(Close Window)
Topic: Parents of Child Killed in Boston Marathon Bombing Don’t Want Tsarnaev to Face the Death Penalty
Message: Posted by: landmark (Apr 19, 2015 08:36PM)
Although I am opposed to the death penalty, I don't think I could ever feel as these parents do, were I in their position. They have my admiration.

"The Boston Globe has published a heartbreaking appeal from the parents of Martin Richard, the 8-year-old boy who died in the Boston Marathon bombing. Bill and Denise Richard (who were also injured in the blast, along with their two surviving children) are asking prosecutors to stop seeking the death penalty for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who was recently found guilty of carrying out the attacks with his late brother, Tamerlan. Rather than seeing Tsarnaev killed — and enduring the years of legal maneuvering that generally precede an execution in the United States — the Richards want the 21-year-old sentenced to life in prison "without any possibility of release and waiving all of his rights to appeal."

'We understand all too well the heinousness and brutality of the crimes committed. We were there. We lived it. The defendant murdered our 8-year-old son, maimed our 7-year-old daughter, and stole part of our soul. We know that the government has its reasons for seeking the death penalty, but the continued pursuit of that punishment could bring years of appeals and prolong reliving the most painful day of our lives. We hope our two remaining children do not have to grow up with the lingering, painful reminder of what the defendant took from them, which years of appeals would undoubtedly bring.'

For us, the story of Marathon Monday 2013 should not be defined by the actions or beliefs of the defendant, but by the resiliency of the human spirit and the rallying cries of this great city. We can never replace what was taken from us, but we can continue to get up every morning and fight another day. As long as the defendant is in the spotlight, we have no choice but to live a story told on his terms, not ours. The minute the defendant fades from our newspapers and TV screens is the minute we begin the process of rebuilding our lives and our family.' "

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/04/richard-family-opposes-death-penalty-for-bomber.html?mid=google&google_editors_picks=true
Message: Posted by: Destiny (Apr 19, 2015 09:31PM)
[quote]On Apr 19, 2015, landmark wrote:
Although I am opposed to the death penalty, I don't think I could ever feel as these parents do, were I in their position. They have my admiration.

"The Boston Globe has published a heartbreaking appeal from the parents of Martin Richard, the 8-year-old boy who died in the Boston Marathon bombing. Bill and Denise Richard (who were also injured in the blast, along with their two surviving children) are asking prosecutors to stop seeking the death penalty for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who was recently found guilty of carrying out the attacks with his late brother, Tamerlan. Rather than seeing Tsarnaev killed — and enduring the years of legal maneuvering that generally precede an execution in the United States — the Richards want the 21-year-old sentenced to life in prison "without any possibility of release and waiving all of his rights to appeal."

'We understand all too well the heinousness and brutality of the crimes committed. We were there. We lived it. The defendant murdered our 8-year-old son, maimed our 7-year-old daughter, and stole part of our soul. We know that the government has its reasons for seeking the death penalty, but the continued pursuit of that punishment could bring years of appeals and prolong reliving the most painful day of our lives. We hope our two remaining children do not have to grow up with the lingering, painful reminder of what the defendant took from them, which years of appeals would undoubtedly bring.'

For us, the story of Marathon Monday 2013 should not be defined by the actions or beliefs of the defendant, but by the resiliency of the human spirit and the rallying cries of this great city. We can never replace what was taken from us, but we can continue to get up every morning and fight another day. As long as the defendant is in the spotlight, we have no choice but to live a story told on his terms, not ours. The minute the defendant fades from our newspapers and TV screens is the minute we begin the process of rebuilding our lives and our family.' "

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/04/richard-family-opposes-death-penalty-for-bomber.html?mid=google&google_editors_picks=true [/quote]


It's heartbreaking. I don't believe in the death penalty either, but sometimes it's a struggle, and this guy compounds his guilt with his inability to take responsibility for his own actions. I will say that while I don't believe in the death penalty I do think they go to rather extreme lengths to ensure these people don't kill themselves. I'd be a bit lazier.
Message: Posted by: Chessmann (Apr 19, 2015 10:12PM)
Interesting perspective on the (possibly long) process from the parents.
Message: Posted by: Starrpower (Apr 19, 2015 10:32PM)
I cannot imagine how one must feel when a loved on is murdered, but I am not opposed to the death penalty on the grounds that it is inhumane, extreme, immoral, etc. Additionally, I don't think it completely matters what the victim thinks, as one of the purposes of sentencing is punishment of behalf of society (as well as deterrence and rehabilitation. Obviously, death does not rehabilitate, but it does prevent habitual offenders). The only factor that concerns me is that it might possibly be applied to someone who was wrongly convicted.
Message: Posted by: Destiny (Apr 19, 2015 10:44PM)
[quote]On Apr 19, 2015, Starrpower wrote:
I cannot imagine how one must feel when a loved on is murdered, but I am not opposed to the death penalty on the grounds that it is inhumane, extreme, immoral, etc. Additionally, I don't think it completely matters what the victim thinks, as one of the purposes of sentencing is punishment of behalf of society (as well as deterrence and rehabilitation. Obviously, death does not rehabilitate, but it does prevent habitual offenders). The only factor that concerns me is that it might possibly be applied to someone who was wrongly convicted. [/quote]

Good point - I wonder about the value of victim impact statements - if it helps the victim - good but I don't see the value regarding sentencing - one doesn't need to be a victim to understand a crime is abhorrent. And there's the terrible system of blood money insome countries where criminals can avoid other punishment by paying the victims family for their loss.
Message: Posted by: arthur stead (Apr 19, 2015 10:50PM)
What's the point of keeping him alive in jail, where he can spend his days converting other prisoners and persuading them to become jihadists?
Message: Posted by: tommy (Apr 19, 2015 11:39PM)
Death or a life time in prison, the way I see it is, what’s the difference?
Message: Posted by: Salguod Nairb (Apr 20, 2015 12:51AM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, tommy wrote:
Death or a life time in prison, the way I see it is, what’s the difference? [/quote]

[img]http://i.imgur.com/DBKtB63.gif[/img]
Message: Posted by: tommy (Apr 20, 2015 04:02AM)
Looks like you have been on the oxytocin pills again.
Message: Posted by: Mr. Mystoffelees (Apr 20, 2015 07:51AM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, tommy wrote:
Death or a life time in prison, the way I see it is, what’s the difference? [/quote]

I quite like Chessmann's thought - and there could be a great deal of difference for the relatives and victims. That said, I would be strongly in favor of death but for the endless morass we have made of the process...
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 20, 2015 01:29PM)
[quote]On Apr 19, 2015, Starrpower wrote:
I cannot imagine how one must feel when a loved on is murdered, but I am not opposed to the death penalty on the grounds that it is inhumane, extreme, immoral, etc. Additionally, I don't think it completely matters what the victim thinks, as one of the purposes of sentencing is punishment of behalf of society (as well as deterrence and rehabilitation. Obviously, death does not rehabilitate, but it does prevent habitual offenders). The only factor that concerns me is that it might possibly be applied to someone who was wrongly convicted. [/quote]
Wrongly convicted people getting the death penalty is a major issue in the US. According to research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences one in 25 of those on death row are completely innocent, and the USA has executed more than 100 innocent people since the resumption of executions in 1977.

Also, the Supreme Court has ruled (Herrera V Collins) that proving one is innocent is not grounds to halt an execution. That is the most compelling reason to oppose the death penalty.
Message: Posted by: Magnus Eisengrim (Apr 20, 2015 02:01PM)
Death penalty, life in prison, very long in prison. They are all inadequate responses to heinous crimes.

There is no happy ending; there is no fitting conclusion. I doubt that there ever can be.
Message: Posted by: rockwall (Apr 20, 2015 02:24PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
...
Also, the Supreme Court has ruled (Herrera V Collins) that proving one is innocent is not grounds to halt an execution. That is the most compelling reason to oppose the death penalty. [/quote]

Quite a simplistic overview of the actual Supreme Court ruling. The actual ruling creates a much less compelling reason to oppose the death penalty.
Message: Posted by: tommy (Apr 20, 2015 02:24PM)
It is pretty amazing that he is still alive. I think he was brainwashed and bulldozed into it but apart from that I can’t think why they wouldn't pass the death penalty. He could kill himself anyway.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 20, 2015 02:28PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
[quote]On Apr 19, 2015, Starrpower wrote:
I cannot imagine how one must feel when a loved on is murdered, but I am not opposed to the death penalty on the grounds that it is inhumane, extreme, immoral, etc. Additionally, I don't think it completely matters what the victim thinks, as one of the purposes of sentencing is punishment of behalf of society (as well as deterrence and rehabilitation. Obviously, death does not rehabilitate, but it does prevent habitual offenders). The only factor that concerns me is that it might possibly be applied to someone who was wrongly convicted. [/quote]
Wrongly convicted people getting the death penalty is a major issue in the US. According to research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences one in 25 of those on death row are completely innocent, and the USA has executed more than 100 innocent people since the resumption of executions in 1977.

Also, the Supreme Court has ruled (Herrera V Collins) that proving one is innocent is not grounds to halt an execution. That is the most compelling reason to oppose the death penalty. [/quote]

The authors of the very study you cite (which makes a number of assumptions, many of them questionable, and in no way provides a basis for any sort of firm conclusions) doesn't think the number of exectued defendants exceeds 50, let alone 100.


"The most charged question in this area is different: How many innocent defendants have been put to death (6)? We cannot estimate that number directly but we believe it is comparatively low. If the rate were the same as our estimate for false death sentences, the number of innocents executed in the United States in the past 35 y would be more than 50 (20). We do not believe that has happened"
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (Apr 20, 2015 02:56PM)
How many executions of innocent defendants is acceptable?
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 20, 2015 03:05PM)
Good question. A related question is "What's an acceptable number of innocent defendants in prison for the rest of their lives?"
Message: Posted by: NYCTwister (Apr 20, 2015 03:09PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
How many executions of innocent defendants is acceptable? [/quote]

Zero.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 20, 2015 03:24PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, NYCTwister wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
How many executions of innocent defendants is acceptable? [/quote]

Zero. [/quote]

Which, if true, still doesn't give one license to make up an unsupported high number.
Message: Posted by: Payne (Apr 20, 2015 03:37PM)
[quote]
On Apr 19, 2015, arthur stead wrote:

What's the point of keeping him alive in jail, where he can spend his days converting other prisoners and persuading them to become jihadists?

[/quote]

That will be a little tough for him to do as he will be in solitary confinement for the rest of his life where he will have no contact with any of the prison population.
Message: Posted by: NYCTwister (Apr 20, 2015 03:47PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, NYCTwister wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
How many executions of innocent defendants is acceptable? [/quote]

Zero. [/quote]

Which, if true, still doesn't give one license to make up an unsupported high number. [/quote]

True.

