Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2004 19:37:37 GMT -6
Any country that murders its citizens as a judicial punishment is uncivilised. It is barbarity of the worst kind. As a Brit I read in horror of the judical killing of another human being. Texas is a real place of shame. Death row is occupied by the poorest of the poor, the un educated, usually Black or Hispanic. When was the last time someone with a lawyer paid for by themselves was put to death? When was a white executed for murdering a black?. My God you even execute people with mental handicaps Your site glories in despair and wallows in suffering. The victims are not helped by more death but life without parole ensures that the murderer really serves punishment. You cannot call yourself truly civilised by lowering yourselves to the level of China, Saudi Arabia or Afganistan
|
|
GW and his all girl orchestra
Guest
|
Post by GW and his all girl orchestra on Feb 2, 2004 19:52:56 GMT -6
Any country that murders its citizens as a judicial punishment is uncivilised. It is barbarity of the worst kind. As a Brit I read in horror of the judical killing of another human being. Texas is a real place of shame. Death row is occupied by the poorest of the poor, the un educated, usually Black or Hispanic. When was the last time someone with a lawyer paid for by themselves was put to death? When was a white executed for murdering a black?. My God you even execute people with mental handicaps Your site glories in despair and wallows in suffering. The victims are not helped by more death but life without parole ensures that the murderer really serves punishment. You cannot call yourself truly civilised by lowering yourselves to the level of China, Saudi Arabia or Afganistan Any country that permits murderers to live after they have committed the worst crime known to mankind is guilty of crimes against humanity. The rest of your post shows your total ignorance of everything about our country, so I suggest you save your ranting for your murderer-loving buddies on your side of the pond so you can find somebody with whom to agree.
|
|
Scott
Regular
"Capital punishment is a government program, so skepticism is in order." (George Will)
Posts: 434
|
Post by Scott on Feb 2, 2004 20:02:31 GMT -6
50 percent of the 450 offenders on Texas death row are white. 35 percent are from Harris County. More information about these guys can be found at this link: www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/offendersondrow.htm Since 1976, when the death penalty was reinstated in America, there have been eleven white people executed for killing black victims. From googling around, I found this info: John King (killer of James Byrd) will be the second white person sentenced to die in Texas for killing a black person. The only white man actually executed by the state was a guy accused of destroying private property. He was a farmer who allegedly killed another white farmer's favorite slave in the 1850s. And no decent Texas would stand for that! I mean think of the economic loss if you’re best slave gets killed (much worse than loosing a few good horses).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2004 21:28:47 GMT -6
Scott, FYI. Took a tour of Hapers Ferry, W VA. Park rangers made the point that dangerous mining and blasting construction jobs were reserved for Irish immigrants. They could be hired for a pittance and "the company store" recouped most of their earnings. Slaves were far too valuable to risk doing that sort of thing.
|
|
|
Post by Donnie on Feb 2, 2004 22:35:48 GMT -6
No, barbarity of the worst kind is practiced by murderers who torture and rape their victims in the process of murdering them. Here is a link to just one example: abcd.freewebsitehosting.com/Wichita/Trial%20Testimony.htmlNo citizens are murdered in the US as judicial punishment. Sometimes murderers, who have escaped the DP, murder other criminals in prison. But those murders are nonjudicial punishment. Death by execution in the US is one of the more pleasant ways to die. There is simply nothing barbaric about it. Neither is there any horror involved. If you want real horror, you should read some murder cases that have occured in England as well as the US. If you are so upset about executions, I doubt that you will be able to face the reality of what murderers do. If, as you claim, " death row is occupied by the poorest of the poor" why is it relevant for you to ask about "the last time someone with a lawyer paid for by themselves was put to death?" That is a question has a rather strange construction. I think you asked it that way because you know that your statement respecting the "poorest of the poor" is false. John Wayne Gacy and Linda Lyons are the most recent people executed who paid for their own lawyers. Westerfield and Sibley are two more rich people that are awaiting execution. In fact, murderers who are well of are more likely to be executed than the "poorest of the poor". In general, murderers sentenced to death are better off financially than the general population. Any country that murders its citizens as a judicial punishment is uncivilised. It is barbarity of the worst kind. As a Brit I read in horror of the judical killing of another human being. Texas is a real place of shame. Death row is occupied by the poorest of the poor, the un educated, usually Black or Hispanic. When was the last time someone with a lawyer paid for by themselves was put to death? When was a white executed for murdering a black?. My God you even execute people with mental handicaps Your site glories in despair and wallows in suffering. The victims are not helped by more death but life without parole ensures that the murderer really serves punishment. You cannot call yourself truly civilised by lowering yourselves to the level of China, Saudi Arabia or Afganistan
|
|
|
Post by HH on Feb 5, 2004 10:58:44 GMT -6
I just don't get it. You think that your justice system is wonderful. But it even will kill innocent people so that the politicians, prosecutors etc. don't lose face. Do you not have compassion, forgiveness, love in your country. Mind you your country murders mentally ill, mentally 'retarded' and juveniles.... which from a human rights perspective in the recent years actually put you on a par with Somalia. Even Iran, Pakistan and Suadi Arabia don't kill criminals that were children when they committed their crimes anymore. And yet you are so proud of it.
