Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2009 7:18:40 GMT -6
After having been an opponent most of my adult life, I'm firmly a DP supporter these days. In Australia we don't have the death penalty but we probably should. See the case link below. www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VICSC/1999/184.htmlIt's an atrocious crime and one that would have been better served to have been tried in Texas US as opposed to Melbourne Australia. As a parent and community member this filth should have been sent on their miserable way to the bone-yard.
|
|
|
Post by The Tipsy Broker on May 2, 2009 7:26:42 GMT -6
First let me welcome you to the board and good to hear you converted to the 'dark side' ;D this does sound an awful case and shame no gurney awaits the scumbag.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2009 7:47:06 GMT -6
Thanks for the welcome thebroker. I had always thought that forums like this would be frequented by hard nosed right wingers but all of the arguments that I have read on this forum have been very lucid and well considered. In the case I provided a link to I can no see no reason why these two POS should be allowed to consume anymore oxygen at all. How anyone could rape and abuse a 14 and 16 year old over a period of nine hours and then tie them up to a tree and stab them is completely beyond me. I believe that the DP should be available to our judges, the community wants it, as evidenced by numerous public polls. Curiously the politicians wont go anywhere near it - strange!
|
|
|
Post by Californian on May 2, 2009 7:58:56 GMT -6
Man, that's what I call cutting up a criminal into tiny slices with the power of words. 30 paragraphs that can be summarized as "you worthless POS, you're gonna die in prison!"
We have one like that too. This is the sentencing remarks by the judge in the case of Richard Reid, a terrorist known as the "shoe bomber."
Hear now the words of federal Judge William Young. Reid currently resides (and will until he dies) at Federal Supermax prison in Florence, Colorado.
YOUNG: Mr. Richard C. Reid, hearken now to the sentence the Court imposes upon you.
On counts 1, 5 and 6 the Court sentences you to life in prison in the custody of the United States Attorney General. On counts 2, 3, 4 and 7, the Court sentences you to 20 years in prison on each count, the sentence on each count to run consecutive one with the other. That's 80 years.
On Count 8 the Court sentences you to the mandatory 30 years consecutive to the 80 years just imposed. The Court imposes upon you on each of the eight counts a fine of $250,000 for the aggregate fine of $2 million.
The Court accepts the government's recommendation with respect to restitution and orders restitution in the amount of $298.17 to Andre Bousquet and $5,784 to American Airlines.
The Court imposes upon you the $800 special assessment.
The Court imposes upon you five years supervised release simply because the law requires it. But the life sentences are real life sentences so I need not go any further.
This is the sentence that is provided for by our statutes. It is a fair and a just sentence. It is a righteous sentence. Let me explain this to you.
We are not afraid of any of your terrorist co-conspirators, Mr. Reid. We are Americans. We have been through the fire before. There is all too much war talk here. And I say that to everyone with the utmost respect.
Here in this court where we deal with individuals as individuals, and care for individuals as individuals, as human beings we reach out for justice.
You are not an enemy combatant. You are a terrorist. You are not a soldier in any war. You are a terrorist. To give you that reference, to call you a soldier gives you far too much stature. Whether it is the officers of government who do it or your attorney who does it, or that happens to be your view, you are a terrorist.
And we do not negotiate with terrorists. We do not treat with terrorists. We do not sign documents with terrorists.
We hunt them down one by one and bring them to justice.
So war talk is way out of line in this court. You're a big fellow. But you're not that big. You're no warrior. I know warriors. You are a terrorist. A species of criminal guilty of multiple attempted murders.
In a very real sense Trooper Santiago had it right when first you were taken off that plane and into custody and you wondered where the press and where the TV crews were and you said you're no big deal. You're no big deal.
What your counsel, what your able counsel and what the equally able United States attorneys have grappled with and what I have as honestly as I know how tried to grapple with, is why you did something so horrific. What was it that led you here to this courtroom today? I have listened respectfully to what you have to say. And I ask you to search your heart and ask yourself what sort of unfathomable hate led you to do what you are guilty and admit you are guilty of doing.
And I have an answer for you. It may not satisfy you. But as I search this entire record it comes as close to understanding as I know.
