# Execution Put On Hold



## MJS (Jan 26, 2006)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11013748/



> The court wants to consider his appeal that the cocktail of chemicals the state uses to kill condemned inmates causes pain and violates the Constitutions ban on cruel and inhuman punishment.


 
So I guess that the cop that he shot in the back didn't feel any pain. Personally, any method of execution that they might use is IMO, going to cause pain.

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

The process in and of itself does not seem like the person is going to be in a constant state of pain.


----------



## arnisador (Jan 26, 2006)

MJS said:
			
		

> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11013748/Personally, any method of execution that they might use is IMO, going to cause pain.



That would be no surprise. I say, if he wants hanging or the firing squad, let him have it.

The electric chair is a better one to try this on, I think--the lethal injection doesn't seem cruel to me.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Jan 26, 2006)

I wonder if beheading hurts
If he wants death let him have it he has earned it


----------



## Sapper6 (Jan 26, 2006)

what a pity.  how about we spare his life...

get on with it.  bring unto him what this man deserves.

i heard the defense was claiming this dude suffered from mental retardation.  of course this guy is retarded....kill a cop and expect to live...?  that's pretty ****ing retarded!     see ya dude!


----------



## michaeledward (Jan 26, 2006)

www.afterinnocence.com

While not making any comments on this specific case, I will point out that the State of Florida has exonerated 25 convicted, death row inmates since 1972. 

Also, Florida has spent more than One Billion dollars operating their death penalty system. In return, there have been 58 executions. To date, that is 18 Million dollars per execution. 

http://www.fadp.org


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Jan 26, 2006)

MJS said:
			
		

> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11013748/
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
How about this one? A death row inmate in California claimed, along with sympathetic supporters, that he was TOO old to be executed. Two of his victims were 17 year old girls. One strangled, the other shotgunned while she begged for her life.
http://www.ktvu.com/deathrow/6128928/detail.html

He _was_ executed, and at 76, he had nearly 60 more years on Earth than two of his victims did.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jan 27, 2006)

Jonathan Randall said:
			
		

> How about this one? A death row inmate in California claimed, along with sympathetic supporters, that he was TOO old to be executed. Two of his victims were 17 year old girls. One strangled, the other shotgunned while she begged for her life.
> http://www.ktvu.com/deathrow/6128928/detail.html
> 
> He _was_ executed, and at 76, he had nearly 60 more years on Earth than two of his victims did.


 The guy in California we could chalk up as state assisted Euthanasia instead.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jan 27, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> www.afterinnocence.com
> 
> While not making any comments on this specific case, I will point out that the State of Florida has exonerated 25 convicted, death row inmates since 1972.
> 
> ...


 That's funny, I guess when the specific facts of the case don't support a position, just talk in vague generalities.  

As for the cost, it is a direct result of these kinds of appeals.....appeals not made on the merits of the case, but about what are, fundamentally, irrelavent issues to any discussion of guilt or innocence.


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Jan 27, 2006)

sgtmac_46 said:
			
		

> The guy in California we could chalk up as state assisted Euthanasia instead.


 
Yes, putting a rabid dog down...


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jan 27, 2006)

Jonathan Randall said:
			
		

> Yes, putting a rabid dog down...


 It's interesting that the gentleman in California is living PROOF against the idiotic argument that simply incarcerating someone for the rest of their lives is protection enough for society.  He was able to contract the murders that were committed from inside prison walls.  

Only death can guarantee society is beyond the violent reach of these kind of men.


----------



## michaeledward (Jan 27, 2006)

sgtmac_46 said:
			
		

> That's funny, I guess when the specific facts of the case don't support a position, just talk in vague generalities.
> 
> As for the cost, it is a direct result of these kinds of appeals.....appeals not made on the merits of the case, but about what are, fundamentally, irrelavent issues to any discussion of guilt or innocence.


 
I don't know the specific facts in this case, so I offer no comment on them. Anytime the State slows down, or stops an Execution, I support that decision. I do not believe the state should ever take a life.

According to the Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, the cost is *NOT* the 'direct results of these kinds of appeals'. The cost is front loaded. They support that assertion with an article from the Florida Lakeland Ledger.

This paragraph, from the www.fadp.org web site, offers three link that support their 'cost is prohibitive' position.