Shame really. I am so glad we saw sense and the rest of Europe actually laugh at your situation.... more crime per capita and yet the dp is a deterrent?
I am so glad that I have the ability to forgive as I think the hate that spurs people to the dp must cause problems.
I do have sympathy for the families and feel that their rights should be protected like having the assailant locked in prison forever without having to go through more heartache come execution time. It is showing now with more and more of victims families taking the high moral ground and making sure they get healing and closure by forgiving the assailant and requesting no cp or requesting clemency.
Btw I have been a victim of crime so I do know on some slight level how it feels.
|
|
The Ghost Of George Stinney
Guest
|
Post by The Ghost Of George Stinney on Feb 6, 2004 2:48:04 GMT -6
Even recently, the US legally kills those who not kill. In fact they killed somebody because he REFUSED to kill. His name was Eddie Slovik..he was killed so the US could save face.
The Rosenbergs never killed anybody either.
Let us not forget that now, in order to impose their will, Bush and Ashcroft have decreed that any murder that takes place in a non-DP state will be a *federal* matter and out of local jurisdiction. So much for so-called "states rights" that Republicans support.
Are we surprised that Bush has openly spit on human rights and has withdrawn the US from several Human Rights organizations?
|
|
|
Post by Donnie on Feb 6, 2004 5:30:13 GMT -6
Eddie Slovik’s desertion during wartime in the face of the enemy wasn't recent. That was during World War II. You might read a little history. There was quite a bit of killing going on at the time. Your lie about Bush and Ashcroft will only work on the most ignorant. The US Congress has determined which murderers Bush and Ashcroft are required to consider for the death penalty. It is a very small number of murderers who have murdered in the course of violating other specific laws. Congress had already made those crimes a "federal matter". There are no decrees by anybody involved. It is just a matter of Bush and Ashcroft doing exactly what the Constitution requires, enforcing the laws that Congress has passed and the Courts have upheld. Of course it only takes one person to stop any death penalty from even being imposed. One juror can stop it during the penalty phase of the trial. Even recently, the US legally kills those who not kill. In fact they killed somebody because he REFUSED to kill. His name was Eddie Slovik..he was killed so the US could save face. The Rosenbergs never killed anybody either. Let us not forget that now, in order to impose their will, Bush and Ashcroft have decreed that any murder that takes place in a non-DP state will be a *federal* matter and out of local jurisdiction.
