|
Post by Edina on Jun 14, 2004 7:25:19 GMT -6
I copied the case Charlene wrote (all 81 pages!) and I am wondering? Have any of those scumbags been executed yet? It's been 10 years now--has justice been served on any of them? Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Tessa on Jun 16, 2004 0:13:52 GMT -6
No they havent been executed yet and hopefully they wont be. They got a stay on their execution and are waiting for the supreme court to rule on the juvenile issue.
|
|
|
Post by Mari on Jun 17, 2004 13:06:40 GMT -6
I hope they DON'T get executed either.
|
|
|
Post by peacejoy on Jun 20, 2004 13:38:06 GMT -6
One did have a date, but was stayed because of his age at the time of the crime. Waiting for the Supreme Court ruling.
This case is a tragic one. My heart goes out to both the families of the vicitms, and the families of the inmates.
|
|
|
Post by dio on Oct 22, 2004 17:13:19 GMT -6
Well I thought I had finally found a website that wasn't full of the excuses I find so often on the Anti pages.Yet I read these posts and they all say "I hope they don't buy the ticket ,they were just kids."Here's a word of advice from the 1 true supporter that has posted here today,"kids don't go around raping and killing other kids,murderers do that."And as I always say they who murder innocent people deserve to die a slow painful death,regardless of AGE SEX or CREED.It is God's job to punish the guilty,but first we must send them to him!KILL THE KILLERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
Macklin
Inactive
The more clearly we see the sovereignty of God, the less preplexed we are by the calamities of men.
Posts: 1,701
|
Post by Macklin on Oct 22, 2004 17:27:09 GMT -6
Tessa...you wrote:
No they havent been executed yet and hopefully they wont be. They got a stay on their execution and are waiting for the supreme court to rule on the juvenile issue.
My Reply:
We will have to wait until June or July for the Supreme courts ruling on the DP for juvenile will change or not....
It doesn't look real good at the moment because there is no real evidence to showthey should not be held responsible for their crimes.
Boston Globe Oct 22, 2004 00:15
Some juvenile killers deserve to die
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments last week in Roper v. Simmons, a Missouri case that raises the question of whether the Eighth Amendment's ban on "cruel and unusual punishment" forbids the execution of murderers who were 16 or 17 at the time they committed their crimes.
The court was supposed to have settled this issue 15 years ago. In the 1989 case of Stanford v. Kentucky, a 5-4 majority found that there was no American consensus against the use of capital punishment in such instances and ruled accordingly that the constitutional standard -- "cruel and unusual" -- didn't apply.
But now the justices are being urged to overturn Stanford on supposedly scientific grounds. We know more than we used to about the way the adolescent mind works, the argument runs, and there are biological reasons why teens younger than 18 tend not to be as adept as adults in controlling their impulses.
A friend-of-the-court brief filed by a gaggle of healthcare organizations, including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, claims that 16- and 17-year-olds behave differently than adults because their brains are not fully developed. To execute persons who commit murder at that age would be "to hold them accountable . . . for the immaturity of their neural anatomy and psychological development."
A similar amicus brief, this one from the American Psychological Association and its Missouri affiliate, informs the court that "late adolescents are less likely to consider alternative courses of action, understand the perspective of others, and restrain impulses," since their "brain has not reached adult maturity, particularly in the frontal lobes." Tossing off references to "longitudinal MRI studies" and "cognitive neurology," the brief asserts that "16- and 17-year-olds as a group are less mature developmentally than adults."
Well, stop the presses.
The problem here is that what is relevant isn't exactly new -- what parent doesn't know that adolescents don't always restrain their impulses ? -- and what is new may not be legally relevant.
The work of the UCLA neurologist Elizabeth Sowell is cited in both of these briefs, yet Sowell herself warns against using neuroscience to promote a legal agenda.
"The scientific data aren't ready to be used by the judicial system," she told Science News in April. "The hardest thing . . . is to bring brain research into real-life contexts."
Also skeptical is Harvard psychologist Jerome Kagan, former director of the Mind/Brain Behavior Interfaculty Initiative. "The brain data don't show that adolescents typically have reduced legal culpability for crimes," he says. Clearly teens "can control their impulses without having fully developed frontal lobes" -- otherwise "we should be having Columbine incidents every week."
But we don't have Columbine incidents every week. The vast majority of 17-year-olds don't commit violent crimes, least of all the very worst violent crimes: the especially depraved homicides that the law calls capital murder.
Adolescents who have not yet turned 18 may not always act wisely, but rarely do they turn to murder.
