Ok Arnold, don't wuss out.

[Steff]

I agree with what you're saying about trying to help out these communities economically.  Maybe if the money we wasted on the failure that is the welfare state in this country had been better spent we wouldn't have these problems.

 

 

The person that figures this out will truly be worthy of the NPP.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Yea.. like child molesting Priests.

 

 

Dont even get me started on those guys. A lot of these clowns should be right next to Tookie.

[Steff]

Dont even get me started on those guys.  A lot of these clowns should be right next to Tookie.

 

 

 

You meant to say all...

[southsideirish71]

Okay I can play along with those who want the death penalty abolished now that we are housing said psychopathic killer on the goverment dime for the next 30-50 years what about the following. Lets play make believe, lets eliminate the death penalty. Woosh, its gone. Now what.

 

Can we eliminate their phone privilieges. It seems that some of the killers in illinois seem to get judges/relatives of law enforcement and specifically vicitims familys personal information and like to make phone calls. And yes they do make phone calls and mess with the people, because some of them get a kick out of torturing the victims families and blame the law enforcement for putting them there.

 

Can we eliminate their mail or screen it for content. I did love the "Execute the Law, Not the people Free John Wayne Gacy" letterhead we received monthly from John when he would send letters to certain law enforcement agencies in cook county. It was touching, but a waste of my time.

 

Can we elminate the sale for profit of "X the serial killers life story".

 

Do they really need full cable TV? I mean I have to pay for it.

 

Do they need to get married? Just because a Jerry Springer show contestant wants to be on "So I married a serial killer" do we need to make it happen.

 

Do they need internet access?

 

Now obviously the criminal(sorry thats judgemental of me(guest of the state)) cannot be in solitare because that is torture. So lets put him back into general popluation. And our guest of the state has nothing to worry about, he cannot be killed by the government. So now in general population how do we protect the other "guests of the state". Oddly I think he may be violent and in some cases horny.

 

Can all states make sure that these people cannot vote. You can murder someone and end their voting right, but you can vote yourself.

 

The answer to these and more most likely from the liberal side is no. Of course not, these are rights. And some people think that murders/rapists/pedophiles can be rehabilitated. That it was something wrong in their upbringing, maybe johnny didnt get the Nintendo 64 and feels bad about it. A few hours in the doctors chair and some meds and maybe Ted Bundy doesnt murder brunettes anymore. And for all those who really believe that I would suggest that you volunteer your neighborhood for a possible location where the rehabilitated move to. Oddly when they release pedophiles they pretty much start right up again.

 

I do find it ironic that the cry of socials worker magazines out for the oppressed poor man who is about to be executed because he had a bad childhood and didnt have the materialistic items that you and I had forget that in most Socialist based governments Mr. Tookie would of been taken out after his trial and shot to death by a firing squad.

[juddling]

Occassionally the state just misses and executes an innocent person.

 

 

occasionally....that is correct.....but in this particular case...i think they got it right. even after all the appeals he's still headed towards death. I for one have faith that our justice system got this one right. Just curious, since i knew someone would bring up this argument...how many people have been excuted in the US in the last 50 years and how many times has facts turned up afterwards to prove innocence??? you make it sound like they are excuting innocent people all the time. I'm not saying it doesn't happen but i doubt the CSI teams across the country are getting innocent people out of jail on a weekly basis.

 

No justice system is perfect..(well...one is but you have to believe in god to believe that) but i feel ours is about as perfect as one can be and we have to believe it works. (unless you're named O.J.)

[LowerCaseRepublican]

occasionally....that is correct.....but in this particular case...i think they got it right. even after all the appeals he's still headed towards death.  I for one have faith that our justice system got this one right.  Just curious, since i knew someone would bring up this argument...how many people have been excuted in the US in the last 50 years and how many times has facts turned up afterwards to prove innocence???  you make it sound like they are excuting innocent people all the time.  I'm not saying it doesn't happen but i doubt the CSI teams across the country are getting innocent people out of jail on a weekly basis.

