Quote:
And who wears the Mr. Do Bee costume?
I believe we could just make niobia cry again and then we could get her to do it....YAY no humiliation for us.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- I don't know how to feel about this
I don't know how to feel about thisFollow
I believe we could just make niobia cry again and then we could get her to do it....YAY no humiliation for us.
He willing committed the crimes for which the judicial system deems suitable for execution. The only reason he had the time to write books and act nice was because his case was held up in the usual network of appeals, etc. If his crimes were worthy of capital punishment 25 years ago, they're still worthy of it today regardless of how he spent the intermediate couple decades while his lawyers tried to appeal it.
I don't support the current system of capital punishment in the first place (though that's another thread and one gone over before and the last I'll say of it here) but I don't think one should able to buy out of it with good deeds while the lawyers hash out an existing sentence.
I don't support the current system of capital punishment in the first place (though that's another thread and one gone over before and the last I'll say of it here) but I don't think one should able to buy out of it with good deeds while the lawyers hash out an existing sentence.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Quote:
A lot of people in this thread have the attitude of "no matter what he did since." So you're saying there's NOTHING he can do that would convince you he has value to society that outweighs the value of his death?
Sure, he can cure cancer. Or maybe AIDS.
Quote:
You say he needs to be executed as a deterrent? Well what example does it show if he is executed despite rehabilitation?
I say he needs to be executed because he was tried, found guilty, and sentenced to the death penalty. It has nothing to do with "despite rehabilitation" Rehabilitation was never the issue, he was sentenced to death.
Quote:
I'm not saying he should be parolled or held up as a role model, I just don't see the relative value in his death.
To see justice done?
Some people are like slinkies, they aren't really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.
I'm not referring to this case exclusively, but rather a comment on the death penalty topic which occasionally pops up. A lot of the replies in this thread are ostensibly pro-death penalty no matter what the circumstances.
It's too late for Williams for any changes in the law, but he can be an example for future arguments of why the death penalty is detrimental.
Quote:
To see justice done?
If that's your definition of justice. It isn't for everybody.
This was enough to make me anti death penalty:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/02/national/main620661.shtml
After I read that I really started thinking about it and decided I don't trust my peers enough to decide these kind of things with enough certainty to kill someone.
Also around the same time that story came out my father-in-law was on trial in federal court for something that I KNOW he did not do. His future son-in-law (my future brother-in-law, grrrr) actually admitted to setting him up, but still he spent 2 weeks in federal detention and had to spend about $50,000 on bail and lawyer fees not to mention lost work. He was found not guilty after a 3 day trial and only about 30 minutes of jury deliberation.
Long story short, I dont trust anyone's judgement of guilt or innocence enough to kill someone over it. But, I have to admit leaving them locked up for life seems pointless too. I'm not sure what I think should really happen.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/02/national/main620661.shtml
After I read that I really started thinking about it and decided I don't trust my peers enough to decide these kind of things with enough certainty to kill someone.
Also around the same time that story came out my father-in-law was on trial in federal court for something that I KNOW he did not do. His future son-in-law (my future brother-in-law, grrrr) actually admitted to setting him up, but still he spent 2 weeks in federal detention and had to spend about $50,000 on bail and lawyer fees not to mention lost work. He was found not guilty after a 3 day trial and only about 30 minutes of jury deliberation.
Long story short, I dont trust anyone's judgement of guilt or innocence enough to kill someone over it. But, I have to admit leaving them locked up for life seems pointless too. I'm not sure what I think should really happen.
trickybeck wrote:
A lot of people in this thread have the attitude of "no matter what he did since." So you're saying there's NOTHING he can do that would convince you he has value to society that outweighs the value of his death?
You say he needs to be executed as a deterrent? Well what example does it show if he is executed despite rehabilitation?
I'm not saying he should be parolled or held up as a role model, I just don't see the relative value in his death.
As for the money issue, remember that the death penalty costs more than life in prison.
You say he needs to be executed as a deterrent? Well what example does it show if he is executed despite rehabilitation?
I'm not saying he should be parolled or held up as a role model, I just don't see the relative value in his death.
As for the money issue, remember that the death penalty costs more than life in prison.
I think it's fairly obvious that I'm with Trickybeck on this one.
