The Death Penalty

[Reba]

...Take for instance, a woman who has spent years in an abusive relationship. Tired of being beaten and degraded, she shoots her husband because she beleives that is the only way to protect herself from continued abuse. She is guilty of murder, but is she likely to repeat that behavior? No. Most murders fall into this category.

Does a woman in that scenario usually get the death penalty? I don't think so.

And, if justice is to be fair, we cannot ask for a puishment that exceeds the crime committed. To sentence a rapist to death simply because we fear that he/she may commit the crime again is to sentence them to punishment that exceeds the crime. Life in prison with no chance of parole is justifiable is some cases, particularly with a serial rapists who commits crimes against children, to be sure. But to sentence to death for a crime that did not result in death is nothing more than revenge.

Do serial rapists and child rapists get life without parole? Not always. Not even often.

Some criminal experiences are worse than death, the victims will tell you. Do you want to tell the victims that their suffering wasn't enough to justify a severe sentence for the perpetrator?

 

[Hwy99]

Man's guilt doubted after 26 years in prison - CNN.com
CHICAGO, Illinois (AP) -- A man locked away 26 years for murder was granted a new trial and freed on bond Friday with the help of two attorneys who came forward with a client's confession after the client died in prison.


Alton Logan, right, walks out of jail Friday with family members Eugene Logan and Barbara Cannon.

Alton Logan's family took up a collection in the lobby of the Cook County Criminal Courthouse and quickly came up with the $1,000 they needed to post bond.

A dozen friends and family broke into applause as Logan, 54, exited the building. He tearfully said it felt "great" to be free before he was whisked away in a black SUV.

Logan's younger brother, Eugene Logan, was adamant that he would be freed after his retrial.

"Nobody deserves to be locked away for 26 years for something they didn't do," said Eugene Logan, 48, of Portland, Oregon. "It's a blessing today that my brother's been released. He's not been exonerated yet, but we're going back to court, and it will happen."

Two attorneys recently revealed that their former client, Andrew Wilson, admitted committing the crime that sent Logan to prison, but attorney-client privilege had kept them from coming forward.

Wilson's death last year allowed the attorneys to unseal an affidavit stating that Logan was not responsible for the fatal shooting of security guard Lloyd Wickliffe at a McDonald's restaurant in January 1982.

Dale Coventry, one of the attorneys who signed the affidavit, said Friday night that he hopes prosecutors will acknowledge they went in the wrong direction with the case.

"Poor Mr. Logan was locked up all these years for something he didn't do, and that's unfortunate that it worked out the way it did," Coventry said. "I wish (the release) had happened a lot sooner, but unfortunately there was no way to do anything."

It would be up to Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan's office to prosecute the case because of a conflict of interest for the Cook County State's Attorney's office. Madigan's spokeswoman, Robyn Ziegler, said no decision had been made about a retrial.

"We will carefully review all the evidence in the case and then decide the appropriate next step," she said.

Logan's uncle, Arthur Gordon, 70, of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, waited outside the jail, saying he knew his nephew was innocent.

"I knew he didn't do that because I had been talking to him over the years," Gordon said. "He kept his spirit. He said, 'Uncle, I have to stay up. I can't go down. I can't go down."'

Logan's family planned to take him for a steak and lobster dinner on his first night of freedom.

"I'm going to turn him on to life," Eugene Logan said. "That's what we're going to do. We're going to live it together."

Here is a very good reason NOT to support the death penalty.

Yike! That's so sad! Shame on them...

 

[Reba]

This is your opinion if you mean ALL murderers.

Yes, a life sentence teaches lesson.

Yeah. It teaches that the life of a victim is cheap, and that the murderer's life is more valuable.

You did not quote to answer my question.
Liebling's post
Is it right to teach someone that killing is wrong by killing them? Can you explain how can we teach that killing is wrong by showing that kill as a punishment is right?

Yes, ma'am, I'll hop right to it! I only had a few minutes available on the computer but I should drop everything and answer you. I don't have the luxury of using my employer's time and computer to respond to AD posts.

