Texas inmate, 67, set for execution in slayings 31 years ago

See? You and CP assumed he ALREADY got death penalty... NOT SO FAST!

Yes, the Jury had recommended Death penalty on that Boston bomber that's all, it does NOT mean that Death penalty is official yet!

PLEASE wait until this coming Wednesday, the Judge before the Boston Bomber will make formal decision and can decide whether Juror decision on Death penalty would go forward or NOT! The Judges still holds power blocking Jury death penalty decision.
I didn't say that he got death penalty. Foxrac did. I just asked that since the jury found him guilty, you still oppose death penalty, even after he killed a little boy, is that correct?
 
you got to have dna proof before do this and there is none as I understand.
 
My advice when it comes to execution, do NOT act like if your God. Best leave to God on judging. Thats why I won't act like God so therefore I have no right in taking somebody's life when there is no threat against me... END OF STORY.

This land is not for God Law. What if Nobody act like God, Atheist, nonbeliever, or agnostic? They just doing their job. They will pulling switch anyway. :-/
 
This land is not for God Law. What if Nobody act like God, Atheist, nonbeliever, or agnostic? They just doing their job. They will pulling switch anyway. :-/

When they "pull the switch" what makes them any different from the murder "in the chair"....
 
See? You and CP assumed he ALREADY got death penalty... NOT SO FAST!

Yes, the Jury had recommended Death penalty on that Boston bomber that's all, it does NOT mean that Death penalty is official yet!

PLEASE wait until this coming Wednesday, the Judge before the Boston Bomber will make formal decision and can decide whether Juror decision on Death penalty would go forward or NOT! The Judges still holds power blocking Jury death penalty decision.

It isn't about recommended, the jury has final word for Boston bomber, so jurors made decision to have death penalty for him, period.

The judge will overturn the death penalty if there is civil rights violation or crime isn't serious enough to facing execution.

Boston bomber is facing execution and judge has no heart to overturn the execution for him - he killed 6 people and 264 people are injured (many of them lost the limbs).
 
When they "pull the switch" what makes them any different from the murder "in the chair"....

Originally Posted by diehardbiker View Post
My advice when it comes to execution, do NOT act like if your God. Best leave to God on judging. Thats why I won't act like God so therefore I have no right in taking somebody's life when there is no threat against me... END OF STORY.

i was making different about that. not talking about murder in the chair.
 
Originally Posted by diehardbiker View Post
My advice when it comes to execution, do NOT act like if your God. Best leave to God on judging. Thats why I won't act like God so therefore I have no right in taking somebody's life when there is no threat against me... END OF STORY.

i was making different about that. not talking about murder in the chair.

What do you mean then?
 
It isn't about recommended, the jury has final word for Boston bomber, so jurors made decision to have death penalty for him, period.

The judge will overturn the death penalty if there is civil rights violation or crime isn't serious enough to facing execution.

Boston bomber is facing execution and judge has no heart to overturn the execution for him - he killed 6 people and 264 people are injured (many of them lost the limbs).
That makes sense. I think next the judge will decide on a date?
 
You both didn't pay enough attention in the media. The sentence will be formally announce on June 24th of 2015, thats what media said. So judge can change anything. Has it happened? You could bet on it.


It isn't about recommended, the jury has final word for Boston bomber, so jurors made decision to have death penalty for him, period.

The judge will overturn the death penalty if there is civil rights violation or crime isn't serious enough to facing execution.

Boston bomber is facing execution and judge has no heart to overturn the execution for him - he killed 6 people and 264 people are injured (many of them lost the limbs).
 
To prove you wrong, see red font below... Judge has not formally handed down sentence to this Boston scumbag, that won't happen until June 24th! The jury decision is merely a recommendation for judge to hand down death penalty thats all. It does not mean its final decision!

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/28/us/boston-bombing-tsarnaev-sentence/

(CNN)Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's death sentence is expected to be made official next month.

Formal sentencing for Tsarnaev has been set for June 24 in Boston's Joseph Moakley Courthouse.

A federal jury sentenced Tsarnaev, 21, to death this month for his role in the April 2013 bombings, in which three people were killed and at least 264 were injured when two pressure-cooker bombs exploded near the Boston Marathon finish line.