 

No justice system is perfect..(well...one is but you have to believe in god to believe that) but i feel ours is about as perfect as one can be and we have to believe it works. (unless you're named O.J.)

122 since 1973 -- which is really 122 too many.

 

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=6&did=110

 

Their main page has exonerations by state, year and race. I can no longer believe it works after McKlesky v. Kemp -- A study of death sentences in Philadelphia found that African American defendents were almost FOUR times more likely to receive the death penalty than were people of other ethnic origins who committed similar crimes.

 

Over 80% of people executed since 1976 were convicted of killing white victims, although people of color make up more than half of all homicide victims in the US.

 

A defendant who can afford his or her own attorney is much less likely to be sentenced to die. 95% of all people sentenced to death in the US could not afford their own attorney.

 

In 1987, McCleskey v. Kemp, a Supreme Court case brought forth the famous Baldus study that revealed facts that proved the following: "(1) defendants charged with killing white victims in GA are 4.3 times as likely to be sentenced to death as defendants charged with killing blacks; (2) 6 of every 11 defendants convicted of killing a white person would not have received the death penalty if their victim had been black; and (3) cases involving black defendants and white victims are more likely to result in a death sentence than cases featuring any other racial combination of defendant and victim. This case was defeated by a 5-4 vote given the reason by Justice Powell: "McCleskey's claim, taken to its logical conclusion, throws into serious question the principles that underlie our entire criminal justice system."

 

Just google the Baldus study and you'll get the details about how he came to his conclusions.

 

As long as we have a system that is highly arbitrary in who receives it along with a blatant race/class based bias, there should be no faith in a system that can take a life, especially under these dubious circumstances. I'd sit here and type more but just look around http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=1328 for info.

 

And I forgot: "The idea that murder victims' families are best served by continuing the cycle of violence is something that I consider to be not only a lie, but criminally negligent. You lie to victims' families when you tell them they're going to receive closure if they participate in the process and witness the execution of a human being. I've witnessed the execution of a human being. This is not an abstract for me. I promise you, it isn't going to heal anybody. I'll never recover from it. It's incredibly irresponsible to allow victims' family members to witness executions."

--Steve Earle

[BHAMBARONS]

I wonder how many convictions since 1990 when the courts ruled that DNA evidence could be used in criminal trials. As a member of the criminal justice system I am tired of hearing this rid the death penalty because of the possibility of innocence when people could careless about the people that serve life in prison who could be innocent. It is almost like it is ok for an innocent person to spend life in prison but when an innocent person is sent to death row it makes the whole system flawed.

Edited December 12, 2005 by BHAMBARONS

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

122 since 1973 -- which is really 122 too many.

 

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=6&did=110

 

Their main page has exonerations by state, year and race.  I can no longer believe it works after McKlesky v. Kemp -- A study of death sentences in Philadelphia found that African American defendents were almost FOUR times more likely to receive the death penalty than were people of other ethnic origins who committed similar crimes.

 

Over 80% of people executed since 1976 were convicted of killing white victims, although people of color make up more than half of all homicide victims in the US.

 

A defendant who can afford his or her own attorney is much less likely to be sentenced to die. 95% of all people sentenced to death in the US could not afford their own attorney.

 

In 1987, McCleskey v. Kemp, a Supreme Court case brought forth the famous Baldus study that revealed facts that proved the following: "(1) defendants charged with killing white victims in GA are 4.3 times as likely to be sentenced to death as defendants charged with killing blacks; (2) 6 of every 11 defendants convicted of killing a white person would not have received the death penalty if their victim had been black; and (3) cases involving black defendants and white victims are more likely to result in a death sentence than cases featuring any other racial combination of defendant and victim.  This case was defeated by a 5-4 vote given the reason by Justice Powell: "McCleskey's claim, taken to its logical conclusion, throws into serious question the principles that underlie our entire criminal justice system."

 

Just google the Baldus study and you'll get the details about how he came to his conclusions.

 

As long as we have a system that is highly arbitrary in who receives it along with a blatant race/class based bias, there should be no faith in a system that can take a life, especially under these dubious circumstances.  I'd sit here and type more but just look around http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=1328 for info.

