the death penalty

Godfather.

ajedigecko wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

nobody answered my question, is the death penalty voted on from state to state ?

Godfather.

i believe so.......as it should be.

agreed, I hope it is, this is a decision that should be made by the people of each state and not a state or federal court. IMO

Godfather.

chadwick

i vote for the traveling death sentence guy.

one man in black.
he strolls in.
he strolls out.
next...

he is on his way to the next disgusting monster.

one man in black.
he strolls in.
he strolls out.
next...

it would be beautiful.

OnTheEdge

arq wrote:

Now tell me that this piece of crap doesn't deserve to die? or even better let put him on a nice cell with 3 meals a day... :evil: he's a monster a he deserves to be treated as such :evil:

http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailywee ... ates_c.php

As sick and twisted as this guy is, I can not agree with the death penalty in this case because he has not taken another life. I would suggest life in prison without posibility of parole and hope he gats raped.

he still stands

chadwick

OnTheEdge wrote:

arq wrote:

Now tell me that this piece of crap doesn't deserve to die? or even better let put him on a nice cell with 3 meals a day... :evil: he's a monster a he deserves to be treated as such :evil:

http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailywee ... ates_c.php

As sick and twisted as this guy is, I can not agree with the death penalty in this case because he has not taken another life. I would suggest life in prison without posibility of parole and hope he gats raped.

that sounds methodical, painstaking, organized, plotted out and torturous.
interesting.
even i am not that terrible.
a swift bullet and it is over.
the sickness stops.
why continue the bullshit of feeding evil?

ajedigecko

OnTheEdge wrote:

arq wrote:

Now tell me that this piece of crap doesn't deserve to die? or even better let put him on a nice cell with 3 meals a day... :evil: he's a monster a he deserves to be treated as such :evil:

http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailywee ... ates_c.php

As sick and twisted as this guy is, I can not agree with the death penalty in this case because he has not taken another life. I would suggest life in prison without posibility of parole and hope he gats raped.

i believe what the thing did.....is worse than killing.

chadwick

ajedigecko wrote:

i believe what the thing did.....is worse than killing.

you may just become my newest hero, many here are.
i am enjoying how you refer to this beast as "the thing" rather than him or human or person.
"the thing"
very well done, Sir.

_

Godfather. wrote:

ajedigecko wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

nobody answered my question, is the death penalty voted on from state to state ?

Godfather.

i believe so.......as it should be.

agreed, I hope it is, this is a decision that should be made by the people of each state and not a state or federal court. IMO

Godfather.

The people of the state don't actually get to vote on it in all (any?) states though. It's the legislature and the governor who decide.

ajedigecko

chadwick wrote:

ajedigecko wrote:

i believe what the thing did.....is worse than killing.

you may just become my newest hero, many here are.
i am enjoying how you refer to this beast as "the thing" rather than him or human or person.
"the thing"
very well done, Sir.

too me....it is the only label that seems to fit.

ajedigecko

The people of the state don't actually get to vote on it in all (any?) states though. It's the legislature and the governor who decide.[/quote]


if i remember correctly...back in 1994, we voted on wether to reinstate it, or not.

chadwick

ajedigecko wrote:

too me....it is the only label that seems to fit.

i understand exactly what you are saying.

_

ajedigecko wrote:

scb wrote:

The people of the state don't actually get to vote on it in all (any?) states though. It's the legislature and the governor who decide.

if i remember correctly...back in 1994, we voted on wether to reinstate it, or not.

Good to know. We don't get to vote directly on things like that here. Of course when our legislature passed a bill a year or so ago, which our governor signed into law, repealing the death penalty here, it was a response to many years of outcry from the public.

catefrances

so what do we do with this guy????

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=1077951

A Sydney man has apologised for almost severing a baby's head after a judge found him not guilty of murdering her on the grounds of mental illness.

Days before the killing, Jayant Kumar Singh was released from a mental hospital after earlier telling staff of thoughts of wanting to strangle the baby.

He later told a psychiatrist people had conspired to place black magic spells on him involving "devilism".

After Justice Robert Shallcross Hulme delivered the not guilty verdict in the NSW Supreme Court on Tuesday, Singh said from the dock: "I am very sorry for what I have done."

The then 53-year-old had been babysitting the 10-month-old baby and her two siblings on December 22, 2006 at a house in Campsie, in Sydney's southwest.

"When the mother went to do the shopping, after a little while, I got a stick and hit the baby, then I used the knife and the chopper to cut the neck off," he told police.

The mother described Singh as being "very good with the kids" and said she had never seem him become angry or aggressive with any of them.

Justice Hulme said the post-mortem report revealed the baby had extensive fracturing to her skull, brain injury and her neck "had also been deeply severed with near decapitation".

Singh told police he had hit each of the two siblings once with a crutch after they started to cry and "tried to interrupt" him from attacking the baby.

