Ohio man excuted after vulgar last gesture

Jiro said:
if it were up to me, I'd put him in prison for life without parole and that's me being merciful because I took death penalty off the table when this action is typically an automatic death penalty.
Click to expand...

Who are you referring to, the molester or the dad that shot him dead?

Yiz
 
Jiro said:
that doesn't mean anything.

a person with schizophrenia can function like a normal person and it's just a matter of time till he gets a psychotic breakout or delusional episode.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
Babyblue said:
I never excused Yates actions. That is an incorrect assumption on your part. I stated that she had recorded mental illness prior to the killing. To answer your question to why the court excused her. Not me.

It is still a disorder or illness that one can not help to have.
Click to expand...

And you are still very mistaken on your concept of certain mental illnesses. We are not talking about depression, we are not talking about a personality disorder. We are talking about a psychotic illness.
 
Babyblue said:
He was fine when planning and delusional while killing.... is what you are saying. I doubt that. He knew what he was doing the whole time.
Click to expand...

Okay, we're going to go with your assumption that he planned the whole thing and was fine. Please explain to me how that is possible for a paranoid schizophrenic. In light of his disorder, please explain to me how he was able to over come his biological disorder that creates an inability to recognize reality and just put it aside, plan and consider like a person without schizophrenia, and then go back to being schizophrenic. I am interested in exactly how you think this is accomplished. You may have some insight into some revolutionary new treatments for schizophrenia.
 
Jiro said:
did the medical professionals testify that he knew right from wrong?
Click to expand...

And that really has nothing to do with anything, because no one was disputing his conviction. What the issue is is executing a mentally ill inmate.
 
yizuman said:
If I had decided to rape you, then started raping your children in front of you and got out a huge blade and cut your child's head off very slowly while you listen to your child screaming as he or she is dying. You will want me dead 100% even while you talk outta your butt against the death penalty.

I love hypocrites that talk crap until it actually happens to them.

Yiz
Click to expand...

Leave you hypothetical morbid fantasies out of it. None of that happened in this case, nor is it likely to ever happen. Stick to the facts of this case.
 
jillio said:
Leave you hypothetical morbid fantasies out of it. None of that happened in this case, nor is it likely to ever happen. Stick to the facts of this case.
Click to expand...

There is no wasted thought. Somewhere in an alternate universe, Yiz committed a hell of a crime. :|
 
Defense attorneys have argued that prosecutors withheld information that would have supported a mental health defense. Former Judge Harry Hanna, one of the three on the panel, told the Ohio Parole Board he would not have voted for the death penalty if he'd had information from police reports that were provided to the defense more recently.

Ohio execution policies


LUCASVILLE, Ohio — Ohio was poised Tuesday to end a nearly six-month break in its use of capital punishment by executing a man who fatally shot his three sons while they slept in 1982, shortly after his wife filed for divorce.

State and federal courts have rejected attorneys' arguments that 66-year-old Reginald Brooks of East Cleveland is not mentally competent and that the government withheld relevant evidence that could have affected Brooks' case.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected Brooks' request to halt the execution, as did the Ohio Supreme Court Monday. It was unclear if Brooks' appeals were done, or if a last-minute request to a federal appeals court in Cincinnati Tuesday must still be decided.

Prison officials said they were temporarily postponing the execution until the final appeals are resolved. Brooks, 66, was scheduled to die by injection at 10 a.m.

U.S. District Court Judge Donald Nugent in Cleveland rejected Brooks' latest appeal Tuesday, saying it appeared he still had issues he could argue in Ohio state courts. But the Ohio Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected Brooks' claims in recent days, and it was unclear exactly what options he had left. Brooks' lawyers immediately appealed Nugent's ruling to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Prosecutors acknowledge Brooks is mentally ill

US Supreme Court won't delay Ohio execution | SignOnSanDiego.com

"It all has to do with their ability to form what we consider to be adult conceptions of morality and responsibility," says Bill Harris, a Texas attorney who represented Larry Keith Robison, a schizophrenic who was executed in 2001 for killing five people during a psychotic episode nearly 20 years earlier. "If you say it's cruel and unusual to execute the mentally retarded because they can't perform on an adult level, and then you say the same thing about people who are mentally normal but because of their age you can't execute them, it makes sense to extend that to mental illness."

"If it impairs their ability to make those kind of moral judgments, they should also be, logically, exempt."

"We are not trying to excuse the misconduct of these people," Tabak explains. "If we were trying to do that, we wouldn't allow them to be punished at all." But, he says, "the extent of blameworthiness, the extent to which they can be held among what's sometimes called 'the worst of the worst,' is diminished by their mental illness."