Should those who do be regarded primarily as heedless kids -- or as determined killers?
Consider Christopher Simmons, the defendant in the case before the Supreme Court.
in September 1993, Simmons discussed with friends the crime he intended to commit: A victim would be robbed, then tied up and pushed off a bridge. On Sept. 8, Shirley Crook became that victim. Simmons and 2 friends broke into her home, bound and gagged her with duct tape, then forced her into a minivan. Simmons drove the van to a railroad trestle spanning the Meramec River, where he found that she had managed to work some of the duct tape off. So he hog-tied her with electrical wire, then covered her face with duct tape. And then he threw her into the river below.
Simmons's age wasn't ignored in his trial. It was offered as a mitigating circumstance, and the jury took it into account when deciding his punishment. That is what the Supreme Court should continue to permit every jury to do.
There are times when a bright-line rule based on age makes sense. We don't let kids drive until they are 16 or buy tobacco before turning 18. When it comes to drivers' licenses and cigarettes, an arbitrary cutoff is both reasonable and efficient.
But when someone has been brutally murdered and an accused killer is in the dock, reasonableness and efficiency are not the standards we use. Guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Jurors must weigh all the evidence. Criminal justice is done individually, particularly, with a focus not on how people act generally, but on how this person acted in this specific case.
The law as it exists does not condemn every 16- or 17-year-old murderer to death. It simply preserves capital punishment as one option for the jury. It allows society to say, in rare but appropriate cases, that a juvenile who plotted like an adult and murdered like an adult can be punished like an adult. That isn't cruel and unusual. It's justice.
(source: Column, Jeff Jacoby, The Boston Globe
|
|
|
Post by RickZ on Oct 23, 2004 8:25:04 GMT -6
Well I thought I had finally found a website that wasn't full of the excuses I find so often on the Anti pages.Yet I read these posts and they all say "I hope they don't buy the ticket ,they were just kids. . . . LOL!!! You read four posts by people so starry-eyed over the condemned that they desire to keep these "celebrities" around. Not all of us on this board feel that way! ----------- Macklin, good article. This one line really sums up the death penalty argument in one sentence: "Criminal justice is done individually, particularly, with a focus not on how people act generally, but on how this person acted in this specific case." It's called holding one accountable for one's actions, i.e., personal responsibility.
|
|
|
Post by snowy111 on Oct 23, 2004 10:25:11 GMT -6
Tessa Posted on: 06/16/2004 at 02:13:52 No they havent been executed yet and hopefully they wont be. They got a stay on their execution and are waiting for the supreme court to rule on the juvenile issue.
Posted by: Mari Posted on: 06/17/2004 at 15:06:40 I hope they DON'T get executed either.
Would you like to take them in and house, feed, and clothe them?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2004 11:37:25 GMT -6
I feel these people must be executed because of the sheer brutality of their crime. I don't understand how anti's can be taken in by their sudden change of personality. These boys have shown their true colours and for the safety of other prisoners and people working within the TDCJ need to be executed. I really hope Efrains and Villareals sentences aren't commuted.
G
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2004 17:30:59 GMT -6
i'm writing to Jose Medelling in 4 years... he is waiting to see what's going to happen because he knows probably soon he will have a date... i cried when i found out what he has done...and i don't wnat to commiserate him... he is a killer and stopped the life of 2 innocent girls...but i can tell you that's not the only colour of Josè... he can be a friend, he can love, he can listen to you. he can feel every feeling as we do.... in a short time he won't be on this word...Priscilla won't have her father anymore...another innocent victim....
|
|
|
Post by snowy111 on Oct 26, 2004 19:44:13 GMT -6
i'm writing to Jose Medelling in 4 years... he is waiting to see what's going to happen because he knows probably soon he will have a date... i cried when i found out what he has done...and i don't wnat to commiserate him... he is a killer and stopped the life of 2 innocent girls...but i can tell you that's not the only colour of Josè... he can be a friend, he can love, he can listen to you. he can feel every feeling as we do.... in a short time he won't be on this word...Priscilla won't have her father anymore...another innocent victim.... Too bad he didn't try to be a friend instead of an evil monster when those two girls were walking home. If he is so nice why didn't he show it then? Most guys would want to be a boyfriend to a nice looking girl not murder them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2004 19:52:16 GMT -6
i'm writing to Jose Medelling in 4 years... he is waiting to see what's going to happen because he knows probably soon he will have a date... i cried when i found out what he has done...and i don't wnat to commiserate him... he is a killer and stopped the life of 2 innocent girls...but i can tell you that's not the only colour of Josè... he can be a friend, he can love, he can listen to you. he can feel every feeling as we do.... in a short time he won't be on this word...Priscilla won't have her father anymore...another innocent victim.... But are you sure he is being a friend and not "using" you for personal gain?
