I see no difference here in NY since they repealed the death penalty, mostly because they never used it to begin with. What's the point of having it if you're never going to actually put someone to death? What's the point of keeping someone like Charles Manson alive all these years? He's beyond redemption, he's never going to contribute anything positive to society again, so why have the taxpayers of CA paid all these years to keep him in jail?
I see no difference here in NY since they repealed the death penalty, mostly because they never used it to begin with. What's the point of having it if you're never going to actually put someone to death? What's the point of keeping someone like Charles Manson alive all these years? He's beyond redemption, he's never going to contribute anything positive to society again, so why have the taxpayers of CA paid all these years to keep him in jail?
I assume you're not saying Manson should have been released.
The entire system to be redone. If you commit 1st degree murder, you need to be put to death. In the states that allow it anyway. 1 appeal is fine but not sitting on death row for 20 years.
Mods should mind their own business and leave poster's profile signatures alone.
The State of California commuted Charles Manson's death sentence to life in prison as a result of the US Supreme Court's 1972 ruling in Furman v. Georgia regarding the application of the death penalty.
"Generosity. That was my first mistake." "Experience must be our only guide; reason may mislead us." "Instagram is Twitter for people who can't read."
Re: Crime & Justice
[Re: olivant]
#644163 04/17/1201:12 AM04/17/1201:12 AM
The State of California commuted Charles Manson's death sentence to life in prison as a result of the US Supreme Court's 1972 ruling in Furman v. Georgia regarding the application of the death penalty.
One of the many reasons California is a joke.
Mods should mind their own business and leave poster's profile signatures alone.
And you are illustrating exactly the sorts of backwards attitudes that give many religious conservatives a justifiably bad name.
If religious people want to believe in God they are quite free to do so. When they, however attempt to make laws for everybody else based on nothing more than a belief in God, they're going to get questioned. The morons in Tennessee who are attempting to bring in intelligent design and creationism thru the back door by criticizing the chemical basis of life and evolution are an example of why biblical literalists don't mix well with science and logic, you know that post-Enlightenment stuff. Biblical literalists make claims about the world that are at best untestable and at worst demonstrably untrue. If they wish to step on the playing field of science with that junk, they're gonna get smoked. Again.
First, secular liberals are no different when it comes to their beliefs influencing law. They just don't do it under the banner of religion. Third, there's issues in the conservative cause (abortion, gay marriage, etc.) that can be supported without bringing religion into it. Third, while one shouldn't lump every religious person (including us Mormons) with the outspoken Evengelical types who misread the opening chapters of the Bible involving the creation, the secular science-is-our-god crowd seems to forget that science hasn't answered as many questions, or proved or disproved as many things as they like to think. They seem to forget the "theory" part in the "theory of evolution."
Science, not religion, is responsible for the lives we enjoy today. People who rant on about the theory of evolution and then turn to religious texts to try to disprove it show that they don't understand what a theory means in science. Gravity is also a theory. Religion doesn't have much useful to bring to the table when it comes to discussing evolution, the second law of thermodynamics, Huygen's Principle, superconductivity, chemical basis of life, Planck's law or any number of well tested scientific theories and facts.
So since conservative selective biblical literalists can't disprove evolution (or indeed any other scientific fact or theory) using scientific tools, they must inevitably turn to the state to attempt to strongarm their way into the scientific discussion. This makes about as much sense as someone who insists there is no such thing as gravity and the only reason we don't fall off the planet is God's love. Possible? Yes. Worthy of teaching or discussing in science class? Absolutely not.
Quote:
Evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered.-Stephen Jay Gould
"When the snows fall and the white winds blow, the lone wolf dies but the pack survives." Winter is Coming Now this is the Law of the Jungle—as old and as true as the sky; And the wolf that shall keep it may prosper, but the wolf that shall break it must die. As the creeper that girdles the tree-trunk, the Law runneth forward and back; For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack.
Re: Crime & Justice
[Re: olivant]
#644183 04/17/1206:24 AM04/17/1206:24 AM
The 19-year-old man suspected of murdering his father and bludgeoning his mother and a brother in a rampage early Monday in Farmington Hills had a long history of trouble with the law and was released from jail only recently -- but probation officials had no idea where he was living in the days leading up to the attack, the Free Press has learned.