|
|
|
Post by Donnie on Feb 6, 2004 5:38:48 GMT -6
First you need to figure out who murders and who doesn't, then you can write an intelligent post. It is not our country who murders, it is individual murderers acting in defiance of the laws against murder. The state doesn't murder juveniles, or even execute them after they murder. Juveniles are murdered by individual murderers, often by other juveniles who are let off with a few years in juvenile detention. Any human activity will kill innocent people. Many of them kill many innocent people each year. The justice system isn't wonderful, but it kills fewer innocent people each year (zero) than most other human activities. Murderers who are completely devoid of compassion are treated with compassion. Even the few who are mercifully executed are treated with much more compassion than the showed for their victims. There is no moral high ground traveled in letting a murderer escape justice and kill again. I just don't get it. You think that your justice system is wonderful. But it even will kill innocent people so that the politicians, prosecutors etc. don't lose face. Do you not have compassion, forgiveness, love in your country. Mind you your country murders mentally ill, mentally 'retarded' and juveniles.... which from a human rights perspective in the recent years actually put you on a par with Somalia. Even Iran, Pakistan and Suadi Arabia don't kill criminals that were children when they committed their crimes anymore. And yet you are so proud of it. Shame really. I am so glad we saw sense and the rest of Europe actually laugh at your situation.... more crime per capita and yet the dp is a deterrent? I am so glad that I have the ability to forgive as I think the hate that spurs people to the dp must cause problems. I do have sympathy for the families and feel that their rights should be protected like having the assailant locked in prison forever without having to go through more heartache come execution time. It is showing now with more and more of victims families taking the high moral ground and making sure they get healing and closure by forgiving the assailant and requesting no cp or requesting clemency. Btw I have been a victim of crime so I do know on some slight level how it feels.
|
|
The Ghost Of George Stinney
Guest
|
Post by The Ghost Of George Stinney on Feb 6, 2004 11:45:47 GMT -6
"Eddie Slovik’s desertion during wartime in the face of the enemy wasn't recent. That was during World War II. You might read a little history. There was quite a bit of killing going on at the time."
You sound as if Slovik was joining the Axis side. Slovik was killed because he refused to kill...he went AWOL...kind of like the way *somebody* went AWOL from the National Guard in Texas...but Slovik didn't have a rich daddy to pay off people. Oh yes..Slovok refused to kill..so he must be killed....
Your lie about Bush and Ashcroft will only work on the most ignorant. The US Congress has determined which murderers Bush and Ashcroft are required to consider for the death penalty. It is a very small number of murderers who have murdered in the course of violating other specific laws. Congress had already made those crimes a "federal matter". There are no decrees by anybody involved. It is just a matter of Bush and Ashcroft doing exactly what the Constitution requires, enforcing the laws that Congress has passed and the Courts have upheld. Of course it only takes one person to stop any death penalty from even being imposed. One juror can stop it during the penalty phase of the trial.
Bush and and Ashcroft have no respect for the Constitution..where have you been? They will go over local jurisdiction without a care...
|
|
|
Post by Donnie on Feb 7, 2004 9:19:45 GMT -6
No, a deserter does not join the other side. That is a traitor. Desertion is not the same as AWOL. However, in either case it is not a matter of personal opinion. It is a judicially determined matter. Clinton did not go AWOL, he illegally avoided the draft and all other service to his country. At the same time he avoided principled ways of avoiding the draft. The duty of a soldier in wartime is to kill the enemy. If Slovik didn't want to kill, he could have declared himself to be a conscientious objector. Slovik was not simply an AWOL soldier, he was a deserter in the fact of the enemy during wartime. "Eddie Slovik’s desertion during wartime in the face of the enemy wasn't recent. That was during World War II. You might read a little history. There was quite a bit of killing going on at the time." You sound as if Slovik was joining the Axis side. Slovik was killed because he refused to kill. Oh yes..Slovok refused to kill..so he must be killed.... Your lie about Bush and Ashcroft will only work on the most ignorant. The US Congress has determined which murderers Bush and Ashcroft are required to consider for the death penalty. It is a very small number of murderers who have murdered in the course of violating other specific laws. Congress had already made those crimes a "federal matter". There are no decrees by anybody involved. It is just a matter of Bush and Ashcroft doing exactly what the Constitution requires, enforcing the laws that Congress has passed and the Courts have upheld. Of course it only takes one person to stop any death penalty from even being imposed. One juror can stop it during the penalty phase of the trial.
|
|
|
Post by Monty on Feb 7, 2004 21:21:24 GMT -6
Ghost of George.....