"I hit them, they backed off," he said.

In the middle of 2006, Singh was admitted to hospital with blood sugar problems but some mental problems manifested themselves and he was transferred to Rozelle Mental Hospital.

The judge said he was released on December 12, when the mother said he was not the same person as before, always looking sleepy and not talkative.

But he still appeared attached to the children and never showed any signs of being angry or upset with them.

Referring to the Rozelle hospital notes, Justice Hulme said that on July 14 Singh described "guilty ruminations about strangling the baby" and on July 15 reported thoughts of killing the children.

After the death, one psychiatrist diagnosed Singh as suffering from major depression with melancholic and psychotic features.

He later said Singh suffered from "ongoing active symptoms of a significant psychotic disorder characterised by delusional beliefs of persecution".

The judge ordered that Singh be detained in a mental health facility until, and if, he is assessed as being no danger to the public.

chadwick

catefrances wrote:

so what do we do with this guy????

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=1077951

A Sydney man has apologised for almost severing a baby's head after a judge found him not guilty of murdering her on the grounds of mental illness.

Days before the killing, Jayant Kumar Singh was released from a mental hospital after earlier telling staff of thoughts of wanting to strangle the baby.

He later told a psychiatrist people had conspired to place black magic spells on him involving "devilism".

After Justice Robert Shallcross Hulme delivered the not guilty verdict in the NSW Supreme Court on Tuesday, Singh said from the dock: "I am very sorry for what I have done."

The then 53-year-old had been babysitting the 10-month-old baby and her two siblings on December 22, 2006 at a house in Campsie, in Sydney's southwest.

"When the mother went to do the shopping, after a little while, I got a stick and hit the baby, then I used the knife and the chopper to cut the neck off," he told police.

The mother described Singh as being "very good with the kids" and said she had never seem him become angry or aggressive with any of them.

Justice Hulme said the post-mortem report revealed the baby had extensive fracturing to her skull, brain injury and her neck "had also been deeply severed with near decapitation".

Singh told police he had hit each of the two siblings once with a crutch after they started to cry and "tried to interrupt" him from attacking the baby.

"I hit them, they backed off," he said.

In the middle of 2006, Singh was admitted to hospital with blood sugar problems but some mental problems manifested themselves and he was transferred to Rozelle Mental Hospital.

The judge said he was released on December 12, when the mother said he was not the same person as before, always looking sleepy and not talkative.

But he still appeared attached to the children and never showed any signs of being angry or upset with them.

Referring to the Rozelle hospital notes, Justice Hulme said that on July 14 Singh described "guilty ruminations about strangling the baby" and on July 15 reported thoughts of killing the children.

After the death, one psychiatrist diagnosed Singh as suffering from major depression with melancholic and psychotic features.

He later said Singh suffered from "ongoing active symptoms of a significant psychotic disorder characterised by delusional beliefs of persecution".

The judge ordered that Singh be detained in a mental health facility until, and if, he is assessed as being no danger to the public.

the thing is a maniac.
you know exactly what he deserves.
that is one horrible story.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

"the thing" is sick, not evil. I can't imagine the horror of this happening to my 10 month old daughter. But what do you, Chadwick, do to the hospital who let him out days after he admitted to wanting to strangle the baby?? maybe we should give them "one quick bullet" too, since they could be culpable in this crime?

chadwick wrote:

catefrances wrote:

so what do we do with this guy????

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=1077951

A Sydney man has apologised for almost severing a baby's head after a judge found him not guilty of murdering her on the grounds of mental illness.

Days before the killing, Jayant Kumar Singh was released from a mental hospital after earlier telling staff of thoughts of wanting to strangle the baby.

He later told a psychiatrist people had conspired to place black magic spells on him involving "devilism".

After Justice Robert Shallcross Hulme delivered the not guilty verdict in the NSW Supreme Court on Tuesday, Singh said from the dock: "I am very sorry for what I have done."

The then 53-year-old had been babysitting the 10-month-old baby and her two siblings on December 22, 2006 at a house in Campsie, in Sydney's southwest.

"When the mother went to do the shopping, after a little while, I got a stick and hit the baby, then I used the knife and the chopper to cut the neck off," he told police.

The mother described Singh as being "very good with the kids" and said she had never seem him become angry or aggressive with any of them.

Justice Hulme said the post-mortem report revealed the baby had extensive fracturing to her skull, brain injury and her neck "had also been deeply severed with near decapitation".

Singh told police he had hit each of the two siblings once with a crutch after they started to cry and "tried to interrupt" him from attacking the baby.

"I hit them, they backed off," he said.

In the middle of 2006, Singh was admitted to hospital with blood sugar problems but some mental problems manifested themselves and he was transferred to Rozelle Mental Hospital.

The judge said he was released on December 12, when the mother said he was not the same person as before, always looking sleepy and not talkative.

