Susan Atkins wants out of jail to die...

[deanws]

Still - if we sent him to the lab and asked them to tell us what he is, the scientists would find that he is human.

:laugh::laugh::laugh: SCM you are too cute and as I said in my previous...way to nice. :Banane27:

 

[PSUfan]

I would. He's human also.

So you, and others, believe that every killer should be sent home to die? Maybe just women killers, because this woman seems to have brought out the crocodile tears. Bring her home even if it causes the victims family more pain? Do you consider the victims family, and what they have lost in your compassion for the killer?

One more question... do you draw the line with any killers? Bundy? Dahmer? Should they have been sent home within 6 months of their natural deaths, to die in peace? And suppose they get a spurt of energy, and kill again.

You should probably write your Representatives and tell them why Life in prison without parole, is not compassionate for killers.

 

[southcitymom]

You and Jana are just toooooo nice! :bang: But I love you both anyway!~:blowkiss:

For me, it's not about nice - it's about what has true power.

I believe a show of love is the most powerful weapon that we have in the face of evil. And I don't just believe that in a "I saw a pretty fairy tale" today way - I believe it in a "This is the tool we have been given to change the world" way. Nothing comes close to stopping it. All genuine love extended changes the world forever. Why screw around with anything less powerful?:blowkiss:

 

[PSUfan]

This presupposes that compassion is is like a pie and those we deem most desireable should get the first, best slice - or the whole damn thing. For me, compassion is more like a flame - it can be given to all without becoming any less - and in fact, when shared with all, lightens the world.

That sounds pretty and nice, but somebody who has had a child brutally murdered really does deserve more compassion from society than does the evil person who murdered.

 

[DeltaDawn]

Re: Scott Peterson

They would also find that he has no compassion..at this point it isn't part of his make up. As the years pass he may find that he is not the person he believed himself to be and others are not as disposable as he once thought..that is a point yet to be proven.

Compassion is imprisoning those members of society so they can not harm us or themselves, and still treating them as human. But not disregarding what they have done, nor how they have hurt other families. No more..no less

To let a murderer out early because they are dying is a huge slap in the face to the family of the victims.

 

[southcitymom]

So you, and others, believe that every killer should be sent home to die? Maybe just women killers, because this woman seems to have brought out the crocodile tears. Bring her home even if it causes the victims family more pain? Do you consider the victims family, and what they have lost in your compassion for the killer?

One more question... do you draw the line with any killers? Bundy? Dahmer? Should they have been sent home within 6 months of their natural deaths, to die in peace? And suppose they get a spurt of energy, and kill again.

You should probably write your Representatives and tell them why Life in prison without parole, is not compassionate for killers.

I think all humans should be treated with love and compassion. When I say all, I mean all.

I have no opinion that all killers should be sent home to die peacefully. It sounds, from the original article, like that is taken on a case by case basis. I believe the article said 10 of 60 compassion requests may be granted.

I do not have a problem keeping potential dangerous people away from society. I personally doubt that Susan will kill again, but people who know her and her current situation better than I are in a better position to make that call. I simply laid out some reasons that it wouldn't bother me to see her request honored.

 

[southcitymom]

That sounds pretty and nice, but somebody who has had a child brutally murdered really does deserve more compassion from society than does the evil person who murdered.

I understand that some folks feel that way. It's simply not my experience of the nature of compassion. I don't know that it sounds pretty and nice - to some folks it sounds insane! I am simply sharing my experience of it.

 

[southcitymom]

They would also find that he has no compassion..at this point it isn't part of his make up. As the years pass he may find that he is not the person he believed himself to be and others are not as disposable as he once thought..that is a point yet to be proven.

Compassion is imprisoning those members of society so they can not harm us or themselves, and still treating them as human. But not disregarding what they have done, nor how they have hurt other families. No more..no less.

I do not have a problem segregating humans who have proven dangerous or harmful. I do agree that they should be treated with love and compassion.

 

[PSUfan]

I think all humans should be treated with love and compassion. When I say all, I mean all.

I have no opinion that all killers should be sent home to die peacefully. It sounds, from the original article, like that is taken on a case by case basis. I believe the article said 10 of 60 compassion requests may be granted.