On the one hand if there is ANY doubt as to the guilt then the death penalty should be off the table.

On the other hand if there is no doubt i.e. a combination of multiple video acoounts, multiple eye witnesses, DNA evidence, an uncoerced taped confession, completely taped interrogation etc. then I don't think that someone who murders another should be allowed to keep their life, regardless of how they spend their prison time.
Murder is the only crime it should even be considered for.

I just hate the whole subject. At the end of the whole thing the person carrying out the sentence is also a killer.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 20, 2015 03:53PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, NYCTwister wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, NYCTwister wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
How many executions of innocent defendants is acceptable? [/quote]

Zero. [/quote]

Which, if true, still doesn't give one license to make up an unsupported high number. [/quote]

True.

On the one hand if there is ANY doubt as to the guilt then the death penalty should be off the table.

On the other hand if there is no doubt i.e. a combination of multiple video acoounts, multiple eye witnesses, DNA evidence, an uncoerced taped confession, completely taped interrogation etc. then I don't think that someone who murders another should be allowed to keep their life, regardless of how they spend their prison time.
Murder is the only crime it should even be considered for.

I just hate the whole subject. At the end of the whole thing the person carrying out the sentence is also a killer. [/quote]


Sounds like you share Bob's position on the issue.
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 20, 2015 06:48PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
Death penalty, life in prison, very long in prison. They are all inadequate responses to heinous crimes.

There is no happy ending; there is no fitting conclusion. I doubt that there ever can be. [/quote]

OMG. I cannot believe it but I believe and agree whole heartedly with what you said.
Message: Posted by: rockwall (Apr 20, 2015 07:10PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
How many executions of innocent defendants is acceptable? [/quote]

2%
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 20, 2015 07:12PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
How many executions of innocent defendants is acceptable? [/quote]

Zero is the acceptable answer. But unfortunately it is not the solution. All issues have solutions. But many of those solutions are not acceptable by everyone. Does that surprise anyone?

The only fortunate fact is that more guilty have met their punishment than have gone free. In some minds that is enough. Is it? I find it difficult to answer that question because of the content. :) However there is no absolute answer. There are many opinions and just arguments for both sides.
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 20, 2015 07:17PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
[quote]On Apr 19, 2015, Starrpower wrote:
I cannot imagine how one must feel when a loved on is murdered, but I am not opposed to the death penalty on the grounds that it is inhumane, extreme, immoral, etc. Additionally, I don't think it completely matters what the victim thinks, as one of the purposes of sentencing is punishment of behalf of society (as well as deterrence and rehabilitation. Obviously, death does not rehabilitate, but it does prevent habitual offenders). The only factor that concerns me is that it might possibly be applied to someone who was wrongly convicted. [/quote]
Wrongly convicted people getting the death penalty is a major issue in the US. According to research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences one in 25 of those on death row are completely innocent, and the USA has executed more than 100 innocent people since the resumption of executions in 1977.

Also, the Supreme Court has ruled (Herrera V Collins) that proving one is innocent is not grounds to halt an execution. That is the most compelling reason to oppose the death penalty. [/quote]

Just some additional facts:



Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, 1,389 convicted murderers have been executed in the United States. (As of October 1, 2014)

Of those executed, 15 were female. (The last was Lisa Ann Coleman in Texas on September 14, 2014).

Of those executed, 772 (55.6%) were white and 470 (33.8%) were black.

Executions were held in 34 different states: 517 (37.2%) were in Texas and 20 (1.4%) were in Indiana.


Of those executed:

1,212 (87.3%) were executed by lethal injection, including 748 of the last 758 executions.

158 (11.6%) were executed by electric chair. (The last was Robert Charles Gleason Jr. in Virginia on January 16, 2013).
Florida 44, Virginia 31, Alabama 24, Georgia 23, Louisiana 20, South Carolina 7, Indiana 3, Nebraska 3, Kentucky 1, Arkansas 1, Tennessee 1.

11 (0.8%) were executed by gas chamber. (The last was Walter LaGrand in Arizona on March 3, 1999).
Mississippi 4, California 2, North Carolina 2, Arizona 2, Nevada 1.

3 (0.2%) were executed by hanging. (The last was Billy Bailey in Delaware on January 25, 1996).
Washington 2, Delaware 1.


3 (0.2%) were executed by firing squad. (The last was Ronnie Lee Gardner in Utah on June 18, 2010).
Utah 3.

Currently 32 states, the Federal Government and U.S. Military have active Death Penalty statutes:
(Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming)

Currently, 18 states and the District of Columbia have no death penalty:
(Alaska, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin)



Also:


Wrongful execution is a miscarriage of justice occurring when an innocent person is put to death by capital punishment, the "death penalty." Cases of wrongful execution are cited as an argument by opponents of capital punishment.[1]

A number of people are claimed to have been innocent victims of the death penalty.[2][3] Newly available DNA evidence has allowed the exoneration and release of more than 17 death row inmates since 1992 in the United States,[4] but DNA evidence is available in only a fraction of capital cases. Others have been released on the basis of weak cases against them, sometimes involving prosecutorial misconduct; resulting in acquittal at retrial, charges dropped, or innocence-based pardons. The Death Penalty Information Center (U.S.) has published a list of 10 inmates "executed but possibly innocent".[5] At least 39 executions are claimed to have been carried out in the U.S. in the face of evidence of innocence or serious doubt about guilt.[6]

Did something I usually do not do and looked up this info as I find it troubling and was looking for some answers. Not sure where Tony gets the 100 innocent executed. I did not find these numbers. I may have missed them. However this number seems to be 39 not 100. But yea...39 to many. But...
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Apr 20, 2015 10:08PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, Salguod Nairb wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, tommy wrote:
Death or a life time in prison, the way I see it is, what’s the difference? [/quote]

[img]http://i.imgur.com/DBKtB63.gif[/img] [/quote]
Sigh...am I the only one who has stopped looking at these animated squares?
I wish you would just post something. The novelty has worn off. We get it, you know how to do it. Move on. Sorry. Not trying to be mean.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Apr 20, 2015 10:14PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, NYCTwister wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, NYCTwister wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
How many executions of innocent defendants is acceptable? [/quote]

Zero. [/quote]

Which, if true, still doesn't give one license to make up an unsupported high number. [/quote]

True.

On the one hand if there is ANY doubt as to the guilt then the death penalty should be off the table.

On the other hand if there is no doubt i.e. a combination of multiple video acoounts, multiple eye witnesses, DNA evidence, an uncoerced taped confession, completely taped interrogation etc. then I don't think that someone who murders another should be allowed to keep their life, regardless of how they spend their prison time.
Murder is the only crime it should even be considered for.

I just hate the whole subject. At the end of the whole thing the person carrying out the sentence is also a killer. [/quote]
A killer, but not a murderer.
Message: Posted by: NYCTwister (Apr 20, 2015 11:49PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, magicfish wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, NYCTwister wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, NYCTwister wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
How many executions of innocent defendants is acceptable? [/quote]

Zero. [/quote]

Which, if true, still doesn't give one license to make up an unsupported high number. [/quote]

True.

On the one hand if there is ANY doubt as to the guilt then the death penalty should be off the table.

On the other hand if there is no doubt i.e. a combination of multiple video acoounts, multiple eye witnesses, DNA evidence, an uncoerced taped confession, completely taped interrogation etc. then I don't think that someone who murders another should be allowed to keep their life, regardless of how they spend their prison time.
Murder is the only crime it should even be considered for.

I just hate the whole subject. At the end of the whole thing the person carrying out the sentence is also a killer. [/quote]
A killer, but not a murderer. [/quote]

Of course.

I'd imagine that the deliberate taking of another life would weigh on the conscience of anyone.

You couldn't get me to take the job.
Message: Posted by: Salguod Nairb (Apr 21, 2015 12:15AM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, magicfish wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, Salguod Nairb wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, tommy wrote:
Death or a life time in prison, the way I see it is, what’s the difference? [/quote]

[img]http://i.imgur.com/DBKtB63.gif[/img] [/quote]
Sigh...am I the only one who has stopped looking at these animated squares?
I wish you would just post something. The novelty has worn off. We get it, you know how to do it. Move on. Sorry. Not trying to be mean. [/quote]


[img]http://33.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_luscumAVd81qfdwsio1_500.gif[/img]
Message: Posted by: tommy (Apr 21, 2015 02:20AM)
Clever boy.
Message: Posted by: stoneunhinged (Apr 21, 2015 03:24AM)
[quote]On Apr 21, 2015, Salguod Nairb wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, magicfish wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, Salguod Nairb wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, tommy wrote:
Death or a life time in prison, the way I see it is, what’s the difference? [/quote]

[img]http://i.imgur.com/DBKtB63.gif[/img] [/quote]
Sigh...am I the only one who has stopped looking at these animated squares?
I wish you would just post something. The novelty has worn off. We get it, you know how to do it. Move on. Sorry. Not trying to be mean. [/quote]


[img]http://33.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_luscumAVd81qfdwsio1_500.gif[/img] [/quote]

:)
Message: Posted by: ed rhodes (Apr 21, 2015 12:17PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Good question. A related question is "What's an acceptable number of innocent defendants in prison for the rest of their lives?" [/quote]

An innocent defendant in prison can work on getting released. An innocent defendant who has been executed cannot work on coming back to life.

In this particular case, I'm sadistic enough to like the idea of this guy spending the next 70 years in jail.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 21, 2015 12:45PM)
[quote]On Apr 21, 2015, ed rhodes wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Good question. A related question is "What's an acceptable number of innocent defendants in prison for the rest of their lives?" [/quote]

An innocent defendant in prison can work on getting released. An innocent defendant who has been executed cannot work on coming back to life.
[/quote]
An innocent defendant on death row can work on getting released, too. Conversely, an innocent defendant who has died in prison cannot work on getting released before spending the rest of his life in prison.

And, of course, you didn't answer the question - What's the acceptable number of innocent defendants in prison for the rest of their lives?


[quote]
In this particular case, I'm sadistic enough to like the idea of this guy spending the next 70 years in jail. [/quote]
Doesn't sound like a fun 70 years.
Message: Posted by: tommy (Apr 21, 2015 02:21PM)
He was not the first nor will he the last to retaliate for the US lead wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

If you don’t kill him, down the line he might get exchanged for a captured American.

Well there are many things that might not go according to plan.
Message: Posted by: stoneunhinged (Apr 21, 2015 02:53PM)
[quote]On Apr 21, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Conversely, an innocent defendant who has died in prison cannot work on getting released before spending the rest of his life in prison.

