# Dennis Prager: The death penalty, a defense.



## billc (Dec 1, 2011)

To lighten things up here on martialtalk I'm linking to the most recent Dennis Prager on the always fun and delightful topic of the death penalty...

http://www.dennisprager.com/columns...nse_to_oregons_governor_on_capital_punishment



> The governor of Oregon, John Kitzhaber, announced last week that he would not allow any more executions in his state during his time in office.
> Kitzhaber, a Democrat, gave five reasons for his decision. My response follows each one.



An example from the column:




> 2. "I do not believe that those executions (the two that the governor allowed) made us safer."
> We all acknowledge that two executions do not make us safer (though they do make it safer for prison guards and for other inmates). Who ever said two executions would make us safer? Overwhelmingly, the reason people give for supporting the death penalty is justice. It is indescribably unjust to allow everyone who deliberately takes a human life to keep his own.
> But if you want to talk safety, then yes, we who support the death penalty are certain that, applied with any consistency, it is a deterrent. The late sociologist Ernest van den Haag had an interesting thought experiment. Suppose that murders committed on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays carried a death sentence, while those committed on the other days were punishable by a prison sentence. On which days do you suppose more murders would be committed?
> The notion that parking tickets deter illegal parking but that death does not deter murder is truly irrational. It shows what happens when people put ideology over common sense.





> 3. "Certainly I don't believe (the executions of murderers) made us more noble as a society."
> Why is it noble to keep all murderers alive? Was Israel less noble for executing Adolf Eichmann, the architect of the Holocaust? When two men enter the home of a family of four; rape the wife and two young daughters; beat all four nearly to death, leaving them in the agony of crushed bones and skulls; and then tie them up and burn the three females to death, why is it "noble" to keep the men who did that alive?


----------



## Josh Oakley (Dec 1, 2011)

Ah, Prager. Based on his basic stance that morality must only come from God's authority, it makes sense that he is all for the death penalty. 

But where I disagree with him AND his god is that the death penalty in most cases does not restore justice. Especially in this country, where a number of death sentences were overturned, post-mortem. I'd rather a guilty man live than an innocent man die. I don't think "collatoral damage" is adequate here. Any time an innocent man is killed, it is a shameful affront to justice, and unless we can perfect the court system (like that'll happen...) the death penalty in practice will mean innocent men die.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 1, 2011)

Josh Oakley said:


> But where I disagree with him AND his god is that the death penalty in most cases does not restore justice. Especially in this country, where a number of death sentences were overturned, post-mortem..


Thats not true there has never been a person convicted and put to death that was later found not to have been guily since the Death penality was reinstated.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Dec 2, 2011)

The death penalty isn't a deterrent to crime. 
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/det...alty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates




> A 1995 survey of police chiefs and country sheriffs found that most  ranked the death penalty last in a list of six options that might deter  violent crime. Their top two picks? Reducing drug abuse and fostering an  economy that provides more jobs. (cite)
> 
> Data on murder rates  seem to discredit the deterrence theory as well. The region of the  county with the greatest number of executions -- the South -- is the  region with the largest murder rates. For 2007, the average murder rate  in states with the death penalty was 5.5; the average murder rate of the  14 states without the death penalty was 3.1.
> 
> Thus deterrence, which is offered as a reason to support capital punishment ("pro"), doesn't wash.


http://uspolitics.about.com/od/deathpenalty/i/death_penalty_2.htm

As to wrongful death convictions:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrongful_execution
http://listverse.com/2010/01/12/10-convicts-presumed-innocent-after-execution/
http://www.criminaljusticedegreesguide.com/features/10-infamous-cases-of-wrongful-execution.html


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 2, 2011)

As we've talked about before here, I am in favour of the use of the death penalty for those crimes deserving off it IF there is absolute proof of guilt.  This is less about deterrence, for punishments only deter if they vastly outweigh the offence (death for parking offences!), than it is about removing a threat to public safety.

To elaborate a little, in my mind, there is no doubt that executing a serial killer is justifiable but executing a man who killed in a fit of rage (the so-called 'Crime of Passion') is less supportable because that man is less likely to repeat such a terrible offence again.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 2, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> The death penalty isn't a deterrent to crime.
> http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/det...alty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates


As said above its not always about being a deterrent its about being punished for the crime you committed.  BUT its 100% effective in deterring the person put to death from ever killing again.