Tucker Robert Cipriano also had a history of getting breaks from the criminal justice system, records show. He was released from the Oakland County Jail on Feb. 24 and last reported on March 15, despite being required to report in person twice a month, a source familiar with the case told the Free Press.
When Cipriano last spoke to his probation agent Saturday, he said he was homeless and was ordered to come in Thursday, the source said.
Farmington Hills police said they believe Cipriano and an accomplice broke into his family's home on Rose Hill Drive about 2:50 a.m. Monday, intending to rob them.
Police Chief Chuck Nebus said it appears the family may have woken up, and a verbal argument turned physical with baseball bats. One of the sons was able to hide and dial 911, Nebus said.
Robert (Bob) Cipriano, 52, was killed. His wife, Rose, 51, and son Salvatore (Sal) Cipriano, 17, were seriously injured. They are being treated at Botsford Hospital, said the Rev. John Huber, principal of Detroit Catholic Central High School.
"When the snows fall and the white winds blow, the lone wolf dies but the pack survives." Winter is Coming Now this is the Law of the Jungle—as old and as true as the sky; And the wolf that shall keep it may prosper, but the wolf that shall break it must die. As the creeper that girdles the tree-trunk, the Law runneth forward and back; For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack.
The State of California commuted Charles Manson's death sentence to life in prison as a result of the US Supreme Court's 1972 ruling in Furman v. Georgia regarding the application of the death penalty.
One of the many reasons California is a joke.
You might want to read the Court's opinion which was rendered in response to several cases none of which was a california case. As typically happens, the Court remanded those cases for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion. In light of the Court's opinion, the State of California could anticipate a large number of appellate hearings based on that opinion thus tying up significant State resources. Further, the necessity for a revision in california criminal statutes and the challenges to their compatibility with the Court's opinion would have simply achieved what the commutation of Manson's sentence achieved.
"Generosity. That was my first mistake." "Experience must be our only guide; reason may mislead us." "Instagram is Twitter for people who can't read."
I have no moral compunctions about the death penalty. I also don't believe it to be "barbaric," as so many lefties like to describe it. If you go around killing people for no reason other than you were in a foul mood, then you deserve to come to a "barbaric" end.
No, my problem with the death penalty is that our judicial system will never be foolproof. Look how many people have been vindicated of crimes through DNA in the last ten years. If one innocent person is put to death, then the whole system collapses. It's just not worth the chance.
"I got news for you. If it wasn't for the toilet, there would be no books." --- George Costanza.
Theres alot of heinous shit that goes on every day. My problem is why doesnt the mainstream media give these cases the same attention as they do others. To me they only really care when there is some sort of angle whether it be liberals or conservatives, right or left. The trayvon martin case gives both sides an opportunity to talk shit about eachother but none of them really care about either zimmerman or martin. The whole black on black violence issue their bringing up although is an important issue and should be delved into its sole purpose in this situation is to score points against blacks and liberals not because they are genuinely concerned about young black men. No ones gonna care in a year about this whole case but its brought alot about the media and how they present race.
Coming back to my point of why cases like the ones below dont really reach a national even though they are much worser than the trayvon martin case even the casey anthony trial. My theory is that they offer no angle to anyone. Being all white on white crimes, theres no race involved, no politics and no national outrage. The situation in england is the same almost all the heinous high profile crimes whether they be serial killers child murders, abductions have been done white men yet they find out their are some pakistanis in the north who are pimping out underage white girls all of a sudden you have white people wanting to join racist organisations like english defense league like they think that underage prostitution, child mollestation is something new to the criminal justice system exported by immigrants.
Bill oreilly, Limbaugh and hannity may have been upset by the young white couple in tennesee who were killed by a group of african americans or any number of other black on white crimes, but where are they when it comes to the cases i have posted which there are plenty of as there are black ones, wheres the outrage. The truth is these cases dont help them in any way support their political views or racial views. Their selective in what they want to put out to their fanbase just as much as liberal pundits.
Their audiences need reassuring of their views and the media obliges.
The "Knoxville Horror" didn't outrage conservatives because it was a heinous black on white crime. It outrage people because it never got the national attention many feel it deserved, and certainly would have received if the victims were black and perps white.
Look at what happened at Fordham a few months ago. Black female student claims someone scrawled a racial epithet on her door. It was treated like the crime of the century by the media. CNN, MSNBC and local affiliates sent a news crew up to the Bronx every day for three or four night to cover this story. Media loves to hype white on black crime while trying to ignore black on white.