I do not have a problem keeping potential dangerous people away from society. I personally doubt that Susan will kill again, but people who know her and her current situation better than I are in a better position to make that call. I simply laid out some reasons that it wouldn't bother me to see her request honored.

The main reason that it would bother me is that the victims family has vigilantly shown up to every single one of her parole hearings. Her being released would cause them more pain. They have been through enough pain already. She needs to die in jail, for the sake of the victims families. They have suffered enough already. It would just add insult to injury, and that is an understatement.

 

[southcitymom]

The main reason that it would bother me is that the victims family has vigilantly shown up to every single one of her parole hearings. Her being released would cause them more pain. They have been through enough pain already. She needs to die in jail, for the sake of the victims families. They have suffered enough already. It would just add insult to injury, and that is an understatement.

I would surely hope that their desires would be considered in making a decision concerning Susan's request. They should be and I'm certain they will be.

 

[DeltaDawn]

For me, it's not about nice - it's about what has true power.

I believe a show of love is the most powerful weapon that we have in the face of evil. And I don't just believe that in a "I saw a pretty fairy tale" today way - I believe it in a "This is the tool we have been given to change the world" way. Nothing comes close to stopping it. All genuine love extended changes the world forever. Why screw around with anything less powerful?:blowkiss:

I agree that love is one of the biggest powers in the world. As a parent, out of love, needs to correct a child when they have misbehaved inorder to keep them on the right track, so society needs to do the same with members that perpatrate acts of murder, rape, abduction.

Susan Adkins has gotten what she deserves..and what she knew she would get if caught. Infact she was sentenced to the DP..so she already has seen compassion in her life. She just really didn't care about that at that time. She still went ahead and murdered innocent people she did not know..just to murder.

Here is my first clue..none of us get out of this world alive, very few of us know the day, time or hour of our death, very few of us get to have loved ones with us at that time..and when the time comes we all make that passage on our own.

She has been given compassion..no more no less..and far more then she gave Sharon Tate and the other murders she was involved with.

 

[shana]

Instead of getting hung-up on the word "compassionate" for a moment, let's suppose her release would be named "terminal disease". The last thing the justice system needs is one more legal wrangle within its parameters; and in this most notorious case, you can bet a whole series of such requests would be forthcoming, particularly if granted.

It is unfortunate that when CA declared the DP unconstitutional it did not exchange with a sentence of LWOP in the literal sense, no exceptions.

In this case...

We do not know Susan's condition. I believe most brain cancer patients go into a coma some weeks or days before they pass...nature's compassion, if you will. And from the onset of the disease, and especially if any debulking surgeries were performed, a loss of brain cells and clear thinking occurs immediately and progressively. IOW, is this her request or that of her husband? Need I add that Polanski had no such privilege when the lives of his wife and unborn were so brutally ended.

Prison has been Susan's chosen home for decades. Perhaps she could die over in that facility among familiar and friendly faces rather than in the hospital? She never made a home on the outs with her husband...totally unfamiliar territory.

I do not know what Hospice/palliative services are afforded one in prison, but a morphine pump would not be the only choice for a dying patient...patches would work.

Now IF there were a problem with her end-of-life care and it was denied, then I would feel differently...a cause for compassion.

Posted in honor of Doris Tate.

 

[philamena]

I know I'm going against the grain here but I say let her go.
She's apologized numerous times. She's served more time than any female in Ca. state history. She is sick. She is bedridden. She is dying with no chance of recovery from her illness.
I vote to let her die at home.

 

[cinsbythesea]

Really? Cuz I think he is pond scum!

As much as I admire your compassion SCM - I have to agree with DeanWS. "Human" as Peterson is - he deprived Laci and his unborn child of years and years of life. Though I generally find myself on both sides of the fence as far as the death penalty - Peterson I strongly feel is most deserving of an eye for an eye...

As far as Susan Atkins --as usual my SO and I disagree. He thinks Peterson got an unfair trial (GAG) and that she should be allowed to come home to die - I feel she IS home and should die there. Ultimately - she will have to answer to a higher power once she has left this earth - whether she leaves it in a prison or her home.