Yes, it is right to teach people that if they murder someone they will have to pay for the crime with their own lives.

We teach that murder is wrong by providing a strong punishment for it. We have to show that we mean business when we tell people that murder is wrong.

If you mean ALL murderers then is your opinion.

To which I'm entitled.

Yes I've read, too. They said this but it's really truth is never, never, never solve to satisfy them because they lost their loved one forever.

It doesn't bring back their loved one but it lets them sleep in peace without having to look over their shoulders or get dragged back into the presence of the murderer each time a parole hearing comes up.

Are you saying that all murderers?

The murderers, rapists, and pedophiles who are on death row, yes.

Unless they truly repent their sins and turn to God, they will get pleasure from reliving their crimes.

I'm surprise that you didn't know that.

It's a total fantasy to believe that the police can fully protect citizens 24/7. Even if they could, why should the victims have to live like prisoners in fear? That's totally screwed up.

First you said "escaped" then change again and said "runs around freely"?

Why are you confused? If they escape they are running around freely. They are out of prison.

1. If the killer escaped out of prison then all victims and witnesses get protection as long as the killer get catch.

That's not real life; that's TV.

2. If the killer are out of prison after long years... Do you really think the victims and witnesses stay the same place where and how the killer kill their loved one? No, they would move out to other state for their safety.[/color]

That's is so wrong. Why should the victims and witnesses have to move and hid. That's ridiculous. They didn't do anything wrong.

Besides, guess what? The killer can travel to another state and pursue them. There are no border checks at each state. Give me a break. :roll:

You didn't quote to answer my question.

Repeat...Liebling"s post.
That's just we disagree that it's okay for government to kill human when they know killing is wrong but why is okay to kill as a punishment?

Yes, ma'am!

The US "government" executes guilty criminals after a long, multi-staged process. That is not the same thing as a blood-thirsty pervert who rapes, tortures, and then kills little girls.

I do not consider death penalty as a punishment but vengeance.

You can consider it whatever you want. That doesn't change the facts.

What would you consider if government kill innoncent... ?

What do you mean by innocent? Do you mean someone who is judged innocent, or do you mean people who have been wrongly convicted?

Would government also get death penalty as a "punishment" for kill wrong person to be fair?

If you mean someone who was wrongly convicted, and it was proven, how could "the government" get a death penalty punishment? The government is not a person. That doesn't make sense.

If you think kill is okay then don't teach anyone that kill is not okay.

Murder is not OK.

 

[Reba]

This is your opinion if you mean ALL murderers....
If you read this page, and the following chapters, you will see some of what I mean:

Serial Killer Art, therapy with a profit motive - The Crime library

They are not repentant.

 

[Cheri]

Take for instance, a woman who has spent years in an abusive relationship. Tired of being beaten and degraded, she shoots her husband because she beleives that is the only way to protect herself from continued abuse. She is guilty of murder, but is she likely to repeat that behavior? No. Most murders fall into this category.

I wouldn't call her "murder", It looks like a clear case of self-defense, but, the prosecutors wouldn't think so, because you can't put justice in your own hands to stop the abuse.

 

[jillio]

This is your opinion if you mean ALL murderers....
If you read this page, and the following chapters, you will see some of what I mean:

Serial Killer Art, therapy with a profit motive - The Crime library

They are not repentant.

That is a facet of the mental illness that leads to serial killing. An inability to experience remorse. However, they are still in the minority when it comes to individuals convicted of murder.

 

[jillio]

I wouldn't call her "murder", It looks like a clear case of self-defense, but, the prosecutors wouldn't think so, because you can't put justice in your own hands to stop the abuse.

Unless she was being attacked at the time she killed him, it can't be called "self defense" under the law. But they can take mitigating circumstances under consideration that attest to the mental state of someone who has been abused repeatedly over time.

 

[jillio]

Was he on death row?

Whether he was on death row or not is irrelevent. This is proof of the errors made in our jsutice system. If our system is subject to errors that wrongly convict innocent individuals, then to risk making that error in the case of a death penalty is too great a risk to take.