[/quote]

I don't get this point, Lobo. Dying in prison is not the same thing as being executed. If you die, you die, wherever you are. If you are killed, you are killed, wherever you are. Dying and being killed are not the same.
Message: Posted by: tommy (Apr 21, 2015 03:38PM)
Compromise; when he dies hang his dead body in public.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 21, 2015 04:58PM)
[quote]On Apr 21, 2015, stoneunhinged wrote:
[quote]On Apr 21, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Conversely, an innocent defendant who has died in prison cannot work on getting released before spending the rest of his life in prison.

[/quote]

I don't get this point, Lobo. Dying in prison is not the same thing as being executed. If you die, you die, wherever you are. If you are killed, you are killed, wherever you are. Dying and being killed are not the same. [/quote]

Ed point is misleading. It suggests that a life sentence is reversible, and a death sentence isn't. But in fact that's only true if you consider the death sentence *after* the penalty has been carried out, and the life sentence *before*. A prisoner on death row might have his conviction overturned twenty years later. A prisoner sentenced to life in prison might die in prison ten years later - his entire sentence was carried out, and nothing can be done about it.

If you don't oppose life sentences, then you have to be willing to accept a nonzero number of innocent defendants spending the rest of their lives in prison. So the question remains...how many?
Message: Posted by: Mr. Mystoffelees (Apr 21, 2015 05:13PM)
So, does this doubt attend the guilt of Tsarnaev? Are we 100% certain?
Message: Posted by: tommy (Apr 21, 2015 05:41PM)
Sophisticates always leave open a slim possibility that what they know for certain might be wrong.
Message: Posted by: ed rhodes (Apr 21, 2015 05:42PM)
[quote]On Apr 21, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On Apr 21, 2015, ed rhodes wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Good question. A related question is "What's an acceptable number of innocent defendants in prison for the rest of their lives?" [/quote]

An innocent defendant in prison can work on getting released. An innocent defendant who has been executed cannot work on coming back to life.


[quote]
An innocent defendant on death row can work on getting released, too. Conversely, an innocent defendant who has died in prison cannot work on getting released before spending the rest of his life in prison.
[/quote]

Except, as it's been pointed out, those appeals and requests take time and money. (It's actually been mentioned that it's cheaper for the state to hold someone for life than to go through all the processes necessary to execute them.) And there are those who think it would be better if we could "streamline" the process (i.e., remove some of those pesky legal hurdles so they can be killed quicker and cheaper.)


[quote]
And, of course, you didn't answer the question - What's the acceptable number of innocent defendants in prison for the rest of their lives?
[/quote]

I don't think there's an acceptable number of innocent [i]anyones[/i] being punished for something they didn't do. But we are humans and there will be mistakes.

[quote]

[quote]
In this particular case, I'm sadistic enough to like the idea of this guy spending the next 70 years in jail. [/quote]
Doesn't sound like a fun 70 years. [/quote]

Good.
Message: Posted by: tommy (Apr 21, 2015 06:17PM)
He said it will be more fun than where you lot are going soon.
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 21, 2015 10:56PM)
This is where I feel that the system sort of fails. He is guilty. We know he is guilty. Everyone knows he is guilty. He has been convicted. So let us carry it one step further. The jury decides to execute this man, if I may call this dirt bag a man. Then why not do it ASAP?

We all know he will never win an appeal. We all know he is guilty. Flip the switch or drop the tablets or hang him but do it ASAP and tell him after the jury has found to execute him it will take place within 5 days. Maybe even show him some vids of other executions. Yea sick right? No sicker than what he did and the beheadings of Christians by his ilk. That is punishment. Not this other BS. No more glamour shots on that wonderful rag Rolling Stone.

Also it seems that the biggest concern of the parents of the little boy killed, slaughtered, murdered, whatever you wish to call it. Is the having to go through appeals for countless years instead of getting their due justice and this dirt bag his justice. Which I fully understand and agree with. So having said that. Why not execute him ASAP? Hardly any cost them. Just put his remains in a bag. Put it out for the garbage where it belongs. Let them pick it up on garbage day and take it to the landfill. Or is there someone here who thinks he may be innocent? Dole out punishment to fit the crime. There is no chance that this piece of crap is innocent and will be added to the numbers of those executed that were innocent.

Well there you have it. Another crazy post from acesover proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is not very benevolent toward those people who want to destroy the United States of America and what we gave so many lives to protect. Just waiting for Bob's comments and a few others. Good night, sleep tight knowing that there are some people who want justice for the just. :pop:
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (Apr 21, 2015 11:02PM)
Don't hold your breath waiting for my comments, aces. The death penalty question is far too serious to be approached superficially and simplistically.
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 21, 2015 11:21PM)
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
Don't hold your breath waiting for my comments, aces. The death penalty question is far too serious to be approached superficially and simplistically. [/quote]

Bob,

I agree about the death penalty being serious. I realize all about precedent etc. That is just me ranting. Thing is I agree with the Magnus post earlier:

Death penalty, life in prison, very long in prison. They are all inadequate responses to heinous crimes.

There is no happy ending; there is no fitting conclusion. I doubt that there ever can be.


So this is the closest thing I feel is justice in this instance. Honestly I don't mean to turn this into a debate as I know my feelings have many flaws. Just my feelings in this instance as to what I feel justice is.
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (Apr 21, 2015 11:24PM)
One of the "problems" in your post is the fact that appeals are part of the due process of law guaranteed by the Constitution.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 22, 2015 05:30AM)
An apology guys - I based the figure of 100 wrongfully executed on an extrapolation from the statistics, but I based it on the number on death row, not the number of actual executions. An oversight. The actual figure should be around forty.

But the entire civilized world, with one or two exceptions, have decided that even one is too much, which is why the death penalty is used in less that a handful of countries in the developed world. And in some of those countries it is on the books but not used.
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 22, 2015 09:54AM)
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
One of the "problems" in your post is the fact that appeals are part of the due process of law guaranteed by the Constitution. [/quote]

I know.

That is why I added this comment in my second post. "So this is the closest thing I feel is justice in this instance".

Of course it would not be justice for Tsarnaev according to our Constitution which as you know I support. A real paradox for me here. That as why I agree with the comment that goes something like, "our justice system in the U.S. is horrible but the best there is anywhere at this time. Sorry for butchering the quote. :) You know what I mean.

I guess one of the issues that frustrates me the most is that exactly what this person is opposed to is what protects him, our morals and our laws.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 22, 2015 10:17AM)
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
An apology guys - I based the figure of 100 wrongfully executed on an extrapolation from the statistics, but I based it on the number on death row, not the number of actual executions. An oversight. The actual figure should be around forty.

But the entire civilized world, with one or two exceptions, have decided that even one is too much, which is why the death penalty is used in less that a handful of countries in the developed world. And in some of those countries it is on the books but not used. [/quote]

So where did the 40 come from?

I take it that 40 (or more) is an acceptable number of innocent defendants to spend the rest of their lives in prison.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 22, 2015 10:27AM)
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, acesover wrote:
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
One of the "problems" in your post is the fact that appeals are part of the due process of law guaranteed by the Constitution. [/quote]

I know.

That is why I added this comment in my second post. "So this is the closest thing I feel is justice in this instance".

Of course it would not be justice for Tsarnaev according to our Constitution which as you know I support. A real paradox for me here. That as why I agree with the comment that goes something like, "our justice system in the U.S. is horrible but the best there is anywhere at this time. Sorry for butchering the quote. :) You know what I mean.

I guess one of the issues that frustrates me the most is that exactly what this person is opposed to is what protects him, our morals and our laws. [/quote]


There's a difference between the substantive and the procedural in law. Generally, the substantive (wih respect to criminal cases, the actual sentence) is what results in, or fails to result in, "Justice." The procedural (the process - the right to an attorney, appeals, jury trials, etc.) are the procedures through which the best chance at Justice (weighted according to our value system, e.g. better to acquit the guilty than convict the innocent)) is achieved.

So when a defendant is known to be guilty, if the death penalty is "just," then carrying it out the next day would do a fine job of providing Justice - the guilty don't need appeals for Justice to transpire. The appeals are there because the process should be consistent, and they provide safeguards against a certain type of miscarriage of justice.

Of course, when it comes to "guilt," in the legal sense, we're talking about not only "Did he do it?" But "What was his state of mind?"
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 22, 2015 10:40AM)
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
An apology guys - I based the figure of 100 wrongfully executed on an extrapolation from the statistics, but I based it on the number on death row, not the number of actual executions. An oversight. The actual figure should be around forty.

But the entire civilized world, with one or two exceptions, have decided that even one is too much, which is why the death penalty is used in less that a handful of countries in the developed world. And in some of those countries it is on the books but not used. [/quote]

So where did the 40 come from?

I take it that 40 (or more) is an acceptable number of innocent defendants to spend the rest of their lives in prison. [/quote]
There is no acceptable number of innocent defendants forced to spend lengthy time in prison. But at least they are alive to plea their case.

In most of the world a life sentence rarely involves dying behind bars. Most countries release life prisoners on licence after a long number of years, though the life sentence still hangs over them as a guarantee of their good conduct.

A mistake in a life sentence can be rectified. A mistake after an execution cannot.

Also, as a side point, of all the few countries using the death penalty, why does the USA pick the most cruel and prolonged methods? Lethal injection and electrocution are among the most barbaric methods of execution devised. Other countries afford prisoners the more dignified and swift methods of shooting, hanging or beheading. You lock them up for more than ten years - a full life sentence in many countries - then at the end of that lengthy period, when many would consider they had served their time, you execute them in the most cruel manner possible.

Acesover, you said that the American system might be flawed but is the best of a bad lot (paraphrasing here). I would contend that the British system is the best available. Like the American system it guarantees a fair trial and a presumption of innocence. But it does not include three strikes for minor offences, it allows the possibility of parole for life sentences, and it decisively reverses miscarriages of justice.

The Irish system is close to the British, but not as good. After a recent supreme court decision constitutional rights of defendants are no longer guaranteed, which is a huge step backwards.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 22, 2015 11:12AM)
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
An apology guys - I based the figure of 100 wrongfully executed on an extrapolation from the statistics, but I based it on the number on death row, not the number of actual executions. An oversight. The actual figure should be around forty.

But the entire civilized world, with one or two exceptions, have decided that even one is too much, which is why the death penalty is used in less that a handful of countries in the developed world. And in some of those countries it is on the books but not used. [/quote]

So where did the 40 come from?

