BONNE TERRE, Mo. — A Missouri inmate was executed early Wednesday for abducting, raping and killing a Kansas City teenager as she waited for her school bus in 1989, marking the state's fourth lethal injection in as many months.
Michael Taylor, 47, was pronounced dead at 12:10 a.m. at the state prison in Bonne Terre. Federal courts and the governor had refused last-minute appeals from his attorneys, who argued that the execution drug purchased from a compounding pharmacy could have caused Taylor inhuman pain and suffering.
Taylor offered no final statement, although he mouthed silent words to his parents, clergymen and other relatives who witnessed his death. As the process began, he took two deep breaths before closing his eyes for the last time. There were no obvious signs of distress.
His victim, 15-year-old Ann Harrison, was in her driveway, carrying her school books, flute and purse, when Taylor and Roderick Nunley abducted her. The men pulled her into their stolen car and drove her to a home, where they raped and fatally stabbed her as she pleaded for her life. Nunley was also sentenced to death.
Ann's father and two of her uncles witnessed Taylor's execution. They declined to make a public statement.
In their appeals, Taylor's attorneys questioned Missouri's use of an unnamed compounding pharmacy to provide the execution drug, pentobarbital. They also cited concerns about the state executing inmates before appeals were complete and argued that Taylor's original trial attorney was so overworked that she encouraged him to plead guilty.
After using a three-drug execution method for years, Missouri switched late last year to pentobarbital. The same drug had been used in three earlier Missouri executions, and state officials said none of those inmates showed outward signs of distress.
Still, attorneys for Taylor said using a drug from a compounding pharmacy, which unlike large pharmaceutical companies are not regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, runs the risk of causing pain and suffering during the execution.
The Oklahoma-based compounding pharmacy Apothecary Shoppe agreed last week that it wouldn't supply the pentobarbital for Taylor's execution, forcing Missouri to find a new supplier. Attorney General Chris Koster's office said a new provider had been found, but Koster refused to name the pharmacy, citing the state's execution protocol that allows the manufacturer anonymity.
Taylor's attorneys said use of the drug without naming the compounding pharmacy could cause the inmate pain and suffering because no one could check if the operation was legitimate and had not been accused of any violations.
Pete Edlund doesn't want to hear it. The retired Kansas City police detective led the investigation into the teenager's death.
"Cruel and unusual punishment would be if we killed them the same way they killed Annie Harrison," Edlund said. "Get a damn rope, string them up, put them in the gas chamber. Whatever it takes."
Ann stepped out of her home the morning of March 22, 1989, to wait in her driveway for her school bus.
Authorities said Nunley and Taylor, then in their early 20s, drove past in a car they had stolen after a night of binging on crack cocaine. One of the men jumped out of the car and grabbed Ann, forcing her into the vehicle. Both claimed the other did it.
The men drove to the home of Nunley's mother. Ann was forced into the basement and raped — DNA testing linked Taylor to the crime. Afraid she would be able to identify them, the men used kitchen knives to stab the girl 10 times, including in her throat and torso, as she begged for her life.
She offered money if they would let her live. She died about 30 minutes later, according to the medical examiner.
The stolen car was then driven to a nearby neighborhood and abandoned, with Ann's body in the trunk. She was found the next day. But the crime went unsolved for about six months until a $10,000 reward led to a tip, and Taylor and Nunley were both arrested, Edlund said. Both pleaded guilty and were sentenced to death.
The case left even veteran officers traumatized, Edlund said.
"She just turned 15," the retired detective said. "It was a tragedy all the way around. This was an innocent child."
Linda Taylor, Michael Taylor's mother, issued a statement with other family members stating Taylor has great remorse for his crime. The family does not want to see Taylor executed and Linda Taylor has said that life in prison should be sufficient punishment.
Janel Harrison, mother of Ann Harrison, said the execution is needed justice for her daughter.
"There should be an ultimate penalty," Harrison said. =D>
Good riddance hopefully Missouri moves forward with this 25 years is a joke he should've been put down years ago
JEFFERSON CITY - If you kidnap your victim in Missouri and kill them, your execution could be put on the fast track.
Sen. Dan Brown is proposing legislation intended that would limit extensions for appeals, and the Missouri Supreme Court would need to hear arguments in a case within six months of submission of the last written argument. The high court would have another six months to issue its decision.
The measure also would require the court to issue a warrant to carry out the execution no more than 10 days after the defendant’s state and federal appeals have ended.
I'm beginning to think that some of these people are right: prison is way worse than being executed and murderers do eventually understand the significance of their crimes and become remorseful.
For example, Anders Brievek, Norway's mass murdering fiend is being tortured right now because the prison won't upgrade his PS2 to a PS3, he doesn't get adult games to play, and he wants contact with the outside world.
Good for him though, if he doesn't get it, he'll go on a hunger strike. This should motivate the bleeding hearts excessively concerned for the murderer of 77 children and then the torture will likely end for him.
Home World News UK Showbiz Femail Sport US Home US Showbiz Health Sci & Tech Video Money Travel Login Desktop Site News 'Having an old Playstation is NOT torture': Norwegian police throw out bizarre claim by mass murderer Anders Breivik about his treatment in jail
By Sarah Michael 02:24 25 Feb 2014, updated 10:22 25 Feb 2014 +6 Facebook Twitter Click to open Google Plus Reddit Stumble Upon Fark Digg it LinkedIn Email Click to close 165 shares 72 comments Far-right terrorist Anders Breivik's complaints over daily body searches and lack of activities dismissed by police Mass murderer who killed 77 in Norway in 2011 wanted better video games and unmonitored contact with the outside world Breivik sent letter to anti-torture watchdog and media outlets claiming he has penned a book that is being censored by prison authorities Police in Norway have rejected a complaint by mass murderer Anders Breivik that his treatment in jail amounted to 'serious torture'.
The far-right terrorist who killed 77 people in a bombing and mass shooting on July 22, 2011, filed a formal complaint against the Norwegian Minister of Justice and a prison director, in which he said his daily body searches and outdated video games were equal to 'aggravated torture'.
The complaint filed in January last year was examined by police but a preliminary investigation was closed on Monday according to police commissioner Ingrid Wirum.
+6 Convicted mass murderer Anders Breivik, 35, has had his claims that he is being 'tortured' in jail rejected by police +6 In this letter sent to media outlets Breivik complained he was being subjected to 'torture' because he had to play outdated video games and undergo daily body searches ‘On this basis we have concluded that neither the prison in Ila nor the people mentioned in the complaint are guilty of any wrongdoing,’ Ms Wirum told AFP.
Lawyer Tord Jordet told AFP his client Breivik ‘was not surprised’ by the decision, The Local reported.
‘He noted that the case has been closed despite significant documentation which demonstrates the violation of European prison regulations and human rights,’ Mr Jordet said.
MORE... Breivik hunger strike threat: wants bigger gym Mass killer Anders Breivik apologised to his mother for ruining her life according to controversial new biography about her ‘It does not seem that the police wanted to investigate thoroughly.’
Breivik, who is serving a 21-year sentence, has repeatedly threatened to go on hunger strikes in protest of his treatment in prison.
In a letter received by various media outlets last month, which was sent to prison authorities in November 2013, the right-wing extremist detailed 12 demands including the right to communicate more freely with the outside world and access to a computer rather than a typewriter.
Breivik, who was recently moved from the Ila prison outside Olso to the Telemark prison in Skien, also demanded that his Playstation 2 be upgraded to a PS3 and that he be given ‘access to more adult games that I get to choose myself’.
+6 The exterior of Ila prison near Olso where Breivik complained of harsh treatment. The convicted killer has been moved to the Telemark prison in Skien +6 Library facilities at the Ila prison where Breivik served part of his 21-year sentence for the murder of 77 people in 2011. The right-wing extremist says he has written a book providing new details about his bombing and mass shooting but prison authorities have refused to release it ‘Other inmates have access to adult games while I only have the right to play less interesting kids games. One example is "Rayman Revolution", a game aimed at three year olds,’ Breivik wrote.
Breivik also asked for an armchair to replace his ‘painful’ chair, his weekly allowance of 300 kroner (£30) to be doubled and his mail to cease being monitored and censored by the jail.
‘You've put me in hell ... and I won't manage to survive that long. You are killing me,’ the convicted killer wrote.
‘If I die, all of Europe's right-wing extremists will know exactly who it was that tortured me to death ... That could have consequences for certain individuals in the short term but also when Norway is once again ruled by a fascist regime in 13 to 40 years from now.’
In the letter, which was also sent to Norway’s anti-torture watchdog, the mass murderer also claimed to have written a book which is he is unable to send to a publisher.
According to Breivik’s lawyer Mr Jordet the more than 1000-page book gives fresh details on the planning on his 2011 bombing and shooting rampage as well as reasons for the attacks.Breivik murdered eight people when he bombed the outside of a government building in Oslo and massacred another 69 people at a youth camp on the island of Utoya.
+6 A memorial overlooking the island of Utoya where 69 people, mostly teenagers, were killed by right-wing terrorist Breivik in a shooting spree.
Canada obviously has the best rehabilitation program.
Just 6 years after beheading and eating a fellow passenger on a bus, Vince Li is granted unescorted trips into Selkirk. I'm not sure if there are any 10C members that live in Selkirk, but if there are... make sure to say "Hi" and congratulate Li on his successful recovery from a deranged lunatic while he's hanging out in your city!
Thursday's ruling by the Criminal Code Review Board means Vince Li will be on his own in public for the first time since he stabbed Tim McLean and then ate parts of his body six years ago.
The board granted Li all the new freedoms his psychiatric team had requested at a hearing earlier this week. Lead psychiatrist Dr. Steven Kremer said Li, a schizophrenic, has stopped experiencing delusions and is a model, non-violent patient.
The victim's mother is distraught, but who gives a shit? She should just get over it. This is all about fast-tracking a guy into mainstream society.
Instead of the supervised outings Li had been granted previously, he will be allowed unescorted trips from the Selkirk Mental Health Centre into the nearby city of Selkirk. The visits, to begin next Thursday, are to start at 30 minutes and increase to full days.