Have any of you seen a rap video lately? There is an entire culture that worships gangs and thug culture. You want to talk about the good this man has done just because he is scared of whatever boogeyman he might have to face on the other side of the mortal coil? I tell you, there was someone who knew him while they were growing up and glorified him. There are people that were directly influenced by his actions before he was imprisoned BEYOND just the vitims of his heinous crimes.
Today, we have people who worship the ground he walks on UNTIL they find out that he might or might not try to speak out against the criminal culture he helped spawn. So, yes, he is better off dead than alive. None of this stupid "Oh I didnt mean it" years later crap. No fuc[/u]king group hug for the murderer!
Today, we have people who worship the ground he walks on UNTIL they find out that he might or might not try to speak out against the criminal culture he helped spawn. So, yes, he is better off dead than alive. None of this stupid "Oh I didnt mean it" years later crap. No fuc[/u]king group hug for the murderer!
The death penalty is barbaric and our criminal justice system is archaic.
None-the-less, I see no reason to give this guy special treatment.
None-the-less, I see no reason to give this guy special treatment.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Not that I'm disagreeing with your basic premise, but...
All you've done is show us two examples where someone was arrested and charged with a crime they didn't commmit, and the legal system verified their claim and delivered a not-guilty verdict in their cases.
That's hardly a valid argument against capital punishment. You've just shown us two examples of the system working properly.
Suggestion: Examples of folks wrongly convicted (not just accused) of murder and later found to be innocent would work much better...
klyia wrote:
This was enough to make me anti death penalty:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/02/national/main620661.shtml
After I read that I really started thinking about it and decided I don't trust my peers enough to decide these kind of things with enough certainty to kill someone.
Also around the same time that story came out my father-in-law was on trial in federal court for something that I KNOW he did not do. His future son-in-law (my future brother-in-law, grrrr) actually admitted to setting him up, but still he spent 2 weeks in federal detention and had to spend about $50,000 on bail and lawyer fees not to mention lost work. He was found not guilty after a 3 day trial and only about 30 minutes of jury deliberation.
Long story short, I dont trust anyone's judgement of guilt or innocence enough to kill someone over it. But, I have to admit leaving them locked up for life seems pointless too. I'm not sure what I think should really happen.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/02/national/main620661.shtml
After I read that I really started thinking about it and decided I don't trust my peers enough to decide these kind of things with enough certainty to kill someone.
Also around the same time that story came out my father-in-law was on trial in federal court for something that I KNOW he did not do. His future son-in-law (my future brother-in-law, grrrr) actually admitted to setting him up, but still he spent 2 weeks in federal detention and had to spend about $50,000 on bail and lawyer fees not to mention lost work. He was found not guilty after a 3 day trial and only about 30 minutes of jury deliberation.
Long story short, I dont trust anyone's judgement of guilt or innocence enough to kill someone over it. But, I have to admit leaving them locked up for life seems pointless too. I'm not sure what I think should really happen.
All you've done is show us two examples where someone was arrested and charged with a crime they didn't commmit, and the legal system verified their claim and delivered a not-guilty verdict in their cases.
That's hardly a valid argument against capital punishment. You've just shown us two examples of the system working properly.
Suggestion: Examples of folks wrongly convicted (not just accused) of murder and later found to be innocent would work much better...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
gbaji wrote:
You've just shown us two examples of the system working properly.
Suggestion: Examples of folks wrongly convicted (not just accused) of murder and later found to be innocent would work much better...
Suggestion: Examples of folks wrongly convicted (not just accused) of murder and later found to be innocent would work much better...
Well, yes they were both acquitted, but the guy from the link was in jail for 5 months and the person I know was in jail for 2 weeks and spent a lot of money on the deal. It is pretty sad when that is considered "working properly".
I wasn't really trying to give examples of people wrongly convicted, just pointing out why I have general trust issues with the system.
klyia wrote:
gbaji wrote:
You've just shown us two examples of the system working properly.
Suggestion: Examples of folks wrongly convicted (not just accused) of murder and later found to be innocent would work much better...
Suggestion: Examples of folks wrongly convicted (not just accused) of murder and later found to be innocent would work much better...