> As to wrongful death convictions:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrongful_execution
> http://listverse.com/2010/01/12/10-convicts-presumed-innocent-after-execution/
> http://www.criminaljusticedegreesguide.com/features/10-infamous-cases-of-wrongful-execution.html



 Ok my post still stands there has never been a person put to death that was later found innocent since the Death Penality was reinstated in 1976.  And as we get better at testing things like dna the possibility goes down.  I think there should be some safeguards like requirement for dna matches, video footage of the crime. Multiple independent wittness.  If the state does not have something like that the risk is too high to execute for my liking.  But I have no problem executing someone when we have solid dna evidence he commited the crime.  Id also like to see the use expanded to include other crimes as well.  You rape a child under 8 years old or 5 years old something like that you don't deserve to live on this earth your pure evil.  


And


----------



## Empty Hands (Dec 2, 2011)

I have no problem with the death penalty in principle, but the American justice system has demonstrated amply and repeatedly that it cannot be trusted to consistently apply fair standards and practices of justice.  Thus, no death penalty because a not insubstantial number of those executed will be innocent.  Look here.  Even with a life sentence, there remains the possibility of exoneration and recompense for the innocent.  Not so when they are dead.

I find it rather remarkable that a group of people who feel that the government is consistently and without fail incompetent when it comes to health care or welfare or most anything else suddenly feel that the incompetent government becomes omnipotent and infallible when the topic is criminal justice.  Or intelligence gathering, war, and torture for that matter.


----------



## Empty Hands (Dec 2, 2011)

ballen0351 said:


> Ok my post still stands there has never been a person put to death that was later found innocent since the Death Penality was reinstated in 1976.



That's because once someone is dead, no one bothers to look.  Can't look actually, since the court will refuse to hear a claim without a harmed party.  Dead people can't make appeals.  Convenient for the government, no?

Many people *on death row* have been exonerated though.  Look here.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 2, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> That's because once someone is dead, no one bothers to look.  Can't look actually, since the court will refuse to hear a claim without a harmed party.  Dead people can't make appeals.  Convenient for the government, no?
> 
> Many people *on death row* have been exonerated though.  Look here.


I know many on death row have been released one guy lives in my town and I've apoken to him several times.  The fact these people are being found innocent and released shows the appeals process is working and our technology in the field of forensics is getting to the point where we can be more confident then ever people are guilty.  Like I said I don't think we sould use it without dna or video evidence or multiple. Independent witnesses. Not codefendant testimony or single witness information.  People may lie or get confused but if its 5 people all independently telling you same thing then that's better.  It shouldn't be used willy nilly but reserved for serious disturbing premeditated crimes.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Dec 2, 2011)

ballen0351 said:


> Ok my post still stands there has never been a person put to death that was later found innocent since the Death Penality was reinstated in 1976.  And as we get better at testing things like dna the possibility goes down.  I think there should be some safeguards like requirement for dna matches, video footage of the crime. Multiple independent wittness.





> *Claude Jones*:  Claude Jones was executed in 2000 for the murder of liquor store owner  Allen Hilzendager, in San Jacinto County in 1989. On Nov. 14, 1989,  Jones and another man were seen pulling into a liquor store in Point  Blank, Texas. One stayed in the car while the other went inside and shot  the owner. Witnesses who were standing across the road couldn&#8217;t see the  killer, but Jones and two other men, Kerry Dixon and Timothy Jordan,  were all linked to the murder. Although Jones said he never entered the  store, *Dixon and Jordan testified that Jones was in fact the shooter and  they were both spared the death penalty. The deciding factor and only  admissible evidence in Jones&#8217; conviction came down to a strand of hair  that was found at the scene of the crime. A forensic expert testified  that the hair appeared to have come from Jones, and he was sentenced to  death.* Forensic technology was underdeveloped during the 1990 trial and  it wasn&#8217;t able to match Jones&#8217; DNA with the hair sample. Therefore,  before his 2000 execution, Jones&#8217; attorneys filed petitions for a stay  of execution with a district court and the Texas Court of Criminal  Appeals and requested that the hair be submitted for DNA testing that  was now possible, but all courts and former Texas Governor George W.  Bush denied Jones and he was executed.* In an attempt to prove that Texas  executed an innocent man, the Innocence Project and the Texas Observer  filed a lawsuit in 2007 to obtain the strand of hair and submitted it  for DNA testing, which was determined to be the hair of the victim.*




So, guilty because of a strand of hair, later found to not be his.

As long as we're sure that he did it based on the other evidence.

Wait.  There was no other admissible evidence.

So, was an innocent man executed?