As well, Li’s supervision on outings to other communities —Winnipeg, Lockport and nearby beaches — will be relaxed. He is to be part of a group without a staff member dedicated to monitoring him.
Li is also to be moved to an unlocked ward at the hospital from the secure wing where he has been kept.
For McLean’s mother, the changes were an outrage.
“We’re not surprised. We’re very disappointed, embarrassed, ashamed,” Carol DeDelley said.
“I ultimately do not believe that when you take a life, you have the right to freedom any longer.”
BONNE TERRE, Mo. — A Missouri inmate was executed early Wednesday for abducting, raping and killing a Kansas City teenager as she waited for her school bus in 1989, marking the state's fourth lethal injection in as many months.
Michael Taylor, 47, was pronounced dead at 12:10 a.m. at the state prison in Bonne Terre. Federal courts and the governor had refused last-minute appeals from his attorneys, who argued that the execution drug purchased from a compounding pharmacy could have caused Taylor inhuman pain and suffering.
Taylor offered no final statement, although he mouthed silent words to his parents, clergymen and other relatives who witnessed his death. As the process began, he took two deep breaths before closing his eyes for the last time. There were no obvious signs of distress.
His victim, 15-year-old Ann Harrison, was in her driveway, carrying her school books, flute and purse, when Taylor and Roderick Nunley abducted her. The men pulled her into their stolen car and drove her to a home, where they raped and fatally stabbed her as she pleaded for her life. Nunley was also sentenced to death.
Ann's father and two of her uncles witnessed Taylor's execution. They declined to make a public statement.
In their appeals, Taylor's attorneys questioned Missouri's use of an unnamed compounding pharmacy to provide the execution drug, pentobarbital. They also cited concerns about the state executing inmates before appeals were complete and argued that Taylor's original trial attorney was so overworked that she encouraged him to plead guilty.
After using a three-drug execution method for years, Missouri switched late last year to pentobarbital. The same drug had been used in three earlier Missouri executions, and state officials said none of those inmates showed outward signs of distress.
Still, attorneys for Taylor said using a drug from a compounding pharmacy, which unlike large pharmaceutical companies are not regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, runs the risk of causing pain and suffering during the execution.
The Oklahoma-based compounding pharmacy Apothecary Shoppe agreed last week that it wouldn't supply the pentobarbital for Taylor's execution, forcing Missouri to find a new supplier. Attorney General Chris Koster's office said a new provider had been found, but Koster refused to name the pharmacy, citing the state's execution protocol that allows the manufacturer anonymity.
Taylor's attorneys said use of the drug without naming the compounding pharmacy could cause the inmate pain and suffering because no one could check if the operation was legitimate and had not been accused of any violations.
Pete Edlund doesn't want to hear it. The retired Kansas City police detective led the investigation into the teenager's death.
"Cruel and unusual punishment would be if we killed them the same way they killed Annie Harrison," Edlund said. "Get a damn rope, string them up, put them in the gas chamber. Whatever it takes."
Ann stepped out of her home the morning of March 22, 1989, to wait in her driveway for her school bus.
Authorities said Nunley and Taylor, then in their early 20s, drove past in a car they had stolen after a night of binging on crack cocaine. One of the men jumped out of the car and grabbed Ann, forcing her into the vehicle. Both claimed the other did it.
The men drove to the home of Nunley's mother. Ann was forced into the basement and raped — DNA testing linked Taylor to the crime. Afraid she would be able to identify them, the men used kitchen knives to stab the girl 10 times, including in her throat and torso, as she begged for her life.
She offered money if they would let her live. She died about 30 minutes later, according to the medical examiner.
The stolen car was then driven to a nearby neighborhood and abandoned, with Ann's body in the trunk. She was found the next day. But the crime went unsolved for about six months until a $10,000 reward led to a tip, and Taylor and Nunley were both arrested, Edlund said. Both pleaded guilty and were sentenced to death.
The case left even veteran officers traumatized, Edlund said.
"She just turned 15," the retired detective said. "It was a tragedy all the way around. This was an innocent child."
Linda Taylor, Michael Taylor's mother, issued a statement with other family members stating Taylor has great remorse for his crime. The family does not want to see Taylor executed and Linda Taylor has said that life in prison should be sufficient punishment.
Janel Harrison, mother of Ann Harrison, said the execution is needed justice for her daughter.
"There should be an ultimate penalty," Harrison said. =D>
Good riddance hopefully Missouri moves forward with this 25 years is a joke he should've been put down years ago
JEFFERSON CITY - If you kidnap your victim in Missouri and kill them, your execution could be put on the fast track.
Sen. Dan Brown is proposing legislation intended that would limit extensions for appeals, and the Missouri Supreme Court would need to hear arguments in a case within six months of submission of the last written argument. The high court would have another six months to issue its decision.
The measure also would require the court to issue a warrant to carry out the execution no more than 10 days after the defendant’s state and federal appeals have ended.
these two fucking scumbags should have been executed years ago. but... good on missouri for finally stepping up & stopping a twisted sick monster's heart. when did the other guy get offed or is he still breathing?
"The Death Penalty is a Hate Crime": Bob Autobee Speaks Out to Spare Life of Son’s Killer Democracy Now! Wednesday, March 5, 2014
We are joined by Bob Autobee, a Colorado resident who is opposing the death penalty for the prisoner who killed his son Eric, a prison guard, in 2002. During the original trial, Autobee supported a death sentence for Edward Montour. But the Colorado Supreme Court threw out Montour’s sentence in 2007 because it was imposed by a judge, not a jury as is required. A decade later, Autobee has now changed his mind. In the new murder trial that begins today, he wants to make a victim’s statement to the jury asking them not to impose the death penalty — but the judge in the case has barred him from doing so. Autobee describes why he opposes the death penalty in this case, and why he wants to see it abolished overall. "You’ve got to be willing to heal, and you’ve got to let the hate go," Autobee says. "To me the death penalty is a hate crime, a crime against humanity." We are also joined by Democracy Now! producer and criminal justice correspondent Renée Feltz, who notes that 80 percent of Colorado voters actually passed a constitutional amendment in 1992 that enshrines the rights of victims to make a statement in cases like Autobee’s.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: We turn now to Colorado, where a trial set to begin today has drawn attention to the state’s ongoing debate about its use of the death penalty. The case involves a prison inmate named Edward Montour, who is accused of beating a prison guard named Eric Autobee to death in 2002. Montour pled guilty to the murder and was convicted. But the state’s Supreme Court threw out his death sentence in 2007 because it was imposed by a judge, and not a jury, as is required. Now the case is back in court. This time the killer is pleading not guilty by reason of insanity, and the victim’s father, who wanted to seek the "ultimate punishment" in the original trial, has had a change of heart.
AMY GOODMAN: During a meeting with prosecutors, Bob Autobee asked them to spare the life of his son’s killer, but to no avail. In a surprising move, they have not only decided to pursue another death sentence, they’ve also succeeded in blocking Autobee from making a victim’s statement to the jury that expresses his request for a life sentence. Last week, the judge in the case ruled, quote, "The Autobees may testify about the emotional impact of a death sentence or a life sentence ... However, the Autobees will not be allowed to testify about what sentence the jury should impose."
For more, we turn to Bob Autobee. He’s joining us from Denver, just before he goes to the trial today. We’re also joined by Democracy Now! producer and criminal justice correspondent, Renée Feltz.
Bob Autobee, welcome to Democracy Now! How is it—
BOB AUTOBEE: Thank you. Good morning.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you explain how, in your victim’s statement, you’re not allowed to say what you want to say?
BOB AUTOBEE: Well, there’s been concern from the beginning when I started picketing that I could taint the jury. But this trial has already been tainted numerous times. And I feel I have as much right to speak as the DA or the defense.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, let’s go to part of the video recording from when you met with your son’s killer, Edward Montour, this past December, along with a moderator who’s trained in the method of restorative justice. This clip begins with Edward Montour apologizing to you.
EDWARD MONTOUR: One thing I would like to say, before we go further, is that I am deeply, deeply sorry for the pain I caused you and your family for killing your son. I had no right. I had no right. And I am very humbled by you forgiving me. And I want to thank you for that, because you didn’t have to. And I’m not sure if I would have the courage to do what you’re doing. You’re a good man. And I want to thank you for this opportunity.
BOB AUTOBEE: I appreciate that. I wasn’t always a good man. You know, this isn’t just about me and you, because Eric’s right here. My son’s over there. My wife is at home. She said she couldn’t—she couldn’t be in the same room with you. But she forgives you. My son has forgiven you. I have forgiven you. And so—and I’m sure Eric has forgiven you. I see an opportunity here, an opportunity to make something positive out of my son’s death. And you’re a part of it. We’re all a part of that. When your trial starts in January, I told him, "I’ll be at the courthouse, but I’ll be outside picketing, because I don’t believe it’s justice." The death penalty would not bring me any satisfaction.
....
AMY GOODMAN: You were a corrections officer yourself, and your son, of course, Eric, was a prison guard. That’s where Edward Montour killed him.
BOB AUTOBEE: That’s correct.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And you said this experience has made you very critical of the prison system and the penal system, in general. Could you talk about what specific changes you’ve been advocating in the Colorado prison system?
BOB AUTOBEE: Well, we’ve asked—we suggested focus groups from the staff, because the management has refused to listen to the people that are in the trenches, and so a lot of things get by that management doesn’t know anything about. We’d also—we suggested different colored jumpsuits for the inmates, so violent offenders could be recognized immediately, because right now in Colorado we have violent and maximum-security inmates in medium-security facilities where they have no business. And unless you’ve read every jacket of every inmate, you don’t know what they’re in there for. So, I think the different colored uniforms would help. We’ve even suggested dogs to go on patrol with the officers, rather than leaving them by themselves. There’s a lot of things that could be done, but the administration refuses to listen.
AMY GOODMAN: Renée?
RENÉE FELTZ: I wanted to suggest that Bob describe what he did in January, which was very interesting. He went to protest against the death penalty in this case outside of the courtroom, when he wasn’t quite sure if he would be allowed to make a statement inside. And, Bob, could you talk about what—who joined you? There were other victims of murder, families, that were with you for that protest, is that right? Can you talk about what you did and who joined you?