The jury's decision is legally binding, but it officially is a recommendation until a judge formally hands out the sentence.


Boston Marathon bomber's trial leaves a lingering sadness
 
You both didn't pay enough attention in the media. The sentence will be formally announce on June 24th of 2015, thats what media said. So judge can change anything. Has it happened? You could bet on it.

It won't take death penalty off, sorry.
 
Guess you don't understand how the court process, don't you read in media that the death penalty was RECOMMENDATION, not a final decision, on June 24th the Judge will announce his final ruling on Juror recommendation. The judge CAN ignore the recommendation of death penalty from Jurors, BUT can NOT ignore Juror recommendation against death penalty. That's how it is. Of course, most of the time Judge DO honor Juror's recommendation on death penalty.

Jurors already speak for.
 
To prove you CP and Fox wrong. This is from reliable source...

Read it, Judges CAN override Juror death penalty recommendation,

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/12/us/12bar.html
Overriding the Jury in Capital Cases

JULY 11, 2011


WASHINGTON — Alabama allows judges to reject sentencing decisions from capital juries, which sounds like a sensible idea. You might want a mature and dispassionate jurist standing between a wounded community’s impulse toward vengeance and a defendant at risk of execution.

“If you didn’t have something like that,” said Judge Ferrill D. McRae, who spent 40 years on the bench in Mobile before he retired in 2006, “a jury with no experience in other cases would be making the ultimate decision, based on nothing. The judge has seen many, many cases, not just one.”

Judge McRae, chatting on the phone the other day, recalled having breakfast with Justice Thurgood Marshall at an American Bar Association meeting not long after the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976.

Justice Marshall was a fierce opponent of the death penalty. But, according to Judge McRae, the justice also saw the wisdom of the override system. “He thought it was better that someone who had seen more than one case was making the decision,” Judge McRae said.

What Justice Marshall probably did not anticipate, though, was that judges in Alabama would not use their power for mercy — that they would, in fact, be even tougher than juries. Since 1976, according to a new report, Alabama judges have rejected sentencing recommendations from capital juries 107 times. In 98 of those cases, or 92 percent of them, judges imposed the death penalty after juries had called for a life sentence.

More than 20 percent of the people on death row in Alabama are there because of such overrides, according to the report, from the Equal Justice Initiative, a nonprofit law firm that represents poor people and prisoners. The overrides in Alabama contributed to the highest per capita death sentencing rate in the nation, far outstripping Texas.
Sidebar
Coverage and consideration of developments in the world of law.

Justices Get Out More, but Calendars Aren’t Open to Just Anyone
JUN 1
Supreme Court Ruling Altered Civil Suits, to Detriment of Individuals
MAY 18
Justices’ Opinions Grow in Size, Accessibility and Testiness, Study Finds
MAY 4
In Brief to Justices, Former Military Officials Support Same-Sex Marriage
APR 20
Supreme Court Asked to Look Abroad for Guidance on Same-Sex Marriage
APR 6

See More »

Judge McRae himself ordered six defendants executed notwithstanding jury verdicts calling for life sentences, more than any other judge in Alabama in the modern history of capital punishment. But he never rejected a jury’s recommendation of death.

Judge McRae said he had tried to determine, in the words of an Alabama law, whether the crime in question was “especially heinous, atrocious or cruel.” Having seen a lot of cases helped him make that decision, he said. “Juries don’t know,” he said, “what is ‘especially heinous, atrocious or cruel.’ ”

Alabama judges have justified their decisions to override in favor of death on other grounds as well. Judge Dale Segrest, who retired in 2001, said he had rejected one jury’s recommendation that a white defendant’s life be spared on the ground of racial equality. “If I had not imposed the death sentence, I would have sentenced three black people to death and no white people,” he said at a sentencing hearing in 2000.

Judge Charles C. Partin, who sat in Bay Minette, said the defendant before him was probably not mentally disabled, a factor that may have figured in the jury’s life verdict. “The sociological literature suggests that Gypsies intentionally test low on standard I.Q. tests,” he wrote in a 1990 sentencing order.