I take it that 40 (or more) is an acceptable number of innocent defendants to spend the rest of their lives in prison. [/quote]
There is no acceptable number of innocent defendants forced to spend lengthy time in prison. But at least they are alive to plea their case.
[/quote]

Your argument with respect to the death certainly SEEMS to be, "If even one is too many innocent defendants to suffer penalty X, then penalty X should be done away with." On that basis, clearly life imprisonment sentences should be abolished.
[quote]



In most of the world a life sentence rarely involves dying behind bars. Most countries release life prisoners on licence after a long number of years, though the life sentence still hangs over them as a guarantee of their good conduct. [/quote]
So now "RARELY" is good enough, even though one is too many? Fortunately, innocent defendants "rarely" (if ever) are executed in the United States.
[quote]

A mistake in a life sentence can be rectified. A mistake after an execution cannot.
[/quote]
You're cheating, just like Ed. A mistake "AFTER" a life sentence (i.e. after the defendant has died in prison) can't be rectified either.
[quote]

Also, as a side point, of all the few countries using the death penalty, why does the USA pick the most cruel and prolonged methods? Lethal injection and electrocution are among the most barbaric methods of execution devised. Other countries afford prisoners the more dignified and swift methods of shooting, hanging or beheading. [/quote] I agree with you that death sentences should be carried out in the most humane manner possible. [quote]You lock them up for more than ten years - a full life sentence in many countries [/quote] If you're talking about murder for those full life sentences, and people are getting out in ten years, then IMHO, you're posting time should be spent on the injustices inherent in THOSE countries' criminal justice proceedings. [quote]- then at the end of that lengthy period, when many would consider they had served their time, you execute them in the most cruel manner possible.

Acesover, you said that the American system might be flawed but is the best of a bad lot (paraphrasing here). I would contend that the British system is the best available. Like the American system it guarantees a fair trial and a presumption of innocence. But it does not include three strikes for minor offences,[/quote] In three strikes laws (at least, the one in California), the strikes are felonies and the predicate offenses are serious or violent felonies. If you're a historic violent criminal and you can't control yourself from committing yet another felony - knowing that you have two strikes - we want you off the streets. If you'd like to start a movement to give our career criminals political asylum in your country, you're welcome to them. [quote] it allows the possibility of parole for life sentences,[/quote] So, effectively, there are no life sentences. [quote]and it decisively reverses miscarriages of justice.

The Irish system is close to the British, but not as good. After a recent supreme court decision constitutional rights of defendants are no longer guaranteed, which is a huge step backwards. [/quote]
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 22, 2015 03:59PM)
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
An apology guys - I based the figure of 100 wrongfully executed on an extrapolation from the statistics, but I based it on the number on death row, not the number of actual executions. An oversight. The actual figure should be around forty.

But the entire civilized world, with one or two exceptions, have decided that even one is too much, which is why the death penalty is used in less that a handful of countries in the developed world. And in some of those countries it is on the books but not used. [/quote]

So where did the 40 come from?

I take it that 40 (or more) is an acceptable number of innocent defendants to spend the rest of their lives in prison. [/quote]
There is no acceptable number of innocent defendants forced to spend lengthy time in prison. But at least they are alive to plea their case.

In most of the world a life sentence rarely involves dying behind bars. Most countries release life prisoners on licence after a long number of years, though the life sentence still hangs over them as a guarantee of their good conduct.

A mistake in a life sentence can be rectified. A mistake after an execution cannot.

Also, as a side point, of all the few countries using the death penalty, why does the USA pick the most cruel and prolonged methods? Lethal injection and electrocution are among the most barbaric methods of execution devised. Other countries afford prisoners the more dignified and swift methods of shooting, hanging or beheading. You lock them up for more than ten years - a full life sentence in many countries - then at the end of that lengthy period, when many would consider they had served their time, you execute them in the most cruel manner possible.

Acesover, you said that the American system might be flawed but is the best of a bad lot (paraphrasing here). I would contend that the British system is the best available. Like the American system it guarantees a fair trial and a presumption of innocence. But it does not include three strikes for minor offences, it allows the possibility of parole for life sentences, and it decisively reverses miscarriages of justice.

The Irish system is close to the British, but not as good. After a recent supreme court decision constitutional rights of defendants are no longer guaranteed, which is a huge step backwards. [/quote]
Tony,

I could never understand the possibility of parole for life sentences. How can you be imprisoned for life if you can get parole? "For life" means to me, until you die. Just like death. You cannot be more dead once you are dead.


As per your, "I would contend that the British system is the best available". That is your opinion. Nothing wrong with having opinions. :)
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 22, 2015 04:00PM)
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
An apology guys - I based the figure of 100 wrongfully executed on an extrapolation from the statistics, but I based it on the number on death row, not the number of actual executions. An oversight. The actual figure should be around forty.

But the entire civilized world, with one or two exceptions, have decided that even one is too much, which is why the death penalty is used in less that a handful of countries in the developed world. And in some of those countries it is on the books but not used. [/quote]

So where did the 40 come from?

I take it that 40 (or more) is an acceptable number of innocent defendants to spend the rest of their lives in prison. [/quote]
There is no acceptable number of innocent defendants forced to spend lengthy time in prison. But at least they are alive to plea their case.

In most of the world a life sentence rarely involves dying behind bars. Most countries release life prisoners on licence after a long number of years, though the life sentence still hangs over them as a guarantee of their good conduct.

A mistake in a life sentence can be rectified. A mistake after an execution cannot.

Also, as a side point, of all the few countries using the death penalty, why does the USA pick the most cruel and prolonged methods? Lethal injection and electrocution are among the most barbaric methods of execution devised. Other countries afford prisoners the more dignified and swift methods of shooting, hanging or beheading. You lock them up for more than ten years - a full life sentence in many countries - then at the end of that lengthy period, when many would consider they had served their time, you execute them in the most cruel manner possible.

Acesover, you said that the American system might be flawed but is the best of a bad lot (paraphrasing here). I would contend that the British system is the best available. Like the American system it guarantees a fair trial and a presumption of innocence. But it does not include three strikes for minor offences, it allows the possibility of parole for life sentences, and it decisively reverses miscarriages of justice.

The Irish system is close to the British, but not as good. After a recent supreme court decision constitutional rights of defendants are no longer guaranteed, which is a huge step backwards. [/quote]
Tony,

I could never understand the possibility of parole for life sentences. How can you be imprisoned for life if you can get parole? "For life" means to me, until you die. Just like death. You cannot be more dead once you are dead.


As per your, "I would contend that the British system is the best available". That is your opinion. Nothing wrong with having opinions. :) As long as you keep it in perspective and realize it is only your opinion and there may be others out there.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 22, 2015 06:33PM)
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Your argument with respect to the death certainly SEEMS to be, "If even one is too many innocent defendants to suffer penalty X, then penalty X should be done away with." On that basis, clearly life imprisonment sentences should be abolished.
[/quote]
No that is not my argument.

There is a big difference between all other punishments and the death penalty. All other punishments can be ended. The death penalty is final, which makes it different. If someone gets a life sentence and later evidence proves their innocence, we can release them. We do not have that option with the death penalty.

Is it acceptable that society can temporarily imprison an innocent man? I think we have to accept that.
Is it acceptable that society can kill an innocent man? I think we do not have to accept that.

Consider the case of George Stinney, a fourteen year old executed in the forties. He has since been completely exonerated. He was the victim of sloppy and racist police work. Is it acceptable that we can put an innocent child to death? Most countries say no.

Acesover, on the question of length of a life sentence, most of the world differs from America. Most countries allow for the possibility of rehabilitation. As a journalist I spent a number of days in the high security wing of Limerick prison. There were five guys on the wing doing life for murder. Two stood out.

One was a serial killer doing life for a series of brutal rape-murders. Another was a house burglar who got disturbed during a robbery and ran down the stairs. He ran into the homeowner, who fell and broke his neck. Both guys were guilty of murder. I know what I am going to say next will be controversial. Some of us say that all killers are the same. Others say that some are a lot worse than others and need to be dealt with differently.

Here is how we deal with it in Ireland and the UK. The serial killer died in prison a few years back. If he had lived to ninety he would have died in prison. The burglar did fifteen years and was released on licence. If he goes back to burglary the life sentence will be reactivated and he will do another fifteen years at least. If he lives a clean and useful life, he is given a second chance. Personally I like to leave open the possibility of redemption. The US system generally closes that door.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 22, 2015 07:18PM)
The "big difference" that you refer to is an illusion. Someone given a life sentence may die in prison (an unacceptable result, according to you); someone given a death sentence may be released before that sentence is carried out. In fact, according to the study you referenced, he has better chances of getting out with a death sentence because of the higher scrutiny such cases are given.


Where did the 40 figure come from?
Message: Posted by: tommy (Apr 22, 2015 07:18PM)
In reality he is not simply a murderer but a traitor and ought to have been shot a dawn.
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 22, 2015 08:35PM)
Tony,

So from what I gather you are saying that a convicted murderer should go to prison as in your example for 15 years then be left out and if he does ok that is fine. however if he commits another murder he should go back to prison. For what another 15 years or is two enough?

I actually have to laugh when you say that the house burglar got "disturbed". Sorry to disturb him while he is working, lol. :) Then he accidently killed someone while trying to get away. Well after all they did disturb him. Guess they had it coming. Doesn't that sound kind of silly to you? You failed to mention if he was armed at the time or not. However it should not matter. He killed someone while committing a felony.

Then of course you will get those who if the home owner shot and killed the burglar. The home owner would be accused of using excessive force and probably sentenced to life in prison because he violated the burglar's right to rob a home and be safe while doing so.

The possibility of redemption of a felon is probably less than 50% after prison. Repeat offenders ever hear of them? Not good odds in my opinion.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 23, 2015 08:14AM)
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, acesover wrote:
Tony,

So from what I gather you are saying that a convicted murderer should go to prison as in your example for 15 years then be left out and if he does ok that is fine. however if he commits another murder he should go back to prison. For what another 15 years or is two enough?

I actually have to laugh when you say that the house burglar got "disturbed". Sorry to disturb him while he is working, lol. :) Then he accidently killed someone while trying to get away. Well after all they did disturb him. Guess they had it coming. Doesn't that sound kind of silly to you? You failed to mention if he was armed at the time or not. However it should not matter. He killed someone while committing a felony.

Then of course you will get those who if the home owner shot and killed the burglar. The home owner would be accused of using excessive force and probably sentenced to life in prison because he violated the burglar's right to rob a home and be safe while doing so.

The possibility of redemption of a felon is probably less than 50% after prison. Repeat offenders ever hear of them? Not good odds in my opinion. [/quote]
To clarify, no there should not be an automatic release after fifteen years. There should be a parole hearing. We keep the serial killers in for life, and the gang hitmen. As for the burglar who was disturbed, he was unarmed, and had NEVER committed a violent act before. He was a career criminal, but not a violent man.

In my view, a view shared by many, there is hope of redemption for people like him. The greater than 50% recidivism rate you quoted is true for a lot of jurisdictions, but by no means universal. In Ireland and the UK a big effort goes into rehabilitating prisoners, and those who learn a trade and further their education inside reoffend far less than that. Those who do not take advantage of the opportunities are far more likely to reoffend, and all of that is taken into account at parole hearings.