It seems to me you hate the one thing that to us is most precious. You hate our freedom. Our individual freedom. Our individual freedom to live as we choose, to come and go as we choose, to believe or not believe as we individually choose.
Here, in this society, the very winds carry freedom. They carry it everywhere from sea to shining sea. It is because we prize individual freedom so much that you are here in this beautiful courtroom. So that everyone can see, truly see that justice is administered fairly, individually, and discretely.
It is for freedom's seek that your lawyers are striving so vigorously on your behalf and have filed appeals, will go on in their, their representation of you before other judges. We care about it. Because we all know that the way we treat you, Mr. Reid, is the measure of our own liberties.
Make no mistake though. It is yet true that we will bear any burden; pay any price, to preserve our freedoms.
Look around this courtroom. Mark it well. The world is not going to long remember what you or I say here. Day after tomorrow it will be forgotten. But this, however, will long endure. Here, in this courtroom, and courtrooms all across America, the American people will gather to see that justice, individual justice, justice, not war, individual justice is in fact being done.
The very President of the United States through his officers will have to come into courtrooms and lay out evidence on which specific matters can be judged, and juries of citizens will gather to sit and judge that evidence democratically, to mold and shape and refine our sense of justice.
See that flag, Mr. Reid? That's the flag of the United States of America. That flag will fly there long after this is all forgotten. That flag still stands for freedom. You know it always will. Custody, Mr. Officer. Stand him down.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2009 8:15:45 GMT -6
Yep - now that's well put. I reckon that terrorist in that judgement was dealt with as an individual - he could no longer hide behind the veil of being some sort of honourable warrior. That judge reduced him to what he is ... i.e. a criminal. It's like the child rapist who tries to cover their vile deeds by saying that they have a "different sexual orientation". What a load of crap this disguise is - different sexual orientation??? - no mate you're a low life pedophile who 99.9% of the community despise.
|
|
|
Post by The Tipsy Broker on May 2, 2009 9:05:41 GMT -6
That Richard Reid is a pathetic specimen. Even in his photos he looks the coward he is. British? Pah, not to me Reid
|
|
|
Post by wrench on May 2, 2009 12:09:55 GMT -6
sounda, they are both going to need segregation. the judge ripped him to shreds. as he said, the other prisoners are going to take shots at them. (one can only hope.) lauren and nicole did not deserve the abuse and torture of these thugs.
i say a public stoning is in order for leslie and lindsay.
|
|
|
Post by wrench on May 2, 2009 12:11:50 GMT -6
That Richard Reid is a pathetic specimen. Even in his photos he looks the coward he is. British? Pah, not to me Reid his looks are about as sharp as his intellect. one pathetic POS.
|
|
|
Post by Potassium_Pixie on May 2, 2009 18:56:30 GMT -6
Welcome to our side Sounda. We know that you couldn't resist being an opponent after that case.
|
|
|
Post by kingsindanger on May 2, 2009 19:06:55 GMT -6
Sounda, welcome to the boards. Dive right in.
|
|
|
Post by Potassium_Pixie on May 2, 2009 19:10:03 GMT -6
Hope you enjoy your stay here.
|
|
|
Post by kingsindanger on May 3, 2009 0:24:08 GMT -6
Is there any response from the antis regarding the posted article?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2009 0:59:16 GMT -6
Is there any response from the antis regarding the posted article? What can they say?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2009 1:33:36 GMT -6
G'day sounda good to have another aussie aboard,we can only hope that one day the DP will be reinstated for the worst of the worst pos that walk the streets in Australia..