But he still appeared attached to the children and never showed any signs of being angry or upset with them.

Referring to the Rozelle hospital notes, Justice Hulme said that on July 14 Singh described "guilty ruminations about strangling the baby" and on July 15 reported thoughts of killing the children.

After the death, one psychiatrist diagnosed Singh as suffering from major depression with melancholic and psychotic features.

He later said Singh suffered from "ongoing active symptoms of a significant psychotic disorder characterised by delusional beliefs of persecution".

The judge ordered that Singh be detained in a mental health facility until, and if, he is assessed as being no danger to the public.

the thing is a maniac.
you know exactly what he deserves.
that is one horrible story.

chadwick

Billy Pumpkin wrote:

"the thing" is sick, not evil. I can't imagine the horror of this happening to my 10 month old daughter. But what do you, Chadwick, do to the hospital who let him out days after he admitted to wanting to strangle the baby?? maybe we should give them "one quick bullet" too, since they could be culpable in this crime?

severely mentally ill or evil.
it's bullshit.
i have zero time for such things.

btw, severely ill can be down right evil.
fuck him
fuck that

end of story
the intelligent, strong & innocent prevail
this thing is far from any of those things.

poor dumb asshole should be wearing a wooden box

Godfather.

chadwick wrote:

catefrances wrote:

so what do we do with this guy????

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=1077951

A Sydney man has apologised for almost severing a baby's head after a judge found him not guilty of murdering her on the grounds of mental illness.

Days before the killing, Jayant Kumar Singh was released from a mental hospital after earlier telling staff of thoughts of wanting to strangle the baby.

He later told a psychiatrist people had conspired to place black magic spells on him involving "devilism".

After Justice Robert Shallcross Hulme delivered the not guilty verdict in the NSW Supreme Court on Tuesday, Singh said from the dock: "I am very sorry for what I have done."

The then 53-year-old had been babysitting the 10-month-old baby and her two siblings on December 22, 2006 at a house in Campsie, in Sydney's southwest.

"When the mother went to do the shopping, after a little while, I got a stick and hit the baby, then I used the knife and the chopper to cut the neck off," he told police.

The mother described Singh as being "very good with the kids" and said she had never seem him become angry or aggressive with any of them.

Justice Hulme said the post-mortem report revealed the baby had extensive fracturing to her skull, brain injury and her neck "had also been deeply severed with near decapitation".

Singh told police he had hit each of the two siblings once with a crutch after they started to cry and "tried to interrupt" him from attacking the baby.

"I hit them, they backed off," he said.

In the middle of 2006, Singh was admitted to hospital with blood sugar problems but some mental problems manifested themselves and he was transferred to Rozelle Mental Hospital.

The judge said he was released on December 12, when the mother said he was not the same person as before, always looking sleepy and not talkative.

But he still appeared attached to the children and never showed any signs of being angry or upset with them.

Referring to the Rozelle hospital notes, Justice Hulme said that on July 14 Singh described "guilty ruminations about strangling the baby" and on July 15 reported thoughts of killing the children.

After the death, one psychiatrist diagnosed Singh as suffering from major depression with melancholic and psychotic features.

He later said Singh suffered from "ongoing active symptoms of a significant psychotic disorder characterised by delusional beliefs of persecution".

The judge ordered that Singh be detained in a mental health facility until, and if, he is assessed as being no danger to the public.

the thing is a maniac.
you know exactly what he deserves.
that is one horrible story.

send him to some good ol' boys in the US and give him a quick lesson on gun control.

Godfather.

chadwick

Godfather. wrote:

send him to some good ol' boys in the US and give him a quick lesson on gun control.

Godfather.

that's exactly what he needs.
gun control, the swift lesson.
lights are out.
the end.

ajedigecko

i accept apologies.....when someone bumps into me.
i will not accept apologies.....for severed heads or hitting children.

this thing needs to be outsourced to the peruvian justice system.

lastly.....i do not think the hospital should be held accountable. i am sure they did everything in their limited power to correct the situation. there are some things that can never be corrected.

_

chadwick wrote:

Billy Pumpkin wrote:

"the thing" is sick, not evil. I can't imagine the horror of this happening to my 10 month old daughter. But what do you, Chadwick, do to the hospital who let him out days after he admitted to wanting to strangle the baby?? maybe we should give them "one quick bullet" too, since they could be culpable in this crime?

severely mentally ill or evil.
it's bullshit.
i have zero time for such things.

btw, severely ill can be down right evil.
fuck him
fuck that

end of story
the intelligent, strong & innocent prevail
this thing is far from any of those things.

poor dumb asshole should be wearing a wooden box

Wow - I'm surprised to hear this even from you. This isn't only inhumane, but un-American.

So if you one day have a psychotic break out of nowhere and kill someone, you should be put to death no questions asked? Even if you can be normal again with the help of meds?