Many killers try to use that trick, then victimize later.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2004 23:54:58 GMT -6
i haven't say he did not wrong...i said that he can be a different person from what he seemed... i said that there is not just the "monster" part....but the himan side too... using me? and ....how? ?? i can't do nothing for him, full some of his hours, writing him letters...no more then this...
|
|
|
Post by snowy111 on Oct 27, 2004 6:46:32 GMT -6
i haven't say he did not wrong...i said that he can be a different person from what he seemed... i said that there is not just the "monster" part....but the himan side too... using me? and ....how? ?? i can't do nothing for him, full some of his hours, writing him letters...no more then this... I am not saying a person can't change but be careful, he may be showing you what you want to see. He is behind a glass window. He can't do much from there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2004 11:08:06 GMT -6
medallin chose not to be a father the moment he raped and murdered those 2 beautiful young girls. You should ask him what his views on the death penalty would be if it was his daughter raped beaten and left to rot in a park... not knowing where she was for days. I bet he would be singing a whole different tune then.
|
|
|
Post by salemjones on Oct 28, 2004 18:02:53 GMT -6
KILL THE KILLERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If this proposition was to be literarily applied, let's hope we have a high fertility rate and a generous appeals process. Otherwise we'll run out of people quite soon...
|
|
|
Post by snowy111 on Oct 28, 2004 18:18:08 GMT -6
If this proposition was to be literarily applied, let's hope we have a high fertility rate and a generous appeals process. Otherwise we'll run out of people quite soon... You really think that many people will commit murder. Which means everyone.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2004 19:37:30 GMT -6
If this proposition was to be literarily applied, let's hope we have a high fertility rate and a generous appeals process. Otherwise we'll run out of people quite soon... We already have a high fertility rate, and our appeals process is way too generous as it is, and costly too!
|
|
|
Post by oldsparky on Oct 29, 2004 0:22:09 GMT -6
If this proposition was to be literarily applied, let's hope we have a high fertility rate and a generous appeals process. Otherwise we'll run out of people quite soon... Agreed! That way we have the planet populated by a lot of good people since natural selection - or should I say judicial selection - will take care of the bad ones!
|
|
|
Post by christina on Jun 14, 2005 20:01:41 GMT -6
i have written 2 letters and recieved two from efrain and i am debating on writing a third. i just can't seem to feel he has any kind of remorse for what he has done. then again if he did would that really make a differance in the lives of the families of jennifer and elizabeth.
|
|
|
Post by dio on Jun 14, 2005 20:42:18 GMT -6
i have written 2 letters and recieved two from efrain and i am debating on writing a third. i just can't seem to feel he has any kind of remorse for what he has done. then again if he did would that really make a differance in the lives of the families of jennifer and elizabeth. Would it make a difference if 1 of these animals you lust after killed your kid on the way to mail your love letter?I doubt it scumpals have no feelings for anyone except the man behind the glass.
|
|
|
Post by RickZ on Jun 14, 2005 20:42:55 GMT -6
i have written 2 letters and recieved two from efrain and i am debating on writing a third. In the vernacular of this board, you are a scum-pal. What thrill do you get from writing a murderer on death row (even if only for a little while longer)? Showing remorse would be a good godd*mn start in taking responsibility for his heinous actions. And, no, remorse will not bring Jennifer and Elizabeth back. He can never make a postive difference to the families as he's already made the greatest negative impact he possibly can. Why would anyone write to such trash?
|
|
|
Post by Charlene on Jun 14, 2005 21:20:31 GMT -6
If Perez felt remorse for his part in Jenny and Elizabeth's murder, I don't think it would matter much to the Penas or Ertmans. Would it make a difference in his life? Probably so, don't you think? Believe me, there are better ways to spend your time and I hope you find them. Charlene i have written 2 letters and recieved two from efrain and i am debating on writing a third. i just can't seem to feel he has any kind of remorse for what he has done. then again if he did would that really make a differance in the lives of the families of jennifer and elizabeth.
|
|
|
Post by dio on Jun 14, 2005 21:22:37 GMT -6
Cliff diving is an excellent way to spend an afternoon...Just pick a high 1 and jump.
|
|