Simply put, as technology gets better, more will go free. If half the people on death row have been cleared and saved from the gallows since the reinstatement in 1976, and DNA testing's only been reliable since 2000, that allows for a number of innocents to have been executed prior to technology improving.  Given that evidence is often destroyed after execution, we will never know how many innocents were killed, but we can use logic to determine the probability that some innocents were in fact executed.

So your statement that "there has never been a person put to death that was later found innocent since the Death Penality was reinstated in 1976." is in face a falsehood, based in part on the inability to accurately test it for truth.


----------



## billc (Dec 2, 2011)

Hmmm...and then you have the over 30 bodies of young men taken from underneath john wayne gacey's home, and the refrigerator full of body parts found in jeffery dahmers apartment, and the bodies of girls recovered from the description of their burial sites by ted bundy....Hmmm...I think we can put those guys down with a pretty good degree of confidence in their guilt.  I also support what Ballen is saying and that I don't mind that it takes so long to execute a murderer.  I also want as much technology and skill put into confirming guilt before the death penalty is enacted...but...I believe in the death penalty and that it saves innocent lives.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 2, 2011)

Bob you may want to read the entire case of mr jones.  Was he innocent not a chance.  Im on my cell so I can't post all the details but read up on your innocent man.  Read up on his prior murder conviction while in prison for bank robbery.  Read up on the two other robberies he and his two were accused of during the same crime spree he shot the clerk.  Read up on felony murder rule where even if you don't pull the triger your still as guilty as the one who did.   Proving the hair belonged to a victim does not prove this man didn't kill anyone.  And more to the point has he been put to death for his first murder then he would have never been involved. In his second and the clerk would have not been murdered in cold blood just trying to earn a living.  Even the innocence project said just because the hair didn't blong to jones didn't mean jones was innocent


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 2, 2011)

I wouldn't have a problem with and think it may be a good idea to change the law to only allow with conclusive dna or video evidence and to commute all currnt death row cases to life unless the meet the new law requirements.  I just don't see the value in removing it all together forever.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Dec 2, 2011)

ballen0351 said:


> Bob you may want to read the entire case of mr jones.  Was he innocent not a chance.  Im on my cell so I can't post all the details but read up on your innocent man.  Read up on his prior murder conviction while in prison for bank robbery.  Read up on the two other robberies he and his two were accused of during the same crime spree he shot the clerk.  Read up on felony murder rule where even if you don't pull the triger your still as guilty as the one who did.   Proving the hair belonged to a victim does not prove this man didn't kill anyone.  And more to the point has he been put to death for his first murder then he would have never been involved. In his second and the clerk would have not been murdered in cold blood just trying to earn a living.  Even the innocence project said just because the hair didn't blong to jones didn't mean jones was innocent



I never said he was innocent. I said that the 'key' piece of evidence was a hair that wasn't his.
I pulled 1 example out of a list.  
If today we're overturning 50% and 10 years ago only 25%, that implies that either 10 years ago less innocents were wrongly convicted or 10 years ago 25% innocents were wrongly executed.

There's been enough questions about how prosecutions handle these cases to worry. They pick their man, build their case, and work to ensure a conviction. Mean while the real guilty party continues on, still a threat to society.

Put another way, execute a criminal, you save future victims.
Execute an innocent man....you just murdered Justice.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Dec 2, 2011)

ballen0351 said:


> Thats not true there has never been a person convicted and put to death that was later found not to have been guily since the Death penality was reinstated.



First off, reinstated? I am from Washington state, where it's never been taken off the books. This is true for a number of states. Second, I am calling BS. http://listverse.com/2010/01/12/10-convicts-presumed-innocent-after-execution/ and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/barry-scheck/innocent-but-executed_b_272327.html are just two examples of many I could bring up.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Dec 2, 2011)

I take that back. The death penalty actually WAS removed from America from 1972 to 1976. The rest stands.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 2, 2011)

You implied he was innocent as your rebutal to my statement that no innocent man has been executed.  That's just simply a fact that has not been proven wrong.  You can speculate and guess all you want about cases but you don't know the facts on the case you know what the reporter decided to put into the story to make the story fit his beliefs.


----------



## andy.m (Dec 2, 2011)

> As we've talked about before here, I am in favour of the use of the death penalty for those crimes deserving off it etc


 - sukurkin
I totally agree with your views, one thing about here (GB) that I also disagree with : life should mean life ! I would far rather be able to pardon and release someone than stand at a grave and try to say sorry.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-15983761
These guys would have been executed on the corrupt evidence of the cops. Funny how some of the evidence was destroyed and the new case miss handled.
Andy (and his over active cynicism gland.)