Theoretically, some of the most severely mentally ill inmates are protected by a 1986 Supreme Court ruling, Ford v. Wainwright, that forbids capital punishment of those who are so insane that they cannot comprehend their impending execution or the reasons for it. Citing the Eighth Amendment, the decision blocked Florida from executing Alvin Ford, a man convicted of murder who became insane while on death row. Justice Lewis Powell drew his own line, reasoning that the Constitution protected only those who are so insane that they are "unaware of the punishment they are about to suffer and why they are to suffer it. Justice Powell concluded that Florida could execute Ford if he became sane again, presenting a cruel irony: death row inmates who become insane must remain insane to avoid execution. Moreover, the Ford decision left the determination of sanity up to each state and herein lies the heart of the problem.

they had been able to find treatment when they were free.

Texas executed on March 26, 2003, James Blake Colburn, a 43-year-old mentally ill man who heard voices and worried about demons defiling his corpse, despite his failed, repeated attempts to get help before he murdered Peggy Murphy. "We begged for help," his sister, Tina Duroy told Amnesty International a year before his execution. "He himself wanted help, and they ... just pushed him out on the street."

The state of Texas, which ranks number one in number of people executed, ranked 46th among the states for amount of money spent per person on the treatment of the mentally ill, including in jails and prisons, according to the National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors.

Cruel and Inhumane: Executing the Mentally Ill | Amnesty International USA
 
:roll: The lack of humanity exhibited by the very people requesting humanity for their own is a sign of seriously disturbed thinking.
 
jillio said:
And that really has nothing to do with anything, because no one was disputing his conviction. What the issue is is executing a mentally ill inmate.
Click to expand...

As usual, you are wrong.
If medical professional testified in court that he was not mentally ill, and the court accepted that, then is was not.
Of course, there could be medical professional on both sides but if the court rules he is not, he is not.
 
rolling7 said:
As usual, you are wrong.
If medical professional testified in court that he was not mentally ill, and the court accepted that, then is was not.
Of course, there could be medical professional on both sides but if the court rules he is not, he is not.
Click to expand...

No, rolling, you don't know what you are talking about. Testifying in court has to do with convicition, and no one is arguing his conviction. What is being argued is the legality of executing an mentally ill individual, particularly when information regarding his mental status was withheld from the 3 judge panel who recommended death. One of those judges has already stated that he would would not have recommended death had the information been made available to the panel. That means the sentence would never have been death if information had not been withheld.

In regard to postponing the execution or commutation of the sentence, the court has already ruled that he is mentally ill. They fully recognize that he is mentally ill. They are not ruling on whether he is mentally ill or not.

You truly do not have an understanding of the issues involved here.
 
jillio said:
No, rolling, you don't know what you are talking about. Testifying in court has to do with convicition, and no one is arguing his conviction. What is being argued is the legality of executing an mentally ill individual, particularly when information regarding his mental status was withheld from the 3 judge panel who recommended death. One of those judges has already stated that he would would not have recommended death had the information been made available to the panel. That means the sentence would never have been death if information had not been withheld.

In regard to postponing the execution or commutation of the sentence, the court has already ruled that he is mentally ill. They fully recognize that he is mentally ill. They are not ruling on whether he is mentally ill or not.

You truly do not have an understanding of the issues involved here.
Click to expand...

It is truly disturbing that information was withheld. It is immoral and speaks volumes of the mental state of those doing it. God help us all.
 
as crazy as i might sound, i'd like to interject that i have read last month(was doing research for an assignment that i have now finished) that a policeman had a NDE (near-death experience) returned and since then he left the police force as he couldnt use a gun on anyone, not even the 'worse of worse' , he gone off and become a cousellor...

my point is, killing is wrong, even under circumstance of pure revenge (mericiful as jiro's sense is right) , but lfe imprisonment isnt right either, but long term hard labour and extensive counselling IN JAIL for 5 years would be enough in my opinion., not 10 years, simply because yes he broke the law, but it wasnt intend to be a nuisence to socety but the situation was a nuisence itself, he took the law into his own hands in a misguided view of judgement. Now from that point it gets very complex, and its really should go up to the high court...then again, i dont like the idea of justice workers (judges, lawyers, bail officers being highly paided either, to me, THAT is INJUSTICE as well...ever wonder why bail is so high (in some place its RIDICULOUS, like half mill to maybe much more), and in other places, NZ , my country for example, the high taxes pays them!, all with the smokescreen of need police, or need education...everyone forgets who's making it off!...not good

anyway, great thought provoking thread , and my point is, im against death penalty. and i acknowledge with Yiz that those other places do it differently BUT I DONT agree with them (or Yiz) it IS barbaric and stupid. Heck, my brother is living in UAE, and says they are thick, slow, dont think for themselves like we do..interesting....spoilt in a place with no taxes , life too easy and simple AND they have No other views but muslim...in other words they are brainwashed and gone dull... incredible but again, im not surprised...right here in my uni, they not so too bright either, except one guy with a PhD (in microbiology), but like most of us, we're are too bright either and fewers of us stands out in the intellect..