The State of California commuted Charles Manson's death sentence to life in prison as a result of the US Supreme Court's 1972 ruling in Furman v. Georgia regarding the application of the death penalty.
One of the many reasons California is a joke.
You might want to read the Court's opinion which was rendered in response to several cases none of which was a california case. As typically happens, the Court remanded those cases for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion. In light of the Court's opinion, the State of California could anticipate a large number of appellate hearings based on that opinion thus tying up significant State resources. Further, the necessity for a revision in california criminal statutes and the challenges to their compatibility with the Court's opinion would have simply achieved what the commutation of Manson's sentence achieved.
I may be wrong, but I believe that shortly after Furman the California Supreme Court held that the death penalty was incompatible with the California state constitution.
I have no moral compunctions about the death penalty. I also don't believe it to be "barbaric," as so many lefties like to describe it. If you go around killing paople for no reason other than you were in a foul mood, then you deserve to come to a "barbaric" end.
No, my problem with the death penalty is that our judicial system will never be foolproof. Look how many people have been vindicated of crimes through DNA in the last ten years. If one innocent person is put to death, then the whole system collapses. It's just not worth the chance.
Completely agree PB, often I think I would want the death penalty in UK and Australia, but then there's the nagging doubt in the back of my mind that somewhere along the line an innocent person will be put to death.
Right. I think it was in Anderson. But the Cal. const was then amended to sanction the death penalty only to have SCOTUS a few months later place all death penalty sentences on hold.
"Generosity. That was my first mistake." "Experience must be our only guide; reason may mislead us." "Instagram is Twitter for people who can't read."
The "Knoxville Horror" didn't outrage conservatives because it was a heinous black on white crime. It outrage people because it never got the national attention many feel it deserved, and certainly would have received if the victims were black and perps white.
Look at what happened at Fordham a few months ago. Black female student claims someone scrawled a racial epithet on her door. It was treated like the crime of the century by the media. CNN, MSNBC and local affiliates sent a news crew up to the Bronx every day for three or four night to cover this story. Media loves to hype white on black crime while trying to ignore black on white.
vinny i wasnt really talking about conservatives or liberals as an entire group but just the media and the people in it that seem to take either side and how they present things. CNN, MSNBC only do those things because they feel black people are more likely to react and it creates more of a story which to me is just as racist a notion. I guess what im saying is the media is shit either way.
Re: Crime & Justice
[Re: olivant]
#644498 04/19/1206:22 AM04/19/1206:22 AM
The majority of the conservatives crying crocodile tears about black victims of violence don't care about them one iota. It's all pure deflection. We never use the term white-on-white violence though the majority of whites murdered are indeed killed by other whites. Playing the Violence Card
Quote:
Playing the Violence Card By KHALIL GIBRAN MUHAMMAD EVER since the culture wars of the 1980s, Americans have been familiar with “the race card” — an epithet used to discredit real and imagined cries of racism. Less familiar, however, is an equally cynical rhetorical tactic that I call “the violence card.”
Here’s how it works. When confronted with an instance of racially charged violence against a black person, a commentator draws attention to the fact that there is much more black-on-black violence than white-on-black violence. To play the violence card — as many criminal-justice advocates have done since the Rodney King police brutality case of the early 1990s — is to suggest that black people should worry more about the harm they do to themselves and less about how victimized they are by others.
"When the snows fall and the white winds blow, the lone wolf dies but the pack survives." Winter is Coming Now this is the Law of the Jungle—as old and as true as the sky; And the wolf that shall keep it may prosper, but the wolf that shall break it must die. As the creeper that girdles the tree-trunk, the Law runneth forward and back; For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack.
Re: Crime & Justice
[Re: Lilo]
#644534 04/19/1211:34 AM04/19/1211:34 AM
The majority of the conservatives crying crocodile tears about black victims of violence don't care about them one iota. It's all pure deflection. We never use the term white-on-white violence though the majority of whites murdered are indeed killed by other whites. Playing the Violence Card
Quote:
Playing the Violence Card By KHALIL GIBRAN MUHAMMAD EVER since the culture wars of the 1980s, Americans have been familiar with “the race card” — an epithet used to discredit real and imagined cries of racism. Less familiar, however, is an equally cynical rhetorical tactic that I call “the violence card.”