----------



## elder999 (Dec 2, 2011)

billcihak said:


> To lighten things up here on martialtalk I'm linking to the most recent Dennis Prager on the always fun and delightful topic of the death penalty...:



You know, Dennis Prager is a moderately bright guy, but he's missing the mark here.



> The governor of Oregon, John Kitzhaber, announced last week that he would not allow any more executions in his state during his time in office.
> Kitzhaber, a Democrat, gave five reasons for his decision. My response follows each one.
> 1. "I refuse to be part of this compromised and inequitable system any longer."
> This has become one of the most frequently offered reasons for objecting to capital punishment -- that because the system is not equitable, no murderer should be put to death.
> This is a reason that is devoid of reason. If a system is not equitable, you don't end the system, you try to end what is not equitable



But the governor hasn't "ended the system." He *can't*. The death penalty in Oregon still stands-he's simply said that he's not going to carry those sentences out. It's a reasonable position-not devoid of reason at all. In many states, such as Oregon, where the death penalty exists, the one who ultimately signs off on executions is the governor-_he has the option not to do this_, whether it's based on reasonable doubt, or moral grounds-it's not like he'll be governor forever, and those prisoners will either die on death role, be released due to successful appeals, or, ultimately *executed*.



> 2. "I do not believe that those executions (the two that the governor allowed) made us safer."
> We all acknowledge that two executions do not make us safer (though they do make it safer for prison guards and for other inmates). Who ever said two executions would make us safer? Overwhelmingly, the reason people give for supporting the death penalty is justice. It is indescribably unjust to allow everyone who deliberately takes a human life to keep his own.
> But if you want to talk safety, then yes, *we who support the death penalty are certain that, applied with any consistency, it is a deterrent. *The late sociologist Ernest van den Haag had an interesting thought experiment. Suppose that murders committed on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays carried a death sentence, while those committed on the other days were punishable by a prison sentence. On which days do you suppose more murders would be committed?
> *The notion that parking tickets deter illegal parking but that death does not deter murder is truly irrational*. It shows what happens when people put ideology over common sense.



The death penalty is not a deterrent. Murderers-like most criminals-generally don't consider consequences _beyond the extent of trying to avoid them._ Not recognizing this mentality-that *murder is "truly irrational"*-is a failure in critical thinking of the highest order. Sure. The possibility of a life sentence or death sentence (??) might keep most of us from committing murder, but it clearly doesn't keep *15,000* people from commiting murder *every year*. (And roughly 37% of those murders go unsolved-around 5,000 people literally _get away with murder every year_)

In this instance, Prager is an_ idiot_, making a knee-jerk reaction to a measured moral and legal stand that is only a temporary setback for those sentences being carried out, because it came from a Democrat-a stand that he paints as "liberal" when it is clearly _personal,_ and the perogative of that state's chief *executive

*_Idiot_. 

_To lighten things up
linking to the most recent
I'm Dennis Prager _
_here on martialtalk
the always fun 
always delightful 
death penalty...
Dennis
death
Prager
penalty
an example

_


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 2, 2011)

Josh Oakley said:


> First off, reinstated? I am from Washington state, where it's never been taken off the books. This is true for a number of states. Second, I am calling BS. http://listverse.com/2010/01/12/10-convicts-presumed-innocent-after-execution/ and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/barry-scheck/innocent-but-executed_b_272327.html are just two examples of many I could bring up.



And All of the examples you posted have been studied by every overzealous law studient looking to make a name for themselves and the Innocence Project  100's of times over last 10 years and still nobody has ever found evidence them not guilty.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Dec 2, 2011)

ballen0351 said:


> Thats not true there has never been a person convicted and put to death that was later found not to have been guily since the Death penality was reinstated.



Okay, let's re-examine your claim. You mean by the court, by police investigators, or in general? On the first premise you would be absolutely right. On the second two, you would be wrong.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Dec 2, 2011)

ballen0351 said:


> And All of the examples you posted have been studied by every overzealous law studient looking to make a name for themselves and the Innocence Project  100's of times over last 10 years and still nobody has ever found evidence them not guilty.



How do you reexamine a case when the evidence was destroyed after the execution?


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 2, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> How do you reexamine a case when the evidence was destroyed after the execution?