As for reoffending and reactivating the life sentence, it does not require him to kill again to do that. If he broke into a house, or drove drunk, or started a bar fight, that would reactivate the life sentence automatically. Even shoplifting would. So it is not as bonkers as it seems. The fact that the reactivation of life sentences is very rare shows that this policy does work in practical terms.

As for homeowners killing burglars, I am very uncomfortable with the use of deadly force. But of course that is a completely different matter than murder. I think most of us can accept that, even those of us opposed to deadly force.

But it does illustrate my point; you can kill a man and not be an irredeemably evil criminal. I like a legal system that recognises nuances.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 23, 2015 08:20AM)
An article in the Washington Post this week is relevant to this discussion. 268 cases from the eighties and nineties have been assessed, and the forensic testimony provided by the FBI on hair analysis has been shown to be misleading in 95% of those cases. So people were convicted on the basis of untrue and discredited testimony.

Of those convicted 32 received the death penalty, and 14 are now dead and beyond the appeals process. If I were an American I would find this unacceptable, which is one of the reasons I oppose the death penalty.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 23, 2015 08:36AM)
[quote]On Apr 23, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, acesover wrote:
Tony,

So from what I gather you are saying that a convicted murderer should go to prison as in your example for 15 years then be left out and if he does ok that is fine. however if he commits another murder he should go back to prison. For what another 15 years or is two enough?

I actually have to laugh when you say that the house burglar got "disturbed". Sorry to disturb him while he is working, lol. :) Then he accidently killed someone while trying to get away. Well after all they did disturb him. Guess they had it coming. Doesn't that sound kind of silly to you? You failed to mention if he was armed at the time or not. However it should not matter. He killed someone while committing a felony.

Then of course you will get those who if the home owner shot and killed the burglar. The home owner would be accused of using excessive force and probably sentenced to life in prison because he violated the burglar's right to rob a home and be safe while doing so.

The possibility of redemption of a felon is probably less than 50% after prison. Repeat offenders ever hear of them? Not good odds in my opinion. [/quote]
To clarify, no there should not be an automatic release after fifteen years. There should be a parole hearing. We keep the serial killers in for life, and the gang hitmen. As for the burglar who was disturbed, he was unarmed, and had NEVER committed a violent act before. He was a career criminal, but not a violent man.

In my view, a view shared by many, there is hope of redemption for people like him. The greater than 50% recidivism rate you quoted is true for a lot of jurisdictions, but by no means universal. In Ireland and the UK a big effort goes into rehabilitating prisoners, and those who learn a trade and further their education inside reoffend far less than that. Those who do not take advantage of the opportunities are far more likely to reoffend, and all of that is taken into account at parole hearings.

As for reoffending and reactivating the life sentence, it does not require him to kill again to do that. If he broke into a house, or drove drunk, or started a bar fight, that would reactivate the life sentence automatically. Even shoplifting would. So it is not as bonkers as it seems. The fact that the reactivation of life sentences is very rare shows that this policy does work in practical terms.

As for homeowners killing burglars, I am very uncomfortable with the use of deadly force. But of course that is a completely different matter than murder. I think most of us can accept that, even those of us opposed to deadly force.

But it does illustrate my point; you can kill a man and not be an irredeemably evil criminal. I like a legal system that recognises nuances. [/quote]

I agree with you that not all murderers should receive the same sentence.
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 23, 2015 01:58PM)
[quote]On Apr 23, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
An article in the Washington Post this week is relevant to this discussion. 268 cases from the eighties and nineties have been assessed, and the forensic testimony provided by the FBI on hair analysis has been shown to be misleading in 95% of those cases. So people were convicted on the basis of untrue and discredited testimony.

Of those convicted 32 received the death penalty, and 14 are now dead and beyond the appeals process. If I were an American I would find this unacceptable, which is one of the reasons I oppose the death penalty. [/quote]


Of those 14 that are now dead. Were they executed or did they die in prison of natural causes?
Message: Posted by: Magnus Eisengrim (Apr 23, 2015 02:17PM)
[quote]On Apr 23, 2015, acesover wrote:
[quote]On Apr 23, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
An article in the Washington Post this week is relevant to this discussion. 268 cases from the eighties and nineties have been assessed, and the forensic testimony provided by the FBI on hair analysis has been shown to be misleading in 95% of those cases. So people were convicted on the basis of untrue and discredited testimony.

Of those convicted 32 received the death penalty, and 14 are now dead and beyond the appeals process. If I were an American I would find this unacceptable, which is one of the reasons I oppose the death penalty. [/quote]


Of those 14 that are now dead. Were they executed or did they die in prison of natural causes? [/quote]

According to a table at the end of the [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/local/fbi-hair/]Washington Post article[/url], 9 were executed and 5 died while on death row.
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 23, 2015 03:07PM)
While the defendants were not convicted on the sole testimony of the hair analysis it could have helped convict them. Also there is no saying they were innocent. However they are saying that misleading testimony was given.

Those giving false testimony should be punished. If it was truly false. However if given honestly but in such a way as to sound incriminating it is the defense attorney's job to bring this out.

When one hires or uses an expert witness do not expect unbiased testimony. But expect truthful testimony not perjury.

When the procuetor uses their forensic expert witness, expect it to show what the Procesecution wants or they would not have them testify. However as stated earlier it should be the truth even if delivered in a biased way.
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 23, 2015 03:37PM)
I just lost 15 posts for some reason. This truly is a magical place. Yesterday I still had 880. Check my signature.
Message: Posted by: Magnus Eisengrim (Apr 23, 2015 03:56PM)
[quote]On Apr 23, 2015, acesover wrote:
I just lost 15 posts for some reason. This truly is a magical place. Yesterday I still had 880. Check my signature. [/quote]


Don't go postal on us ;)
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 23, 2015 04:08PM)
[quote]On Apr 23, 2015, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
[quote]On Apr 23, 2015, acesover wrote:
I just lost 15 posts for some reason. This truly is a magical place. Yesterday I still had 880. Check my signature. [/quote]


Don't go postal on us ;) [/quote]

I don't really care. But it is annoying as to why it happens. However I had 1,009 at one time. Then they started to disappear. That is why after losing aaround 125 posts I put the amount I had in my signature and the date I had them.

Perhaps someone in high places does not like what I post.
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 23, 2015 04:13PM)
[quote]On Apr 23, 2015, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
[quote]On Apr 23, 2015, acesover wrote:
I just lost 15 posts for some reason. This truly is a magical place. Yesterday I still had 880. Check my signature. [/quote]


Don't go postal on us ;) [/quote]

I am as sane as this guy... :heavymetal:
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 23, 2015 06:36PM)
[quote]On Apr 23, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
[quote]On Apr 22, 2015, acesover wrote:
Tony,

So from what I gather you are saying that a convicted murderer should go to prison as in your example for 15 years then be left out and if he does ok that is fine. however if he commits another murder he should go back to prison. For what another 15 years or is two enough?

I actually have to laugh when you say that the house burglar got "disturbed". Sorry to disturb him while he is working, lol. :) Then he accidently killed someone while trying to get away. Well after all they did disturb him. Guess they had it coming. Doesn't that sound kind of silly to you? You failed to mention if he was armed at the time or not. However it should not matter. He killed someone while committing a felony.

Then of course you will get those who if the home owner shot and killed the burglar. The home owner would be accused of using excessive force and probably sentenced to life in prison because he violated the burglar's right to rob a home and be safe while doing so.

The possibility of redemption of a felon is probably less than 50% after prison. Repeat offenders ever hear of them? Not good odds in my opinion. [/quote]
To clarify, no there should not be an automatic release after fifteen years. There should be a parole hearing. We keep the serial killers in for life, and the gang hitmen. As for the burglar who was disturbed, he was unarmed, and had NEVER committed a violent act before. He was a career criminal, but not a violent man.

In my view, a view shared by many, there is hope of redemption for people like him. The greater than 50% recidivism rate you quoted is true for a lot of jurisdictions, but by no means universal. In Ireland and the UK a big effort goes into rehabilitating prisoners, and those who learn a trade and further their education inside reoffend far less than that. Those who do not take advantage of the opportunities are far more likely to reoffend, and all of that is taken into account at parole hearings.

As for reoffending and reactivating the life sentence, it does not require him to kill again to do that. If he broke into a house, or drove drunk, or started a bar fight, that would reactivate the life sentence automatically. Even shoplifting would. So it is not as bonkers as it seems. The fact that the reactivation of life sentences is very rare shows that this policy does work in practical terms.

As for homeowners killing burglars, I am very uncomfortable with the use of deadly force. But of course that is a completely different matter than murder. I think most of us can accept that, even those of us opposed to deadly force.

But it does illustrate my point; you can kill a man and not be an irredeemably evil criminal. I like a legal system that recognises nuances. [/quote]


A legal system that recognises nuances is one waiting for major corruption. Certainly you see this right?
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 23, 2015 06:43PM)
[quote]On Apr 23, 2015, Dannydoyle wrote:
A legal system that recognises nuances is one waiting for major corruption. Certainly you see this right? [/quote]
Absolutely, Danny. But a system without nuances is a lot worse in my view.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 23, 2015 07:15PM)
So you prefer one where some are intentionally treated differently than others? Not me.

It happens enough when it is not encouraged.
Message: Posted by: Wizard of Oz (Apr 23, 2015 07:46PM)
He wants to die and be a martyr, which is exactly why he shouldn't die.

If he lives, he will almost certainly be kept in a "supermax" prison called ADX in Colorado. His life would be a living hell, with only an hour each day out of his cell and little to no exposure to other inmates. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/2015/04/09/how-tsarnaev-will-live-lives/76emAU2RNeUxfSDt4POHwJ/story.html

Sadly, this is exactly why he should live.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 23, 2015 10:06PM)
Sadly that actually would sort of be torture. Intentionally making his life a living hell and all.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 24, 2015 02:07AM)
[quote]On Apr 23, 2015, Wizard of Oz wrote:
He wants to die and be a martyr[/quote]


I guess his legal team didn't get the memo; they're working their butts to off to keep him from getting the death penalty...and I don't see him firing them.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 24, 2015 03:51AM)
[quote]On Apr 23, 2015, Dannydoyle wrote:
So you prefer one where some are intentionally treated differently than others? Not me.

It happens enough when it is not encouraged. [/quote]
You already have a system that treats different convicted people differently. That's why there is a separate hearing after conviction to determine if the death penalty should be applied.