 

[jillio]

I honestly don't know. The only thing that comes to mind is a question... If that had happened, could his family have sued the state?

I also read that the judge ordered a new trial for this man. To me, THAT is wrong, too. The person that is said to have committed the crime, died in prison. If they KNOW who committed the crime, why go through the expense of retrying THIS man? It makes NO SENSE!

Yes, the family could have sued the state had he been executed. But how does one decide the monetary value of a life taken in revenge?

 

[jillio]

Exactly. Why should the victims and their families have to suffer over, and over again?

Execution does not do anything to remedy the suffering. It simply satisfies a need for revenge.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Ask a victim's family. I have read many, many families say that the execution was a relief to them. Not a pleasure, not revenge but relief.

In your opinion. Ask the victims for their opinion.

http://freenet-homepage.de/dpinfo/victimsfamilies.htm

 

[Liebling:-)))]

So how does it punish the killer? It doesn't. They are thrilled to get all that attention. Why should the killer get pleasure? It's not fair to the victims.

This is bitter talk.

They don't feel guilty. They enjoy killing.

Not all killers but some - mental illness.

WikiAnswers - What are the distinct differences between a serial killer and a mass murderer

 

[Liebling:-)))]

I disagree..I dont think I want to live my life in paralyzing fear knowing that the killer has been released. Also, in my area last year, a child murderer was paroled and the neighbors lived in complete fear even though they werent direct victims of this murderer. It makes everyone become a victim when they have to change their lifestyles and live with that constant terror especially if they are parents of young children. The murderer committed suicide so everyone was able to breathe a bit easier. It was before we bought the house. Our neighbors informed us. Wow..

I have no problem to have you to disagree with me. I can understand your point but I see different.

Anyway, death penalty are banned in many EU countries. Many killers went out of prison after long years sentence and start new life instead of seek for revenage against victim´s families. Maybe a very few... Maybe my neighbor was murderer or victim´s family??? Maybe murderer or victim used live in my house...??? I rather to think positive instead of think negative too much.

I have seen many victim´s families move out to start a new life.. Some victim´s families stay on the same place where their loved one killed. Look at many Jews who contiune live in Germany after what and how Nazi did to them and their families. All what they do is FORGAVE them and MOVE ON. Many jews and Germans move out of Germany to other countries to start a new life after WWII. They never, never thought how fear they are after learn the killer get out of prison. They know it´s no good when they continue to be bitter, hate and paraniod but they prefer to work out to heal themselves and move on... because bitter and hate doesn´t solve anything but destory their self-esteem.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Man's guilt doubted after 26 years in prison - CNN.com
CHICAGO, Illinois (AP) -- A man locked away 26 years for murder was granted a new trial and freed on bond Friday with the help of two attorneys who came forward with a client's confession after the client died in prison.


Alton Logan, right, walks out of jail Friday with family members Eugene Logan and Barbara Cannon.

Alton Logan's family took up a collection in the lobby of the Cook County Criminal Courthouse and quickly came up with the $1,000 they needed to post bond.

A dozen friends and family broke into applause as Logan, 54, exited the building. He tearfully said it felt "great" to be free before he was whisked away in a black SUV.

Logan's younger brother, Eugene Logan, was adamant that he would be freed after his retrial.

"Nobody deserves to be locked away for 26 years for something they didn't do," said Eugene Logan, 48, of Portland, Oregon. "It's a blessing today that my brother's been released. He's not been exonerated yet, but we're going back to court, and it will happen."

Two attorneys recently revealed that their former client, Andrew Wilson, admitted committing the crime that sent Logan to prison, but attorney-client privilege had kept them from coming forward.

Wilson's death last year allowed the attorneys to unseal an affidavit stating that Logan was not responsible for the fatal shooting of security guard Lloyd Wickliffe at a McDonald's restaurant in January 1982.

Dale Coventry, one of the attorneys who signed the affidavit, said Friday night that he hopes prosecutors will acknowledge they went in the wrong direction with the case.