These cases have been studied OVER and OVER court transcripts, interviews, ect.  They have been studied to death and the conclusion has always been the same.  We "think" he was innocent but there is no proof.  You cant try to twist and turn anyway you want the fact are the facts.  Ive personally studied this topic in depth for several college classes I have taken and written detailed reports and findings.  Ive studied and went thru actual trial transcripts not just what some anti-death penality reporter published.  Just in the Jones case alone you said there was NO evidence other then the hair.  Thats just not true.  They found evidence of not only the robbery that resulted in the Murder but 2 other robberies including a bank robbery  Jones and his same to co-defendants did and took the money and went to Vegas and lived it up AFTER killing the store clerk in cold blood.  Thats was AFTER Jones was given a Life Sentence for a Murder he  committed while in jail for a prior bank robbery.  Jones is almost always the case thats brought up when they talk about an innocent man and the death penality and hes is about as far from innocent as you can get.  
I respect your opinion and I agree 1 innocent man put to death is 1 too many.  As stated I would like to see all death row cases that are currently in the system to all be re-examinded using todays science and if there is not conclusive DNA or video evidence then it be changed to life without parole.  I also would like all future case held to same standards


----------



## billc (Dec 2, 2011)

So 15,000 people out of 300 million and you agree that there are people who won't commit murder because of the consequences.  There are people who do avoid parking tickets and those who don't.   As far as making us safer...hmmmm...how about this...

http://www.aim.org/media-monitor/killers-who-kill-again/



> The other side of the story is that criminals who stay alive in prison can murder again. Consider the case of Donna A. Payant, who was an officer in the New York State Department of Corrections when she was strangled, beaten, bitten and killed by an inmate in 1981. The killer was sentenced to death but this was overturned and changed to life in prison. The inmate, Lemuel Smith, was working for the prison chaplain when the incident occurred. He had been an alter server.
> Smith had held up a religious store in 1976 and had murdered the owner of the store and an employee. The next year, Smith kidnapped a New York woman and robbed and murdered her. When he was finally apprehended, he was tried and convicted on two counts of murder, robbery, and kidnapping. He was sentenced by the court to serve three terms of 25 years to life in prison. If Smith had been executed after his first conviction of murder, Donna Payant would not have been murdered. Obviously, the death penalty would have been a deterrent in this case at least.





> If Smith had been executed after his first conviction of murder, Donna Payant would not have been murdered. Obviously, the death penalty would have been a deterrent in this case at least.



Also from wikipedia linked from Jeffery Dahmer:



> *Christopher J. Scarver* (born July 6, 1969)[SUP][1][/SUP] is an American convicted murderer who, while in prison, murdered notorious serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer and convicted murderer Jesse Anderson. He described the killings as "the work of God".




Does anyone here doubt the guilt of Jeffery Dahmer, John Wayne Gacey or Ted bundy or that bundy and gacey deserved the death penalty?


The murder of other prisoners and guards by convicted murderers serving life sentences and less is a reason for the death penalty, not to mention when prisoners, convicted of murder, escape and kill again.


----------



## billc (Dec 2, 2011)

Elder, pragers is talking about the argument in general at that point and not specifically the gov.

This has become one of the most frequently offered reasons for objecting to capital punishment -- that because the system is not equitable, no murderer should be put to death.
This is a reason that is devoid of reason. If a system is not equitable, you don't end the system, you try to end what is not equitable


----------



## elder999 (Dec 2, 2011)

A condemned inmate who was scheduled to be executed next month is now slamming Gov. John Kitzhaber for giving him a reprieve, saying the governor didn't have the guts to carry out the execution.  *Two-time murderer* Gary Haugen had voluntarily given up his legal challenges, saying he wants to be executed in protest of a criminal justice system he views as broken. But *Kitzhaber on Tuesday said he won't allow anyone to be executed while he is in office*, calling Oregon's death penalty scheme "compromised and inequitable."

[/quote]


----------



## elder999 (Dec 2, 2011)

billcihak said:


> So 15,000 people out of 300 million and you agree that there are people who won't commit murder because of the consequences. There are people who do avoid parking tickets and those who don't.



THat's not at all what I said. What I said was that it might deter people from murder.

I can only speak for myself-and I won't.

I also think that the argument isn't devoid of reason-there is no "general argument" as you put it-it's the governor's personal position.

Sort of like this guy:




> condemned inmate who was scheduled to be executed next month is now slamming Gov. John Kitzhaber for giving him a reprieve, saying the governor didn't have the guts to carry out the execution. *Two-time murderer* Gary Haugen had voluntarily given up his legal challenges, saying he wants to be executed in protest of a criminal justice system he views as broken. But *Kitzhaber on Tuesday said he won't allow anyone to be executed while he is in office*, calling Oregon's death penalty scheme "compromised and inequitable."