 

And I forgot: "The idea that murder victims' families are best served by continuing the cycle of violence is something that I consider to be not only a lie, but criminally negligent. You lie to victims' families when you tell them they're going to receive closure if they participate in the process and witness the execution of a human being. I've witnessed the execution of a human being. This is not an abstract for me. I promise you, it isn't going to heal anybody. I'll never recover from it. It's incredibly irresponsible to allow victims' family members to witness executions."

--Steve Earle

 

 

Black people do get sentenced to death more often than whites. That much is obvious and is why I have been saying over and over again that the the death penalty needs to be imposed in a uniform manner.

 

Murder 1 = Death

Rape = Death

 

No class distinction, no racial distinction, none if it. You get convicted of certain crimes, you die.

[mr_genius]

I am tired of hearing this rid the death penalty because of the possibility of innocence when people could careless about the people that serve life in prison who could be innocent. It is almost like it is ok for an innocent person to spend life in prison but when an innocent person is sent to death row it makes the whole system flawed.

 

 

I think the point they are trying to make is this: if someone is executed and later found innocent there is nothing that can be done for that person. If someone is sent to life in prison and later found to be innocent (assuming they are still alive) they can be freed and given compensation.

[juddling]

122 since 1973 -- which is really 122 too many.

 

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=6&did=110

 

Their main page has exonerations by state, year and race.  I can no longer believe it works after McKlesky v. Kemp -- A study of death sentences in Philadelphia found that African American defendents were almost FOUR times more likely to receive the death penalty than were people of other ethnic origins who committed similar crimes.

 

Over 80% of people executed since 1976 were convicted of killing white victims, although people of color make up more than half of all homicide victims in the US.

 

A defendant who can afford his or her own attorney is much less likely to be sentenced to die. 95% of all people sentenced to death in the US could not afford their own attorney.

 

In 1987, McCleskey v. Kemp, a Supreme Court case brought forth the famous Baldus study that revealed facts that proved the following: "(1) defendants charged with killing white victims in GA are 4.3 times as likely to be sentenced to death as defendants charged with killing blacks; (2) 6 of every 11 defendants convicted of killing a white person would not have received the death penalty if their victim had been black; and (3) cases involving black defendants and white victims are more likely to result in a death sentence than cases featuring any other racial combination of defendant and victim.  This case was defeated by a 5-4 vote given the reason by Justice Powell: "McCleskey's claim, taken to its logical conclusion, throws into serious question the principles that underlie our entire criminal justice system."

 

Just google the Baldus study and you'll get the details about how he came to his conclusions.

 

As long as we have a system that is highly arbitrary in who receives it along with a blatant race/class based bias, there should be no faith in a system that can take a life, especially under these dubious circumstances.  I'd sit here and type more but just look around http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=1328 for info.

 

And I forgot: "The idea that murder victims' families are best served by continuing the cycle of violence is something that I consider to be not only a lie, but criminally negligent. You lie to victims' families when you tell them they're going to receive closure if they participate in the process and witness the execution of a human being. I've witnessed the execution of a human being. This is not an abstract for me. I promise you, it isn't going to heal anybody. I'll never recover from it. It's incredibly irresponsible to allow victims' family members to witness executions."

--Steve Earle

 

 

I'm not sure who Steve Earle is (unless it's the country singer of the early 80's) but i have seen interviews with people who say witnessing an execution of a murderer of a loved one DOES give them closure. Closure is different to each of us so i don't think he or any of us can say what gives us closure.

[Steff]

Just curious, since i knew someone would bring up this argument...how many people have been excuted in the US in the last 50 years and how many times has facts turned up afterwards to prove innocence???  you make it sound like they are excuting innocent people all the time.  I'm not saying it doesn't happen but i doubt the CSI teams across the country are getting innocent people out of jail on a weekly basis.

 

 

This Georgia man is the 164th person to be freed from prison.