|
|
|
Post by The Tipsy Broker on May 3, 2009 2:20:50 GMT -6
Is there any response from the antis regarding the posted article? Good spot. They're very quiet
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2009 3:52:36 GMT -6
Sadly, you would probably see very little interest to restore Capital Punishment in Australia amongst politicians and prosecutors. You can see the current government being involved in international efforts to eliminate the DP on a world wider basis. I think Leslie Camilleri is being housed at the Goulburn Supermax Prison in southern new south wales, despite him being convicted in Victoria for murder. I think he comes from the Goulburn area though. (The girls were kidnapped from Bega, and transported over the stateline into Victoria where they were killed, that is why they were prosecuted in Victoria) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goulburn_Correctional_CentreThe only other account of him I can remember is in the book by Ex-Lawyer Andrew Fraser. (who was a Coke addicted lawyer who was convicted of drug importation or trafficking). Fraser describes how he was placed in a Unit with some of the most revolting criminals in Victoria (ie Camelleri). Anyway Camelleri squares up to Fraser and tells Fraser that he should kill him, despite the fact they had never met before. Fraser was actually the star witness in the murder trial of Peter Dupas when Dupas was convicted of the murder of Mersina Halvagis. Dupas is serving three life sentences and is another oxygen theif
|
|
|
Post by mel77 on May 3, 2009 5:13:59 GMT -6
After reading the post, I researched the case in more detail last night.
These two vile figures are the type of real-life examples one could easily use to try and convince antis to change their minds. They are criminals who have no respect for the law or for other people and even though I am a lay-woman, I would venture to say that they could never, ever be rehabilitated, nor should they be. They are sadistic creeps void of any empathy.
Would I mourn their deaths? Not for a second.
In my opinion - bearing in mind that I am not an MVS and have not experienced the incredible pain of having a loved one taken by a criminal - the stance on the death penalty is a political, abstract one, not influenced by personal experience. We ask, do we want to kill criminals or do we want to lock them up? I cannot say whether I would change my mind if I were to become an MVS - I certainly cannot say for sure that I wouldn't.
I have chosen to disagree with the death penalty (so far), I suppose mainly due to the manner in which I was socialized. I think the ultimate punishment should be LWOP. At present, I stand firm in my opinion.
I believe that all convicted murderers should spend the rest of their natural lives in prison because murder is the ultimate crime against another person. I do not believe in putting them down. I think we should set sufficient funds aside to segregate them sufficiently so as to ensure that they do not endanger others, particulary COs.
After having spent a few years on this board and having read the stories and the miniscule amount of pain one can convey as an MVS over an internet message board, I can very much understand that people agree with the death penalty and I have thought my stance over many a time. I remain an anti not because the crimes I have heard about haven't been awful enough to make me change my mind, but rather because I have (for the time being) come to the conclusion that LWOP - and I mean NO PAROLE, ever - in a high security unit serves the purpose of protecting others from murderers sufficiently, if actually done. I am unable to condone the death penalty for the sole reason that we are not willing to provide the ressources to protect others from murderers and therefore they may murder again.
Btw, if we are going to condone the death penalty, I would find it more consistent to put them all down, rather than only those who did something particularly "bad". Murder, by definition, is always a crime. If someone was killed, for example, in self defense, then it wasn't murder in any case.
|
|
|
Post by Kay on May 3, 2009 5:53:54 GMT -6
After reading the post, I researched the case in more detail last night. These two vile figures are the type of real-life examples one could easily use to try and convince antis to change their minds. They are criminals who have no respect for the law or for other people and even though I am a lay-woman, I would venture to say that they could never, ever be rehabilitated, nor should they be. They are sadistic creeps void of any empathy. Would I mourn their deaths? Not for a second. In my opinion - bearing in mind that I am not an MVS and have not experienced the incredible pain of having a loved one taken by a criminal - the stance on the death penalty is a political, abstract one, not influenced by personal experience. We ask, do we want to kill criminals or do we want to lock them up? I cannot say whether I would change my mind if I were to become an MVS - I certainly cannot say for sure that I wouldn't. I have chosen to disagree with the death penalty (so far), I suppose mainly due to the manner in which I was socialized. I think the ultimate punishment should be LWOP. At present, I stand firm in my opinion. I believe that all convicted murderers should spend the rest of their natural lives in prison because murder is the ultimate crime against another person. I do not believe in putting them down. I think we should set sufficient funds aside to segregate them sufficiently so as to ensure that they do not endanger others, particulary COs. After having spent a few years on this board and having read the stories and the miniscule amount of pain one can convey as an MVS over an internet message board, I can very much understand that people agree with the death penalty and I have thought my stance over many a time. I remain an anti not because the crimes I have heard about haven't been awful enough to make me change my mind, but rather because I have (for the time being) come to the conclusion that LWOP - and I mean NO PAROLE, ever - in a high security unit serves the purpose of protecting others from murderers sufficiently, if actually done. I am unable to condone the death penalty for the sole reason that we are not willing to provide the ressources to protect others from murderers and therefore they may murder again. Btw, if we are going to condone the death penalty, I would find it more consistent to put them all down, rather than only those who did something particularly "bad". Murder, by definition, is always a crime. If someone was killed, for example, in self defense, then it wasn't murder in any case. Excellent post Mel, thank you
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on May 3, 2009 9:05:06 GMT -6
Thanks for the welcome thebroker. I had always thought that forums like this would be frequented by hard nosed right wingers but all of the arguments that I have read on this forum have been very lucid and well considered. In the case I provided a link to I can no see no reason why these two POS should be allowed to consume anymore oxygen at all. How anyone could rape and abuse a 14 and 16 year old over a period of nine hours and then tie them up to a tree and stab them is completely beyond me. I believe that the DP should be available to our judges, the community wants it, as evidenced by numerous public polls. Curiously the politicians wont go anywhere near it - strange! Hard nosed right wingers? Hmm, I see you have'nt met Stormy and Cali yet!