BOB AUTOBEE: That’s correct. When I met with Brauchler at my home, I told him that if he pursued the death penalty, that I would fight it, and I would picket—
RENÉE FELTZ: And that’s the prosecutor in the case.
BOB AUTOBEE: Yes. And I’ve been picketing. And then Tim Ricard, the husband of Mary Ricard, the second officer that was killed in Colorado recently, he’s also anti-death penalty, and we’ve been working together. We had a survivor from one of the victims of Nathan Dunlap, was also involved. And I met with the mother of that young lady, and we had a wonderful talk, and hope I was able to help her understand, you know, you’ve got to be willing to heal, and you’ve got to let the hate go. I mean, to me, the death penalty is a hate crime, and it’s a crime against humanity. And once you come to this side and see it for what it really is, then you’ll know you’re doing the right thing.
"The Death Penalty is a Hate Crime": Bob Autobee Speaks Out to Spare Life of Son’s Killer Democracy Now! Wednesday, March 5, 2014
We are joined by Bob Autobee, a Colorado resident who is opposing the death penalty for the prisoner who killed his son Eric, a prison guard, in 2002. During the original trial, Autobee supported a death sentence for Edward Montour. But the Colorado Supreme Court threw out Montour’s sentence in 2007 because it was imposed by a judge, not a jury as is required. A decade later, Autobee has now changed his mind. In the new murder trial that begins today, he wants to make a victim’s statement to the jury asking them not to impose the death penalty — but the judge in the case has barred him from doing so. Autobee describes why he opposes the death penalty in this case, and why he wants to see it abolished overall. "You’ve got to be willing to heal, and you’ve got to let the hate go," Autobee says. "To me the death penalty is a hate crime, a crime against humanity." We are also joined by Democracy Now! producer and criminal justice correspondent Renée Feltz, who notes that 80 percent of Colorado voters actually passed a constitutional amendment in 1992 that enshrines the rights of victims to make a statement in cases like Autobee’s.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: We turn now to Colorado, where a trial set to begin today has drawn attention to the state’s ongoing debate about its use of the death penalty. The case involves a prison inmate named Edward Montour, who is accused of beating a prison guard named Eric Autobee to death in 2002. Montour pled guilty to the murder and was convicted. But the state’s Supreme Court threw out his death sentence in 2007 because it was imposed by a judge, and not a jury, as is required. Now the case is back in court. This time the killer is pleading not guilty by reason of insanity, and the victim’s father, who wanted to seek the "ultimate punishment" in the original trial, has had a change of heart.
AMY GOODMAN: During a meeting with prosecutors, Bob Autobee asked them to spare the life of his son’s killer, but to no avail. In a surprising move, they have not only decided to pursue another death sentence, they’ve also succeeded in blocking Autobee from making a victim’s statement to the jury that expresses his request for a life sentence. Last week, the judge in the case ruled, quote, "The Autobees may testify about the emotional impact of a death sentence or a life sentence ... However, the Autobees will not be allowed to testify about what sentence the jury should impose."
For more, we turn to Bob Autobee. He’s joining us from Denver, just before he goes to the trial today. We’re also joined by Democracy Now! producer and criminal justice correspondent, Renée Feltz.
Bob Autobee, welcome to Democracy Now! How is it—
BOB AUTOBEE: Thank you. Good morning.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you explain how, in your victim’s statement, you’re not allowed to say what you want to say?
BOB AUTOBEE: Well, there’s been concern from the beginning when I started picketing that I could taint the jury. But this trial has already been tainted numerous times. And I feel I have as much right to speak as the DA or the defense.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, let’s go to part of the video recording from when you met with your son’s killer, Edward Montour, this past December, along with a moderator who’s trained in the method of restorative justice. This clip begins with Edward Montour apologizing to you.
EDWARD MONTOUR: One thing I would like to say, before we go further, is that I am deeply, deeply sorry for the pain I caused you and your family for killing your son. I had no right. I had no right. And I am very humbled by you forgiving me. And I want to thank you for that, because you didn’t have to. And I’m not sure if I would have the courage to do what you’re doing. You’re a good man. And I want to thank you for this opportunity.
BOB AUTOBEE: I appreciate that. I wasn’t always a good man. You know, this isn’t just about me and you, because Eric’s right here. My son’s over there. My wife is at home. She said she couldn’t—she couldn’t be in the same room with you. But she forgives you. My son has forgiven you. I have forgiven you. And so—and I’m sure Eric has forgiven you. I see an opportunity here, an opportunity to make something positive out of my son’s death. And you’re a part of it. We’re all a part of that. When your trial starts in January, I told him, "I’ll be at the courthouse, but I’ll be outside picketing, because I don’t believe it’s justice." The death penalty would not bring me any satisfaction.
....
AMY GOODMAN: You were a corrections officer yourself, and your son, of course, Eric, was a prison guard. That’s where Edward Montour killed him.
BOB AUTOBEE: That’s correct.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And you said this experience has made you very critical of the prison system and the penal system, in general. Could you talk about what specific changes you’ve been advocating in the Colorado prison system?
BOB AUTOBEE: Well, we’ve asked—we suggested focus groups from the staff, because the management has refused to listen to the people that are in the trenches, and so a lot of things get by that management doesn’t know anything about. We’d also—we suggested different colored jumpsuits for the inmates, so violent offenders could be recognized immediately, because right now in Colorado we have violent and maximum-security inmates in medium-security facilities where they have no business. And unless you’ve read every jacket of every inmate, you don’t know what they’re in there for. So, I think the different colored uniforms would help. We’ve even suggested dogs to go on patrol with the officers, rather than leaving them by themselves. There’s a lot of things that could be done, but the administration refuses to listen.
AMY GOODMAN: Renée?
RENÉE FELTZ: I wanted to suggest that Bob describe what he did in January, which was very interesting. He went to protest against the death penalty in this case outside of the courtroom, when he wasn’t quite sure if he would be allowed to make a statement inside. And, Bob, could you talk about what—who joined you? There were other victims of murder, families, that were with you for that protest, is that right? Can you talk about what you did and who joined you?
BOB AUTOBEE: That’s correct. When I met with Brauchler at my home, I told him that if he pursued the death penalty, that I would fight it, and I would picket—
RENÉE FELTZ: And that’s the prosecutor in the case.
BOB AUTOBEE: Yes. And I’ve been picketing. And then Tim Ricard, the husband of Mary Ricard, the second officer that was killed in Colorado recently, he’s also anti-death penalty, and we’ve been working together. We had a survivor from one of the victims of Nathan Dunlap, was also involved. And I met with the mother of that young lady, and we had a wonderful talk, and hope I was able to help her understand, you know, you’ve got to be willing to heal, and you’ve got to let the hate go. I mean, to me, the death penalty is a hate crime, and it’s a crime against humanity. And once you come to this side and see it for what it really is, then you’ll know you’re doing the right thing.
Ed was in prison for killing his infant daughter.
His 'second' murder could have been prevented if the dp had been applied to the child murderer- showing it's effectiveness as a deterrent in this case.
If Bob could take time back and have the death penalty applied to the child murderer once convicted- hence, saving his son's life- would he be saying something different?
His 'second' murder could have been prevented if the dp had been applied to the child murderer- showing it's effectiveness as a deterrent in this case.
If Bob could take time back and have the death penalty applied to the child murderer once convicted - hence, saving his son's life - would he be saying something different?
The second murder could probably have been prevented if the things that he suggests in the article had been applied:
"...we suggested different colored jumpsuits for the inmates, so violent offenders could be recognized immediately, because right now in Colorado we have violent and maximum-security inmates in medium-security facilities where they have no business. And unless you’ve read every jacket of every inmate, you don’t know what they’re in there for. So, I think the different colored uniforms would help. We’ve even suggested dogs to go on patrol with the officers, rather than leaving them by themselves. There’s a lot of things that could be done, but the administration refuses to listen."
Why is killing someone the only solution in your repertoire? It doesn't work as a deterrent, It's more expensive than keeping them locked up (thereby taking money and resources away from solving more crimes out on the street), and it teaches people that murder is an acceptable solution - states with the death penalty have a higher number of murders than those without the death penalty.
His 'second' murder could have been prevented if the dp had been applied to the child murderer- showing it's effectiveness as a deterrent in this case.
If Bob could take time back and have the death penalty applied to the child murderer once convicted - hence, saving his son's life - would he be saying something different?
The second murder could probably have been prevented if the things that he suggests in the article had been applied:
"...we suggested different colored jumpsuits for the inmates, so violent offenders could be recognized immediately, because right now in Colorado we have violent and maximum-security inmates in medium-security facilities where they have no business. And unless you’ve read every jacket of every inmate, you don’t know what they’re in there for. So, I think the different colored uniforms would help. We’ve even suggested dogs to go on patrol with the officers, rather than leaving them by themselves. There’s a lot of things that could be done, but the administration refuses to listen."
Why is killing someone the only solution in your repertoire? It doesn't work as a deterrent, It's more expensive than keeping them locked up (thereby taking money and resources away from solving more crimes out on the street), and it teaches people that murder is an acceptable solution - states with the death penalty have a higher number of murders than those without the death penalty.
It's ironic that you ask that question of me when, in fact, my repertoire of solutions is broader than yours. You don't include a sentence of death for the most heinous of crimes and I do- the 'other' sentences we agree on and both carry as solutions for 'typical' murderers. Killers of children and mass/serial murderers are atypical and I see treating them differently than, say, gangbangers shooting each other over dollars.
Money should not be an issue when determining a person's fate. The only reason it is so costly to begin with is because we have made it so. It could be infinitely cheaper.
It is only opinion that suggests that it 'teaches people murder is an acceptable solution'.
And I thought an understanding was reached that any statements made to the effectiveness of the DP as a deterrent are moot given the studies and statistics are seriously flawed and unreliable for making any accurate and definitive claims (at least, according to the scientific community). I don't wish to test it, but in order to determine the DP's authentic effectiveness, we would need to employ it in a much higher case rate than- off the top of my head- 0.0007% of murder cases.
Now, answer my question if you please: If Bob could take time back and have the death penalty applied to the child murderer once convicted - hence, saving his son's life - would he be saying something different?
Convicted Cheshire killer Steven Hayes was found unresponsive in his death row cell on Monday, Connecticut authorities said. Awaiting his date with a state execution, Hayes, 50, was found in his cell at the Northern Correctional Institute around 9:35 a.m. by officers on their “routine tour,” who revived the killer.
A spokesman would not reveal whether Hayes attempted suicide or suffered a medical emergency, saying instead that the incident is under investigation.
Hayes was the only inmate in his cell at the time, and is now reportedly in stable condition at a local hospital, the Connecticut Department of Corrections said.
Convicted Cheshire killer Steven Hayes was found unresponsive in his death row cell on Monday, Connecticut authorities said. Awaiting his date with a state execution, Hayes, 50, was found in his cell at the Northern Correctional Institute around 9:35 a.m. by officers on their “routine tour,” who revived the killer.
A spokesman would not reveal whether Hayes attempted suicide or suffered a medical emergency, saying instead that the incident is under investigation.
Hayes was the only inmate in his cell at the time, and is now reportedly in stable condition at a local hospital, the Connecticut Department of Corrections said.
This case is one of the more horrific cases we could possibly come to know of.
Hayes was a really really stupid man who was duped into a committing a horrific crime- initially thinking he was participating in in a home invasion... only to eventually find himself participating in bondage, rape and mass murder (which was the original and unrevealed plan of Komisarjevky all along).
As much as I loathe rapists and murderers, I believe he genuinely struggles living with himself for what has happened- he continually has asked to be executed sooner than later. Most death row inmates I read about, like his scumbag partner, Joshua Komisarjevky, are really busy feeling sorry for themselves- claiming they are the victims- while scurrying to save themselves with hardly a thought for the true victims.
Don't get me wrong... he made some horrific decisions and he will ultimately pay for them without me feeling too much remorse. But in fairness to him... this was not a premeditated act on his part and he got caught up in something that he didn't have the skill set to get out of. JK on the other hand... well... he's a rodent of the lowest order and clinical execution is very generous and merciful given what he did.
And I thought an understanding was reached that any statements made to the effectiveness of the DP as a deterrent are moot given the studies and statistics are seriously flawed and unreliable for making any accurate and definitive claims (at least, according to the scientific community). I don't wish to test it, but in order to determine the DP's authentic effectiveness, we would need to employ it in a much higher case rate than- off the top of my head- 0.0007% of murder cases.
No, we wouldn't. The statistics are based on reality. They're based on the death penalty and it's alleged deterrence capability as it is applied around the World. And the statistics show that it does not work as a deterrent. Not only does it not work as a deterrent, but murder rates are higher in areas that employ it. And that article you posted suggesting that more people need to be executed in order to better evaluate the effectiveness of the death penalty...that article was a sham. 80% of the Worlds top criminologists have said that the DP does not work as a deterrent. The article you posted has no merit.
And I thought an understanding was reached that any statements made to the effectiveness of the DP as a deterrent are moot given the studies and statistics are seriously flawed and unreliable for making any accurate and definitive claims (at least, according to the scientific community). I don't wish to test it, but in order to determine the DP's authentic effectiveness, we would need to employ it in a much higher case rate than- off the top of my head- 0.0007% of murder cases.
No, we wouldn't. The statistics are based on reality. They're based on the death penalty and it's alleged deterrence capability as it is applied around the World. And the statistics show that it does not work as a deterrent. Not only does it not work as a deterrent, but murder rates are higher in areas that employ it. And that article you posted suggesting that more people need to be executed in order to better evaluate the effectiveness of the death penalty...that article was a sham. 80% of the Worlds top criminologists have said that the DP does not work as a deterrent. The article you posted has no merit.
You still stubbornly cling to the testing parameters as being valid? This is close-minded behaviour, Byrnzie. I'm sorry, but you are flat out wrong with your assertion here.
The 'reality' is that with such limited and infrequent usage... it is impossible to determine whether the DP is or is not a deterrent- leaving all arguments for and against... moot.
To that end, it is impossible to determine if anything is or isn't efficient when it is employed 0.0007% of the time. This fact is what the scientific community agreed upon in the comprehensive article and study RG- your fellow, well-spoken opponent- presented in this thread.
It's not wise to allow your passion to prevent you from following and admitting to such simple and basic logic. This is very similar behaviour to that of gun enthusiasts who deny or attempt to refute overwhelming gun statistics that threaten their belief system.
Fair enough. If the delivery of my message has got you in a tizzy, I'll rescind what I considered a rather benign comment to Know about feeling sorry for murderers.
But as I do this... let's also acknowledge the fact that you remained very complacent with other somewhat muddied tactics on the part of the people you are now carrying the torch for: when they referred to proponents of the dp as 'savages' and 'no better than the killers'.
Hmmm. Consider the exchanges here. One side aggressively initiates a mud slinging affair by calling their opponents a 'savage' and then labelling them as 'being on the same level as a serial murderer'. The other side responds in kind to these charges by stating their opponent is 'feeling sorry for murderers'. And... Ping gets himself worked up about the retort and spins it to suggest this was 'shitty behaviour' with the ultimate design of misrepresenting the opinions of his opponents.
To my way of thinking, if a person wishes to anoint themselves as a board tactic monitor as you have seen fit to do, Ping, then they should likely do so in an unbiased manner... otherwise... their righteousness comes across as self-serving: attacking only the cheaper tactics employed by the side they disagree with.
I'll stop there, given I have enjoyed your contributions on this site immensely and hope to do so in the future.
Admittedly I am more likely to jump to the defence of somebody I agree with here, because I see people trying to quite eloquently put forward the argument for why justice should dispassionate, and see that they are treated as though they themselves are dispassionate, or worse, more passionate about saving murderers than about punishing them, which is a fundamental failure to understand the anti-dp stance taken by many here.
I think that is quite well illustrated by the way people keep posting long, and horrific articles about the various horrible ways in which innocent people have been murdered, as though all those opposed to the death penalty are somehow not aware, or don't care that these things have happened, which could not be further from the truth. The whole point of what a lot of people are trying to say here is that in order for justice to be effective and fair it is necessary to disassociate yourself from your emotional reaction to crime, and view it objectively, emotion clouds logic, and justice must be predicated on logic. That's what every good judge does, that is what every good jury does, that is what the people who post these articles would find themselves having to do it they were called for jury duty as well. That does not mean that one cannot feel, or should not feel, and it is insulting for people to keep implying that those opposed to the death penalty do not feel for victims.
For the record though, I do not believe everybody who supports the death penalty is barbaric or a savage for doing so, and I absolutely condemn that line of reasoning as a cheap tactic designed to delegitimize an opponent's argument without addressing it.
This case is one of the more horrific cases we could possibly come to know of.
Hayes was a really really stupid man who was duped into a committing a horrific crime- initially thinking he was participating in in a home invasion... only to eventually find himself participating in bondage, rape and mass murder (which was the original and unrevealed plan of Komisarjevky all along).
As much as I loathe rapists and murderers, I believe he genuinely struggles living with himself for what has happened- he continually has asked to be executed sooner than later. Most death row inmates I read about, like his scumbag partner, Joshua Komisarjevky, are really busy feeling sorry for themselves- claiming they are the victims- while scurrying to save themselves with hardly a thought for the true victims.
Don't get me wrong... he made some horrific decisions and he will ultimately pay for them without me feeling too much remorse. But in fairness to him... this was not a premeditated act on his part and he got caught up in something that he didn't have the skill set to get out of. JK on the other hand... well... he's a rodent of the lowest order and clinical execution is very generous and merciful given what he did.
i like what you wrote here & i throughly believe you've read, watched & researched this case, heck you may have followed it some. you write well & get your point across. thank you for enlightening me some.
Fair enough. If the delivery of my message has got you in a tizzy, I'll rescind what I considered a rather benign comment to Know about feeling sorry for murderers.
But as I do this... let's also acknowledge the fact that you remained very complacent with other somewhat muddied tactics on the part of the people you are now carrying the torch for: when they referred to proponents of the dp as 'savages' and 'no better than the killers'.
Hmmm. Consider the exchanges here. One side aggressively initiates a mud slinging affair by calling their opponents a 'savage' and then labelling them as 'being on the same level as a serial murderer'. The other side responds in kind to these charges by stating their opponent is 'feeling sorry for murderers'. And... Ping gets himself worked up about the retort and spins it to suggest this was 'shitty behaviour' with the ultimate design of misrepresenting the opinions of his opponents.
To my way of thinking, if a person wishes to anoint themselves as a board tactic monitor as you have seen fit to do, Ping, then they should likely do so in an unbiased manner... otherwise... their righteousness comes across as self-serving: attacking only the cheaper tactics employed by the side they disagree with.
I'll stop there, given I have enjoyed your contributions on this site immensely and hope to do so in the future.
Admittedly I am more likely to jump to the defence of somebody I agree with here, because I see people trying to quite eloquently put forward the argument for why justice should dispassionate, and see that they are treated as though they themselves are dispassionate, or worse, more passionate about saving murderers than about punishing them, which is a fundamental failure to understand the anti-dp stance taken by many here.
I think that is quite well illustrated by the way people keep posting long, and horrific articles about the various horrible ways in which innocent people have been murdered, as though all those opposed to the death penalty are somehow not aware, or don't care that these things have happened, which could not be further from the truth. The whole point of what a lot of people are trying to say here is that in order for justice to be effective and fair it is necessary to disassociate yourself from your emotional reaction to crime, and view it objectively, emotion clouds logic, and justice must be predicated on logic. That's what every good judge does, that is what every good jury does, that is what the people who post these articles would find themselves having to do it they were called for jury duty as well. That does not mean that one cannot feel, or should not feel, and it is insulting for people to keep implying that those opposed to the death penalty do not feel for victims.
For the record though, I do not believe everybody who supports the death penalty is barbaric or a savage for doing so, and I absolutely condemn that line of reasoning as a cheap tactic designed to delegitimize an opponent's argument without addressing it.
People have also taken to posting long articles of detailing people who do not wish to support the execution of their child's murderer and long articles detailing philosophy as well.
I question why we feel it is so necessary to remove the very human and natural emotional reaction to the crime. I struggle with ignoring the emotional distress caused by some psychopath so that we can treat the psychopath more objectively. The emotion parents feel after finding out their child has been taken from them is at the very heart of the crime. The losses they have suffered cannot be measured in dollars as accurately as they can be measured in emotion and suffering. And if we are even remotely interested in compensating them for their losses, then we would seek to compensate them accordingly. It's way to easy for us to sit on the sideline and tell them what they need and deserve given how they have been wronged.
What exactly does a person legitimately deserve after torturing, raping and murdering children? I truly fail to understand why some feel depraved murderers demand our best and fairest efforts when they have acted in such a heinous manner. To me it's very simple... don't kill children. If you do kill children... don't expect gentle treatment.
As you suggested... let's talk logic.
How does this equate: (1) a man smuggles cocaine and gets 30 years in prison, while (2) another man murders a family and gets 30 years in prison?
Why are the lives of a family so cheap? Why can't the punishment fit the crime?
This case is one of the more horrific cases we could possibly come to know of.
Hayes was a really really stupid man who was duped into a committing a horrific crime- initially thinking he was participating in in a home invasion... only to eventually find himself participating in bondage, rape and mass murder (which was the original and unrevealed plan of Komisarjevky all along).
As much as I loathe rapists and murderers, I believe he genuinely struggles living with himself for what has happened- he continually has asked to be executed sooner than later. Most death row inmates I read about, like his scumbag partner, Joshua Komisarjevky, are really busy feeling sorry for themselves- claiming they are the victims- while scurrying to save themselves with hardly a thought for the true victims.
Don't get me wrong... he made some horrific decisions and he will ultimately pay for them without me feeling too much remorse. But in fairness to him... this was not a premeditated act on his part and he got caught up in something that he didn't have the skill set to get out of. JK on the other hand... well... he's a rodent of the lowest order and clinical execution is very generous and merciful given what he did.
i like what you wrote here & i throughly believe you've read, watched & researched this case, heck you may have followed it some. you write well & get your point across. thank you for enlightening me some.
It doesn't equate, but that's hardly the point, your problem could just as easily be with the absurdly over the top sentencing for drug related crimes. Nor does that really have the first thing to do with whether the death penalty is ethical or appropriate or not, which is a point completely divorced from relative sentencing from one crime to another. One might describe your whole line of reasoning there as a red herring.
Finally, my called for objective justice isn't about treating psychopaths more objectively, everybody should be treated objectively regardless of the severity of their crimes. Do you seriously think a legal system that is not objective is a good idea? Because I have news for you, our entire system of justice is predicated upon that very principle, it may fail in achieving that, but that objectivity is the ultimate goal. That's because the system can only be relied upon to deliver fair results if it strives to apply that principle consistently.
I honestly do not understand why people are having such a hard time grasping such a blindingly simple concept.
It doesn't equate, but that's hardly the point, your problem could just as easily be with the absurdly over the top sentencing for drug related crimes. Nor does that really have the first thing to do with whether the death penalty is ethical or appropriate or not, which is a point completely divorced from relative sentencing from one crime to another. One might describe your whole line of reasoning there as a red herring.
Finally, my called for objective justice isn't about treating psychopaths more objectively, everybody should be treated objectively regardless of the severity of their crimes. Do you seriously think a legal system that is not objective is a good idea? Because I have news for you, our entire system of justice is predicated upon that very principle, it may fail in achieving that, but that objectivity is the ultimate goal. That's because the system can only be relied upon to deliver fair results if it strives to apply that principle consistently.
I honestly do not understand why people are having such a hard time grasping such a blindingly simple concept.
You used the term 'objective' to diminish the value of 'emotion'. Of course I think a legal system should be objective, but the impact of the crimes has its place when determining justice.
You speak of delivering fair results through objective (uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices) practices. This concept should work two ways... not just the way you think it should. I see dramatic lack of objectivity in various cases: for example, in Norway where they were forced to deal with a man who killed 77 people (mostly children). Is setting him up with a PS3, video games, internet, and providing him an allowance and a recreational program for the duration of 20 years a shining example of objectivity at work? Is this part of the blindingly simple concept I have such a hard time with?
Rick Perry Killed an Innocent Man Tuesday, 11 March 2014
It’s becoming clearer by the day that Rick Perry killed an innocent man.
Ten years ago, Texas executed Cameron Todd Willingham, who was convicted in 1992 on arson charges, for setting a 1991 fire in Corsicana, Texas that killed his three children.
But now, newly uncovered evidence suggests that Willingham, who maintained his innocence until his death, was in fact an innocent man.
Willingham’s original conviction relied on two major pieces of evidence: an analysis of the fire by arson investigators, and the testimony of a jailhouse informant.
In the years since Willingham was executed, the arson investigation that was a key pillar of his case has been discredited.
Questions have been raised over the analysis done by the arson investigators, and the science that was used in the case. It looks now like it was just a tragic house fire.
And as for the jailhouse informant that allegedly heard Willingham confess to the crime, new evidence suggests that informant was offered a deal by the prosecution in return for his testimony. The judge had earlier denied cutting a deal, but now the deal's been found, in the judges own handwriting.
So, it’s looking increasingly more likely that Rick Perry executed an innocent man. And not just an innocent man - a father who discovered his house on fire and was unable to save his three daughters, grieving and distraught, and then thrown in jail and accused of intentionally burning his own house down to kill his kids. Which he probably didn't do. He was just a grieving father. Who's now been killed by Rick Perry.
That's pretty grisly, but, even worse, there's more and more proof that the death penalty doesn’t even work to keep people from killing other people.
Proponents of the death penalty argue that, while it may not be perfect, it still acts as a strong murder deterrent.
They’re wrong.
In fact, it’s the other way around.
According to the Death Penalty Information Center, between 1990 and 2010, the murder rate in states that don’t have the death penalty was consistently lower than the murder rate in states that have the death penalty.
And, according to a 2009 survey of the world’s leading criminologists, 88% felt that the death penalty does not lower homicide rates.
Meanwhile, according to Amnesty International, more than 130 death row inmates have been released because of wrongful convictions since 1973.
Seth Penalver is one of those 130.
Penalver was arrested in 1994 for murdering three people. There was no physical evidence linking him to the murders, and only other evidence police had was a poor-quality video that they claimed showed Penalver.
Penalver was ultimately released in 2012, after he was acquitted of all charges; it turns out the police were wrong and he was innocent.
But the state of Florida nearly killed him, and would have if newly discovered evidence hadn’t led to a new trial.
But we shouldn’t need facts, statistics, and wrongful conviction stories to prove that the death penalty is wrong.
As a society, when we kill people, we become killers ourselves. We coarsen our society. We become accustomed to murder, albeit murder-by-state.
Rick Perry is on the record saying that Cameron Todd Willingham was a “monster,” but it's increasingly looking like Perry is the real monster here.
Not only has he put a likely-innocent man to death, he’s continuing the use of an immoral and inhumane process, that doesn’t even meet its own goals.
America has always sought to be that “shining city upon a hill,” but we can’t possibly hope to be seen that way by the world or even by ourselves if we continue perpetrating state-run murders.
The eyes of the world are on us.
It’s time to lead by example, and thus to get rid of the death penalty once and for all.
It looks like some really questionable evidence placed this grieving father behind bars and to an execution. Texas and Rick Perry appeared really eager to proceed. Improvements in forensics science, communication, and surveillance cannot undo the corruption, ignorance, or ruthlessness inherent in so many people.
Stories like this take a little wind out of my sails. I've said before, the prospect of executing an innocent man is the strongest argument against the DP- one that is hard to refute.
In a sign of the government's interest in legal reform, the Supreme People's Court said in November it would eliminate the use of torture to extract confessions, stop local officials from interfering in legal decisions and allow judges to make their own decisions.
China is now debating trimming the number of crimes subject to the death penalty, according to officials and scholars.
Rights groups say China uses capital punishment more than any other country, raising public concern of irreversible miscarriages of justice.
Various government departments are "actively studying" reducing the number of crimes that carry the death penalty, Vice Foreign Minister Li Baodong told reporters during the Australia-China Human Rights Dialogue last month. Chen from the China University of Political Science and Law said the government is holding discussions with legal scholars as part of this review.
But Chen said several officials in the courts, prosecutors and the police are resisting the changes to the death penalty. He said an announcement on dropping the death penalty for up to half a dozen "non-violent" crimes could be due this year.
Capital punishment applies to 55 offences in China, including fraud and illegal money-lending.
China won't, however, scrap the death penalty for those found guilty of corruption, which the government is waging a renewed campaign against, Chen said. "China now has some major corruption cases, and (if the government) were to scrap the death penalty, the ordinary people will not agree."
China guards the number of people executed every year as state secrets. The San Francisco-based Dui Hua Foundation, which seeks the release of political prisoners in China, estimates that 3,000 people were executed in 2012. For comparison, 43 people were executed that year in the United States, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.
In a sign of the government's interest in legal reform, the Supreme People's Court said in November it would eliminate the use of torture to extract confessions, stop local officials from interfering in legal decisions and allow judges to make their own decisions.
China is now debating trimming the number of crimes subject to the death penalty, according to officials and scholars.
Rights groups say China uses capital punishment more than any other country, raising public concern of irreversible miscarriages of justice.
Various government departments are "actively studying" reducing the number of crimes that carry the death penalty, Vice Foreign Minister Li Baodong told reporters during the Australia-China Human Rights Dialogue last month. Chen from the China University of Political Science and Law said the government is holding discussions with legal scholars as part of this review.
But Chen said several officials in the courts, prosecutors and the police are resisting the changes to the death penalty. He said an announcement on dropping the death penalty for up to half a dozen "non-violent" crimes could be due this year.
Capital punishment applies to 55 offences in China, including fraud and illegal money-lending.
China won't, however, scrap the death penalty for those found guilty of corruption, which the government is waging a renewed campaign against, Chen said. "China now has some major corruption cases, and (if the government) were to scrap the death penalty, the ordinary people will not agree."
China guards the number of people executed every year as state secrets. The San Francisco-based Dui Hua Foundation, which seeks the release of political prisoners in China, estimates that 3,000 people were executed in 2012. For comparison, 43 people were executed that year in the United States, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.