The fact that courts are held in public and reported upon provides a certain protection against corruption.
Message: Posted by: tommy (Apr 24, 2015 05:17AM)
Same old trite.
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 24, 2015 06:21PM)
I think it only fair that he be treated fairly and be put in general populatiion and have all the privileges as the other prisoners. :) Who knows he may even find a boy friend before they do what they do to this sort of person in prison. A win win situation.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 24, 2015 07:20PM)
[quote]On Apr 24, 2015, acesover wrote:
I think it only fair that he be treated fairly and be put in general populatiion and have all the privileges as the other prisoners. :) Who knows he may even find a boy friend before they do what they do to this sort of person in prison. A win win situation. [/quote]
Actually it is a myth that prisoners pick on child offenders, terrorists, etc. Prisoners pick on weaker prisoners. The strong prey on the weak. If he walked in with a hard-ass attitude he could do very well in the general prison population. And if he showed any sign of weakness he would be torn apart in a month. And a lot would depend on which groups he would align himself with once inside. You might be disappointed.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 24, 2015 08:14PM)
Tony you are absolutely ignorant of the American prison system and you un just showed it. MOST prison gangs won't allow in child touchers and many promote for killing them. Some will kill you for having an opportunity to kill one and not taking it. These are well documented facts.

Often rapists have the same issues. You are way out of your depth talking about these things. I am sorry but it is true. It takes way more than a tough attitude, you have to actually BE tough.

Ever been in a maximum security prison? Talk to anyone who has? Try it some time then offer an opinion.
Message: Posted by: tommy (Apr 24, 2015 08:34PM)
Some will kill you just for being white actually.
Message: Posted by: landmark (Apr 24, 2015 09:36PM)
[quote]On Apr 24, 2015, acesover wrote:
I think it only fair that he be treated fairly and be put in general populatiion and have all the privileges as the other prisoners. :) Who knows he may even find a boy friend before they do what they do to this sort of person in prison. A win win situation. [/quote]
It always fascinates me that those who profess to be horrified by Sadaam's rape rooms, like to give a wink and a nudge when it comes to the rape of prisoners as punishment here in the US.
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 24, 2015 10:28PM)
[quote]On Apr 24, 2015, landmark wrote:
[quote]On Apr 24, 2015, acesover wrote:
I think it only fair that he be treated fairly and be put in general populatiion and have all the privileges as the other prisoners. :) Who knows he may even find a boy friend before they do what they do to this sort of person in prison. A win win situation. [/quote]
It always fascinates me that those who profess to be horrified by Sadaam's rape rooms, like to give a wink and a nudge when it comes to the rape of prisoners as punishment here in the US. [/quote]

Well I really don't want him raped. Who knows maybe he likes it. But that is another topic altogether. But I would not mind seeing him dead for killing that little boy and injuring the little girl an many others. Also what he tried to do to the morale of the United States. Yea his death would not make me sad at all.

Would like to see what the other prisoners would do to him when they call him out and he throws them the bird like he has done here in the past. Of course Tony thinks if he acts tough. Tough...yea, he looks tough in the eyes of those in prison, especially after killing an 8 year old boy with a bomb. I believe he would wet his pants in the first 15 minutes. From then on it is down hill for this tough guy. Of course maybe he could pass out signed copies of his picture on the cover of Rolling Stone.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 24, 2015 11:01PM)
[quote]On Apr 24, 2015, landmark wrote:
[quote]On Apr 24, 2015, acesover wrote:
I think it only fair that he be treated fairly and be put in general populatiion and have all the privileges as the other prisoners. :) Who knows he may even find a boy friend before they do what they do to this sort of person in prison. A win win situation. [/quote]
It always fascinates me that those who profess to be horrified by Sadaam's rape rooms, like to give a wink and a nudge when it comes to the rape of prisoners as punishment here in the US. [/quote]

Yes the idea also occurred to me actually.

Mind you prison is what it is and when you commit a crime you sort of sign up for that. But to gleefully wish it upon another sends the wrong message.
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (Apr 24, 2015 11:02PM)
I agree, Danny and landmark. It's especially ironic (and somewhat dismaying) to hear a professed Christian wish that on someone else.
Message: Posted by: tommy (Apr 25, 2015 01:37AM)
Anybody who wishes that on any man is a sick little pervert who ought to be locked up in a mental institution with the other entirely disgusting little perverts.
Message: Posted by: Destiny (Apr 25, 2015 03:35AM)
I feel sorry for the lawyers. I know it's a job someone has to do but I would find it impossible to stand up and defend someone who I knew took a child's life.
I don't know anything about who is defending him - do they do it reluctantly because it has to be done - or enthusiastically for the professional kudos if they do better than expected?
Message: Posted by: ed rhodes (Apr 25, 2015 03:46AM)
[quote]On Apr 24, 2015, landmark wrote:
[quote]On Apr 24, 2015, acesover wrote:
I think it only fair that he be treated fairly and be put in general populatiion and have all the privileges as the other prisoners. :) Who knows he may even find a boy friend before they do what they do to this sort of person in prison. A win win situation. [/quote]
It always fascinates me that those who profess to be horrified by Sadaam's rape rooms, like to give a wink and a nudge when it comes to the rape of prisoners as punishment here in the US. [/quote]

Oh it's always OK when it happens to OUR prisoners because OUR prisoners are really bad guys!

(That was sarcasm by the way.)
Message: Posted by: ed rhodes (Apr 25, 2015 03:48AM)
[quote]On Apr 25, 2015, Destiny wrote:
I feel sorry for the lawyers. I know it's a job someone has to do but I would find it impossible to stand up and defend someone who I knew took a child's life.
I don't know anything about who is defending him - do they do it reluctantly because it has to be done - or enthusiastically for the professional kudos if they do better than expected? [/quote]

Hopefully they do it enthusiastically because they realize he needs the best defense available and that's their job.
If they were doing it "reluctantly" or only for the "professional kudos" then they are in the wrong profession.
Message: Posted by: landmark (Apr 25, 2015 07:14AM)
I would think that any lawyer who could get this client life instead of death would never have to worry about attracting clients again.
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 25, 2015 09:09AM)
[quote]On Apr 25, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
I agree, Danny and landmark. It's especially ironic (and somewhat dismaying) to hear a professed Christian wish that on someone else. [/quote]

Ok let's get something straight here. If you are referring to this post,

Who knows he may even find a boy friend before they do what they do to this sort of person in prison. A win win situation.

It means exactly what it says. First off many prisoners have boyfriends in prison. Check it out. Secondly many child molesters and child killers are beaten and often killed. As he may get a boyfriend. So he may get beaten up and or killed which would not upset me. That is how I feel. Christian or not you can only push me so far.

So what is the issue here?
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 25, 2015 09:24AM)
Bob,

Don't be condescending and use the word "profess" when describing me as being a Christian. I am a Christian and practice my faith. However I am not blinded nor obsessed by it.

There are Christians and there are radical Christians just as there are muslims and radical muslims. Radicals are out there trying to convert everyone to their way of thinking. That is not Christianity as far as I am concerned. That is an obsession and obsessions almost leads to disaster.
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (Apr 25, 2015 09:28AM)
"Profess" simply means "to assert." Any condescension in the word is the product of your own imagination.

Wishing horrible things to happen to others while they are in custody is not my idea of Christianity.
Message: Posted by: acesover (Apr 25, 2015 09:57AM)
[quote]On Apr 25, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
"Profess" simply means "to assert." Any condescension in the word is the product of your own imagination.

Wishing horrible things to happen to others while they are in custody is not my idea of Christianity. [/quote]

Depends on what dictionary one uses. Here is another. to say that you are, do, or feel something when other people doubt what you say.

Never really cared what your idea of Christianity is. Being "in custody" is a nice out. Because I am talking about being incarcerated not just being in custody. We are talking being in prison not in custody. The man if you wish to call him that, is a vicious killer of children and wishes to destroy the American way of life, just for openers. If he could he would gladly kill you and your loved ones. He kills because people do not see things his way. Please don't be blinded and try to be PC. As far as I am concerned any punishment he receives is not enough for his deeds. But I do not believe that makes me a bad Christian. I only take "Turn the other cheek" so far. Don't want to turn this into a long rant as I see it going there because I have no where said all I want on this topic. So I will stop.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 25, 2015 05:04PM)
[quote]On Apr 24, 2015, Dannydoyle wrote:
Tony you are absolutely ignorant of the American prison system and you un just showed it. MOST prison gangs won't allow in child touchers and many promote for killing them. Some will kill you for having an opportunity to kill one and not taking it. These are well documented facts.

Often rapists have the same issues. You are way out of your depth talking about these things. I am sorry but it is true. It takes way more than a tough attitude, you have to actually BE tough.

Ever been in a maximum security prison? Talk to anyone who has? Try it some time then offer an opinion. [/quote]
Danny, I have the same experience of a high security prison as you do. *** all.

If a gang member is a paedophile on the outside, once he gets inside he will still be part of the gang. And that is well documented. The paedophiles and rapists they go after are the non-aligned ones, the weaker ones. If Tsarnaev aligned with a radical Muslim group on the inside - and among some he might be a hero - he would be fine in the general prison population. It is only if he is isolated and on his own that he would be vulnerable.

But it is a moot point, since he won't be in the general population, no matter how the sentencing goes.

Much of the prison population have gang affiliations of various sorts. Drug dealers, career criminals, etc, are often part of groups of various sorts. Most rapists and other deviants are solitary in their pursuits. This is why they are vulnerable in prison. It has nothing to do with some cosy myth that violent criminals share our revulsion with these guys. They don't. They are not the good guys.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 25, 2015 07:22PM)
Now if only we had, say, a Nicaraguan present to provide expertise about Ireland's society and justice system.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 25, 2015 08:19PM)
[quote]On Apr 25, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
[quote]On Apr 24, 2015, Dannydoyle wrote:
Tony you are absolutely ignorant of the American prison system and you un just showed it. MOST prison gangs won't allow in child touchers and many promote for killing them. Some will kill you for having an opportunity to kill one and not taking it. These are well documented facts.

Often rapists have the same issues. You are way out of your depth talking about these things. I am sorry but it is true. It takes way more than a tough attitude, you have to actually BE tough.

Ever been in a maximum security prison? Talk to anyone who has? Try it some time then offer an opinion. [/quote]
Danny, I have the same experience of a high security prison as you do. *** all.

If a gang member is a paedophile on the outside, once he gets inside he will still be part of the gang. And that is well documented. The paedophiles and rapists they go after are the non-aligned ones, the weaker ones. If Tsarnaev aligned with a radical Muslim group on the inside - and among some he might be a hero - he would be fine in the general prison population. It is only if he is isolated and on his own that he would be vulnerable.

But it is a moot point, since he won't be in the general population, no matter how the sentencing goes.