> According to the Miami Herald, it costs 2 to 6 times as much to kill one person than to incarcerate for life. (3.2 million versus $750,000 in Florida). *This cost is weighted UP FRONT - in the initial trial, not in the appeals process as so many believe.* Since Florida's death penalty law was re-written in 1972, our state has spent more than $1 billion on its death penalty system, for a return of only 58 executions. That's more than $18,000,000 per execution, and for what return? Is this a good use of your tax dollars? Don't take our word for it. Click here to read a recent in-depth report by the Lakeland Ledger. Click here and also here to see more about FADP's concerns on the cost issue.


----------



## Martial Tucker (Jan 27, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> I don't know the specific facts in this case, so I offer no comment on them. Anytime the State slows down, or stops an Execution, I support that decision. I do not believe the state should ever take a life.
> 
> According to the Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, the cost is *NOT* the 'direct results of these kinds of appeals'. The cost is front loaded. They support that assertion with an article from the Florida Lakeland Ledger.
> 
> ...



Let's see.........(3,200,000 - 750,000) = 2,450,000 = difference per case. 

                      2,450,000 * 58 cases = 142,100,000 = a far cry from 

                     1,000,000,000 = money well spent, IMO


----------



## michaeledward (Jan 27, 2006)

Martial Tucker said:
			
		

> Let's see.........(3,200,000 - 750,000) = 2,450,000 = difference per case.
> 
> 2,450,000 * 58 cases = 142,100,000 = a far cry from
> 
> 1,000,000,000 = money well spent, IMO


 
The logic of this mathematics exercise ignores the more than 300 additional capital cases in Florida. Some of those cases will eventually lead to execution, which, will, of course, drive down the cost-per-execution.


----------



## Martial Tucker (Jan 27, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> The logic of this mathematics exercise ignores the more than 300 additional capital cases in Florida. Some of those cases will eventually lead to execution, which, will, of course, drive down the cost-per-execution.



Just using the numbers that you provided......

Also, it's funny how the "anti-capital punishment" people can delay an execution on the notion that lethal injection might cause pain, then cite extra costs involved in capital punishment after they have caused much of the extra costs through their incessant delaying efforts.


----------



## MJS (Jan 27, 2006)

Jonathan Randall said:
			
		

> How about this one? A death row inmate in California claimed, along with sympathetic supporters, that he was TOO old to be executed. Two of his victims were 17 year old girls. One strangled, the other shotgunned while she begged for her life.
> http://www.ktvu.com/deathrow/6128928/detail.html
> 
> He _was_ executed, and at 76, he had nearly 60 more years on Earth than two of his victims did.


 
Yeah, that is amazing. I see where some people come from though.  Why execute someone if the chance is out there that they might be innocent.  However, that is not the case with every single inmate.  If it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the guy is guilty and is sentenced to death, then just do it!  Why prolong it with appeal after appeal, after....

Mike


----------



## michaeledward (Jan 27, 2006)

Martial Tucker said:
			
		

> Just using the numbers that you provided......
> 
> Also, it's funny how the "anti-capital punishment" people can delay an execution on the notion that lethal injection might cause pain, then cite extra costs involved in capital punishment after they have caused much of the extra costs through their incessant delaying efforts.


 
I also provided a link to the organization the produced those numbers. 

I have also given links to the cost argument that show the costs are 'front-loaded' more than appeal based.


----------



## Martial Tucker (Jan 27, 2006)

MJS said:
			
		

> Yeah, that is amazing. I see where some people come from though. Why execute someone if the chance is out there that they might be innocent. However, that is not the case with every single inmate. If it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the guy is guilty and is sentenced to death, then just do it! Why prolong it with appeal after appeal, after....
> 
> Mike


I agree with this. While it is only necessary to prove guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" to incarcerate, to me, that is not a high enough degree of certainty to end a person's life. I am all for capital punishment in cases of virtual certainty, where there is video, multiple unrelated eyewitnesses, DNA, or some other incontrovertible evidence. Doesn't matter how sensational or heinous the murder was. Murder is murder. 

If the evidence is "beyond a reasonable doubt" but not absolutely indisputable, lock them up and throw away the key, and let the lawyers continue to look for a "reasonable doubt", if they wish. If the evidence is clear cut and indisputable, execute immediately.


----------



## jdinca (Jan 27, 2006)

The stay of execution has been overturned by the Supreme Court.


----------



## ginshun (Jan 27, 2006)

Is any thing that causes pain to be considered cruel or unusual punishment now?