Well, yes they were both acquitted, but the guy from the link was in jail for 5 months and the person I know was in jail for 2 weeks and spent a lot of money on the deal. It is pretty sad when that is considered "working properly".
Right. But the presence or absense of a death penalty has absolutely *zero* affect on this. It's pretty standard legal practice to hold someone in jail until their trial unless a bail is set and they make that bail payment.
Quote:
I wasn't really trying to give examples of people wrongly convicted, just pointing out why I have general trust issues with the system.
Ok. I can accept this. But what alternative would you propose? That we not hold accused people in jail? We can debate the problems and benefits of our current bail and arraignment process if you want. Again though. None of that has *any* bearing on the death penalty. Those two would have been held for exactly the same amount of time regardless of death penalty availability in their state.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
gbaji wrote:
Ok. I can accept this. But what alternative would you propose? That we not hold accused people in jail? We can debate the problems and benefits of our current bail and arraignment process if you want. Again though. None of that has *any* bearing on the death penalty. Those two would have been held for exactly the same amount of time regardless of death penalty availability in their state.
Honestly, I dont have a proposal. There is no good solution. It's an all around terrible situation. We have no 100% accurate way to determine guilt or innocence.
The system is broken. It may be the best system we have and it may be the best system we ever come up with, but that doesn't change the fact that it sucks. Given how unreliable and inaccurate I think people are at this whole determining guilt vs innocence thing (myself included), I could never advocate the death penalty.
I'll admit, when I first heard what my father-in-law was being charged with, my first thought was "how could he be so stupid?" I am a family member and I even thought he was guilty at first. It actually took a lot of research, digging through bank records, ATM receipts, hospital records, etc to dig up enough evidence to piece the puzzle together. There were parts of it that seemed totally unrelated unless you looked at the time stamps on ATM receipts in relation to when certain people were in the hospital, when my father in law was gone driving a truck across country, etc. Without our lawyer piecing all this together, the other guy would never have admitted to specifically trying to get my father-in-law thrown in jail. There is no doubt in my mind if he had not had enough money to hire a great attorney he would be in jail. In fact, when my wife was looking for an attorney for him most of them wouldn't even consider helping him fight it. They just wanted him to consider making a deal.
When it costs $50,000 just to keep from going to jail for something you didn't do, something is wrong. What about the people who don't have the money? If it happens to be murder they are convicted of, we just kill them?
I just dont think we are good enough at this to go off killing someone based on them being "proven" guilty.
And I'll admit, I'm a little too emotionally involved in certain aspects of this to make a decent argument and I keep getting waaaaaaaaaaay off track :)
But, even if you don't feel the same way, I think you can see my basic point. I don't trust any of us and I'm sure not going to advocate killing someone based on convincing the right 12 people of their guilt.
That's just how it is to me. *shrug*
life in prison > death penalty
So if I commited a rape, and followed it up by self castration, should I get time cut from my sentence?
Or would that require me to cut off my pee-pee? Cause I'd rather be a eunich than a ******** ****.
Or would that require me to cut off my pee-pee? Cause I'd rather be a eunich than a ******** ****.
Oh my god.
I am sorry America, but having seen some recent cases highlighted and the poor man in the ballpark just shown ..
Are you guilty till proven innocent now in your country? Very scary indeed.
I hope that poor man sues that police department silly and that the people leading that investigation are disciplined. That looks too much like they tried to stick a crime on him, purely as "it was his time". The UK had an issue with policing like this once ...... justice came for no one from such rogue policing.
I am truly sickened.
I am sorry America, but having seen some recent cases highlighted and the poor man in the ballpark just shown ..
Are you guilty till proven innocent now in your country? Very scary indeed.
I hope that poor man sues that police department silly and that the people leading that investigation are disciplined. That looks too much like they tried to stick a crime on him, purely as "it was his time". The UK had an issue with policing like this once ...... justice came for no one from such rogue policing.
I am truly sickened.
double posts, bleh Edited, Wed Oct 26 08:27:08 2005 by JennockFV
Meh. At this point, what's at stake is his peace of mind/eternal salvation/soul. Justice is a separate issue. A man can harm someone and repent, but that repentance in no way should affect his responsibility for his actions.
Recent Visitors: 258
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (258)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- I don't know how to feel about this
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC