Texas Death Row Prisoner Faces Execution He DID NOT Commit

g under p

Short case summary: At approximately 6:00 a.m. on Jan. 2, 1996, while Wood waited outside, Reneau entered the gas station with a gun and pointed it at Kris Keeran, the clerk standing behind the counter. Reneau ordered him to a back room. When he did not move quickly enough, Reneau fired one shot with a 22 caliber handgun that struck Keeran between the eyes. Death was almost instantaneous. Proceeding with the robbery, Reneau went into the back office and took a safe. When hearing the shot, Wood got out of the car to see what was going on. He walked by the door and looked through the glass. Then he went inside, and he looked over the counter and ran to the back, where Reneau was. Wood was then ordered, at gun point by Reneau, to get the surveillance video and to drive the getaway-car.

Texas Death Row Prisoner Jeff Wood Faces Execution He DID NOT Commit

Should he be put to death for this???

Peace

Collin

No.

Skitch Patterson

Yes.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

maybe

Wobbie

Hell, no! Not in our "civilized" society. It looks like cooler heads prevailed and the execution was stayed. I'm not the type to say we should never execute someone, but W set the bar pretty low in Texas :mad:

Uncle Leo

I don't agree with the death penalty. But he was a part of the robbery. As a participant in a robbery in which a victim was killed, he is legally as culpable for the murder as the guy who pulled the trigger. As he should be. The two guys should get the same punishment.

Looking at the story, it appears that Wood was not treated the way that a suspect should be treated--something very important so as not to railroad innocent people into prison. So, that is a whole other story.

But as for the "DID NOT commit," it appears that he DID commit.

g under p

More on Texas Death Row Prisoner Faces Execution Tonight for Murder He Didn’t Commit.

I still can't anything on whether he was actually executed or not.

Peace

Collin

Uncle Leo wrote:

I don't agree with the death penalty. But he was a part of the robbery. As a participant in a robbery in which a victim was killed, he is legally as culpable for the murder as the guy who pulled the trigger. As he should be. The two guys should get the same punishment.

Looking at the story, it appears that Wood was not treated the way that a suspect should be treated--something very important so as not to railroad innocent people into prison. So, that is a whole other story.

But as for the "DID NOT commit," it appears that he DID commit.

He did not commit murder.

g under p

Uncle Leo wrote:

I don't agree with the death penalty. But he was a part of the robbery. As a participant in a robbery in which a victim was killed, he is legally as culpable for the murder as the guy who pulled the trigger. As he should be. The two guys should get the same punishment.

Looking at the story, it appears that Wood was not treated the way that a suspect should be treated--something very important so as not to railroad innocent people into prison. So, that is a whole other story.

But as for the "DID NOT commit," it appears that he DID commit.

It appears he DID the crime and deserves time however an execution when he was under gunpoint that's a bit far fetched to be executed for THAT!

Peace

chopitdown

no, in this instance i find it very hard to justify the death penalty b/c of murder by proxy or by association. edit: if they had both planned on committing murder and the other guy carried it out; then it would be easier to say this fella deserves the death penalty. But with the circumstances it doesn't appear he was aware of or condoning the act of murder

catch22

g under p wrote:

Texas Death Row Prisoner Jeff Wood Faces Execution He DID NOT Commit

what execution did he not commit?

g under p

catch22 wrote:

what execution did he not commit?

He didn't actually shoot the person and it appears he wasn't aware a murder was about to be commited. I was asking if he(Jeff Wood) was actually executed on the 21st.

Peace.

know1

Ahh - one of the few issues for me which doesn't have a gray area.

The death penalty is wrong in my opinion - in all circumstances. It lowers the rest of society to the level of the criminal.

g under p

know1 wrote:

Ahh - one of the few issues for me which doesn't have a gray area.

The death penalty is wrong in my opinion - in all circumstances. It lowers the rest of society to the level of the criminal.

I can agree with that.

Peace

Collin

know1 wrote:

Ahh - one of the few issues for me which doesn't have a gray area.

The death penalty is wrong in my opinion - in all circumstances. It lowers the rest of society to the level of the criminal.

I agree. The death penalty is always wrong.

catch22

g under p wrote:

He didn't actually shoot the person and it appears he wasn't aware a murder was about to be commited. I was asking if he(Jeff Wood) was actually executed on the 21st.

Peace.

just poking fun at the confusing headline

i'm anti-death penalty, but i'm not at all surprised the felony murder rule would be applied this liberally in texas.

g under p

catch22 wrote:

just poking fun at the confusing headline

i'm anti-death penalty, but i'm not at all surprised the felony murder rule would be applied this liberally in texas.

I noticed the headline was confusing but I went ahead with cause it's my job to get the board to read into the subject/investigate.

Peace

Kel Varnsen

chopitdown wrote:

no, in this instance i find it very hard to justify the death penalty b/c of murder by proxy or by association. edit: if they had both planned on committing murder and the other guy carried it out; then it would be easier to say this fella deserves the death penalty. But with the circumstances it doesn't appear he was aware of or condoning the act of murder

How do you know they didn't plan to kill the guy? The only people who can say they did or didn't are the two robbers, and I wouldn't put much credibility in either of their stories. Personally I am not a fan of capital punishment but I do think that this guy is as responsible for the clerks death as the guy who pulled the trigger.

Uncle Leo

Collin wrote:

He did not commit murder.

He most certainly did. There is a reason that the death of a victim in the commission of a felony is considered murder 1 in every state (I think). It's about a cavalier attitude toward the lives of others. This guy was a part of the crime. Did he plan to kill the guy? Probably not. So what? He planned and participated in an armed robbery in which his partner went in with a loaded weapon, thereby putting the life of this victim in danger. Once the victim dies, both perpetrators of guilty of murder.

Are people honestly suggesting that only the person who pulls the trigger can be guilty of murder?

I suppose there could be a discussion as to whether a break could be cut to other participants that did not pull the trigger in terms of taking the death penalty out of the discussion. But by the letter of the law, he committed murder 1. And, morally speaking, I find it hard to believe anything else either.

I happen to the think the two of them should get the same punishment. I don't view this thread as a discussion of the right/wrong of the death penalty (which I do not feel should exist), but as a comparison of the two perpetrators. I personally make no distinction.

Uncle Leo

g under p wrote:

It appears he DID the crime and deserves time however an execution when he was under gunpoint that's a bit far fetched to be executed for THAT!

Peace

It appears that he was under gunpoint after the murder.

Collin

Uncle Leo wrote:

He most certainly did. There is a reason that the death of a victim in the commission of a felony is considered murder 1 in every state (I think). It's about a cavalier attitude toward the lives of others. This guy was a part of the crime. Did he plan to kill the guy? Probably not. So what? He planned and participated in an armed robbery in which his partner went in with a loaded weapon, thereby putting the life of this victim in danger. Once the victim dies, both perpetrators of guilty of murder.

Are people honestly suggesting that only the person who pulls the trigger can be guilty of murder?

I suppose there could be a discussion as to whether a break could be cut to other participants that did not pull the trigger in terms of taking the death penalty out of the discussion. But by the letter of the law, he committed murder 1. And, morally speaking, I find it hard to believe anything else either.

I happen to the think the two of them should get the same punishment. I don't view this thread as a discussion of the right/wrong of the death penalty (which I do not feel should exist), but as a comparison of the two perpetrators. I personally make no distinction.

I do. I think it's a ridiculous law. He did not commit murder no matter how many laws you invent or cite. He did not kill a person. He was near someone who killed a person.

Yes, many people can be guilty of murder. A person can hire someone, can order someone, can ask someone, can force someone... to kill someone. But this guy was in the truck outside waiting.

I don't think anyone in that possition should get the same punishment as the person who actually committed the murder. Especially when that punishment is so barbaric.

I don't care what the law says. I happen to this the law is wrong on a lot of issues. A lot.

So you can say he committed murder according to the law, or according to your own moral code but in reality he was in a truck outside. He did participate in armed robbery.