How about just using a shotgun blast to the skull then?  No pain there.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jan 28, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> I also provided a link to the organization the produced those numbers.
> 
> I have also given links to the cost argument that show the costs are 'front-loaded' more than appeal based.


 If we're dealing with this case, as the title of the article suggests, we'd save money by executing him now.  It's the continued stalling that is racking up the bill.  Had they executed the parasite this last time, the tab would stop clicking up, and we could mark the account 'CLOSED'.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jan 28, 2006)

Martial Tucker said:
			
		

> I agree with this. While it is only necessary to prove guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" to incarcerate, to me, that is not a high enough degree of certainty to end a person's life. I am all for capital punishment in cases of virtual certainty, where there is video, multiple unrelated eyewitnesses, DNA, or some other incontrovertible evidence. Doesn't matter how sensational or heinous the murder was. Murder is murder.
> 
> If the evidence is "beyond a reasonable doubt" but not absolutely indisputable, lock them up and throw away the key, and let the lawyers continue to look for a "reasonable doubt", if they wish. If the evidence is clear cut and indisputable, execute immediately.


 I'm with you up to the indisputable standard.  There is no such thing.  There is 'beyond a reasonable doubt' because that is the highest standard we can meet in this universe, among human beings involving the use of evidence.

As for 'indisputable' it's silly, as obviously someone is going to 'dispute it'.  Even if the evidence is overwhelming, it can be disputed simply by...disputing it.  'We've got film'.....'It wasn't ME, it was my evil twin'.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jan 28, 2006)

I hate to see my tax dollars going to put up and feed these people. Billions of dollars!?!?! Forget that..a really good bullet only cost about $0.35. Shoot him in the head. It's quick and painless and the government can give me back my money!


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jan 28, 2006)

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> I hate to see my tax dollars going to put up and feed these people. Billions of dollars!?!?! Forget that..a really good bullet only cost about $0.35. Shoot him in the head. It's quick and painless and the government can give me back my money!


 I vote for a long-drop and a quick stop.  Rope is cheap, and you can reuse rope and gallows if necessary.


----------



## arnisador (Feb 21, 2006)

Medical personnel refuse to participate in an execution:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-2050737,00.html

If they don't find a work-around by midnight, the warrant expires and the execution is off (at least for the time being).


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 21, 2006)

I heard about this on the radio. But it is odd that you found the article in a newspaper from England. 

If these doctors have an ethical problem with completing the execution, they should not be working the government. It is offensive when Pharmacists refuse to prescribe birth control and emergency contraceptives on moral grounds. It is similarly offensive when Doctors refuse to complete their duties.

What is even more foolish, is that we can't find a drug that quickly and efficiently and painlessly terminates a human life? Please!

In the near future, I will need to euthanize my dog. It is a simple, quiet, painfree procedure (at least for the pup). Why can't we get a similar drug for humans. Foolish.


----------



## Carol (Feb 21, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> In the near future, I will need to euthanize my dog. It is a simple, quiet, painfree procedure (at least for the pup). Why can't we get a similar drug for humans. Foolish.


 
Sorry to hear about your dog 

We do have a similar drug for humans, it's the same med - Sodium Pentobarbital.  The pharmaceutical brand name is Sodium Pentothol (medical) and Euthasol (veterinary).

Something that I recall from Timothy McVeigh's execution, the Sodium Pentathol is administered to the prisoner in a fatal dose, followed by two other compounds, both in doses that if administered alone would be fatal.


----------



## Mark L (Feb 21, 2006)

A few random thoughts ...

If it costs many millions per case to secure a death sentence, perhaps the process itself needs repair.  Hold on, I'm not suggesting we take it lightly and fast track every capital case.  Quite the opposite really, do it right the first time, conduct a thorough, mandatory appeal, then get on with it.  I'm curious as to the relative expense of getting a conviction followed by a life sentence.

For the purposes of this argument, how is "cruel and unusual punishment" defined?  Death is a fairly sanguine thing for the state to impose on a citizen, earned by being found guilty of the most heinous crimes.  I would not condone the torture of these individuals, but it is a punishment, shouldn't it feel like one?


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 21, 2006)

Mark L said:
			
		

> I'm curious as to the relative expense of getting a conviction followed by a life sentence.


 
Listed up thread was a link to the website for 'Floridians Against the Death Penalty'. On their site, they claim the following numbers. 