"Poor Mr. Logan was locked up all these years for something he didn't do, and that's unfortunate that it worked out the way it did," Coventry said. "I wish (the release) had happened a lot sooner, but unfortunately there was no way to do anything."

It would be up to Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan's office to prosecute the case because of a conflict of interest for the Cook County State's Attorney's office. Madigan's spokeswoman, Robyn Ziegler, said no decision had been made about a retrial.

"We will carefully review all the evidence in the case and then decide the appropriate next step," she said.

Logan's uncle, Arthur Gordon, 70, of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, waited outside the jail, saying he knew his nephew was innocent.

"I knew he didn't do that because I had been talking to him over the years," Gordon said. "He kept his spirit. He said, 'Uncle, I have to stay up. I can't go down. I can't go down."'

Logan's family planned to take him for a steak and lobster dinner on his first night of freedom.

"I'm going to turn him on to life," Eugene Logan said. "That's what we're going to do. We're going to live it together."

Here is a very good reason NOT to support the death penalty.

wow, it got me goose pump... I provided some similar links over innocent in several death penatly threads in the past.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Yeah. It teaches that the life of a victim is cheap, and that the murderer's life is more valuable.

wow

Yes, it is right to teach people that if they murder someone they will have to pay for the crime with their own lives.

We teach that murder is wrong by providing a strong punishment for it. We have to show that we mean business when we tell people that murder is wrong.

I am not talking about murder but question either kill is right or wrong...

It doesn't bring back their loved one but it lets them sleep in peace without having to look over their shoulders or get dragged back into the presence of the murderer each time a parole hearing comes up.

It make no difference...

It's a total fantasy to believe that the police can fully protect citizens 24/7. Even if they could, why should the victims have to live like prisoners in fear? That's totally screwed up.

Why are you confused? If they escape they are running around freely. They are out of prison.

That's not real life; that's TV.

This is a bitter and paraniod talk.

That's is so wrong. Why should the victims and witnesses have to move and hid. That's ridiculous. They didn't do anything wrong.

Besides, guess what? The killer can travel to another state and pursue them. There are no border checks at each state. Give me a break. :roll:

You interpreted my post in the wrong way.

Check my response post to Shel90.

The US "government" executes guilty criminals after a long, multi-staged process. That is not the same thing as a blood-thirsty pervert who rapes, tortures, and then kills little girls.

It make no difference... if they killed wrong one, then what?

You can consider it whatever you want. That doesn't change the facts.

As what I said that death penatly as a vengeance, not right punishment is fact.

What do you mean by innocent? Do you mean someone who is judged innocent, or do you mean people who have been wrongly convicted?

Come on, you know what I am talking about.

If you mean someone who was wrongly convicted, and it was proven, how could "the government" get a death penalty punishment? The government is not a person. That doesn't make sense.

wow, you don´t know what government is about...

I hope those definition helps.
government definition - Dictionary - MSN Encarta

The people from government fix the law for death penatly. If the people from court (whom they work for government - follow justice system...) sentenced someone to death and then later they found out that someone they sentenced to death is wrong person. Too late, he or she is dead... they can´t get him or her back... What would you say? murder or not? That´s why I ask the question in my previous post either kill is right or wrong? Repat question: Is it right to teach someone that killing is wrong by killing them? Can you explain how can we teach that killing is wrong by showing that kill as a punishment is right?

Murder is not OK.

Kill is not OK.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Yes, this is a crime that would have made this man eligble for the death penalty. What if we had executed him, and then found out that he is innocent?

*nodding agreement*

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Serial Killer Art, therapy with a profit motive - The Crime library[/url]

They are not repentant.

Accord those link, the people suffer mental illness... Please re-read those link, you provided here. It explains about their unhappy childhood background, that´s how and why lead them into serial killers. That´s why they have no feeling.