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10384331/from/RS.4/

 

DNA tests clear Georgia inmate of rape charges

Judge frees him after nearly 25 years in prison spent denying his guilt

 

Updated: 5:03 p.m. ET Dec. 8, 2005

ATLANTA - A judge Thursday freed an inmate whose claims of innocence in a kidnapping and rape went unheeded for nearly a quarter of a century, until DNA evidence proved him right.

 

At the end of the 15-minute hearing where Robert Clark was finally granted his freedom, his attorney Peter Neufeld patted him on the back and said, “You’re free to go, fella.”

 

A smiling Clark hugged and kissed family members, repeatedly saying, “I told you. I told you.”

 

Clark’s mother died and his children grew up and had families of their own while he sat in prison for a 1981 attack on an Atlanta woman. His lawyers said DNA from another man matches not only that rape, but two others that were committed later.

 

“This is a truly horrific case,” said Vanessa Potkin, an attorney for the Innocence Project, a legal clinic co-directed by Neufeld. “While Robert Clark was wrongfully convicted, it appears the true perpetrator of this crime was out there harming women and children.”

 

Mistaken identity

Clark, 45, was convicted and sentenced to life plus 20 years after a woman identified him as the man who carjacked her at gunpoint from outside an Atlanta Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant and raped her repeatedly.

 

But recent DNA tests showed that Clark did not commit the crime.

 

Tests against state and federal DNA databases of convicts matched samples from the rape to Clark’s friend Floyd Antonio “Tony” Arnold. Cobb County prosecutors, who originally convicted Clark, are looking into whether to seek charges against Arnold, spokeswoman Kathy Watkins said.

 

Arnold had convictions for sodomy and illegal gun possession when the rape took place. He is in prison for cruelty to children and is scheduled to be released Jan. 31.

 

A search by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation revealed that Arnold’s DNA matched two other unsolved Atlanta area rape cases in 2003, Potkin said. Arnold has not been charged with either crime.

 

Clark became the 164th person in the nation and the fifth in Georgia to be freed through post-conviction DNA testing, according to Potkin.

 

Neufeld said an Atlanta law firm has volunteered to look into financial compensation for Clark. Earlier this year, the Georgia Legislature approved $1 million for Clarence Harrison, who spent nearly 18 years in prison before DNA evidence cleared him of rape.

 

A family Christmas

Clark’s son, Rodrickus, said he and other family members looked forward to celebrating his father’s freedom.

 

“He always told me he was innocent. I believed in what he said,” he said. “We can’t make up for lost time. I guess we’ve just got to go on. We want to go fishing together, take a nice fishing trip.”

 

Clark said he is not sure what his long-term plans are, but he is looking forward to his first family Christmas in years.

 

“I won’t be able to give them any gifts or anything, but I don’t think they’re worried about that,” he said. “They just want to have me home.”

[juddling]

Back on to Tookie's case...he continued to run his gang for 7 years while behind bars....no deterrent there. If he's in the ground....guess what.....he isn't running a thing except a food bar for the worms.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Back on to Tookie's case...he continued to run his gang for 7 years while behind bars....no deterrent there.  If he's in the ground....guess what.....he isn't running a thing except a food bar for the worms.

 

 

[SoCalSouthSider59]

Murder 1 = Death

Rape = Death

 

No class distinction,  no racial distinction, none if it.  You get convicted of certain crimes, you die.

 

My sentiments exactly, and let's add child molestation to the death penalty as well, the lowest and most disgusting kind of crime that can be committed.........

 

Murder 1 = Death row

Rape = Death row

Child molestation = Death row

 

[sec159row2]

found an interesting article on this, by none other than Mary Mitchell... whom I normally totally disagree with... some of you may remember she was beat up with her son outside Wrigley Field.... she has some interesting points... "And if he is innocent, why haven't his lawyers been successful in proving his innocence? Why didn't the monied people who are now rallying to this cause put their wealth together to mount a Rubin "Hurricane" Carter-type defense?" and "We would be appalled if a civil rights leader argued that ex-Klansman Robert Chambliss had redeemed himself for his role in the 1963 Birmingham church bombing that killed four black girls -- even if Chambliss wrote a ton of children's books and became a Sunday school teacher.