Can't you come up something just TEXTa littleTEXT more relevant than Slovic or the Rosenburgs? Don't you think that's kinda reaching in your pursuit for a good argument?
And about the President and the so-called AWOL thing. There's no proof, from either side, so it's just all political propaganda at this point.
Me thinks that your trying to argue your case from 'script' verses real intellectual thought.
Now John..... If your country would like to coddle an animal that kidnaps, rapes then murders children (et al) then so be it. Thats your business. I don't even view the DP as punishment or even as a deterent. I see it as something more as these cretians forfited thier right to exists when they committed the crime. The State is just the instrument to the end.
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Feb 8, 2004 22:15:10 GMT -6
The United States has judicial executions (mainly) for murder.
That makes it barbaric? When Britain only abolished the death penalty for all crimes six years ago?!
Come now, Britain has one of the most cruel histories in the world when it comes to the use of the death penalty. And Britain may not maintain the death penalty any longer, but it still carries out extra-judicial killings in pursuit of state interests - the killing of the IRA members in Gibralter (condemned by the European Court of Human Rights) are a case in point. The British military has also executed its fair share of deserters in this century.
The use of the death penalty against the worst murderers is entirely moral and entirely civilized. And even if it weren't, Britain is hardly in any position to criticize anyone.
|
|
|
Post by HH on Feb 9, 2004 8:25:10 GMT -6
I am sorry I was not talking about deep in the dim and distant past! Yes Britian has had its fair share of problems and have an horrendous history and unfortunately for you over there it also applies to British decendants over there. But we woke up and saw the light.
The last person to be hanged on British soil was in 1964. We did have the dp for High Treason and Piracy (with Violence) until 1998 but no one was ever given that sentence. One thing that makes me think about this so much is that I am sure you are aware of the IRA (who were partly funded by some American organisations!) and a series of bombings that took place in the 1970s in England. Very bad and very violent killed quite a few innocent people. Well, over 15 people were convicted in some way or another of being involved in these crimes. In the trial of four of them, (the Guildford 4) the judge actually commented on the fact that he wished he could hand down the death sentence.
After a lot of years the case against them collapsed they were freed! Now what do you think would have happened to them if we had the death penalty.
Humans are not infalible.... innocent people do get convicted if convicted they may be executed is this just collateral damamge?
Yes the state does murder people who are juvenile murderers... Sean Sellars, Scott Hain, Toronto Paterson, Napoleon Beazley... shall I go on. The fact is that this puts your country on a par with Somalia. Just check out the facts or are you all too afraid to? These people were not allowed to drink, smoke, vote but yet were eligible for the ultimate punishment. That is just sick.
No I don't believe us Europeans are all sweetness and light but at least we can see that the dp doesn't solve any problems. It creates them... Some of you states/counties can't afford decent education materials but hey they can afford to try a death penalty case!
It makes me laugh
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Feb 9, 2004 11:45:44 GMT -6
1) Britain might have the death penalty today if it was more of a democracy. A referendum would likely produce a very different result than a parliamentary vote. I don't know if a referendum to reinstate would pass in the UK, but then your governing British "betters" (and your European masters) would never allow such a debate or referendum, would they! No of course not; must not let the unwashed masses get the idea that they actually govern the place - what, what!
2) The widespread miscarriage of justice exposed with respect to IRA trials of the 1970s just illustrate that Britain is in no position to criticize anyone when it comes to human rights issues.
3) What you call the "distant past" is not really so distant. Someone referred to the execution of an American deserter in World War II. Surely then I can refer to the execution of British deserters in World War I.
4) Many of the arguments you raise with regard to the implementation of the death penalty are legitimate ones that should be the subject of free and open debate. But then you have already decided that any state which arrives at the conclusion that the death penalty is necessary is evil and barbaric. In other words, you want to debate the issue but you have already concluded that any position other than yours is immoral. Ah the totalitarianism of liberalism!
|
|
|
Post by The Panel on Feb 9, 2004 14:46:10 GMT -6
The Burden of Proof by The Panel Monday February 09, 2004 at 03:26 PM
Case Overview
A San Diego judge set a Feb. 10 execution date for Kevin Cooper, 45, who was convicted of the 1983 murders of two adults and 2 children near the Southern California prison from which he had just escaped.