Much of the prison population have gang affiliations of various sorts. Drug dealers, career criminals, etc, are often part of groups of various sorts. Most rapists and other deviants are solitary in their pursuits. This is why they are vulnerable in prison. It has nothing to do with some cosy myth that violent criminals share our revulsion with these guys. They don't. They are not the good guys. [/quote]

Well you as usual want to universalise your own experience. I spent quite a bit of time with violent offenders in a program trying to get down the recidivism rate. Gang members trying to disassociate once they were out of prison. I actually have quite a bit of experience. So please do not tell me when you have ZERO experience that you have the same as me.

Dude pedophiles are killed by gangs OUTSIDE of prison! (I am talking in America.) I have way more experience in that world than I care to remember. But it is something you think you researched so you think you know. I am talking about people who I worked with PERSONALLY.

Your ignorance of the AMERICAN prison gang system is hilarious. Often gangs are organized by race. At times the gang you are fighting on the outside may have a member of the gang you have to join to stay alive inside. It happens.

Don't assume everyone shares your level of no experience. They don't. I have NO IDEA what gangs in prison are like in any other country. So I will not speak of it. I just find it laughable that with no experience you make such grand pronouncements.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 26, 2015 02:39PM)
Danny, we both have the same experience. Neither of us has done time in a high security prison.

Like you I have spoken extensively with violent criminals. Also with prison officers and cops. And paedophiles and their victims. Several hundred hours. But aside from a couple of days in a medium security wing of a prison, no actual experience. Loudly proclaiming my lack of experience doesn't actually improve yours.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Apr 26, 2015 03:46PM)
Tony, what you have written here proves that you have very little understanding of the U.S. prison system/culture.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 26, 2015 04:58PM)
Absolutely.

I did not talk or interview them Tony. I worked with them. Huge difference. Sorry yuu break it to you n
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 27, 2015 11:19AM)
Danny, an opinion is like an a&s - we all have one. I haven't seen anything from you to cause me to change my mind. Just stating your opinion forcefully, which is all you have actually done, doesn't cut it with me. Sorry.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 27, 2015 11:39AM)
[quote]On Apr 27, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
Danny, an opinion is like an a&s - we all have one. I haven't seen anything from you to cause me to change my mind. Just stating your opinion forcefully, which is all you have actually done, doesn't cut it with me. Sorry. [/quote]

Funny you should mention it...
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 27, 2015 11:52AM)
I was thinking the same thing.

Odd how I was stating facts nottt opinion. Tony is the one with the differing OPIONION that things are not as they are stated. Yet Tony you offer no proof of what you claim. You want to call it a myth and so forth. I don't think you spent ANY time with maximum security prisoners in America yet you tell those who have they are wrong.

Since it is so well documented as you claim please provide that documentation. Otherwise you are writing fiction again.
Message: Posted by: RNK (Apr 27, 2015 11:52AM)
[quote]On Apr 27, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On Apr 27, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
Danny, an opinion is like an a&s - we all have one. I haven't seen anything from you to cause me to change my mind. Just stating your opinion forcefully, which is all you have actually done, doesn't cut it with me. Sorry. [/quote]

Funny you should mention it... [/quote]

Exactly. And your google opinion when it comes to America doesn't cut it with me. To funny....
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 27, 2015 11:53AM)
And funnily enough to use that analogy because an opinion can often make on3 look like an...
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 27, 2015 08:11PM)
Funny, Danny, how we both quoted the same amount of facts here. None. You stated an opinion. I stated an opinion. And you haven't succeeded in changing my mind.

Maybe if you can tell me a few instances of when gang-aligned paedophiles were targeted by their gangs (for the paedophilia, not for other reasons), then I might change my mind. You will appreciate it is more difficult for me to cite examples of people who weren't picked on, because they weren't picked on. If I am wrong prove me wrong. Don't just blow hot air.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 27, 2015 09:00PM)
Ok a giant raccoon farted several billion years ago and set the big bang in motion. Price me wrong.

YOU are the one making the assertion that people are not picked on and calling it a myth that they are. Prove your claim.

Why is it with you that if you use Google to do research something it is a fact, and other peoples actual life experience is an opinion? http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=90004
Now YOU post something that shows it is a myth for us OK?

Make no mistake I am not trying to change your mind. Not possible. No matter what you are going to think whatever you do because you know better. Even with NO experience and being told different by someone with significant experience you don't change a bit. Never will.

Here this might be interesting for you to see.
http://www.vice.com/read/why-sex-offenders-are-getting-slaughtered-in-california-prisons-218

Straight from the article that won't change your mind one bit. "But one rule holds true across the board: One race doesn't put hands on an inmate of another race, even if the con in question is a pedophile. "Every group takes care of their own," Kilo says. "Once the blacks find out [someone is a pedophile], the Bloods and Crips take care of it. Once the Hispanics find out, the cholos take care of it. Once the whites find out, the skinheads take care of it.

So prison politics come into play when it's deemed time to take out a perv. But why are California sex offenders out in the open—relatively speaking—even after the state established separate housing units for vulnerable inmates?

"The police don't like to try to discriminate despite the fact that they got those charges in their background," Kilo says. "That's a choice they got to make if they want to go to a Sensitive Needs Yard. Some of them try to slide through to the mainline [the general population] until somebody exposes them or hears about their case or whatever. And once they get exposed, it's all bets off."

Even though gangs may disagree on various things, they all agree that sex offenders deserve rough treatment, Kilo tells me.

"When it comes to those type of guys, every race is going to get them," Kilo says. "The chomos don't get a break, period. The only relief they get is if they go to protective custody [PC] and some yards are all PC." And, according to Kilo, if a sex offender makes it out of protective custody, the guards sometimes give the convicts a heads-up."

Bit TONY says it is a myth and it is not true and blah blah blah. Now Tony, how about YOU provide something other than an opinion and saying I only have an opinion and provide back up for your assertion. Till then YOU are the one full of hot air.

As I said I am talking about AMERICAN prison and AMERICAN prison gangs. Lord only knows what you are talking about.

And here is the last line of the article that won't change your mind. (I doubt you will even read it.)
"What can't be dismissed as a trend or passing fad is that when child molesters get exposed in American prisons, they're targeted—and sometimes even killed."

It matches up with my personal experience. Which was what I said before.

Now again I ask you to provide your research as to this being a "myth" please.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 28, 2015 06:43PM)
Danny, thanks for posting those links. Two interesting articles.

In the face of the evidence I will move my position. It now seems obvious that paedophiles are targeted in some US prisons. The articles both however made it clear that it was not universal. I have interviewed prison officials in US jails, but not in Californian jails. I was basing my opinion on what they had told me. Obviously I need a larger sample to interview.

The situation in Europe is as I outlined, but I stand corrected on some American prisons. And definitely on Californian prisons.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 28, 2015 06:54PM)
Well that was exactly my personal experience. The enraging part is you telling me my personal experience is just somehw wrong in light of a couple of interviews.

Also pretty much no behavior is universal. Nobody said it was. We simply said it was not a myth. And that you are ignorant of the American prison system and its gangs. Less so now.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 28, 2015 07:20PM)
Point taken Danny. If we were speaking face to face it would go better!
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 28, 2015 07:58PM)
Well someone was 100% wrong about you changing your position on the matter.

Let me check the thread and see who that was. .. oh wait all I had to check was the mirror. Sorry. The sarcasm was not needed. My bad.
Message: Posted by: Destiny (Apr 30, 2015 09:14AM)
Found an interesting article on the lawyer - she's representing him because she is against the death penalty, which I think is admirable, though I disagree with what seems to be her reasoning - that all these murderers do things because of brain injuries or horrible things that happened to them when they were younger. I tend to think that there are a few among us who are just evil.

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/03/judith-clarke-dzokhar-tsarnaev-lawyer
Message: Posted by: landmark (Apr 30, 2015 10:53AM)
I think there are people who are just evil--they delight in the suffering of others. They have no moral code. They kill for the thrill of it.
I don't think Tsarnev fits that category.
He believed, incredibly, that he was doing the right thing. He was weak-minded and egged on to do a horrific thing.

But, frankly, I am far more interested in the victim's parents' state of mind than in Tsarnaev's. As I said in the OP, I don't think I could be that generous. I am very interested in how and why they came to that conclusion. I want to know more about who these people are. They seem fairly remarkable to me.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 30, 2015 10:56AM)
There are the people you speak about. I have met them.

Because we live in a Yin/Yang type of world there are also the polar opposite type of people in existence. There are people who are just so good that it is hard to imagine what brings them to that place and how in the face of the world they can possibly be so good. Almost as tough to understand.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 30, 2015 11:30AM)
[quote]On Apr 30, 2015, landmark wrote:
I think there are people who are just evil. [/quote]

I'm pleasantly surprised!
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 30, 2015 11:43AM)
[quote]On Apr 30, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On Apr 30, 2015, landmark wrote:
I think there are people who are just evil. [/quote]

I'm pleasantly surprised! [/quote]

To be clear I am interpreting this as you are surprised he would admit this, not that these people exist.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 30, 2015 11:55AM)
[quote]On Apr 30, 2015, Dannydoyle wrote:
[quote]On Apr 30, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On Apr 30, 2015, landmark wrote:
I think there are people who are just evil. [/quote]

I'm pleasantly surprised! [/quote]

To be clear I am interpreting this as you are surprised he would admit this, not that these people exist. [/quote]


I'm a little surprised to learn that Landmark shares my belief on this point. Not everybody does.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 30, 2015 11:59AM)
Spend a few weeks investigating child crimes. The viewpoint tends to be agreed with.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 30, 2015 12:07PM)
And in other venues, it tends to be disagreed with.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Apr 30, 2015 04:07PM)
For certain.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Apr 30, 2015 05:41PM)
[quote]On Apr 30, 2015, landmark wrote:
But, frankly, I am far more interested in the victim's parents' state of mind than in Tsarnaev's. As I said in the OP, I don't think I could be that generous. I am very interested in how and why they came to that conclusion. I want to know more about who these people are. They seem fairly remarkable to me. [/quote]
From my reading of it they are concerned that their lives will be taken up in endless appeals if the death penalty is chosen. They are seeking life imprisonment to end this thing and move on with their lives, not out of compassion. I may be wrong, but that is how I read it.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Apr 30, 2015 05:55PM)
[quote]On Apr 30, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
[quote]On Apr 30, 2015, landmark wrote:
But, frankly, I am far more interested in the victim's parents' state of mind than in Tsarnaev's. As I said in the OP, I don't think I could be that generous. I am very interested in how and why they came to that conclusion. I want to know more about who these people are. They seem fairly remarkable to me. [/quote]
From my reading of it they are concerned that their lives will be taken up in endless appeals if the death penalty is chosen. They are seeking life imprisonment to end this thing and move on with their lives, not out of compassion. I may be wrong, but that is how I read it. [/quote]

That was my impression, too.
Message: Posted by: landmark (Apr 30, 2015 06:56PM)
[quote]On Apr 30, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On Apr 30, 2015, Dannydoyle wrote:
[quote]On Apr 30, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On Apr 30, 2015, landmark wrote:
I think there are people who are just evil. [/quote]

I'm pleasantly surprised! [/quote]

To be clear I am interpreting this as you are surprised he would admit this, not that these people exist. [/quote]


I'm a little surprised to learn that Landmark shares my belief on this point. Not everybody does. [/quote]
I think there are some very damaged people out there. Damaged beyond any hope of repair.
Message: Posted by: landmark (May 1, 2015 06:59AM)
This was eye-opening:

[img]http://i.imgur.com/Azl02Mq.png[/img]
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (May 1, 2015 07:42AM)
The US is in some bad company in that chart. The only first world countries on there are Japan and Taiwan.
Message: Posted by: Destiny (May 1, 2015 09:38AM)
For a place with a small population North Korea is way up there.