 

[Glow]

"She also testified that Tate had pleaded for her life and that of her unborn child, to which Atkins replied, "Woman, I have no mercy for you."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Atkins

This is a hard case. My initial thought is let her die in prison.

 

[Saffron]

Sharon Tate and her unborn baby were killed in August of 1969, has it ever been know if she was having a girl or a boy? IF her unborn baby had been shown mercy and compassion he/she would be turning 39 the end of this summer.

She was having a boy. His name was Paul (Roman named him after Sharon's father). The baby was removed by the coroner, and eventually wrapped in a blanket and buried with Sharon.

 

[Rag Doll 02]

IMO, Susan Adkins CHOSE where she would spend her dying days when she committed capitol murder. If she wanted to spend out the end of her own life surrounded by family and friends, in a hospital or hospice of her choice, she should have considered that all this comes along with the penalty of 'life in prison'. She didnt allow her victims a choice in their dying moments.

I do feel some compassion towards Susan Adkins. I think she is a very mixed up person who made some terrible choices. But we all have to live with choices we make in life. We dont get to do do-overs when we screw up. We all have to live with the consequences of our mistakes. I dont hate her-- I DO hate what she did. But she has to live with the consequence of what she did, and along with that comes dying in prison

IMO

 

[6angels]

Okay, she got sentenced to life in prison. This is her life, she is dying, so she should do it in prison. If she didn't want to die in prison, she should have thought of that before slitting a pregnant woman's throat.

:clap: totally agree

 

[6angels]

This sort of thing bugs the CRAP out of me. This "compassion" for prisoners. Why??? They're criminals!!! "Yeah, well they're human beings." So?? IMO, when you commit a crime, you give up your rights. That was your choice. Period. The end. Quit whining about it.

right I agree with you. I have a cousin that set by while her husband killed her child and they both abused her child.She was not raised this way and our whole family is ashamed of her. Her dad my uncle passed away this past week and they brung her and allowed her to go to the viewing. We called and requested she not be brung in or seen while friends and family was viewing as it would not of turned out pretty! Thankfully they did honor this and none of had to see her ugly face. We do know she came and she signed the book but none of us felt she had a right to be there. She along with her husband took the life of my cousin and her dads grandbaby she was not wanted there by the family nore do we think her dad would of wanted her there or for the family to go threw anymore stress then needed. Heartless? I dont care. She did the unthinkable and should never see the day of light again.( she is in for life and her husband has already been given death by the state. It really made the whole thing more stressful on my family as we all feared seeing her the whole time we was there.

 

[6angels]

Just to give you a taste of why someone on the other side (Me!) might have no problem in letting her go home to die and believe it's the right thing to do:

I don't believe in prison as punishment. There's no punishment on earth suitable for the crime she committed, so I leave justice to a higher authority and don't care a whit if I "see" it or not. I do believe prison is appropriate to keep the rest of society safe from those who have proven dangerous and/harmful.

I don't look at prisoners as , but as fellow humans who made terrible choices. Those terrible choices don't negate the fact that they are humans who should be treated humanely. They have worth just as the rest of us have worth.

She was not compassionate when she murdered Sharon Tate. But I hold myself and society to a higher standard than a murderer. I think we should show compassion because it is the right thing to do. It is the high road, the honorable path and what many of us are called to do by our spiritual beliefs.

It costs us nothing monetarily to allow her to die in the care of relatives. In fact, as a society, we would save money because she would only be released to family memebrs who agreed to be completely financially responsible for her care.

It costs us nothing riskwise to allow her to die in the care of relatives. She is no longer a danger to society.

I'm about creating a "treat others as you would be treated" world and not "a treat others as they treat you" world.

Anyway - I'm not trying to change anyone's minds here. I surely understand the desire for someone to "pay". I don't necessarily understand the desire for someone to suffer - I hate that any of us here suffer, whether we "deserve" it or not. I was just sharing with you the honest feelings that run through my heart when I read a story like this.

If she got out and God forbid killed another human would you still think the same thing?