Hey looks like China's even getting into reform mode maybe they've been reading Byrnzie's posts. :-bd
If in any way your last statement was intended for me... don't get me wrong- the death penalty still has its place. No argument is strong enough to convince me that people like Breivik or Joshua Komisarjevky do not deserve a death sentence for their depravity. The wrongfully convicted speaks more to the process than it does the punishment.
The DP for fraud and illegal money lending seems just a little excessive even though Chen from the China University of Political Science and Law thinks not- reluctant to budge on reform.
I've said before, the prospect of executing an innocent man is the strongest argument against the DP- one that is hard to refute.
And the following fact doesn't enter into your calculations?
'According to the Death Penalty Information Center, between 1990 and 2010, the murder rate in states that don’t have the death penalty was consistently lower than the murder rate in states that have the death penalty.'
Comments
Michael Taylor, 47, was pronounced dead at 12:10 a.m. at the state prison in Bonne Terre. Federal courts and the governor had refused last-minute appeals from his attorneys, who argued that the execution drug purchased from a compounding pharmacy could have caused Taylor inhuman pain and suffering.
Taylor offered no final statement, although he mouthed silent words to his parents, clergymen and other relatives who witnessed his death. As the process began, he took two deep breaths before closing his eyes for the last time. There were no obvious signs of distress.
His victim, 15-year-old Ann Harrison, was in her driveway, carrying her school books, flute and purse, when Taylor and Roderick Nunley abducted her. The men pulled her into their stolen car and drove her to a home, where they raped and fatally stabbed her as she pleaded for her life. Nunley was also sentenced to death.
Ann's father and two of her uncles witnessed Taylor's execution. They declined to make a public statement.
In their appeals, Taylor's attorneys questioned Missouri's use of an unnamed compounding pharmacy to provide the execution drug, pentobarbital. They also cited concerns about the state executing inmates before appeals were complete and argued that Taylor's original trial attorney was so overworked that she encouraged him to plead guilty.
After using a three-drug execution method for years, Missouri switched late last year to pentobarbital. The same drug had been used in three earlier Missouri executions, and state officials said none of those inmates showed outward signs of distress.
Still, attorneys for Taylor said using a drug from a compounding pharmacy, which unlike large pharmaceutical companies are not regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, runs the risk of causing pain and suffering during the execution.
The Oklahoma-based compounding pharmacy Apothecary Shoppe agreed last week that it wouldn't supply the pentobarbital for Taylor's execution, forcing Missouri to find a new supplier. Attorney General Chris Koster's office said a new provider had been found, but Koster refused to name the pharmacy, citing the state's execution protocol that allows the manufacturer anonymity.
Taylor's attorneys said use of the drug without naming the compounding pharmacy could cause the inmate pain and suffering because no one could check if the operation was legitimate and had not been accused of any violations.
Pete Edlund doesn't want to hear it. The retired Kansas City police detective led the investigation into the teenager's death.
"Cruel and unusual punishment would be if we killed them the same way they killed Annie Harrison," Edlund said. "Get a damn rope, string them up, put them in the gas chamber. Whatever it takes."
Ann stepped out of her home the morning of March 22, 1989, to wait in her driveway for her school bus.
Authorities said Nunley and Taylor, then in their early 20s, drove past in a car they had stolen after a night of binging on crack cocaine. One of the men jumped out of the car and grabbed Ann, forcing her into the vehicle. Both claimed the other did it.
The men drove to the home of Nunley's mother. Ann was forced into the basement and raped — DNA testing linked Taylor to the crime. Afraid she would be able to identify them, the men used kitchen knives to stab the girl 10 times, including in her throat and torso, as she begged for her life.
She offered money if they would let her live. She died about 30 minutes later, according to the medical examiner.
The stolen car was then driven to a nearby neighborhood and abandoned, with Ann's body in the trunk. She was found the next day. But the crime went unsolved for about six months until a $10,000 reward led to a tip, and Taylor and Nunley were both arrested, Edlund said. Both pleaded guilty and were sentenced to death.
The case left even veteran officers traumatized, Edlund said.
"She just turned 15," the retired detective said. "It was a tragedy all the way around. This was an innocent child."
http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/national/midwest/2014/02/missouri_executes_man_in_89_rape_killing_of_teen
Linda Taylor, Michael Taylor's mother, issued a statement with other family members stating Taylor has great remorse for his crime. The family does not want to see Taylor executed and Linda Taylor has said that life in prison should be sufficient punishment.
Janel Harrison, mother of Ann Harrison, said the execution is needed justice for her daughter.
"There should be an ultimate penalty," Harrison said. =D>
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/convicted-killer-presses-appeals-missouri-prepares-execution-article-1.1700991#ixzz2uSPzUR2f
Good riddance hopefully Missouri moves forward with this 25 years is a joke he should've been put down years ago
JEFFERSON CITY - If you kidnap your victim in Missouri and kill them, your execution could be put on the fast track.
Sen. Dan Brown is proposing legislation intended that would limit extensions for appeals, and the Missouri Supreme Court would need to hear arguments in a case within six months of submission of the last written argument. The high court would have another six months to issue its decision.
The measure also would require the court to issue a warrant to carry out the execution no more than 10 days after the defendant’s state and federal appeals have ended.
http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/02/26/mo-senator-proposes-execution-bill/
I agree with the retired cop that said 'cruel and unusual' would be to offer them what they offered their victim.
I'm beginning to think that some of these people are right: prison is way worse than being executed and murderers do eventually understand the significance of their crimes and become remorseful.
For example, Anders Brievek, Norway's mass murdering fiend is being tortured right now because the prison won't upgrade his PS2 to a PS3, he doesn't get adult games to play, and he wants contact with the outside world.
Good for him though, if he doesn't get it, he'll go on a hunger strike. This should motivate the bleeding hearts excessively concerned for the murderer of 77 children and then the torture will likely end for him.
Home
World News
UK Showbiz
Femail
Sport
US Home
US Showbiz
Health
Sci & Tech
Video
Money
Travel
Login
Desktop Site
News
'Having an old Playstation is NOT torture': Norwegian police throw out bizarre claim by mass murderer Anders Breivik about his treatment in jail
By Sarah Michael
02:24 25 Feb 2014, updated 10:22 25 Feb 2014
+6
Facebook
Twitter
Click to open
Google Plus
Reddit
Stumble Upon
Fark
Digg it
LinkedIn
Email
Click to close
165
shares
72
comments
Far-right terrorist Anders Breivik's complaints over daily body searches and lack of activities dismissed by police
Mass murderer who killed 77 in Norway in 2011 wanted better video games and unmonitored contact with the outside world
Breivik sent letter to anti-torture watchdog and media outlets claiming he has penned a book that is being censored by prison authorities
Police in Norway have rejected a complaint by mass murderer Anders Breivik that his treatment in jail amounted to 'serious torture'.
The far-right terrorist who killed 77 people in a bombing and mass shooting on July 22, 2011, filed a formal complaint against the Norwegian Minister of Justice and a prison director, in which he said his daily body searches and outdated video games were equal to 'aggravated torture'.
The complaint filed in January last year was examined by police but a preliminary investigation was closed on Monday according to police commissioner Ingrid Wirum.
+6
Convicted mass murderer Anders Breivik, 35, has had his claims that he is being 'tortured' in jail rejected by police
+6
In this letter sent to media outlets Breivik complained he was being subjected to 'torture' because he had to play outdated video games and undergo daily body searches
‘On this basis we have concluded that neither the prison in Ila nor the people mentioned in the complaint are guilty of any wrongdoing,’ Ms Wirum told AFP.
Lawyer Tord Jordet told AFP his client Breivik ‘was not surprised’ by the decision, The Local reported.
‘He noted that the case has been closed despite significant documentation which demonstrates the violation of European prison regulations and human rights,’ Mr Jordet said.
MORE...
Breivik hunger strike threat: wants bigger gym
Mass killer Anders Breivik apologised to his mother for ruining her life according to controversial new biography about her
‘It does not seem that the police wanted to investigate thoroughly.’
Breivik, who is serving a 21-year sentence, has repeatedly threatened to go on hunger strikes in protest of his treatment in prison.
In a letter received by various media outlets last month, which was sent to prison authorities in November 2013, the right-wing extremist detailed 12 demands including the right to communicate more freely with the outside world and access to a computer rather than a typewriter.
Breivik, who was recently moved from the Ila prison outside Olso to the Telemark prison in Skien, also demanded that his Playstation 2 be upgraded to a PS3 and that he be given ‘access to more adult games that I get to choose myself’.
+6
The exterior of Ila prison near Olso where Breivik complained of harsh treatment. The convicted killer has been moved to the Telemark prison in Skien
+6
Library facilities at the Ila prison where Breivik served part of his 21-year sentence for the murder of 77 people in 2011. The right-wing extremist says he has written a book providing new details about his bombing and mass shooting but prison authorities have refused to release it
‘Other inmates have access to adult games while I only have the right to play less interesting kids games. One example is "Rayman Revolution", a game aimed at three year olds,’ Breivik wrote.
Breivik also asked for an armchair to replace his ‘painful’ chair, his weekly allowance of 300 kroner (£30) to be doubled and his mail to cease being monitored and censored by the jail.
‘You've put me in hell ... and I won't manage to survive that long. You are killing me,’ the convicted killer wrote.
‘If I die, all of Europe's right-wing extremists will know exactly who it was that tortured me to death ... That could have consequences for certain individuals in the short term but also when Norway is once again ruled by a fascist regime in 13 to 40 years from now.’
In the letter, which was also sent to Norway’s anti-torture watchdog, the mass murderer also claimed to have written a book which is he is unable to send to a publisher.
According to Breivik’s lawyer Mr Jordet the more than 1000-page book gives fresh details on the planning on his 2011 bombing and shooting rampage as well as reasons for the attacks.Breivik murdered eight people when he bombed the outside of a government building in Oslo and massacred another 69 people at a youth camp on the island of Utoya.
+6
A memorial overlooking the island of Utoya where 69 people, mostly teenagers, were killed by right-wing terrorist Breivik in a shooting spree.