It´s not all serial killers suffer mental illness... but different reasons like jealous, revenge, angry, etc. after that they realized they are wrong and doesn´t mean to kill them... they regretted what and how they did... and accept as punishment to lock in prison for long years... It teach them lesson to not angry, jealous, revenage, etc next time which is very different as serial killers in those link, you provided here.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Whether he was on death row or not is irrelevent. This is proof of the errors made in our jsutice system. If our system is subject to errors that wrongly convict innocent individuals, then to risk making that error in the case of a death penalty is too great a risk to take.

Execution does not do anything to remedy the suffering. It simply satisfies a need for revenge.

Exactly

 

[Wokamuka]

Justice is NOT "revenge"

I notice that those who are against the death penalty throw around the word "revenge" a lot. (Even though one of my postings explained that it was not.)

I notice that "justice" is not used with the same passion.

Following the logic of those who continue to say that capital punishment is all about revenge, one would have to believe that if someone was caught doing anything wrong, we should not seek to put them in jail because that would only be "revenge."

Are judges "revenge artists"? Are the lawmakers/legislators architects of "revenge"? Do our lawyers/barristers seek to have the proper "revenge" given?

The purpose of the prison system is for rehabilitation (or, in some parts, "re-education"). What does it say when you're trying to rehabilitate someone - for life? It would seem that people (namely, anti-Capital Punishment folks) are treating the prison systems not as a tool to create productive citizens - but as dungeons. "Out of sight; out of mind."

It is a delusion to believe that you can condemn someone to a life sentence of rehabilitation - knowing full well that s/he will not be rehabilitated.

I agree that the taking of a human life is an absurd thing to do. Self-defense is always an acceptable reason for any murder/human killing (and I am thankful that I've never been in that circumstance). A society must defend itself by removing those who cannot be rehabilitated so that it can protect it's weaker members.

Forensic science has gotten better in detecting the right criminal. The legal systems in many countries have numerous safeguards to protect the criminal from being wronged. Executions are done with the blessing with the Governor of that particular state (here in the U.S., at least) and, without overwhelming evidence so as to ease his/her conscience, it will not likely happen (there are exceptions and I need not point at Texas).

The next time anyone of you, anti-capital punishment folks, get a traffic violation with a fine - you are duty-bound to argue before the judge that the citation/fine is revenge . . . and not justice.

Let's see how far you get with that logic.

 

[jillio]

I notice that those who are against the death penalty throw around the word "revenge" a lot. (Even though one of my postings explained that it was not.)

I notice that "justice" is not used with the same passion.

Following the logic of those who continue to say that capital punishment is all about revenge, one would have to believe that if someone was caught doing anything wrong, we should not seek to put them in jail because that would only be "revenge."

Are judges "revenge artists"? Are the lawmakers/legislators architects of "revenge"? Do our lawyers/barristers seek to have the proper "revenge" given?

The purpose of the prison system is for rehabilitation (or, in some parts, "re-education"). What does it say when you're trying to rehabilitate someone - for life? It would seem that people (namely, anti-Capital Punishment folks) are treating the prison systems not as a tool to create productive citizens - but as dungeons. "Out of sight; out of mind."

It is a delusion to believe that you can condemn someone to a life sentence of rehabilitation - knowing full well that s/he will not be rehabilitated.

I agree that the taking of a human life is an absurd thing to do. Self-defense is always an acceptable reason for any murder/human killing (and I am thankful that I've never been in that circumstance). A society must defend itself by removing those who cannot be rehabilitated so that it can protect it's weaker members.

Forensic science has gotten better in detecting the right criminal. The legal systems in many countries have numerous safeguards to protect the criminal from being wronged. Executions are done with the blessing with the Governor of that particular state (here in the U.S., at least) and, without overwhelming evidence so as to ease his/her conscience, it will not likely happen (there are exceptions and I need not point at Texas).

The next time anyone of you, anti-capital punishment folks, get a traffic violation with a fine - you are duty-bound to argue before the judge that the citation/fine is revenge . . . and not justice.

Let's see how far you get with that logic.

Your argument is moot. Our justice system is not rehabilitative...it is punitive. It was never intended to be rehabilitative. That is a recent revision, and it has failed miserably.

Comparing a traffic violation to execution is fallicous.