			
				FADP.ORG said:
			
		

> According to the Miami Herald, it costs 2 to 6 times as much to kill one person than to incarcerate for life. (3.2 million versus $750,000 in Florida).


----------



## Mark L (Feb 21, 2006)

Thanks Michael, I got that.  Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought the gist was the cost was up front, I interpret that as getting the conviction and sentencing done.  That the cost of room and board for 40 years was incidental when compared to the trial, sentencing, appeal, etc.  

I'm in no way affiliated with justice system, and I'm curious as to whether the state and defense costs are significantly different in capital vs. non-capital cases.  I wouldn't thinks so.  I've scanned the site you mention, but haven't followed all of the contained links.  Do they indicate where all of the additional expenditures go?


----------



## MJS (Feb 21, 2006)

Seems like they're concerned about him waking up.



> Only hours before the execution, however, both the anaesthetist and a second doctor called in as a back-up withdrew, concerned about a requirement that they intervene* in the event that Morales woke up or appeared to be in pain during the procedure*




However, it seems like thats really not going to happen according to this:

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



> The intravenous injection is usually a mixture of compounds, designed to induce rapid unconsciousness followed by death through paralysis of respiratory muscles and/or by inducing cardiac hyperpolarization.


 
I'm looking forward to seeing what happens, but I'm going to bet that it does not take place.

Mike


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 21, 2006)

Mark L said:
			
		

> Thanks Michael, I got that. Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought the gist was the cost was up front, I interpret that as getting the conviction and sentencing done. That the cost of room and board for 40 years was incidental when compared to the trial, sentencing, appeal, etc.
> 
> I'm in no way affiliated with justice system, and I'm curious as to whether the state and defense costs are significantly different in capital vs. non-capital cases. I wouldn't thinks so. I've scanned the site you mention, but haven't followed all of the contained links. Do they indicate where all of the additional expenditures go?


 
I believe those figures are the lifetime incarceration totals. One of the arguments made by the Capital Punishment supporters when the cost argument is raised, is that it is the endless appeals that drive up the cost. The FADP group argues that this is not true.  

As to why the costs are different at the first trial, I don't know, but I bet the web site would defend their claims.


I'm going off of recollection here .... 

Annual charges to detain a person range from about 12,000 to 36,000 dollars annually, depending on the security level of the facility, and whether it is run locally, at the state level, or at the federal level. Certainly, a capital case conviction would be at the high end of those costs. Also, as the prisoner ages, the costs increase.

There is tons of interesting information on the web about this. One thing is beyond dispute. The costs of detaining people has increased significantly.


----------



## Mark L (Feb 21, 2006)

I just spent an hour typing a really well thought out reply with citations from the www.fadp.org website and lost the damn thing because I hit the wrong key, damn!   The second, and much shorter version:

The Lakeland Ledger in Florida was the primary source of information cited, reporting that death penaly cases are costing $18 million per execution.  The reality is that multiple sources provided data indicating the prosecution of a captial case is more expensive than a non-capital case, ranging from $55K to $200K more, with the capital cases cited averaging around $300K each.  Reference was made to other nebulous costs that are beyond calculation.  No reference to appeals was presented.  No data to back up the $18M per execution.

I interpret this as an opinion piece whose primary purpose was to grab a headline with an astronomical figure.  I'd guess the LL believed its' readership too damned lazy to wade through the entire piece with a critical eye, rather focusing on the sensational headline as the take away message in lieu of the facts.

I am a supporter of the death penalty, although not an ardent one.  I do have concerns about the equitable application of the most severe penalty, mistakes can and will be made, so spending the extra dough to make sure is not asking to much. The paradox is that you could say the same thing about any conviction and sentence, why not use caution everywhere.  I haven't reconciled this in my mind, but if there is no reasonable doubt ...

 Perhaps I am being naive, but the availability of the death penalty within many jurisdictions represents the will of the people, and only they can change it.  But to do so they should be afforded an unbiased presentation of the facts.


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 21, 2006)

I think the math used by fadp was about showing the effectiveness of the system, rather than calculating the costs of processing one criminal through the system. If they were to execute all of the death row inmates tonight, that 18 million dollar per execution number would, obviously, come more inline with the earlier quoted number. 

"If the state has paid out x number of dollars, and we have had y number of executions ... is this system doing what the voters intended and are paying for. "

I think that is a legitimate argument. But I agree it is not an argument for or against the question you are asking. 