Here’s how it works. When confronted with an instance of racially charged violence against a black person, a commentator draws attention to the fact that there is much more black-on-black violence than white-on-black violence. To play the violence card — as many criminal-justice advocates have done since the Rodney King police brutality case of the early 1990s — is to suggest that black people should worry more about the harm they do to themselves and less about how victimized they are by others.
Conservatives are simply saying that black-on-black crime is a more serious issue facing black males, yet blacks are outraged when whites are the perps. And it's true. To the media and activists, if you are black and die at the hands of a white man or cop, it's a huge story.
Look at the story in Houston. Black female walks up to white female with baby, shoots and kills the mother and steals the baby. It's getting some attention, but because the perp is a black female, it's not going to be as big a story as if a white female did this to a black woman with her baby. That's an example of how the media plays up the race card.
Conservatives are simply saying that black-on-black crime is a more serious issue facing black males, yet blacks are outraged when whites are the perps. And it's true. To the media and activists, if you are black and die at the hands of a white man or cop, it's a huge story.
Look at the story in Houston. Black female walks up to white female with baby, shoots and kills the mother and steals the baby. It's getting some attention, but because the perp is a black female, it's not going to be as big a story as if a white female did this to a black woman with her baby. That's an example of how the media plays up the race card.
Seems like this guy, who is black, agrees with you. At least he seems to be saying the exact same thing.
Us whites are guilty of it too. We tend to overreact to black-on-white crime. My only gripe is media treatment. It's like they are trying to start a race war.
Perhaps it happened when he was knocked off his feet from the gun's recoil. Perhaps it was done when he and Trayvon fought. I think that answers to these questions will come out at trial, which is what everyone wanted - an arrest and a trial.
Perhaps it happened when he was knocked off his feet from the gun's recoil. Perhaps it was done when he and Trayvon fought. I think that answers to these questions will come out at trial, which is what everyone wanted - an arrest and a trial.
It may not go to trial. They have to get through the preliminaty hearing first and I think that there is mounting evidence that impugns the prosecution's case. I wouldn't be surprised if the case does not suvive the preliminary hearing.
"Generosity. That was my first mistake." "Experience must be our only guide; reason may mislead us." "Instagram is Twitter for people who can't read."
Re: Crime & Justice
[Re: olivant]
#644689 04/21/1211:13 AM04/21/1211:13 AM
Underboss
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,463 No. Virginia
Originally Posted By: olivant
It may not go to trial. They have to get through the preliminaty hearing first and I think that there is mounting evidence that impugns the prosecution's case. I wouldn't be surprised if the case does not suvive the preliminary hearing.
I've been wondering if the matter won't finally be resolved with Zimmerman going free, and the Martins settling a civil claim against Sanford for poor administration or training of the Neighborhood watch program. Among the many things I don't know is what kind of immunity the program might have.
"All of these men were good listeners; patient men."
It may not go to trial. They have to get through the preliminaty hearing first and I think that there is mounting evidence that impugns the prosecution's case. I wouldn't be surprised if the case does not suvive the preliminary hearing.
I've been wondering if the matter won't finally be resolved with Zimmerman going free, and the Martins settling a civil claim against Sanford for poor administration or training of the Neighborhood watch program. Among the many things I don't know is what kind of immunity the program might have.
As far as I know, such watch programs and their participants do not enjoy any immunity. States' statutes include a citizen arrest component, but such arrest may only take place if one witnesses an act of violence or imminent violence. However, such citizen must proceed as law enforcement would, but does not have governmental immunity.
Last edited by olivant; 04/21/1212:33 PM.
"Generosity. That was my first mistake." "Experience must be our only guide; reason may mislead us." "Instagram is Twitter for people who can't read."
It may not go to trial. They have to get through the preliminaty hearing first and I think that there is mounting evidence that impugns the prosecution's case. I wouldn't be surprised if the case does not suvive the preliminary hearing.
I think you're right, Oli. The 150k bail speaks volumes about the seeming lack of evidence. Bail amounts are often set in direct proportion to the preliminary evidence. And with this taking place in Florida, where absoulutely anything can happen at trial, there's a good chance it may not get that far. The last thing the prosecutor wants to do is go to trial with a high profile case that she knows she can't win. The Judge may just let her off the hook by tossing this thing.