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on May 3, 2009 9:08:51 GMT -6
Is there any response from the antis regarding the posted article? What can they say? LWOP to mean LWOP. The conditions should be such as is merely neccessary to sustain life. I still dotn support the death penalty but that is not to say that some bits of shyte would not geve me an urge to.
|
|
|
Post by Tracy on May 3, 2009 9:53:14 GMT -6
Thanks for posting Judge Young's words Cali,,when he says "You're a big man, but not that big. You are no warrior, I know warriors, you are a terrorist".....LOVE IT! And welcome to the board Sounda
|
|
|
Post by Californian on May 3, 2009 10:55:44 GMT -6
Thanks for posting Judge Young's words Cali,,when he says "You're a big man, but not that big. You are no warrior, I know warriors, you are a terrorist".....LOVE IT! Yup. No one of us is as big as "We, the people..."
|
|
|
Post by Californian on May 3, 2009 11:09:43 GMT -6
Hard nosed right wingers? Hmm, I see you have'nt met Stormy and Cali yet! Felix, I think both you and Mel made excellent responses in this post, and I think you're both sincere in your beliefs. But the facts are simple: One, there's no such thing as life without parole. It only exists within the fevered brows of those who quail at the hard choices of doing what occasionally needs to be done. LWOP exists only until such time as a judge, governor, legislature, or appellate court decides it doesn't. Dead, on the other hand, is dead. Secondly, whether you and Mel are on board with them or not, on the day the DP goes away, the drive will begin by most of your posse to abolish LWOP, as well. If you think that's not true, read this thread and tell me if you agree with the decision. tinyurl.com/cz85ln
|
|
|
Post by mel77 on May 3, 2009 12:06:09 GMT -6
Bob, one of my main points is that if I could decide on my own in this moment, it'd be LWOP, never to be changed.
As we all know, I am not the legislator. Neither are you.
In Austria, the only murderers who really end up spending the rest of their lives in prison are the ones wowies would put to death in the US. Josef Fritzl will never be let out. Jack Unterweger would not have been let out, had he decided not to commit suicide. Most others get out. My personal opinion is that I wish they didn't. But I don't get to decide on my own.
You should also be arguing that, in effect, it is pretty unacceptable to that people are rather often kept in prison for twenty years or more before they are subjected to the death penalty. There's enough crap they can do in twenty years, if one is going to use the argument that we have to kill them to prevent further deaths.
|
|
|
Post by Lotus Flower on May 3, 2009 13:36:26 GMT -6
Welcome to the board.