I'm not sure there is an unbiased resource of information on the subject. But there are plenty that are not as position based as FADP. 

Try   www.deathpenaltyinfo.org

Here's a quiz from that site ... everybody loves quizzes, right? 

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=557&scid=60


----------



## FearlessFreep (Feb 21, 2006)

Here's a chilling thought.  When we talk about how much it costs to execute someone are we really talking about the value of someone's life?

If you knew you were innocent but you were on death row and were appealing and appealing and driving up the cost of having you on death row but not yet dead, at one point would you give up and say "well, I guess they've spent enoughon me for me to try to keep myself alive, I suppose I should just let them execute me now"  How much is you life worth to you?

If you knew you wer guilty, would you be willing to die?  You've already gone against society by your actions that put you on death row, do you care how much they spend as you fight to keep your life; at what point do you give up fighting to keep your life?  How much is yor life worth to you?

If you're the realitive of a victim do you really want to be told "well, we're sorry your daughter was tortured, raped, and murderd but...executionis just to expensive so we're just going to let himstay in  jail for the rest of his life."  Do you really want to know t hat the measure of justice is based not on the society and community's moral and legal evaluation of what justice *is* and should or should not be, but on how much that justice costs

There is a lot of cost to the idea of letting someone living or condemming that person to death, morally, personally, in spirit, in who we are and who we like to believe we are and what we believe about justice and fairness.  I don't really believe that monetary value and monetaru cost should really be a part of that debate


----------



## Mark L (Feb 21, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> Try   www.deathpenaltyinfo.org


This site appears to be more fact based.  They don't cite sources (I didn't look that hard), but it smacks of credibility more than the other.  I learned a little bit, not enough to sway my position (I'm interested in justice, not economics), but I'll look more later.


----------



## arnisador (Feb 22, 2006)

Indefinite delay:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/22/n...gin&adxnnlx=1140620582-rGZaIY7Mcvt3AMYg6Ituvg



> Judge Jeremy Fogel of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California ruled Tuesday afternoon that the state must use a single lethal dose of barbiturates &#8212; five grams of sodium thiopental &#8212; to kill the condemned man, Michael A. Morales, and that the drug must be administered by a medical technician in the death chamber.


----------



## MJS (Feb 22, 2006)

arnisador said:
			
		

> Indefinite delay:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/22/national/22execute.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1140620582-rGZaIY7Mcvt3AMYg6Ituvg


 
I figured it wouldn't go off.  I'm sure it'll be a very long time, if at all, that he actually goes through the procedure.

Mike


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 22, 2006)

Well ... I am opposed to the death penalty in all cases, but, if it is the law, the employees of the state should follow the law. If they have an ethic problem with the law, they should resign.

I understand a Federal Judge recently changed a rule that requires a Medical Professional has to actually administer the chemicals in the execution chamber. I can sort of understand how a doctor might have an ethical objection with pushing the plunger of the needle; the hyppocratic oath and all. But, I don't like it. Not one damn bit. 

It may have been a very clever anti-death-penalty argument, but I don't like the slippery slope nature of it.


----------



## Kenpoist (Feb 28, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> www.afterinnocence.com
> 
> While not making any comments on this specific case, I will point out that the State of Florida has exonerated 25 convicted, death row inmates since 1972.
> 
> ...


 
All the more reason to execute them a little sooner and stop wasting the taxpayer's money on the Inmate Law School Program and all the other BS that goes on in prison.
The families of the victims's need closure, not to be strung along for 20 years waiting for these murderers' to die.


----------



## MJS (Feb 28, 2006)

Kenpoist said:
			
		

> All the more reason to execute them a little sooner and stop wasting the taxpayer's money on the Inmate Law School Program and all the other BS that goes on in prison.


 
I agree.  I was amazed at the number of programs that are offered to the inmates.  Bible study, alcohol programs, narcotic programs, etc.  IMHO, these are just excuses to get out of the cell for a few.  I'm sorry, but I just can't buy that "I've found a new life behind bars" routine.  If they were so interested in making their life better, I'd think that they'd enroll in these programs before they end up in jail, not after, and on the taxpayers dime.



> The families of the victims's need closure, not to be strung along for 20 years waiting for these murderers' to die.


 
I certainly do not disagree, but I wonder how many inmates have been wrongly executed.  IMO, the legal system is a mess.  If the evidence is there, and there is no doubt in anyones mind, why keep them around another 20yrs, trying to sort it out and not giving the families closure?

