Melissa Huckaby.. Death Penalty??

snapdragon said:

Totally agree. We all know in CA at present she will never actually be put to death. However, there are certain rules for those on death row. One is that she will never get conjugal visits. You would be surprised what kind of psychos are out there that will mail these sickos to "hook up".

But in CA, I think on death row they also are in solitary. Not sure if they get yard time together or not. At least she wouldn't be hooking up with some new girlfriend or something. And if we get a new gov. like brown who is tough on crime, who knows if they will start the death juice flowing again.

I am for DP in this case for these reasons.

Click to expand...

Its been reported by Peterson's mom that Scott has yard time and doesn't have any problems with fellow inmates. I guess they were concerned about that because he killed Connor and convicts don't like that kinda thing.

SeriouslySearching said:

Why do we try people for murder and give them the death penalty....but keep them on suicide watch in the meantime? :waitasec: (Thinking it is a waste. A huge waste. hehehe)

Click to expand...

Exactly! I've wondered this, too. Or, even if they haven't been tried and it's pretty obvious they're guilty? It would save the tax payers some $$$.

~ Respectfully bolded ~

daisy.faithfull said:

I know it was a rhetorical question, but I've wondered about that more than once, and the only thing that I can come up with is that it is about taking away the criminal's control of their life. Saying to them, "You don't get to decide when you are going to die, we do."

Click to expand...

And to me this is the crux of the problem with the death penalty. This is my own personal issue - but I will never sit on a DP case, because personally I don't feel I have or should have the power to decide when someone dies. I don't ever, ever want to be in such a position. Its bad enough when I have to step on a spider :crazy:

Why don't we just let them commit suicide if they want to? Let them decide? If they feel they are broken and can't be fixed or they are truely remorseful for their crimes, why not let them do what they feel they need to? NOW - I would hate to see this happen BEFORE the trial and proof/conviction of the crime, because some folks might commit suicide out of depression and horror at just being charged with a brutal crime, even though they did NOT commit the actual crime. But, if they did do the crime, I see no reason to protect them, either from themselves or others, actually. Put them in GP and let them either learn to live with what they have done or take the easy way out. Their CHOICE, not mine and not the choice of innocent jurors/judges. It may be an easy way out for them, but honestly do we care? I don't. If they commit the type of crimes that invoke the DP in the first place, then I don't care if they take the easy way out as long as they are off the street, out of the community and can no longer commit such crimes against other innocent victims.

Salem

Salem said:

~ Respectfully bolded ~
And to me this is the crux of the problem with the death penalty. This is my own personal issue - but I will never sit on a DP case, because personally I don't feel I have or should have the power to decide when someone dies. I don't ever, ever want to be in such a position. Its bad enough when I have to step on a spider :crazy:

Click to expand...

I feel the same way. Please don't stone me for this, but while I believe that MH deserves the death penalty, I wouldn't be able to vote for her to receive that sentence were I a jury member for her trial. I don't know what I would do if I were a member of the legislature or a governor faced with death penalty issues.

Salem said:

Why don't we just let them commit suicide if they want to? Let them decide? If they feel they are broken and can't be fixed or they are truely remorseful for their crimes, why not let them do what they feel they need to? NOW - I would hate to see this happen BEFORE the trial and proof/conviction of the crime, because some folks might commit suicide out of depression and horror at just being charged with a brutal crime, even though they did NOT commit the actual crime. But, if they did do the crime, I see no reason to protect them, either from themselves or others, actually. Put them in GP and let them either learn to live with what they have done or take the easy way out. Their CHOICE, not mine and not the choice of innocent jurors/judges. It may be an easy way out for them, but honestly do we care? I don't. If they commit the type of crimes that invoke the DP in the first place, then I don't care if they take the easy way out as long as they are off the street, out of the community and can no longer commit such crimes against other innocent victims. Salem

Click to expand...

After I wrote my last post I was wondering if another reason why these criminals are not allowed to do what they will may be that because they are in the state's care. If something happens to them, even if they are the worst scum of the universe, the state can be held liable for any harm done to the scum. If this is the case, it pisses me off beyond belief that this is one more time that criminals seem to have more rights than the victims.

These scumbags aren't JUST scumbags, they are spineless, self-preserving, manipulative, lying Kings and Queens of scumbags. So if we did give them the means to do themselves in would they have the b@lls to do it? And would the "we'll give you a gun" sentence avoid the never ending and costly search for a loophole or a more sympathetic jury? I dunno, because there are so many aspects of our criminal justice system that make no sense to me, especially the stuff that protects scumbags at the expense of present and future victims.

I found an article about the last execution in my state. The man was sentenced to death for the crime, but thirteen years later he began requesting to have the sentence carried out. His biggest barrier to making this happen centered around his competentcy to make such a decision. He reportedly said at one point, "An eye for an eye... I mean, I ended a whole bunch of innocent people's lives and changed their lives forever. Even though they're still alive, their lives are destroyed. I owe that to them. I owe it to myself, man. I was totally wrong." How good of him to have this revelation, if he would of had it 20 years earlier is maybe all those people wouldn't have been harmed by his warped mine. If that wasn't a possibility he could have saved us a lot of time and money by doing himself in before LE got to him. But I'd bet his remorse began only when his wrists were cuffed.