oh well better stop babbling and just saying, i know of a story of a cop who wont kill even for justice...because he know our law is NOT the law...something out there WILl bring repercussion to us when the time comes...(no im not try to sound like a Roman Catholic) i am not that O K. ...
Peace and Love to all
 
It's funny.... I hear about a scenario like "if it was your daughter and he raped her and killed her... you'd want him dead"

how about this? If the man was your brother or father or uncle and he raped and murdered somebody's daughter... you'd want him to get the best help available. You plead for mercy because his medication was too costly and the state has done very little to help him because of budget cut or he was just simply screwed and ignored by the system.
 
Jiro said:
It's funny.... I hear about a scenario like "if it was your daughter and he raped her and killed her... you'd want him dead"

how about this? If the man was your brother or father or uncle and he raped and murdered somebody's daughter... you'd want him to get the best help available. You plead for mercy because his medication was too costly and the state has done very little to help him because of budget cut or he was just simply screwed and ignored by the system.
Click to expand...


Not everyone thinks that way, Jiro...
We have someone in our family that was a crack addict, broke into an elderly couple's home, beat them almost to death and robbed them....The elderly couple, to this day, suffers from the attack. That elderly couple were "strangers".

Did I or my family think that what our relative did was a mistake, and he needed to get "the best help possible?"...Did we plead mercy for him?...No, we did not!...We all did chip in for a lawyer, and knew our relative had the potential of spending the rest of his natural life in prison (as the lawyer said also)...but that's all we did. He's now serving his sentence of 15 years...but that old couple will suffer needlessly until they die. which won't be long coming.

Hence the saying...you do the crime, then you do the time....even if it were my son, or my brother, father....whatever....then suffer the consequences of what they did.

I teach my own boys lessons to follow, rules that are made, and if they get broken, consequences will follow. But whatever they do in their adult life...then the system will dole out the consequences and I will not stand behind them, and what I mean by that, is I will not blame the system for what they have done....especially if it's a horrific crime of murder, rape, or abusing the elderly.

Our justice system may be flawed....mistakes may be made. But I do feel justice in this case was correct, he deserved to die for killing his children.
 
rockin'robin said:
Not everyone thinks that way, Jiro...
We have someone in our family that was a crack addict, broke into an elderly couple's home, beat them almost to death and robbed them....The elderly couple, to this day, suffers from the attack. That elderly couple were "strangers".

Did I or my family think that what our relative did was a mistake, and he needed to get "the best help possible?"...Did we plead mercy for him?...No, we did not!...We all did chip in for a lawyer, and knew our relative had the potential of spending the rest of his natural life in prison (as the lawyer said also)...but that's all we did. He's now serving his sentence of 15 years...but that old couple will suffer needlessly until they die. which won't be long coming.

Hence the saying...you do the crime, then you do the time....even if it were my son, or my brother, father....whatever....then suffer the consequences of what they did.

I teach my own boys lessons to follow, rules that are made, and if they get broken, consequences will follow. But whatever they do in their adult life...then the system will dole out the consequences and I will not stand behind them, and what I mean by that, is I will not blame the system for what they have done....especially if it's a horrific crime of murder, rape, or abusing the elderly.

Our justice system may be flawed....mistakes may be made. But I do feel justice in this case was correct, he deserved to die for killing his children.
Click to expand...
You're talking about a crack addict. nothing to do with somebody with mental retardation/illness.

your family member knew right from wrong and he just didn't care because he needed a fix. A person with mental retardation/illness does not know right from wrong and cannot differentiate between reality and fantasy. and this individual would be in state of extreme confusion and paranoia which can make him very dangerous to himself or to public.

Your family member was not suffering from that kind of psychotic episode and he was not confused between reality and fantasy. Mind you - I'm a staunch supporter of death penalty and I believe a sick twisted person like Ted Bundy or "Hannibal Lector" should be executed. But how can I, in my moral sense, allow an execution for a man who does not fully understand his action? or a man with 10-years old mind?
 
Back
Top