Published by Associated Newspapers Ltd
Part of the Daily Mail, The Mail on Sunday & Metro Media Group
© Associated Newspapers Ltd
Contact us
Mobile apps
View desktop site
Advertise with us
Terms
Privacy policy & cookies
Just 6 years after beheading and eating a fellow passenger on a bus, Vince Li is granted unescorted trips into Selkirk. I'm not sure if there are any 10C members that live in Selkirk, but if there are... make sure to say "Hi" and congratulate Li on his successful recovery from a deranged lunatic while he's hanging out in your city!
Thursday's ruling by the Criminal Code Review Board means Vince Li will be on his own in public for the first time since he stabbed Tim McLean and then ate parts of his body six years ago.
The board granted Li all the new freedoms his psychiatric team had requested at a hearing earlier this week. Lead psychiatrist Dr. Steven Kremer said Li, a schizophrenic, has stopped experiencing delusions and is a model, non-violent patient.
Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/man-who-beheaded-bus-passenger-gets-unescorted-trips-from-hospital-1.1707209#ixzz2uonO0651
The victim's mother is distraught, but who gives a shit? She should just get over it. This is all about fast-tracking a guy into mainstream society.
Instead of the supervised outings Li had been granted previously, he will be allowed unescorted trips from the Selkirk Mental Health Centre into the nearby city of Selkirk. The visits, to begin next Thursday, are to start at 30 minutes and increase to full days.
As well, Li’s supervision on outings to other communities —Winnipeg, Lockport and nearby beaches — will be relaxed. He is to be part of a group without a staff member dedicated to monitoring him.
Li is also to be moved to an unlocked ward at the hospital from the secure wing where he has been kept.
For McLean’s mother, the changes were an outrage.
“We’re not surprised. We’re very disappointed, embarrassed, ashamed,” Carol DeDelley said.
“I ultimately do not believe that when you take a life, you have the right to freedom any longer.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/man-who-beheaded-bus-passenger-in-manitoba-wins-right-to-unescorted-trips/article17140007/
that poor little girl went through hell.
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
The relaxing on Li's "oversight" outrages me too - as an understatement...so I can only imagine what Mrs. McLean must feel.
Not only does it piss me off, but I simply cannot grasp the mindsets of those - those WHO DECIDE THIS SHIT no less - who think this is a good thing.
No risk at all!
Everything's fine, folks.
We're rooting for ol' Vince here, so you all just move along.
"The Death Penalty is a Hate Crime": Bob Autobee Speaks Out to Spare Life of Son’s Killer
Democracy Now!
Wednesday, March 5, 2014
We are joined by Bob Autobee, a Colorado resident who is opposing the death penalty for the prisoner who killed his son Eric, a prison guard, in 2002. During the original trial, Autobee supported a death sentence for Edward Montour. But the Colorado Supreme Court threw out Montour’s sentence in 2007 because it was imposed by a judge, not a jury as is required. A decade later, Autobee has now changed his mind. In the new murder trial that begins today, he wants to make a victim’s statement to the jury asking them not to impose the death penalty — but the judge in the case has barred him from doing so. Autobee describes why he opposes the death penalty in this case, and why he wants to see it abolished overall. "You’ve got to be willing to heal, and you’ve got to let the hate go," Autobee says. "To me the death penalty is a hate crime, a crime against humanity." We are also joined by Democracy Now! producer and criminal justice correspondent Renée Feltz, who notes that 80 percent of Colorado voters actually passed a constitutional amendment in 1992 that enshrines the rights of victims to make a statement in cases like Autobee’s.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: We turn now to Colorado, where a trial set to begin today has drawn attention to the state’s ongoing debate about its use of the death penalty. The case involves a prison inmate named Edward Montour, who is accused of beating a prison guard named Eric Autobee to death in 2002. Montour pled guilty to the murder and was convicted. But the state’s Supreme Court threw out his death sentence in 2007 because it was imposed by a judge, and not a jury, as is required. Now the case is back in court. This time the killer is pleading not guilty by reason of insanity, and the victim’s father, who wanted to seek the "ultimate punishment" in the original trial, has had a change of heart.
AMY GOODMAN: During a meeting with prosecutors, Bob Autobee asked them to spare the life of his son’s killer, but to no avail. In a surprising move, they have not only decided to pursue another death sentence, they’ve also succeeded in blocking Autobee from making a victim’s statement to the jury that expresses his request for a life sentence. Last week, the judge in the case ruled, quote, "The Autobees may testify about the emotional impact of a death sentence or a life sentence ... However, the Autobees will not be allowed to testify about what sentence the jury should impose."
For more, we turn to Bob Autobee. He’s joining us from Denver, just before he goes to the trial today. We’re also joined by Democracy Now! producer and criminal justice correspondent, Renée Feltz.
Bob Autobee, welcome to Democracy Now! How is it—
BOB AUTOBEE: Thank you. Good morning.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you explain how, in your victim’s statement, you’re not allowed to say what you want to say?
BOB AUTOBEE: Well, there’s been concern from the beginning when I started picketing that I could taint the jury. But this trial has already been tainted numerous times. And I feel I have as much right to speak as the DA or the defense.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, let’s go to part of the video recording from when you met with your son’s killer, Edward Montour, this past December, along with a moderator who’s trained in the method of restorative justice. This clip begins with Edward Montour apologizing to you.
EDWARD MONTOUR: One thing I would like to say, before we go further, is that I am deeply, deeply sorry for the pain I caused you and your family for killing your son. I had no right. I had no right. And I am very humbled by you forgiving me. And I want to thank you for that, because you didn’t have to. And I’m not sure if I would have the courage to do what you’re doing. You’re a good man. And I want to thank you for this opportunity.
BOB AUTOBEE: I appreciate that. I wasn’t always a good man. You know, this isn’t just about me and you, because Eric’s right here. My son’s over there. My wife is at home. She said she couldn’t—she couldn’t be in the same room with you. But she forgives you. My son has forgiven you. I have forgiven you. And so—and I’m sure Eric has forgiven you. I see an opportunity here, an opportunity to make something positive out of my son’s death. And you’re a part of it. We’re all a part of that. When your trial starts in January, I told him, "I’ll be at the courthouse, but I’ll be outside picketing, because I don’t believe it’s justice." The death penalty would not bring me any satisfaction.
....
AMY GOODMAN: You were a corrections officer yourself, and your son, of course, Eric, was a prison guard. That’s where Edward Montour killed him.
BOB AUTOBEE: That’s correct.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And you said this experience has made you very critical of the prison system and the penal system, in general. Could you talk about what specific changes you’ve been advocating in the Colorado prison system?
BOB AUTOBEE: Well, we’ve asked—we suggested focus groups from the staff, because the management has refused to listen to the people that are in the trenches, and so a lot of things get by that management doesn’t know anything about. We’d also—we suggested different colored jumpsuits for the inmates, so violent offenders could be recognized immediately, because right now in Colorado we have violent and maximum-security inmates in medium-security facilities where they have no business. And unless you’ve read every jacket of every inmate, you don’t know what they’re in there for. So, I think the different colored uniforms would help. We’ve even suggested dogs to go on patrol with the officers, rather than leaving them by themselves. There’s a lot of things that could be done, but the administration refuses to listen.
AMY GOODMAN: Renée?
RENÉE FELTZ: I wanted to suggest that Bob describe what he did in January, which was very interesting. He went to protest against the death penalty in this case outside of the courtroom, when he wasn’t quite sure if he would be allowed to make a statement inside. And, Bob, could you talk about what—who joined you? There were other victims of murder, families, that were with you for that protest, is that right? Can you talk about what you did and who joined you?
BOB AUTOBEE: That’s correct. When I met with Brauchler at my home, I told him that if he pursued the death penalty, that I would fight it, and I would picket—
RENÉE FELTZ: And that’s the prosecutor in the case.
BOB AUTOBEE: Yes. And I’ve been picketing. And then Tim Ricard, the husband of Mary Ricard, the second officer that was killed in Colorado recently, he’s also anti-death penalty, and we’ve been working together. We had a survivor from one of the victims of Nathan Dunlap, was also involved. And I met with the mother of that young lady, and we had a wonderful talk, and hope I was able to help her understand, you know, you’ve got to be willing to heal, and you’ve got to let the hate go. I mean, to me, the death penalty is a hate crime, and it’s a crime against humanity. And once you come to this side and see it for what it really is, then you’ll know you’re doing the right thing.
His 'second' murder could have been prevented if the dp had been applied to the child murderer- showing it's effectiveness as a deterrent in this case.
If Bob could take time back and have the death penalty applied to the child murderer once convicted- hence, saving his son's life- would he be saying something different?
"...we suggested different colored jumpsuits for the inmates, so violent offenders could be recognized immediately, because right now in Colorado we have violent and maximum-security inmates in medium-security facilities where they have no business. And unless you’ve read every jacket of every inmate, you don’t know what they’re in there for. So, I think the different colored uniforms would help. We’ve even suggested dogs to go on patrol with the officers, rather than leaving them by themselves. There’s a lot of things that could be done, but the administration refuses to listen."
Why is killing someone the only solution in your repertoire? It doesn't work as a deterrent, It's more expensive than keeping them locked up (thereby taking money and resources away from solving more crimes out on the street), and it teaches people that murder is an acceptable solution - states with the death penalty have a higher number of murders than those without the death penalty.
Money should not be an issue when determining a person's fate. The only reason it is so costly to begin with is because we have made it so. It could be infinitely cheaper.
It is only opinion that suggests that it 'teaches people murder is an acceptable solution'.
And I thought an understanding was reached that any statements made to the effectiveness of the DP as a deterrent are moot given the studies and statistics are seriously flawed and unreliable for making any accurate and definitive claims (at least, according to the scientific community). I don't wish to test it, but in order to determine the DP's authentic effectiveness, we would need to employ it in a much higher case rate than- off the top of my head- 0.0007% of murder cases.
Now, answer my question if you please: If Bob could take time back and have the death penalty applied to the child murderer once convicted - hence, saving his son's life - would he be saying something different?
Awaiting his date with a state execution, Hayes, 50, was found in his cell at the Northern Correctional Institute around 9:35 a.m. by officers on their “routine tour,” who revived the killer.