See, I don't think the death penalty is much of a punishment, let alone a deterrent-I'd rather die than face a life of  unstimulated solitary confinement, like those poor bastards at Supermax.


----------



## billc (Dec 2, 2011)

Hmmm...a lot of killers fight a long time to 





> "face a life of unstimulated solitary confinement"


 and use every legal trick in the book to hold that day off for as long as possible, and then go on to kill guards, other inmates, or people on the outside when they manage to escape.

Yeah, that guy you mentioned is like the guy who is held back by his friends in the bar fight and on the car ride home says he would have cleaned the other guys clock if only his buddies had let him.  You also have to wonder when the guy found out the gov. wasn't going to execute him, before or after the decision to stop fighting the execution. It would be interesting to see what would happen if the gov. changed his mind?  I wonder if that con would change his mind as well.


----------



## elder999 (Dec 2, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Hmmm...a lot of killers fight a long time to and use every legal trick in the book to hold that day off for as long as possible, and then go on to kill guards, other inmates, or people on the outside when they manage to escape.




As you'd say: _hmmmm?_

And I'd say: *Name two.*



billcihak said:


> Yeah, that guy you mentioned is like the guy who is held back by his friends in the bar fight and on the car ride home says he would have cleaned the other guys clock if only his buddies had let him. You also have to wonder when the guy found out the gov. wasn't going to execute him, before or after the decision to stop fighting the execution. It would be interesting to see what would happen if the gov. changed his mind? I wonder if that con would change his mind as well.




Kind of like Gary Gilmore? You remember him.

Oh, that's right-around the time you were born, wasn't it? 



> "Let's do it." - _almost_ last words of Gary Gilmore, facing his (requested) firing squad


----------



## billc (Dec 2, 2011)

Two killers who fought the death penalty sentence and sought





> ""face a life of unstimulated solitary confinement"


:

John Wayne Gacey
Ted Bundy

I believe the guilt of these two murderers is beyond doubt.

To show this isn't just an American problem:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1540632/Convicted-murderers-who-were-set-free-to-kill.html



> Nearly 30 convicted killers released from jail over the past 10 years have gone on to kill again, according to Home Office figures released yesterday.
> Twenty-five of them were convicted in courts for the second homicide &#8212; including 21 murders. A further four suspects in second homicide cases who had previous convictions died or committed suicide before they could be brought to justice.
> 
> The figures, from 1995 to last year, include seven double murderers, suggesting that all or most of the seven claimed a second victim while on licence after being freed from a mandatory life sentence for the previous murder. An eighth convicted murderer went on to commit manslaughter.
> ...



Here are some more:

http://www.lowellpl.lib.in.us/convicts.htm



> John Woolard, 37, and Roy R. Harper, 42, both have long records of criminal
> activity and incarceration, and both were unlikely to ever see the outside of
> prison walls unless they escaped.
> 
> ...



And I repeat this bit for emphasis:



> Woolard's incarceration in Mississippi followed his earlier escape from a
> Florida prison. It was during that escape that he shot and killed a park ranger
> and took another person hostage, earning him the double life sentence.



And a famous local murderer: Richard Speck from wikipedia



> *Richard Franklin Speck* (December 6, 1941 &#8211; December 5, 1991) was a mass murderer who systematically tortured, raped and murdered eight student nurses from South Chicago Community Hospital in Chicago, Illinois on July 14, 1966



As to his life of 





> "unstimulated solitary confinement[/QUOTE
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## billc (Dec 2, 2011)

From wikipedia on john wayne gacey and his desire to avoid execution:



> John Gacy spent much of his time on death row studying books on law and filing numerous, exhaustive appeals and motions, none of which were successful. Gacy contended that he only had "some knowledge" of five of the murders: those of McCoy, Butkovitch, Godzik, Szyc and Piest[SUP][139][/SUP] and contended the remaining 28 murders had been committed by employees who were in possession of keys to his house while he was away on business trips



ted bundy and his desire to live:



> He withheld many details, hoping to parlay the incomplete information into yet another stay of execution. "There are other buried remains in Colorado," he admitted, but refused to elaborate.[SUP][235][/SUP] The new strategy&#8212;immediately dubbed "Ted's bones-for-time scheme"&#8212;served only to deepen the resolve of authorities to see Bundy executed on schedule, and yielded little new detailed information.[SUP][236][/SUP] In cases where he did give details, nothing was found.[SUP][237][/SUP] Colorado detective Matt Lindvall interpreted this as a conflict between his desire to postpone his execution by divulging information and his need to remain in "total possession&#8212;the only person who knew his victims' true resting places."[SUP][238][/SUP]