Mike


----------



## Ray (Feb 28, 2006)

MJS said:
			
		

> I agree. I was amazed at the number of programs that are offered to the inmates. Bible study, alcohol programs, narcotic programs, etc. IMHO, these are just excuses to get out of the cell for a few. I'm sorry, but I just can't buy that "I've found a new life behind bars" routine. If they were so interested in making their life better, I'd think that they'd enroll in these programs before they end up in jail, not after, and on the taxpayers dime.


I believe that some of them really want to change; and that some do change at least while they are in a structured environment.  When they are released from incarceration, they are back in the same old rut and have a tendancy to do the same things they did before.


----------



## MJS (Feb 28, 2006)

Ray said:
			
		

> I believe that some of them really want to change; and that some do change at least while they are in a structured environment. When they are released from incarceration, they are back in the same old rut and have a tendancy to do the same things they did before.


 
Thats what amazes me.  If they do change, you'd think that they'd see their life in a different way.  If these programs are having a positive effect, they should see it.  Granted, when they get out, the majority of the time, they'll end up back in, but if they saw themselves as a changed person so to speak, one would think that they would do something to avoid being pulled back into a criminal life.  

Of course, anytime one has a record, its going to make it hard to find work, but while they may not find that 6 figure job, they could find something other than going back to a criminal life.

Mike


----------



## Kenpoist (Feb 28, 2006)

MJS said:
			
		

> I certainly do not disagree, but I wonder how many inmates have been wrongly executed. IMO, the legal system is a mess. If the evidence is there, and there is no doubt in anyones mind, why keep them around another 20yrs, trying to sort it out and not giving the families closure?
> 
> Mike


 
No, I don't want to see an innocent person sent to death, but we have to have faith in our legal sysytem. It is far from perfect, but better than most countries. If judges were not ruling based on their personal and political beliefs and started applying the law as it is written with some consistancy, crime might improve somewhat.  Unfortunately ist is a complex issue ranging from Parole and Probation to overcrowded prisons to so called "rehabilitation" for sex offenders.  Now that the Supreme Court is swinging back to the right, things may start to improve.

I am reminded of the recent lethal injection issue in California:young girl (20 years ago) was brutilized and murdered (ran over her with a truck) and now the doctor's don't want to give him a dose of the "juice" because it might be "painful". Well too damn bad - maybe they should have thought about that before they comitted the crime.  Lethal Injection is too good for these people.


----------



## MJS (Feb 28, 2006)

Kenpoist said:
			
		

> No, I don't want to see an innocent person sent to death, but we have to have faith in our legal sysytem. It is far from perfect, but better than most countries. If judges were not ruling based on their personal and political beliefs and started applying the law as it is written with some consistancy, crime might improve somewhat. Unfortunately ist is a complex issue ranging from Parole and Probation to overcrowded prisons to so called "rehabilitation" for sex offenders. Now that the Supreme Court is swinging back to the right, things may start to improve.


 
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against the death penalty.  You won't see me outside the prison protesting.  I agree that we need to have faith in the system, but, and maybe it because I'm not a lawyer, judge, etc., but I just can't believe that these guys can be found 100% guilty and yet they're allowed appeal after appeal after appeal.  Michael Ross was executed in CT. last year.  He sat on death row for many years, everyone fully knowing that he was guilty of what he did.  Why did it take so long?



> I am reminded of the recent lethal injection issue in California:young girl (20 years ago) was brutilized and murdered (ran over her with a truck) and now the doctor's don't want to give him a dose of the "juice" because it might be "painful". Well too damn bad - maybe they should have thought about that before they comitted the crime. Lethal Injection is too good for these people.


 
Painful.  I'll never understand those people that say those things.  The pain that that young girl endured was, I'm sure, 100 times greater than a quick injection will ever be.

Mike


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 28, 2006)

I do not want to have 'faith' in our criminal justice system. That is no place for 'belief'. I would like very much to have a reasoned position on crime and punishment. The standard of guilt in criminal cases is 'Beyond a Reasonable Doubt'. There is no room for faith there.

To assume that judges are not interpreting the law as written speaks of a personal bias. Laws are written intentionally vague, and should be. Judges should be able to draw on their vast experience to determine an appropriate sentence for a specific situation. Mandatory sentence rules, while popular with voters often restrict the criminal justice system in unreasonable ways. 