The events leading up to the murder began February 2, 1982, when he was released from a state prison in Pennsylvania. Following his release, Cooper was arrested and charged with burglary. Prior to his conviction, Cooper was committed to the Mayview State Hospital in Pennsylvania for treatment of a psychiatric disorder. He escaped from that institution on October 8, 1982. On the same date that he escaped from the hospital, Cooper burglarized a nearby home, kidnapped and raped a woman, and stolen the rape victim's car.
On December 13, 1982, Cooper applied for and received a California Department of Motor Vehicles identification card using the name David Anthony Trautman. He remained at large.
On January 1, 1983, he committed a burglary in Los Angeles and was arrested. He used the alias David Anthony Trautman, and his true identity was not discovered until later. He was sentenced to four years in state prison on April 19, 1983 and was received by the California Department of Corrections on April 29, 1983. He was transferred to a state prison in Chino (San Bernardino County) on June 1, 1983.
On June 2, 1983, Cooper escaped from the Chino prison. He hid in a small vacant house near the family's home in nearby Chino Hills until, on the night of June 4, he committed what the California Supreme Court called a "nocturnal massacre," hacking to death Douglas and Peggy Ryen, their 10-year-old daughter Jessica and houseguest Christopher Hughes. The Ryens' 8-year-old son, Joshua, was seriously wounded but survived. Cooper used a hatchet, a knife and an ice pick in the horrific attack. Douglas incurred 37 stab wounds; his wife Peggy, was stabbed 32 times; his 10-year-old daughter, was stabbed 46 times, the houseguest Christopher received 26 stab wounds and Cooper also inflicted chopping wounds to the head, and stabbing wounds to the throat, of eight-year-old Joshua Ryen, who survived.
His defense
Critics of the death sentence against Cooper have claimed that his trial was conducted in a racially charged atmosphere. There have also been recent claims that Cooper is mentally retarded and was once confined to a mental hospital in Pennsylvania in 1980; that evidence was planted against Cooper; and of ineffective assistance of counsel. There are also theories that it would have been impossible for one man to kill four people. (we really like that one)
The facts
Cooper, who claims he is innocent, has filed a long series of state and federal court appeals, all unsuccessful, and also obtained DNA testing of evidence at the crime scene, which failed to clear him. The courts that have reviewed the case, however, have expressed no doubt about Cooper's guilt. The state Supreme Court, in a 1991 ruling, called the case against him overwhelming and said he was tied to the crime by evidence that included shoeprints in the house and prison-issued tobacco in the Ryens' car. Defense hopes to prove Cooper's innocence were dashed last year after a new state law allowed convicted felons to request DNA tests of critical evidence. Cooper was one of the first to be tested, and the attorney general's office reported that his DNA was found in a blood spot in the Ryens' house and other evidence near the scene. Attorney General Bill Lockyer said DNA tests indicated a single person was linked to each of the items tested, and indicated Cooper was that person.
Cooper's comments
"Whenever I tell these people that I am innocent of the murders that I was convicted of, it falls on deaf ears. Whenever I tell them that I have been framed by certain members of the San Bernardino County Sheriff's department, I am ignored. Whenever my attorneys tell them about all the evidence we have to show that what I am saying about my innocence and being framed may be true, they are ignored.
Why is this? Could it be because the mainstream news media wants to believe the state? Could it be that the mainstream news media wants to believe that I am guilty? Could it be that, like most Americans, the mainstream news media wants so badly to believe in the "system" that they are willing to turn a blind eye to the truth whenever the truth is something that they don't want to hear or know?"
Our response
Kevin, your claim is that everyone was out to get you because your black and you're poor and oppressed and someone else did it and the authorities planted the evidence to make it look like you did. You also claim that the use of death by lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment.
Well, Kevin we understand that you claim you didn't commit any of these crimes, and that if you did, it was because the aliens in your head told you to do it, and then the bad sheriff pinned it on you instead of the aliens, and that a lawyer wasn't good enough to get you acquitted, but hey, Kevin, just for the hell of it, let's review the case...