That would be at least two Elder, and there are many more.  Also remember that ted bundy escaped from custody several times, during one escape:



> Sometime during the evening of January 14 or the early hours of January 15, 1978&#8212;one week after his arrival in Tallahassee&#8212;Bundy entered FSU's Chi Omega sorority house through a rear door with a faulty lock.[SUP][168][/SUP] Beginning at about 2:45am he bludgeoned Margaret Bowman, 21, with a piece of oak firewood as she slept, then garroted her with a nylon stocking.[SUP][169][/SUP] He then entered the bedroom of 20-year-old Lisa Levy and beat her unconscious, strangled her, tore one of her nipples, bit deeply into her left buttock, and sexually assaulted her with a hair mist bottle.[SUP][170][/SUP] In an adjoining bedroom he attacked Kathy Kleiner, who suffered a broken jaw and deep shoulder lacerations; and Karen Chandler, who suffered a concussion, broken jaw, loss of teeth, and a crushed finger.[SUP][171][/SUP] Tallahassee detectives later determined that all four attacks took place in less than 15 minutes, within earshot of more than 30 witnesses who heard nothing.[SUP][168][/SUP] After leaving the sorority house Bundy broke into an apartment building eight blocks away and attacked FSU student Cheryl Thomas, dislocating her shoulder and fracturing her jaw and skull in five places. She was left with permanent deafness and equilibrium damage that ended her dance career.[SUP][172][/SUP] On Thomas's bed police found a semen stain and a panty-hose "mask" containing two hairs "similar to Bundy's in class and characteristic".[SUP][173][/SUP][SUP][174][/SUP]



Soo...let's say ted bundy recieved life in prison, if you read his wikipedia page he escaped from captivity at least twice, and committed those gruesome murders during one period after having escaped.  Sooo...if he managed to escape from prison, do you think that he wouldn't kill, and kill over and over until he was recaptured?


----------



## billc (Dec 2, 2011)

Here is Bundy's wikipedia page.  

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

On the escape that happened before the brutal killings listed in the previous post:



> Bundy piled books and files in his bunk bed under a blanket to simulate his sleeping body and slipped into the crawlspace. He broke through the ceiling into the apartment of the chief guardwho was out for the evening with his wife[SUP][161][/SUP]changed into street clothes from the guard's closet, and walked out the front door to freedom.[SUP][162][/SUP]


----------



## elder999 (Dec 3, 2011)

billcihak said:


> From wikipedia on john wayne gacey and his desire to avoid execution:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



All of this misses the point. Bundy and Gacy were *not* deterred by the death penalty-they went on killing and killing-they really had no choice, and the narcissism inherent in their pathologies _compelled_ them to try to stay alive, and to deflect blame. Bundy had only been convicted of kidnapping and _charged_ with murder at the time of his first escape, and he was recaptured after six days-he probably would have beaten the rap on the murder he was standing trial for, but escaped again. _Of course_ he killed more. 

There is no escape from Supermax, though-and all of this is superfluous. Using people like Gacy and Bundy to justify the death penalty is pointless: when I was a kid, if someone was misbehaving on the playground, they got removed from the sandbox. If murderers can't play nicely with the other children, and we choose to remove them from the sandbox, I don't really have an issue with that, personally. The governor of Oregon may or may not have an issue with that.What he does seem to have an issue with, along with the various problems he finds in the system, is the_ possibility _that he would have to live with the _possibility _of ordering the execution of an innocent person-and he doesn't have to, _another problem inherent in the system,_ that he *can* do so. 

You'll note that I didn't bother rebutting Prager's whole "justice" argument-while I don't agree with it entirely, and really do think death is preferable to the kind of life sentence I'e described, again, I'm okay with the idea of "removing bad kids from the sandbox." The deterrent argument, and the idea that the governor's _personal_ decision is based on "liberalism," (I don't know that *I'd* be comfortable with that decision, and I'm no liberal) are idiotic, as I've said.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 3, 2011)

elder999 said:


> There is no escape from Supermax,



They said that about Alcatraz too.:bangahead:


----------



## billc (Dec 3, 2011)

Keep in mind as well, jeffery dahmer and the other guy were killed by a convicted murderer in prison, and the other female guard was killed by a convicted murderer,in prison.  Letting these people who cannot control their need to kill live is wrong.  At a minimum, you endanger the lives of the guards, other inmates and other prison administrators and workers, especially if there is a riot.  Also, if they escape, they can and do kill.  As you point out, killing was an impulse to bundy, even on the run from the police he stopped and took time and the risks to murder all of those girls.  You are gambling that a proven escape artist can't get out of a prison, ever, and that he wouldn't have the opportunity to kill a guard or another inmate, especially after years of confinement where he has nothing to do but plan and think about how to kill guards or prison personel.  I would rather a known, without doubt murderer, is put to death, and save the lives of victims we don't even know yet.  You may want to take a chance with that individuals life, I wouldn't.


----------



## elder999 (Dec 3, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Keep in mind as well, jeffery dahmer and the other guy were killed by a convicted murderer in prison, and the other female guard was killed by a convicted murderer,in prison. Letting these people who cannot control their need to kill live is wrong. At a minimum, you endanger the lives of the guards, other inmates and other prison administrators and workers, especially if there is a riot. Also, if they escape, they can and do kill. As you point out, killing was an impulse to bundy, even on the run from the police he stopped and took time and the risks to murder all of those girls. You are gambling that a proven escape artist can't get out of a prison, ever, and that he wouldn't have the opportunity to kill a guard or another inmate, especially after years of confinement where he has nothing to do but plan and think about how to kill guards or prison personel. I would rather a known, without doubt murderer, is put to death, and save the lives of victims we don't even know yet. You may want to take a chance with that individuals life, I wouldn't.




You might have a point, but not one that invalidates my argument that life imprisonment is a punishment worse than death.


----------



## billc (Dec 3, 2011)

I agree with you there Elder.  For a normal person such as myself, and I will also include you in that definition, no need to thank me, as innocent people, that existence would be a nightmare.  For the deranged murderers they manage to create lives in the prison.  Look at my post on richard speck, since he was locked up near here we had several nights of the prison video on the nightly news and it created a real stink fest down in the state capital.  As you know, human beings can adapt to really horrible living conditions as part of the survival mechanism.  speck, and gacey show that.


----------



## elder999 (Dec 3, 2011)

billcihak said:


> I agree with you there Elder. For a normal person such as myself, and I will also include you in that definition, no need to thank me, as innocent people, that existence would be a nightmare.



There's absolutely_ nothing _"normal" about me-_thank you._ :lfao:

_Except maybe that I like women and  pie..... _:lfao:


----------



## billc (Dec 3, 2011)

At the same time?  Or is there before and after relationship?


----------



## elder999 (Dec 3, 2011)

billcihak said:


> At the same time? Or is there before and after relationship?



Oh, billi-it's not an "either or" situation at all:

I like women.

I like pie.

I like women *and* pie. :lfao:


----------



## billc (Dec 14, 2011)

Dennis Prager on a recent show talked about Norman Mailer and how he helped free this convicted killer...who killed another person six weeks after being released...

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



> In 1980, Mailer spearheaded convicted killer Jack Abbott's successful bid for parole. In 1977, Abbott had read about Mailer's work on _The Executioner's Song_ and wrote to Mailer, offering to enlighten the author about Abbott's time behind bars and the conditions he was experiencing. Mailer, impressed, helped to publish _In the Belly of the Beast_, a book on life in the prison system consisting of Abbott's letters to Mailer. Once paroled, Abbott committed a murder in New York City six weeks after his release, stabbing to death 22-year-old Richard Adan. Consequently, Mailer was subject to criticism for his role. In a 1992 interview with the _Buffalo News_, he conceded that his involvement was "another episode in my life in which I can find nothing to cheer about or nothing to take pride in."[SUP][12


][/SUP]


----------



## elder999 (Dec 14, 2011)

Mailer screwed up. He took a man who was basically institutionalized, and planted him in the Lower East Side of Manhattan, where a confrontation like the one that led to his stabbing the waiter was inevitable-making the stabbing inevitable. While the altruism of his gesture, and the recognition of talent that motivated it were admirable, his execution was not, and it was his execution of this that led to Jack Abbot's return to crime-something that wasn't necessarily inevitable, and should have  been anticipated and mitigated.

Of course, _In the Belly of the Beast_ was well written, but naive-and Jack Abbot was also naive about the world outside of prison, and should have had more supervision. It being New York in the 70's, he was never really subject to the death penalty-and maybe didn't have to spend the rest of his life in prison, if not for Norm's negligence....


----------