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

Florida and Delaware also allow overrides, but they are subject to strict standards. No one has been sentenced to death in Florida as a result of a judicial override since 1999, and no one is on death row in Delaware as a consequence of an override. The most recent override in favor of death in Alabama was in March.

Judges in Delaware are appointed and generally use their authority to reject death sentences. Alabama judges are elected, often running on tough-on-crime platforms. Overrides are more common in election years.

“Not surprisingly, given the political pressures they face, judges are far more likely than juries to impose the death penalty,” Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in a 1995 dissent from a decision that upheld Alabama’s capital sentencing system. Much has changed in sentencing law since then, and it is not clear that the system would survive a new look from the Supreme Court.

One thing that is clear is that Justice Marshall, whatever he said at breakfast, was appalled by how things turned out in Alabama. “It approaches the most literal sense of the word ‘arbitrary,’ ” he wrote in a 1988 dissent, “to put one to death in the face of a contrary jury determination where it is accepted that the jury had indeed responsibly carried out its task.”

Alabama jurors are not notably squeamish about the death penalty, and those opposed to it are automatically excluded from service. Deliberations can be agonizing, former jurors say, adding that they would expect their recommendations to count.

William Davis, who served on a capital jury that voted for a life sentence, said he did not see the point of the exercise after a judge dismissed the jury’s unanimous recommendation as “not helpful.”

“If the judge is going to overrule the jury,” he said in a court hearing in Montgomery last year, “then you don’t need a jury. The jury don’t serve a purpose.”
 
How do I know Judges have the power to override Juror's decision? I was following sickening case of Jodi Arias. They did mentioned that the judge can block Juror's death penalty decision if they see it fit. I was like, WTF? what if Judge is very opposed to death penalty and with all taxpayers money well spend on this case only to have judge blocked the Juror's decision (I know it didn't happen, but the point is..)... You see how death penalty law can be abused.

There are so many people trying to avoid jury duty, that is another abuses, and so on. So the idea of Death penalty should never be on the law book in the first place.
 
How do I know Judges have the power to override Juror's decision? I was following sickening case of Jodi Arias. They did mentioned that the judge can block Juror's death penalty decision if they see it fit. I was like, WTF? what if Judge is very opposed to death penalty and with all taxpayers money well spend on this case only to have judge blocked the Juror's decision (I know it didn't happen, but the point is..)... You see how death penalty law can be abused.

There are so many people trying to avoid jury duty, that is another abuses, and so on. So the idea of Death penalty should never be on the law book in the first place.

In Jodi Arias's case, jurors unable to make unanimous agreement on death penalty for her - that's not judge who made a decision for death penalty.
 
Sigh!!!!!

Before, long before the juror made decision on whether death penalty would be imposed. I mean long before that happened, the media reporter DID mentioned that Judge has the power to override the death penalty!!!! Its already said in the media LONG BEFORE the juror made decision!!!

Thats the problem, you were NOT following what I am saying.

In Jodi Arias's case, jurors unable to make unanimous agreement on death penalty for her - that's not judge who made a decision for death penalty.
 
Boston Bomber is in federal court's hand, not state.

Federal and state have different laws and procedure to deal with death penalty so not all systems are created same as you think.

Alabama law allows the judge to override the life sentence by imposing death penalty but it doesn't exist under federal court.

I don't see Boston bomber's death penalty to be overridden and he committed worst crime ever.

To prove you CP and Fox wrong. This is from reliable source...

Read it, Judges CAN override Juror death penalty recommendation,

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/12/us/12bar.html
Overriding the Jury in Capital Cases

JULY 11, 2011


WASHINGTON — Alabama allows judges to reject sentencing decisions from capital juries, which sounds like a sensible idea. You might want a mature and dispassionate jurist standing between a wounded community’s impulse toward vengeance and a defendant at risk of execution.

“If you didn’t have something like that,” said Judge Ferrill D. McRae, who spent 40 years on the bench in Mobile before he retired in 2006, “a jury with no experience in other cases would be making the ultimate decision, based on nothing. The judge has seen many, many cases, not just one.”