It's be interesting to see what crimes the committed in Nth Korea to justify execution - it appears one doesn't have to do something that would be regarded as particularly heinous anywhere else in the world.
Message: Posted by: landmark (May 1, 2015 10:07AM)
Let's not forget about US Partner-in-Peace™ Saudi Arabia.
Message: Posted by: Magnus Eisengrim (May 1, 2015 10:38AM)
To provide some more depth to the issue, a Reddit user [url=http://www.reddit.com/user/Montevideoj]Montevideoj[/url] converted the Amnesty data to per capita figures.

[img]http://i.imgur.com/1ZJa6lC.png[/img]
Message: Posted by: Destiny (May 1, 2015 02:29PM)
Wow - In El Salvador a first time drink driving offense warrants execution but they're a lot more lenient in Bulgaria - you have to be caught twice.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (May 1, 2015 03:06PM)
[quote]On May 1, 2015, Destiny wrote:
Wow - In El Salvador a first time drink driving offense warrants execution but they're a lot more lenient in Bulgaria - you have to be caught twice. [/quote]


In a related story, El Salvador has a tiny fraction of the 10,000 or so annual drunk driving deaths that occur in the USA.
Message: Posted by: landmark (May 1, 2015 07:56PM)
Are you recommending it for such?

I'd save it for telemarketers, myself.
Message: Posted by: Destiny (May 1, 2015 08:45PM)
[quote]On May 1, 2015, landmark wrote:
Are you recommending it for such?

I'd save it for telemarketers, myself. [/quote]

With a bit of good old fashioned drawing and quartering thrown in for good measure.
Message: Posted by: rockwall (May 1, 2015 11:13PM)
[quote]On May 1, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On May 1, 2015, Destiny wrote:
Wow - In El Salvador a first time drink driving offense warrants execution but they're a lot more lenient in Bulgaria - you have to be caught twice. [/quote]


In a related story, El Salvador has a tiny fraction of the 10,000 or so annual drunk driving deaths that occur in the USA. [/quote]

Hey, if it saves just one life ...
Message: Posted by: Dynamike (May 1, 2015 11:44PM)
The fear of a execution and life in prison is not going to stop many people from murdering illegally. We need a torture penalty.
Message: Posted by: Destiny (May 1, 2015 11:45PM)
[quote]On May 2, 2015, Dynamike wrote:
The fear of a execution and life in prison is not going to stop many people from murdering illegally. We need a torture penalty. [/quote]


Touting for new venues?
Message: Posted by: NYCTwister (May 2, 2015 05:31AM)
[quote]On May 2, 2015, Dynamike wrote:
The fear of a execution and life in prison is not going to stop many people from murdering illegally. We need a torture penalty. [/quote]

Really?
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (May 2, 2015 06:21AM)
A torture penalty was used against the slaves in the USA after a number of revolts. After a slave revolt in New York in 1712 one of the leaders was slowly fried to death on a large metal plate. The torture is said to have lasted ten hours. Another was broken at the wheel. That might suit your ideas, Mike. He was strapped to a wagon wheel and his legs and arms were systematically beaten with mallets. But they were careful not to hit his head or torso which might have quickened his end. The rest of the rebels were burnt at the stake.

How did that work out, Mike?

Oh yes, the slaves kept revolting, emancipation was won, the blacks kept agitating, civil rights were won. Thankfully torture was not a deterrent.

It has not been found to be a deterrent, except in the short term, anyplace.
Message: Posted by: NYCTwister (May 2, 2015 07:09AM)
I think he was kidding.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 2, 2015 07:52AM)
You'd like to hope.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (May 2, 2015 08:30AM)
[quote]On May 2, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
A torture penalty was used against the slaves in the USA after a number of revolts. After a slave revolt in New York in 1712 one of the leaders was slowly fried to death on a large metal plate. The torture is said to have lasted ten hours. Another was broken at the wheel. That might suit your ideas, Mike. He was strapped to a wagon wheel and his legs and arms were systematically beaten with mallets. But they were careful not to hit his head or torso which might have quickened his end. The rest of the rebels were burnt at the stake.

How did that work out, Mike?

Oh yes, the slaves kept revolting, emancipation was won, the blacks kept agitating, civil rights were won. Thankfully torture was not a deterrent.

It has not been found to be a deterrent, except in the short term, anyplace. [/quote]

You have no idea from that anecdote whether or not it was a deterrent.
Message: Posted by: NYCTwister (May 2, 2015 09:44AM)
[quote]On May 2, 2015, Dannydoyle wrote:
You'd like to hope. [/quote]

Yep.
Message: Posted by: acesover (May 3, 2015 03:50PM)
[quote]On May 2, 2015, Dannydoyle wrote:
You'd like to hope. [/quote]

Not so sure he is kidding. remember this is his posts on another thread here:

What do we want?...JUSTICE!
When do we want it?...NOW!

That could be be justice in his mind...torture.
Message: Posted by: Destiny (May 3, 2015 11:42PM)
[quote]On May 2, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
[quote]On May 2, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
A torture penalty was used against the slaves in the USA after a number of revolts. After a slave revolt in New York in 1712 one of the leaders was slowly fried to death on a large metal plate. The torture is said to have lasted ten hours. Another was broken at the wheel. That might suit your ideas, Mike. He was strapped to a wagon wheel and his legs and arms were systematically beaten with mallets. But they were careful not to hit his head or torso which might have quickened his end. The rest of the rebels were burnt at the stake.

How did that work out, Mike?

Oh yes, the slaves kept revolting, emancipation was won, the blacks kept agitating, civil rights were won. Thankfully torture was not a deterrent.

It has not been found to be a deterrent, except in the short term, anyplace. [/quote]

You have no idea from that anecdote whether or not it was a deterrent. [/quote]

Charles II had Oliver Cromwell's rotten body dug up, hung, beheaded and drawn and quartered. There is no suggestion Cromwell ever again deposed an English King so I think there is evidence for the efficacy of torture and capital punishment.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (May 4, 2015 12:56AM)
;). Humorous point taken, but Tony's serious point is quite logically flawed. "Deterrent" wouldn't mean that *all* revolts stopped, but rather that there were fewer than here otherwise would have been.
Message: Posted by: tommy (May 4, 2015 01:14AM)
There is no law in Bulgaria, it’s Mafia country.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (May 4, 2015 06:59AM)
[quote]On May 4, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
;). Humorous point taken, but Tony's serious point is quite logically flawed. "Deterrent" wouldn't mean that *all* revolts stopped, but rather that there were fewer than here otherwise would have been. [/quote]
Ok, here is another example. In 1916 a group of people with no popular support in Ireland rebelled against the English authorities who then ran the country. The rebellion was crushed in a week, despite the fact that the British were taken up with the First World War. Many tens of thousands of young Irish men were fighting for the British in the trenches, and there was no real support for the rebels.

Shortly after the rebellion many of the leaders were sentenced to death, and executed by firing squad. One was injured and had to be shot in his wheelchair. When the leaders were killed, the Irish suddenly switched allegiance and backed the rebels, and within three years a full-scale war was in progress against the British. That would not have happened if the British had not chosen to use the deterrent effect of executions. Lengthy prison sentences would have actually served as a far bigger deterrent.

Sometimes a deterrent serves the purpose of annoying a populace and making them more eager to overthrow the regime that imposes the deterrent. I believe that if whites had treated blacks better the march to civil rights would have taken a lot longer. I know that if the British had treated the Irish better after the 1916 rising, we would not have progressed to the war of independence. Deterrents often back-fire.

Ask the Baltimore police force. They'll tell you.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 4, 2015 08:22AM)
The plural of anecdote is not data.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (May 4, 2015 01:57PM)
I know, Danny. But how much scientific study has been done on the deterrent effects of torture and execution? Not really one of the hot areas of research.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 4, 2015 02:27PM)
Actually there is considerable research done on torture.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (May 4, 2015 07:11PM)
On it's effects as a deterrent? Point me in the right direction. I am always eager to learn.

I feel that deterrents are a very blunt instrument. There is anecdotal evidence (the Irish example I cited for instance) that sometimes a deterrent backfires. That is human nature. Obviously sometimes a deterrent works. But I don't think you can take it as a given.
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (May 4, 2015 07:13PM)
Tony- I wouldn't consider the Irish example to be anecdotal. It's a matter of documented historical fact.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 4, 2015 09:43PM)
Https://www.utexas.edu/law/centers/humanrights/events/speaker-series-papers/Hajjar_Does%20Torture%20Work.pdf

A place to start. Not too hard to find studies actually.
Message: Posted by: tommy (May 4, 2015 11:08PM)
As a means of punishment or persuasion do bombs work?
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (May 5, 2015 06:16AM)
Danny, interesting article. But not conclusive. For example, the author acknowledges that the French use of torture in Algiers was a failure, leading to a French withdrawal from that country. He also says that the CIA torture program in Vietnam was ineffective. In fact the whole thrust of the article was that torture does not work.

Unfortunately any study will be anecdotal, as much of this was. It is based on a historic record of what happened, not on any sociological or psychological assessment of the effects of torture, execution, etc. As I said, it would be difficult to get a research grant to study the actual effects of torture. Far easier to get a historic perspective as this study did. More anecdotes, but cloaked in academia.
Message: Posted by: Magnus Eisengrim (May 5, 2015 09:26AM)
[quote]On May 4, 2015, Dannydoyle wrote:
Https://www.utexas.edu/law/centers/humanrights/events/speaker-series-papers/Hajjar_Does%20Torture%20Work.pdf

A place to start. Not too hard to find studies actually. [/quote]

Had a quick read through. Very interesting. Hope to read more thoroughly later. Thanks, Danny.

This one isn't a study, but it's an (informed) summary of other findings, including historical reports. It's pretty persuasive, nonetheless.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 5, 2015 10:26AM)
Yea I thought it a better place for ME to start as a "study" tends to bog down my mind. Not as smart as I think I am sometimes.