens because it degraded the value of human life overall. But, then I realized that war is also a form of state sanctioned murdered where many truly innocent people are killed, so it seems inconsistent to refuse to support the dregs of society being killed.

My husband is a member of Veterans for Peace. He served three tours in Vietnam and when he got out of the service, he swore he would work for peace for the rest of his life. He would absolutely agree that a civilized society should not be killing anyone.


I also used to subscribe to the idea that LWOP was worse than the DP, but then I realized how many amenities they have in prison today...TV, work out rooms, college courses, their own web sites...and I saw that life in prison could be pretty cushy, so these criminals weren't getting much of a punishment, they continued to be a drain on society costing tens of thousands a year to keep allive and giving nothing back.

Except that they are not free. They aren't free to be near their loved ones whenever they want, they aren't free to even choose what they want for breakfast.

It's also misleading to portray all prisons as being the same. They aren't. Most of the prisoners who have been given LWOP are held in high security facilities where they have minimal extras.

Setting aside any arguments about humane confinement, there is a simple truth about giving prisoners some amenities: if they have nothing to lose, they are more dangerous to deal with. If they have access to a TV, radio, etc, then they can be punished for administrative infractions by removal of privileges. They work to keep their privileges, which makes them a little less dangerous to deal with.


I would cut the time for DP appeals to a max of 10 years and I wouldn't give the DP for any case where actual innocence could reasonably be argued, e.g. 'wrong guy' cases.

Many of the recent exonerations have involved men imprisoned for 20+ years. Had they been limited to ten years for appeals, they would have been killed.

To me, that is an outcome that I do not wish to participate in. To imprison an innocent man for many years is a terrible thing. To kill an innocent man, I can't come up with words to convey the horror I feel.

Medea
07-25-2008, 11:15 AM
All of the recent exonerations are due to DNA evidence which wasn't available previously, and we also now know that false witness identification is the leading cause of wrongful conviction...so I would say the odds of a person TODAY being falsely convictioned are much, much smaller than they were even 10 years ago. So, its impossible today that DNA evidence that could exonerate someone would take even 10 years to be tested let alone 20 years...if DNA evidence exited to exonerate a suspect from a stranger rape they would never be prosecuted in the first place.

It's also a little reported and kwown fact that not all of the "exonerated" inmates are necessasrily factually innocent, though many are, some are simply not reprosecutable due to the time lag and many are also career criminals who aren't really deserving of being put on a pedestal...a la Steven Avery..."wrongly" convicted of a stranger rape who went on to commit a stranger rape/torture/murder after his "exoneration" and becoming a poster boy for The Innocence Project.

Yes, an innocent man being imprisoned is a terrible thing...but likewise a guilty person masquerading as an innocent man and a victim going without justice and closure is also a terrible thing.

I see your point about inmates having privileages so they can be used as a tool for discipline but to me giving prisoners Internet access is INSANE and having death row inmates who raped/murdererd/tortured their victims having their own seb sites is truly DISGUSTING and strong evidence that many people are misguided in where they put their sympathy..feeling sorry for the dirtbag remorseless killer and wanting the victims families to basically get over it.

Some people can't be rehabilitated, the problem with our system is that for whatever reason we can't seem to be able to identifiy the difference so non violent drug offenders and petty criminals are sent to jail for decades while violent psychopaths are given parole and work release.

imthemom
07-25-2008, 12:24 PM
I voted undecided only for the fact that I think there needs to be reform but I do believe people who have commited such crimes deserve the death penality. All death row inmates sentences in IL were commuted to life in prison with Ryan left office for the fact that they are not sure who is innocent and who is not because they were putting people away who they knew shouldn't be there. I can say this, if someone in my family was murdered I would want to see the SOB hang, I would probably want to do it myself, so I feel for the victims family's and feel they deserve justice however, they want it.

Grainne Dhu
07-25-2008, 12:28 PM
All of the recent exonerations are due to DNA evidence which wasn't available previously, and we also now know that false witness identification is the leading cause of wrongful conviction...

But it's been known for decades that eye witness testimony can be highly inaccurate. There are studies that were done way back in the 1930s where the researchers set up an incident and filmed it, then asked the onlookers to describe what had happened at timed intervals after the incident. They had the film to prove absolutely what had really happened but even as soon as five minutes after the incident was over, eye witnesses would give highly variable answers.




I hope so. Then again, have you followed the ongoing scandal from Galveston Texas? The state lab there was terrible, infested with cockroaches, mould growing on the walls, etc. They made many mistakes and many people were unjustly convicted on the basis of DNA evidence from that lab.

One Texas prosecutor said of that lab "if you told them to separate a given sample or die, why, bless them, you'd have to shoot them because they can't do it." That was a prosecutor!

[QUOTE]Yes, an innocent man being imprisoned is a terrible thing...but likewise a guilty person masquerading as an innocent man and a victim going without justice and closure is also a terrible thing.

Thomas Jefferson said "better that ten guilty men go free than that one innocent man be convicted." I believe this.


I see your point about inmates having privileages so they can be used as a tool for discipline but to me giving prisoners Internet access is INSANE and having death row inmates who raped/murdererd/tortured their victims having their own seb sites is truly DISGUSTING and strong evidence that many people are misguided in where they put their sympathy..feeling sorry for the dirtbag remorseless killer and wanting the victims families to basically get over it.