A spokesman would not reveal whether Hayes attempted suicide or suffered a medical emergency, saying instead that the incident is under investigation.
Hayes was the only inmate in his cell at the time, and is now reportedly in stable condition at a local hospital, the Connecticut Department of Corrections said.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/steven-hayes-death-row-inmate-found-unresponsive-conn-cell-article-1.1716982#ixzz2vbpc18gT
Fuck him they should've let him die but his time will come
this fucking maniac here should be in a real fucking jam right now & he really isnt in any fucking kind of jam at all
weird
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
Hayes was a really really stupid man who was duped into a committing a horrific crime- initially thinking he was participating in in a home invasion... only to eventually find himself participating in bondage, rape and mass murder (which was the original and unrevealed plan of Komisarjevky all along).
As much as I loathe rapists and murderers, I believe he genuinely struggles living with himself for what has happened- he continually has asked to be executed sooner than later. Most death row inmates I read about, like his scumbag partner, Joshua Komisarjevky, are really busy feeling sorry for themselves- claiming they are the victims- while scurrying to save themselves with hardly a thought for the true victims.
Don't get me wrong... he made some horrific decisions and he will ultimately pay for them without me feeling too much remorse. But in fairness to him... this was not a premeditated act on his part and he got caught up in something that he didn't have the skill set to get out of. JK on the other hand... well... he's a rodent of the lowest order and clinical execution is very generous and merciful given what he did.
And that article you posted suggesting that more people need to be executed in order to better evaluate the effectiveness of the death penalty...that article was a sham. 80% of the Worlds top criminologists have said that the DP does not work as a deterrent. The article you posted has no merit.
The 'reality' is that with such limited and infrequent usage... it is impossible to determine whether the DP is or is not a deterrent- leaving all arguments for and against... moot.
To that end, it is impossible to determine if anything is or isn't efficient when it is employed 0.0007% of the time. This fact is what the scientific community agreed upon in the comprehensive article and study RG- your fellow, well-spoken opponent- presented in this thread.
It's not wise to allow your passion to prevent you from following and admitting to such simple and basic logic. This is very similar behaviour to that of gun enthusiasts who deny or attempt to refute overwhelming gun statistics that threaten their belief system.
I think that is quite well illustrated by the way people keep posting long, and horrific articles about the various horrible ways in which innocent people have been murdered, as though all those opposed to the death penalty are somehow not aware, or don't care that these things have happened, which could not be further from the truth. The whole point of what a lot of people are trying to say here is that in order for justice to be effective and fair it is necessary to disassociate yourself from your emotional reaction to crime, and view it objectively, emotion clouds logic, and justice must be predicated on logic. That's what every good judge does, that is what every good jury does, that is what the people who post these articles would find themselves having to do it they were called for jury duty as well. That does not mean that one cannot feel, or should not feel, and it is insulting for people to keep implying that those opposed to the death penalty do not feel for victims.
For the record though, I do not believe everybody who supports the death penalty is barbaric or a savage for doing so, and I absolutely condemn that line of reasoning as a cheap tactic designed to delegitimize an opponent's argument without addressing it.
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
I question why we feel it is so necessary to remove the very human and natural emotional reaction to the crime. I struggle with ignoring the emotional distress caused by some psychopath so that we can treat the psychopath more objectively. The emotion parents feel after finding out their child has been taken from them is at the very heart of the crime. The losses they have suffered cannot be measured in dollars as accurately as they can be measured in emotion and suffering. And if we are even remotely interested in compensating them for their losses, then we would seek to compensate them accordingly. It's way to easy for us to sit on the sideline and tell them what they need and deserve given how they have been wronged.
What exactly does a person legitimately deserve after torturing, raping and murdering children? I truly fail to understand why some feel depraved murderers demand our best and fairest efforts when they have acted in such a heinous manner. To me it's very simple... don't kill children. If you do kill children... don't expect gentle treatment.
As you suggested... let's talk logic.
How does this equate: (1) a man smuggles cocaine and gets 30 years in prison, while (2) another man murders a family and gets 30 years in prison?
Why are the lives of a family so cheap? Why can't the punishment fit the crime?
Finally, my called for objective justice isn't about treating psychopaths more objectively, everybody should be treated objectively regardless of the severity of their crimes. Do you seriously think a legal system that is not objective is a good idea? Because I have news for you, our entire system of justice is predicated upon that very principle, it may fail in achieving that, but that objectivity is the ultimate goal. That's because the system can only be relied upon to deliver fair results if it strives to apply that principle consistently.
I honestly do not understand why people are having such a hard time grasping such a blindingly simple concept.
You speak of delivering fair results through objective (uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices) practices. This concept should work two ways... not just the way you think it should. I see dramatic lack of objectivity in various cases: for example, in Norway where they were forced to deal with a man who killed 77 people (mostly children). Is setting him up with a PS3, video games, internet, and providing him an allowance and a recreational program for the duration of 20 years a shining example of objectivity at work? Is this part of the blindingly simple concept I have such a hard time with?
Rick Perry Killed an Innocent Man
Tuesday, 11 March 2014
It’s becoming clearer by the day that Rick Perry killed an innocent man.
Ten years ago, Texas executed Cameron Todd Willingham, who was convicted in 1992 on arson charges, for setting a 1991 fire in Corsicana, Texas that killed his three children.
But now, newly uncovered evidence suggests that Willingham, who maintained his innocence until his death, was in fact an innocent man.
Willingham’s original conviction relied on two major pieces of evidence: an analysis of the fire by arson investigators, and the testimony of a jailhouse informant.
In the years since Willingham was executed, the arson investigation that was a key pillar of his case has been discredited.
Questions have been raised over the analysis done by the arson investigators, and the science that was used in the case. It looks now like it was just a tragic house fire.
And as for the jailhouse informant that allegedly heard Willingham confess to the crime, new evidence suggests that informant was offered a deal by the prosecution in return for his testimony. The judge had earlier denied cutting a deal, but now the deal's been found, in the judges own handwriting.
So, it’s looking increasingly more likely that Rick Perry executed an innocent man. And not just an innocent man - a father who discovered his house on fire and was unable to save his three daughters, grieving and distraught, and then thrown in jail and accused of intentionally burning his own house down to kill his kids. Which he probably didn't do. He was just a grieving father. Who's now been killed by Rick Perry.
That's pretty grisly, but, even worse, there's more and more proof that the death penalty doesn’t even work to keep people from killing other people.
Proponents of the death penalty argue that, while it may not be perfect, it still acts as a strong murder deterrent.
They’re wrong.
In fact, it’s the other way around.
According to the Death Penalty Information Center, between 1990 and 2010, the murder rate in states that don’t have the death penalty was consistently lower than the murder rate in states that have the death penalty.
And, according to a 2009 survey of the world’s leading criminologists, 88% felt that the death penalty does not lower homicide rates.
Meanwhile, according to Amnesty International, more than 130 death row inmates have been released because of wrongful convictions since 1973.
Seth Penalver is one of those 130.
Penalver was arrested in 1994 for murdering three people. There was no physical evidence linking him to the murders, and only other evidence police had was a poor-quality video that they claimed showed Penalver.
Penalver was ultimately released in 2012, after he was acquitted of all charges; it turns out the police were wrong and he was innocent.
But the state of Florida nearly killed him, and would have if newly discovered evidence hadn’t led to a new trial.
But we shouldn’t need facts, statistics, and wrongful conviction stories to prove that the death penalty is wrong.
As a society, when we kill people, we become killers ourselves. We coarsen our society. We become accustomed to murder, albeit murder-by-state.
Rick Perry is on the record saying that Cameron Todd Willingham was a “monster,” but it's increasingly looking like Perry is the real monster here.
Not only has he put a likely-innocent man to death, he’s continuing the use of an immoral and inhumane process, that doesn’t even meet its own goals.
America has always sought to be that “shining city upon a hill,” but we can’t possibly hope to be seen that way by the world or even by ourselves if we continue perpetrating state-run murders.
The eyes of the world are on us.
It’s time to lead by example, and thus to get rid of the death penalty once and for all.
Really disturbing.
I checked out more and found the following site informative: http://camerontoddwillingham.com/
It looks like some really questionable evidence placed this grieving father behind bars and to an execution. Texas and Rick Perry appeared really eager to proceed. Improvements in forensics science, communication, and surveillance cannot undo the corruption, ignorance, or ruthlessness inherent in so many people.
Stories like this take a little wind out of my sails. I've said before, the prospect of executing an innocent man is the strongest argument against the DP- one that is hard to refute.
China is now debating trimming the number of crimes subject to the death penalty, according to officials and scholars.
Rights groups say China uses capital punishment more than any other country, raising public concern of irreversible miscarriages of justice.
Various government departments are "actively studying" reducing the number of crimes that carry the death penalty, Vice Foreign Minister Li Baodong told reporters during the Australia-China Human Rights Dialogue last month. Chen from the China University of Political Science and Law said the government is holding discussions with legal scholars as part of this review.
But Chen said several officials in the courts, prosecutors and the police are resisting the changes to the death penalty. He said an announcement on dropping the death penalty for up to half a dozen "non-violent" crimes could be due this year.
Capital punishment applies to 55 offences in China, including fraud and illegal money-lending.
China won't, however, scrap the death penalty for those found guilty of corruption, which the government is waging a renewed campaign against, Chen said. "China now has some major corruption cases, and (if the government) were to scrap the death penalty, the ordinary people will not agree."
China guards the number of people executed every year as state secrets. The San Francisco-based Dui Hua Foundation, which seeks the release of political prisoners in China, estimates that 3,000 people were executed in 2012. For comparison, 43 people were executed that year in the United States, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/10/us-china-parliament-legal-idUSBREA290C320140310
Hey looks like China's even getting into reform mode maybe they've been reading Byrnzie's posts. :-bd
The DP for fraud and illegal money lending seems just a little excessive even though Chen from the China University of Political Science and Law thinks not- reluctant to budge on reform.
'According to the Death Penalty Information Center, between 1990 and 2010, the murder rate in states that don’t have the death penalty was consistently lower than the murder rate in states that have the death penalty.'