What percentage of the United States incarcerated population are locked up for non-violent offenses? A Massachusetts county jail currently has 600 inmates *more *than it was designed to handle. When the county tried to shift some of those inmates to available space in a State prison, they were rebuffed. Overcrowding of prisons makes a dangerous environment for all, including the law enforcement officers who staff the facilities.

Is the Criminal Justice system about punishment, or rehabilitation, or vengence? Has the focus on any one of these outcomes come at a cost to the other outcomes - recidivism?


----------



## Kenpoist (Feb 28, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> I do not want to have 'faith' in our criminal justice system. That is no place for 'belief'. I would like very much to have a reasoned position on crime and punishment. The standard of guilt in criminal cases is 'Beyond a Reasonable Doubt'. There is no room for faith there.
> 
> To assume that judges are not interpreting the law as written speaks of a personal bias. Laws are written intentionally vague, and should be. Judges should be able to draw on their vast experience to determine an appropriate sentence for a specific situation. Mandatory sentence rules, while popular with voters often restrict the criminal justice system in unreasonable ways.
> 
> ...


 
The problem is that your judges (New England) are not drawing on their vast experience to make rational legal decisions in the best interest of the people (i.e. the Vermont Judge who gave the child rapist a month of rehabilitation/counseling). We need to have a set standard across the board and stick to it. In the Federal system they call it "Federal Sentencing Guidlines".  

You may be able to rehabilitate a select few (sexual predators not being among them), but by in large most first time offenders will re-commit within a year after they get out.  If sentences were a little more strict and prisons were not "country clubs", there might be more of an incentive to not commit crime.  We need hard labor/ work camps/ limited exercise/ smaller cells etc...  It should be the worst setup imaginable.


----------



## MJS (Feb 28, 2006)

Kenpoist said:
			
		

> If sentences were a little more strict and prisons were not "country clubs", there might be more of an incentive to not commit crime. We need hard labor/ work camps/ limited exercise/ smaller cells etc... It should be the worst setup imaginable.


 
Amen!  Perhaps spending 23 of the 24hrs of the day in your cell would be a deterant as well.  The inmates in the facility where I worked received 4 hrs of recreation time on the 4-12 shift.  4 hrs to watch tv, use the phone, shower, play games in the dayrooms, as well as participate in the outdoor/indoor rec. programs.  3 squares a day, a roof over their head and 4 hrs of rec....what more can you need for committing a violent crime?

Mike


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 28, 2006)

MJS said:
			
		

> Amen! Perhaps spending 23 of the 24hrs of the day in your cell would be a deterant as well. The inmates in the facility where I worked received 4 hrs of recreation time on the 4-12 shift. 4 hrs to watch tv, use the phone, shower, play games in the dayrooms, as well as participate in the outdoor/indoor rec. programs. 3 squares a day, a roof over their head and 4 hrs of rec....what more can you need for committing a violent crime?
> 
> Mike


 
Would all those willing to step up to this grand and luxurious living please step forward? 

Anyone at all? 

Come on' it's only the Connecticut State Pennitentiary .... who wouldn't want 'Four Hours of Recreation Time".


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 28, 2006)

Kenpoist said:
			
		

> The problem is that your judges (New England) are not drawing on their vast experience to make rational legal decisions in the best interest of the people (i.e. the Vermont Judge who gave the child rapist a month of rehabilitation/counseling). We need to have a set standard across the board and stick to it. In the Federal system they call it "Federal Sentencing Guidlines".
> 
> You may be able to rehabilitate a select few (sexual predators not being among them), but by in large most first time offenders will re-commit within a year after they get out. If sentences were a little more strict and prisons were not "country clubs", there might be more of an incentive to not commit crime. We need hard labor/ work camps/ limited exercise/ smaller cells etc... It should be the worst setup imaginable.


 
Arguing from the Specific to the General ... there are a bunch of problems with that. But, if you are going to regurgitate Bill O'Reilly's arguments, I suppose I know what I should expect. 

Federal Sentencing Guidelines apply to Federal Cases ... which of course is not what was being prosecuted in Vermont ... But don't let facts confuse you. 

I do not believe that prisons should be the 'worst setup imaginable' .... what better way to create criminals ... and make them more violent and more dangerous. 

Lock 'em up forever ... convicted once, locked up forever.  Got it. 

Real charitable of you.