We forgive you! ;D
|
|
|
Post by kingsindanger on May 3, 2009 15:49:51 GMT -6
Bob, one of my main points is that if I could decide on my own in this moment, it'd be LWOP, never to be changed. As we all know, I am not the legislator. Neither are you. In Austria, the only murderers who really end up spending the rest of their lives in prison are the ones wowies would put to death in the US. Josef Fritzl will never be let out. Jack Unterweger would not have been let out, had he decided not to commit suicide. Most others get out. My personal opinion is that I wish they didn't. But I don't get to decide on my own. You should also be arguing that, in effect, it is pretty unacceptable to that people are rather often kept in prison for twenty years or more before they are subjected to the death penalty. There's enough crap they can do in twenty years, if one is going to use the argument that we have to kill them to prevent further deaths. Murderers place a heavy burden on society for a host of reasons including emotional and economical. I think anti and pro alike can agree that there is no place in society for the burden created by murder. The point of disagreement comes in deciding how to deal with that burden. In my opinion, a LWOP sentence is merely transferring that burden from one society (i.e. the streets) for another society (prison). On the other hand, the death penalty is a finite solution to that burden. Once executed, the murderer is no longer a burden to society.
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on May 3, 2009 17:27:58 GMT -6
Hard nosed right wingers? Hmm, I see you have'nt met Stormy and Cali yet! Felix, I think both you and Mel made excellent responses in this post, and I think you're both sincere in your beliefs. But the facts are simple: One, there's no such thing as life without parole. It only exists within the fevered brows of those who quail at the hard choices of doing what occasionally needs to be done. LWOP exists only until such time as a judge, governor, legislature, or appellate court decides it doesn't. Dead, on the other hand, is dead. Secondly, whether you and Mel are on board with them or not, on the day the DP goes away, the drive will begin by most of your posse to abolish LWOP, as well. If you think that's not true, read this thread and tell me if you agree with the decision. tinyurl.com/cz85lnI understand the way the current facts are, but that can be fixed. Where is the logic in being able to kill a man judicially but there being an invisible wall about LWOP and LWOP meaning whole of life? Even in the UK there are prisoners who will not ever see the light of day again and those that died in jail after countless years?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2009 21:18:32 GMT -6
Felix, I think both you and Mel made excellent responses in this post, and I think you're both sincere in your beliefs. But the facts are simple: One, there's no such thing as life without parole. It only exists within the fevered brows of those who quail at the hard choices of doing what occasionally needs to be done. LWOP exists only until such time as a judge, governor, legislature, or appellate court decides it doesn't. Dead, on the other hand, is dead. Secondly, whether you and Mel are on board with them or not, on the day the DP goes away, the drive will begin by most of your posse to abolish LWOP, as well. If you think that's not true, read this thread and tell me if you agree with the decision. tinyurl.com/cz85lnI understand the way the current facts are, but that can be fixed. Where is the logic in being able to kill a man judicially but there being an invisible wall about LWOP and LWOP meaning whole of life? Even in the UK there are prisoners who will not ever see the light of day again and those that died in jail after countless years? "That can be fixed?" I hardly think so. There can always be a law passed, a court decision handed down, or a mistake made, which would spring a LWOP prisoner from prison. If it can "be fixed", then that means it should also possible to fix the broken appeals process, and get the death penalty back on the fast track that it used to be on.
|
|
|
Post by Potassium_Pixie on May 3, 2009 23:29:11 GMT -6
There is no way that the DP will go away in every country. If the US states get rid of it, then Texas and Florida will still keep it.
|
|
|
Post by The Tipsy Broker on May 4, 2009 1:23:29 GMT -6
Bob, one of my main points is that if I could decide on my own in this moment, it'd be LWOP, never to be changed. As we all know, I am not the legislator. Neither are you. In Austria, the only murderers who really end up spending the rest of their lives in prison are the ones wowies would put to death in the US. Josef Fritzl will never be let out. Jack Unterweger would not have been let out, had he decided not to commit suicide. Most others get out. My personal opinion is that I wish they didn't. But I don't get to decide on my own. You should also be arguing that, in effect, it is pretty unacceptable to that people are rather often kept in prison for twenty years or more before they are subjected to the death penalty. There's enough crap they can do in twenty years, if one is going to use the argument that we have to kill them to prevent further deaths. Murderers place a heavy burden on society for a host of reasons including emotional and economical. I think anti and pro alike can agree that there is no place in society for the burden created by murder. The point of disagreement comes in deciding how to deal with that burden. In my opinion, a LWOP sentence is merely transferring that burden from one society (i.e. the streets) for another society (prison). On the other hand, the death penalty is a finite solution to that burden. Once executed, the murderer is no longer a burden to society. Nicely put Kings. 100% agree
|
|