"I got news for you. If it wasn't for the toilet, there would be no books." --- George Costanza.
Re: Crime & Justice
[Re: olivant]
#645615 05/01/1206:13 AM05/01/1206:13 AM
GRAND JUNCTION, Co. (Reuters) - A Colorado man wrongly convicted and sentenced to life in prison for the rape and murder of a woman found strangled with a dog leash was exonerated on the basis of new DNA evidence and set free on Monday after spending more than 16 years behind bars. Robert "Rider" Dewey walked out of a courthouse in Grand Junction, Colorado, a free man after a judge found him innocent of the 1994 killing and said his exoneration marked a "historic day" for the state. "Mr. Dewey spent 6,219 days of his life incarcerated for a crime he did not do," Mesa County District Judge Brian Flynn said during the brief hearing. "This is a reminder to the entire system that it's not perfect."
DALLAS — Two Texas men were exonerated Monday in a nearly 30-year-old rape and shooting after DNA tests in Dallas County implicated others in the crime.
Judge Susan Hawk apologized to James Curtis Williams and Raymond Jackson after she declared both men formally innocent of aggravated sexual assault. Williams and Jackson were convicted of attacking a woman outside a Dallas bar in November 1983 and sentenced to life in prison. Both men were recently paroled.
“I hope that you feel like justice was served for you today,” Hawk said.
Williams and Jackson shook hands with Hawk and Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins, who also apologized..
"When the snows fall and the white winds blow, the lone wolf dies but the pack survives." Winter is Coming Now this is the Law of the Jungle—as old and as true as the sky; And the wolf that shall keep it may prosper, but the wolf that shall break it must die. As the creeper that girdles the tree-trunk, the Law runneth forward and back; For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack.
You know Lilo, I've concluded that one glandular characteristic of conservatives is their passionate desire to avoid complications. Although most of us would like an uncomplicated life, conservatives want it so much that they are even willing to deny reality. A conservative's view of the justice system is simply procedural: the procedures were followed, so leave it at that even if the wrong person is executed. That's why you don't find conservatives flocking to support the Innocence Project or similar efforts to address system injustices.
"Generosity. That was my first mistake." "Experience must be our only guide; reason may mislead us." "Instagram is Twitter for people who can't read."
Certainly seems that way sometimes. I can't imagine how I would feel if were one of those men.
"When the snows fall and the white winds blow, the lone wolf dies but the pack survives." Winter is Coming Now this is the Law of the Jungle—as old and as true as the sky; And the wolf that shall keep it may prosper, but the wolf that shall break it must die. As the creeper that girdles the tree-trunk, the Law runneth forward and back; For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack.
You know Lilo, I've concluded that one glandular characteristic of conservatives is their passionate desire to avoid complications. Although most of us would like an uncomplicated life, conservatives want it so much that they are even willing to deny reality. A conservative's view of the justice system is simply procedural: the procedures were followed, so leave it at that even if the wrong person is executed. That's why you don't find conservatives flocking to support the Innocence Project or similar efforts to address system injustices.
For all the hand-wringing about some innocent person accidentally being executed, I have yet to see an actual example.
Furthermore, I get the feeling even if capital punishment was limited to only cases where the evidence was incontrovertible, the same crowd would still be against it. It's the death penalty in general they're against. Not just the possibility of executing someone who's innocent. That's often just a smokescreen argument.
Last edited by IvyLeague; 05/01/1209:48 PM.
Mods should mind their own business and leave poster's profile signatures alone.
Since 1973 there have been over 130 prisoners released from death row because they were found to be innocent. If the state is going to kill someone they need to get it right.
There have also been at least 5-10 cases I can think of off the top of my head where there were serious deep problems with the case but the person was executed anyway. The most recent case in which an probably innocent man was executed was Cameron Todd Willingham.
If you think that the possibility of executing innocent people is just some sort of "smokescreen argument" then you're just giving credence to what Olivant wrote upthread.
"When the snows fall and the white winds blow, the lone wolf dies but the pack survives." Winter is Coming Now this is the Law of the Jungle—as old and as true as the sky; And the wolf that shall keep it may prosper, but the wolf that shall break it must die. As the creeper that girdles the tree-trunk, the Law runneth forward and back; For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack.