 

We would be just as outraged if it was argued that Byron de la Beckwith had redeemed himself for the 1963 murder of Mississippi civil rights leader Medgar Evers."

 

http://www.suntimes.com/output/mitchell/cst-nws-mitch08.html

 

Mary even goes so far to say this man caused more harm to black families than racial injustice...

 

 

and another note... did "tookie" even write those children's books?

[RockRaines]

Can someone please explain to me how celebs can justify keeping this guy from the death penalty? The guys has contributed and personally killed several people in his life, did those celebs ask the parents and relatives of the victims if it was ok with them if he lived? I dont understand getting behind a killer just because he may have reformed himself a bit. Great, hes better now, I guess we can go ahead and forget about the lives that he took... WTF is wrong with people?

[Goober]

Smart world we live in. The way to stop violence and killing is... more violence and killing. hmmmm.

 

Why do we kill people who have killed others? Guy got what is coming to him? It will make the victim's family happier? It will not, their loved one is still gone. Nothing can change that, and not more killing for sure. Quick, what is the best way to respond to violence? I guess we should believe it is violence. That is an awful precedent to set, that violence solves problems. Revenge is the only reason people want the killer dead. Oh man, if people as a whole start giving into their revengeful feelings, watch out. Everyone has wanted to get revenge, but to say in death row cases that revenge is all right is quite mindless. Do we really want the eye for an eye rule? You steal a loaf of bread from me, I steal bread or perhaps even something else from you. Pretty soon it would become you hurt me, I kill you. It goes downhill from there.

 

You put a man behind bars for the rest of his life, he will regret what he did. He sees the same bars day in and day out and you are damn right he will realize that what he chose to do earlier took away his freedom. Now, isn't that what life is about? Learning. You kill that man, he will have learned nothing. Only possible thing he could have learned was that killing others makes others kill you. That is not right. He should instead be learning that life and freedom is precious, priceless. When he is in jail, he has nothing to do but think about what he has done. He will undoubtedly learn he has done wrong. What is on his mind when he is dead? The answer is nothing. What is on his mind when he is in jail every single day for the rest of his life? What he has done. That is a far worse punishment than anything else is.

 

What gives the right to the government or anybody that they decide who should live and die? Nobody has the right to force his or her way on another person. The killer forced himself on the victims. Nevertheless, the government ends up doing the same and forces itself on the killer. Way to stoop down to his level. I commend you.

[Balta1701]

Can someone please explain to me how celebs can justify keeping this guy from the death penalty?  The guys has contributed and personally killed several people in his life, did those celebs ask the parents and relatives of the victims if it was ok with them if he lived?  I dont understand getting behind a killer just because he may have reformed himself a bit.  Great, hes better now, I guess we can go ahead and forget about the lives that he took... WTF is wrong with people?

If you're opposed to the death penalty on principle, then you think this guy should not get the death penalty...and those books he wrote are just another argument you can make as to why the Death Penalty is inappropriatel

[RockRaines]

Smart world we live in. The way to stop violence and killing is... more violence and killing. hmmmm.

 

Why do we kill people who have killed others? Guy got what is coming to him? It will make the victim's family happier? It will not, their loved one is still gone. Nothing can change that, and not more killing for sure. Quick, what is the best way to respond to violence? I guess we should believe it is violence. That is an awful precedent to set, that violence solves problems. Revenge is the only reason people want the killer dead. Oh man, if people as a whole start giving into their revengeful feelings, watch out. Everyone has wanted to get revenge, but to say in death row cases that revenge is all right is quite mindless. Do we really want the eye for an eye rule? You steal a loaf of bread from me, I steal bread or perhaps even something else from you. Pretty soon it would become you hurt me, I kill you. It goes downhill from there.