----------



## Kenpoist (Feb 28, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> Arguing from the Specific to the General ... there are a bunch of problems with that. But, if you are going to regurgitate Bill O'Reilly's arguments, I suppose I know what I should expect.
> 
> Federal Sentencing Guidelines apply to Federal Cases ... which of course is not what was being prosecuted in Vermont ... But don't let facts confuse you.
> 
> ...


 
Spend a few nights out in the street dealing with pimps, drug addicts, child rapists and the like "the cess pool of life" and than come talk to me about being "charitable".
The Federal Sentencing Guidlines reference was made as it relates to having some set standards in the court system - not for the Vermont Case.  
Why don't we have it your way and just let the criminals have free reign in socierty - wouldn't want to offend anyone.  San Francisco is a prime example of a liberal legal system - It's working out real well  - Isn't IT?


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 28, 2006)

Kenpoist said:
			
		

> Spend a few nights out in the street dealing with pimps, drug addicts, child rapists and the like "the cess pool of life" and than come talk to me about being "charitable".
> The Federal Sentencing Guidlines reference was made as it relates to having some set standards in the court system - not for the Vermont Case.
> Why don't we have it your way and just let the criminals have free reign in socierty - wouldn't want to offend anyone. San Francisco is a prime example of a liberal legal system - It's working out real well - Isn't IT?


 
I'm sorry, who is arguing to allow criminals to have free reign?


----------



## Carol (Feb 28, 2006)

Kenpoist, I'm not sure if you know how much I admire you for keeping the streets safe.  There is no way in Hades I could do what you do, not physically, not mentally. 

But as a New Englander, I want what works in New England with New England criminals.  Because, those criminals come out of jail and become New Englanders again.  I have to live with the results of those convicts returning to society, so I want is believed to be the best for New England.

Source:  2003 FBI uniform crime report. When looking at the overall per capita crime rate, there is no other 6 state region that is as low as New England in terms of overall per capita crime.  The Northern New England states are all in the bottom five of the country.

Our largest city is Boston.   Lowest Per Capita murder rate of ANY major American city.  National average is 5.7 muders per 100,000.  Boston is around 2.8 per 100.000 - half the average.

Boston's per capita murder rate is tied with the Greater Duluth area.  

Expand "Boston" to mean the Boston Metro area, and the murder rate drops to 2.3 per 100,000.  Your favorite state to pick on...Vermont...1.8 per 100,000 statewide.  

Essex County, is home to about 750,000 people including me.  This is hardly the boon docks.  Yet, the per capita murder rate is 1.5 per 100,000...almost one-quarter of the national average.

Is it our liberalism?  You and I both know that per capita crime rates are low in some blue states and higher in others, much like they are lower in some red states and higher in others.

But there is more to the New England than our stance on the death penalty.  We have values here.  We value each other.  New England has the lowest divorce rate of any other region in the country.  The Divorce rate in Massachusetts is HALF the national average...at about 26%.  The divorce rate in Texas is 150% of the national average, at about 76%  (Source:  Boston Globe 10/24/04)

We have the highest number of bachelor's degrees and graduate degrees per capita than any other region in the country.  (Source:  National Science Foundation)

New England is liberal, allright.  That same liberalism has given us a desire to seek out education for ourselves and our children.  What some people dismiss as bleeding hearts, we see as a society that actually cares for one another.

Bash New England all you want, but those liberal values make us what we are...including too smart and too caring to hurt our neighbors to begin with.

I prefer prevention over punishment.

Respectfully, 
Carol


----------



## Kenpoist (Mar 1, 2006)

lady_kaur said:
			
		

> Kenpoist, I'm not sure if you know how much I admire you for keeping the streets safe. There is no way in Hades I could do what you do, not physically, not mentally.
> 
> But as a New Englander, I want what works in New England with New England criminals. Because, those criminals come out of jail and become New Englanders again. I have to live with the results of those convicts returning to society, so I want is believed to be the best for New England.
> 
> ...


 
Don't get me wrong, I like New England, having lived in Maine.  Education in New England is among the best in the country.
The statistics don't take into account the culture and philosophy of the region and other factor's.  
- New England idoes not have the Gun culture of other regions (guns=more violent crime)
 - It is much colder in New England. That keeps alot of the perps off the streets and out of harms way.
 - Not the same diverse culutural background as other major citites.
 - Less populated region (outside of Mass)

Having been a cop in one of the South's most dangerous cities - I can attest to many of these differences.


----------