Before this crime, you burglarized innocent people. You made up a false identification while on the run. You kidnapped, raped and stabbed a young woman and left her for dead. Oh, and then you stole her car (nice touch). Then, while in prison again, you escaped again and showed up at the Ryen's house that night. After the massacre, your DNA and their blood were found all over the place. Their blood was all over you and your clothes. Your DNA and hair was found all over the bodies.
Ok, the jury will decide now.
OK, we reached a verdict.
We say it is not because you are black or poor or oppressed or you are disturbed or someone is out to get you. Hell, we all are black, white, yellow, green or whatever color, are not rich enough, are all a little disturbed, feel oppressed a lot of the time and most days feel the world ain't on our side. But you don't see us robbing, kidnapping, raping and murdering and then blaming the crimes on our lot in life.
We think you did it.
We think you reneged on your membership in life.
Yep, we say life for you at the Hotel California is over.
Warden, strap him to the gurney.
Use a large bore needle.
Next case.
|
|
|
Post by HH on Feb 9, 2004 15:52:50 GMT -6
Well in reference to Bob
I am afraid you can't really talk about democracy from a high stand point because you currenlty have a president who was 'elected' in very dubious circumstances. I don't actually agree you my government or Europe on most things but I can say I am proud of the fact we can show compassion and forgiveness and are not all out for vengenance. Opinion polls int th UK state that we as a nation are not pro-death penalty... and yes I have seen the very skewed poll on the pro death penalty website.
Most Europeans can criticize the US on human rights because we have all stopped killing juveniles, mentally ill, and learning imparied long ago (just after the war) Your dp states do not even have a uniform policy. We don't have and most actively condemn Camp X-ray. And the British government are now distancing themselves from the kangaroo courts that will most likely put to death not just terrorists but people protecting their homeland from a much bigger aggressor.
At least with the IRA miscarriages we eventually released the people incarcerated and were able to apologise to them (unfortunately not to Guiseppe Conlon who died in confinement). We were brave enough to admit to our mistakes but it is a lot easier to cover over the mistakes when the people are dead. Thank god we didn't have the dp then.
British deserters were shot in the Second War too but as I said we woke from the madness of seeking revenge and ultimate punishment.
I am not a liberal, I am not totalitarian, I beleive in forgiveness and understanding, I think a far worse punishment for somone is to rot in jail for evermore having to face up to the reality of what they have done. I am not siding with the murderers and criminals I beleive they should be punished severly but as Ghandi said 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth leaves the whole world blind and hungry'.
A lot of the people on dr have had awful lives and are not as lucky as myself and the people I know. We should be showing them the way not killing them!
As I said previously I have been a victim of crime and I wouldn't want the perpertrators dead because of me. I would not want to be responsible for anyones death.... try and open your minds.....
As for Kevin Cooper I hope to god he gets a stay, I have read the case and I have also read that three od the pro dp jurors have also appealed for a stay. They are the ones that should really know more about the case than us sat here 'discussing'
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Feb 9, 2004 19:36:45 GMT -6
No I'm afraid I'm just an upstart from the colonies - Canada to be exact. Not an American.
Can't respond to your other arguments right now. Got to go out for the evening.
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Feb 9, 2004 21:55:26 GMT -6
I think I can speak to this issue because I too live under the inherently undemocratic Westminster system. The problem with our system of Government is that it concentrates virtually all power in the hands of the executive. Decisions are taken more in the interests of the governing elite (and of course reflect their values) than they are reflecting the will of ordinary people. Capital punishment is just one of many issues where popular will is not reflected in state policy.
I don't believe that Europeans have any lessons to teach the United States on any subject. America liberated Europe from tyranny and American ideas (and power) have been instrumental in transforming that continent from the war and tyranny that so long dominated it.
For Europeans now to argue that because the Americans executes murderers, they are somehow morally inferior is absurd. My God, the Dutch alone kill thousands every year in their mercy killing machine. No there are no lessons of morality to be taught here.
|
|