So far as I know, there are no websites run by prisoners. All such websites I've heard of are run by sympathisers who essentially take dictation from the prisoner and post it to the website. I'm not sure how to prevent this because it gets into First Amendment territory. Someone who has no convictions and has not committed a crime has wide rights to freedom of speech in this country and that's the way I believe it should be. What we, as a people, gain from having freedom of speech (and assembly) is far more precious than restricting a few sickos whose speech is hateful.

I wouldn't tell any family to just get over it. But... there are times when there is something that cannot be stopped or fixed. No one has to log onto the web and look at any particular website; in such cases, I'd urge the families not to look.


Some people can't be rehabilitated, the problem with our system is that for whatever reason we can't seem to be able to identifiy the difference so non violent drug offenders and petty criminals are sent to jail for decades while violent psychopaths are given parole and work release.

I absolutely agree with this.

If people really wanted to reduce violent crime, I think the simplest, easiest step would be to decriminalise marijuana. All the money that goes into trying to stop the transport and sale of marijuana could be put towards fighting violent crime with far better effects. Treat marijuana as if it were alcohol; same penalties for driving under the influence, etc, but not illegal to have or consume so long as no one else is hurt or endangered.

Kiki
07-27-2008, 02:42 AM
I agree with all of your post except for this.


If people really wanted to reduce violent crime, I think the simplest, easiest step would be to decriminalise marijuana. All the money that goes into trying to stop the transport and sale of marijuana could be put towards fighting violent crime with far better effects. Treat marijuana as if it were alcohol; same penalties for driving under the influence, etc, but not illegal to have or consume so long as no one else is hurt or endangered.

I have a cousin who smoked marijuana and only marijuana. He became psychotic and is now on medication for the rest of his life. A psychiatric nurse I know has had patients permanantly affected like this from just one joint. It is a horrible drug and it can destroy people and families. A lot of people argue "I smoked marijuana and it didn't damage me." Perhaps not. Perhaps they do have some damage to their brains that they cannot see. I think it's like tobacco. You can smoke your entire life and not become seriously ill from it or you can be one of those who are who will pay the price early. No one can predict how their bodies will react and it's just not worth it.

Ciara
07-27-2008, 02:49 AM
Its true that cannabis does affect some people that way kiki but it also has the opposite effect in others. Almost every person I know across all ages smokes it. I have seen people who are aggressive or aggressive in drink totally go the opposite way with cannabis and I know of at least one guy given it medically to help keep his aggression tempered.

Alcohol causes more problems than cannabis.

But its true it causes mental problems for some people.

Grainne Dhu
07-28-2008, 05:16 AM
I have a cousin who smoked marijuana and only marijuana. He became psychotic and is now on medication for the rest of his life. A psychiatric nurse I know has had patients permanantly affected like this from just one joint. It is a horrible drug and it can destroy people and families. A lot of people argue "I smoked marijuana and it didn't damage me." Perhaps not. Perhaps they do have some damage to their brains that they cannot see. I think it's like tobacco. You can smoke your entire life and not become seriously ill from it or you can be one of those who are who will pay the price early. No one can predict how their bodies will react and it's just not worth it.

I see marijuana as being more akin to alcohol. For the majority of people, alcohol is a slightly mood altering substance that they enjoy in moderation. For a minority, alcohol is something that changes them into people they'd really rather not be.

In some cases I know, while it may look like they tried marijuana and then had psychiatric problems, the truth is more along the lines that they were already experiencing troubling symptoms of mental illness, they tried marijuana in an attempt to self medicate, it didn't work and they decompensated from there.

As a society, we've decided that it's okay for people to buy alcohol; we hold anyone who does something wrong under the influence responsible for their own actions. Because the majority of people can handle alcohol, we've decided that the onus is on the minority who cannot to avoid it.

While it may be possible that moderate marijuana use causes some type of subtle brain damage, it must be incredibly subtle because it hasn't been found. Moreover, there are some pretty famous users whose marijuana use did not seem to impair their intellectual achievements (Carl Sagan, for one, was rumoured to be a pothead).

Marijuana does have a couple legitimate uses for which there are no effective substitutes--as an anti-emetic, for instance I know someone undergoing chemotherapy who has a prescription for the pharmaceutical equivalent, marinol. Doesn't do her much good because when a person is highly nauseous, keeping a pill down is more of a challenge than they can handle. When she can get hold of pot to smoke, her post-treatment nausea becomes a minor inconvenience rather than a three day ordeal where her life basically stops.

I find it ironic that the whole campaign against marijuana use started off from the selfish interests of a single company: DuPont. When they came up with the first effective, reasonably priced substitute for hemp rope, the company decided to try to get farming hemp made illegal in order to boost their sales. The whole "reefer madness" campaign was the result.

Since then, the anti-marijuana attitude has run amok. Many billions of dollars have been spent on "education," enforcement and punishment, which could have been spent with much greater effect in other areas.

Still could--think of the backlog of evidence for DNA testing. In some states, the waiting list is as long as 5-6 years (longer than the statute of limitations for many crimes!). If we could take the money being dedicated to controlling marijuana use to upgrade and expand lab facilities, that backlog could be eliminated in a year.

I'm not trying to make light of the tragedy your cousin experienced. It was a tragedy but it's akin to the same tragedy that alcoholics and their families experience. As a nation, we've decided that alcohol should be legal even though there are certain to be people who have a bad reaction to it.