Judge McRae, chatting on the phone the other day, recalled having breakfast with Justice Thurgood Marshall at an American Bar Association meeting not long after the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976.

Justice Marshall was a fierce opponent of the death penalty. But, according to Judge McRae, the justice also saw the wisdom of the override system. “He thought it was better that someone who had seen more than one case was making the decision,” Judge McRae said.

What Justice Marshall probably did not anticipate, though, was that judges in Alabama would not use their power for mercy — that they would, in fact, be even tougher than juries. Since 1976, according to a new report, Alabama judges have rejected sentencing recommendations from capital juries 107 times. In 98 of those cases, or 92 percent of them, judges imposed the death penalty after juries had called for a life sentence.

More than 20 percent of the people on death row in Alabama are there because of such overrides, according to the report, from the Equal Justice Initiative, a nonprofit law firm that represents poor people and prisoners. The overrides in Alabama contributed to the highest per capita death sentencing rate in the nation, far outstripping Texas.
Sidebar
Coverage and consideration of developments in the world of law.

Justices Get Out More, but Calendars Aren’t Open to Just Anyone
JUN 1
Supreme Court Ruling Altered Civil Suits, to Detriment of Individuals
MAY 18
Justices’ Opinions Grow in Size, Accessibility and Testiness, Study Finds
MAY 4
In Brief to Justices, Former Military Officials Support Same-Sex Marriage
APR 20
Supreme Court Asked to Look Abroad for Guidance on Same-Sex Marriage
APR 6

See More »

Judge McRae himself ordered six defendants executed notwithstanding jury verdicts calling for life sentences, more than any other judge in Alabama in the modern history of capital punishment. But he never rejected a jury’s recommendation of death.

Judge McRae said he had tried to determine, in the words of an Alabama law, whether the crime in question was “especially heinous, atrocious or cruel.” Having seen a lot of cases helped him make that decision, he said. “Juries don’t know,” he said, “what is ‘especially heinous, atrocious or cruel.’ ”

Alabama judges have justified their decisions to override in favor of death on other grounds as well. Judge Dale Segrest, who retired in 2001, said he had rejected one jury’s recommendation that a white defendant’s life be spared on the ground of racial equality. “If I had not imposed the death sentence, I would have sentenced three black people to death and no white people,” he said at a sentencing hearing in 2000.

Judge Charles C. Partin, who sat in Bay Minette, said the defendant before him was probably not mentally disabled, a factor that may have figured in the jury’s life verdict. “The sociological literature suggests that Gypsies intentionally test low on standard I.Q. tests,” he wrote in a 1990 sentencing order.

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

Florida and Delaware also allow overrides, but they are subject to strict standards. No one has been sentenced to death in Florida as a result of a judicial override since 1999, and no one is on death row in Delaware as a consequence of an override. The most recent override in favor of death in Alabama was in March.

Judges in Delaware are appointed and generally use their authority to reject death sentences. Alabama judges are elected, often running on tough-on-crime platforms. Overrides are more common in election years.

“Not surprisingly, given the political pressures they face, judges are far more likely than juries to impose the death penalty,” Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in a 1995 dissent from a decision that upheld Alabama’s capital sentencing system. Much has changed in sentencing law since then, and it is not clear that the system would survive a new look from the Supreme Court.

One thing that is clear is that Justice Marshall, whatever he said at breakfast, was appalled by how things turned out in Alabama. “It approaches the most literal sense of the word ‘arbitrary,’ ” he wrote in a 1988 dissent, “to put one to death in the face of a contrary jury determination where it is accepted that the jury had indeed responsibly carried out its task.”

Alabama jurors are not notably squeamish about the death penalty, and those opposed to it are automatically excluded from service. Deliberations can be agonizing, former jurors say, adding that they would expect their recommendations to count.

William Davis, who served on a capital jury that voted for a life sentence, said he did not see the point of the exercise after a judge dismissed the jury’s unanimous recommendation as “not helpful.”

“If the judge is going to overrule the jury,” he said in a court hearing in Montgomery last year, “then you don’t need a jury. The jury don’t serve a purpose.”
 
Back
Top