 

You put a man behind bars for the rest of his life, he will regret what he did. He sees the same bars day in and day out and you are damn right he will realize that what he chose to do earlier took away his freedom. Now, isn't that what life is about? Learning. You kill that man, he will have learned nothing. Only possible thing he could have learned was that killing others makes others kill you. That is not right. He should instead be learning that life and freedom is precious, priceless. When he is in jail, he has nothing to do but think about what he has done. He will undoubtedly learn he has done wrong. What is on his mind when he is dead? The answer is nothing. What is on his mind when he is in jail every single day for the rest of his life? What he has done. That is a far worse punishment than anything else is.

 

What gives the right to the government or anybody that they decide who should live and die? Nobody has the right to force his or her way on another person. The killer forced himself on the victims. Nevertheless, the government ends up doing the same and forces itself on the killer. Way to stoop down to his level. I commend you.

What is the purpose of "making him learn his lesson"? He will be in jail for the rest of his life, learning not to kill. Well thank god we have inprisoned a killer so he can sit in jail and learn his lesson so that when he dies in jail eventually, he can know that at least what he has done was wrong. So we give him a longer time until we kill him, but at least, maybe, he gets to think about it?

 

Please. Do you think Dahmer would have really thought about it, Gacy, etc. Come on. Have you even been to prison? Have you seen where lifers live? Some prisons even let the inmate have a nice TV in their cell to catch up on current events. How nice. When someone takes another innocent person's life, do you really think they deserve to sit around for the next 60 years, and think about it? Some of these guys have been in prision multiple times, and have more friends inside than out, so they have a chance to kill someone, whats the worst thing that can happen? They get to go back to a place they have been before, and stay there longer? Wow, what a deterrent. I for one am glad that we can use our tax money to make these killers "think about it" for the next 60 years, because they deserve that much, I mean how bad is killing a person anyway?

[Rex Kickass]

The truth is, what he did or didn't do is immaterial as far as I'm concerned. The death penalty is wrong. Put him away for life. Take away his cable tv, deny him communication privileges, fine. (Right to vote is a different issue entirely btw.) But no man has the right to kill another knowingly and in cold blood. It doesn't matter what that person did. It's just not right.

 

To answer what Nuke said earlier, it is absolutely wrong of the Christian/Catholic Church's practice of war against the nonbelievers. If the Church hadn't at some point realized it, they'd still be fighting.

 

There are moral absolutes in life. Killing someone is at the top of no-nos for me. Especially in cold blood. Especially with intent.

 

You can sit there and insult this person for being a horrible human being. For having a stupid nick name. For being a pox on his society and the world at large. But you don't have the right to take his life away. Only one being has that right, and last time I saw you weren't that being.

[Balta1701]

You can sit there and insult this person for being a horrible human being. For having a stupid nick name. For being a pox on his society and the world at large. But you don't have the right to take his life away. Only one being has that right, and last time I saw you weren't that being.

I am not a believer in that being, but I know at least a little about religion, so I must ask...doesn't the Bible in fact say that only God has the right to judge a person, not that only God has the right to take a life? The Bible is filled with people taking lives in a form that God may very well have considered Just.

[jasonxctf]

does he serve society more alive or dead? no doubt this guy did some horrific things in his past, but if he can help keep these things from happening to others in the future, then I say we leave him in a cell for life.

[RockRaines]

does he serve society more alive or dead? no doubt this guy did some horrific things in his past, but if he can help keep these things from happening to others in the future, then I say we leave him in a cell for life.

So his years of "serving society" in prison make up for taking out SEVERAL lives that could've served society in many positive ways. Maybe he should have thought about the consequences of his actions before he murdered several people. Apparently he places no value on life, so it wouldnt be much of a problem when the gov't takes his life. Good riddance to an evil person.

[SoCalSouthSider59]

So his years of "serving society" in prison make up for taking out SEVERAL lives that could've served society in many positive ways.  Maybe he should have thought about the consequences of his actions before he murdered several people.  Apparently he places no value on life, so it wouldnt be much of a problem when the gov't takes his life.  Good riddance to an evil person.

 

 

[sec159row2]

CLEMENCY DENIED!!!!