Texsox Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/05/18/lionel.tate.ap/index.html FORT LAUDERDALE, Florida (AP) -- Lionel Tate, the teenager who got a second chance after he beat and stomped a 6-year-old girl to death, was sent back to prison for 30 years Thursday for gun possession. "In plain English, you've run out of chances. You do not get any more," Circuit Judge Joel T. Lazarus told Tate, who smirked as he was led off to jail in shackles. Tate, now 19, was convicted of beating Tiffany Eunick to death in 1999, when he was 12, claiming he accidentally killed the girl while imitating pro wrestling moves he had seen on television. He became the youngest person in modern U.S. history to receive a life sentence. His murder conviction was overturned in 2004 by an appeals court that said it was not clear Tate understood the charges. He was freed under a deal in which he pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and was sentenced to 10 years' probation. At 19 this guy is already a waste of time for anyone, I hope he never takes a breath as a free man. He was given the world's biggest mulligan, and f***ed up again and again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 QUOTE(Texsox @ May 18, 2006 -> 02:10 PM) http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/05/18/lionel.tate.ap/index.html At 19 this guy is already a waste of time for anyone, I hope he never takes a breath as a free man. He was given the world's biggest mulligan, and f***ed up again and again. Another example of our soft-ass "justice" system coddling criminals. This is the result when you go soft on criminals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 Soft? The kid was 12 when this murder happened. There is some debate about his mental competency to begin with - and what's more he violated his probation and he's being put away for 30 years.... I don't see what's soft here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ May 18, 2006 -> 07:37 PM) Soft? The kid was 12 when this murder happened. There is some debate about his mental competency to begin with - and what's more he violated his probation and he's being put away for 30 years.... I don't see what's soft here. Soft was letting this s***bag loose. I dont care if the kid is bats*** crazy, you have to incarcerate someone who does something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minors Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 Soft? The kid was 12 when this murder happened. There is some debate about his mental competency to begin with - and what's more he violated his probation and he's being put away for 30 years.... I don't see what's soft here. What was soft was giving a cold blooded killer 10 years probation, now he has graduated to gun possession it only would have been a matter of time before he killed again luckily he gets put where he belongs in prison with all the other thugs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 Sorry, I have a hard time thinking anyone who's 12 is really doing something "in cold blood." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ May 19, 2006 -> 08:32 AM) Sorry, I have a hard time thinking anyone who's 12 is really doing something "in cold blood." Man, what world are you living in? Of course there are evil, sadistic, murdering 12 year olds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ May 19, 2006 -> 01:32 PM) Sorry, I have a hard time thinking anyone who's 12 is really doing something "in cold blood." At my previous town of residence, I saw a 12 year old kid walk up to another 12 year old kid and say "I don't like you, honkey" and then proceed to start hitting the kid even though myself and 2 other adults were within earshot. The other 2 adults were black, just like the kid who did the beating, and although they, along with myself, stopped this cold blooded attack, they competely ignored the racial comments made just before the attack. When we talked to the police, they didn't mention that little tidbit, but I did. That part, however, is a different topic. I believe that this 12 year old in cold blood, went up and started beating this other 12 year old. He knew what he was doing, and he didn't seem sorry for it, even when the police took him away with his momma crying at the top of her lungs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 Sorry for my optimism, but I think a 12 year old is actually reformable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ May 19, 2006 -> 04:46 PM) Sorry for my optimism, but I think a 12 year old is actually reformable. Yeah. We all saw how "reformable" this guy was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ May 18, 2006 -> 07:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Soft? The kid was 12 when this murder happened. There is some debate about his mental competency to begin with - and what's more he violated his probation and he's being put away for 30 years.... I don't see what's soft here. As a big wrestling fan at the time, it was total bulls*** using the "wrestling moves" excuse. I read the description of what he did, and he simply beat the f*** out of her. Didn't this piece of s*** also hold up a pizza man? :headshake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 If it makes anybody feel better, he'll likely be paroled when the jail runs out of room because we've got so many non-violent possession drug offenders locked up in mandatory minimum sentences clogging the jails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ May 21, 2006 -> 10:50 PM) If it makes anybody feel better, he'll likely be paroled when the jail runs out of room because we've got so many non-violent possession drug offenders locked up in mandatory minimum sentences clogging the jails. Sure, change the topic. Typical. This is about a dumbass given a second chance, and screwing it up. Not potheads and some politicians misguided attempt at prosecuting the 'war on drugs'. Different topic altogether, and one which you and I may actually agree on, at least a little bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted May 22, 2006 Share Posted May 22, 2006 QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ May 21, 2006 -> 06:42 PM) Sure, change the topic. Typical. This is about a dumbass given a second chance, and screwing it up. Not potheads and some politicians misguided attempt at prosecuting the 'war on drugs'. Different topic altogether, and one which you and I may actually agree on, at least a little bit. No, I concede the fact that Lionel Tate deserves to be locked up for a long time for his multiple crimes. However, the reality is that in many states, violent offenders (rapists, murderers, etc.) are being let out early on paroles simply because the jails lack room to house them since they are forced by the Feds to have non-violent posession drug offenders in jail for long mandatory minimum sentences. That's where I was going with this. The kid had multiple chances from f***ing up early to the holdup of the pizza guy a few years ago to this new one. It scares me that America's 'war on drugs' may possibly mean a release of this guy while he is still a danger to society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted May 22, 2006 Share Posted May 22, 2006 QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ May 21, 2006 -> 08:03 PM) No, I concede the fact that Lionel Tate deserves to be locked up for a long time for his multiple crimes. However, the reality is that in many states, violent offenders (rapists, murderers, etc.) are being let out early on paroles simply because the jails lack room to house them since they are forced by the Feds to have non-violent posession drug offenders in jail for long mandatory minimum sentences. That's where I was going with this. The kid had multiple chances from f***ing up early to the holdup of the pizza guy a few years ago to this new one. It scares me that America's 'war on drugs' may possibly mean a release of this guy while he is still a danger to society. I do agree with you somewhat. When it comes to dealing with illegal narcotics, I think we'd be better served going hard after the people doing the selling. The jackass who gets busted for simple possession ( at least the 1st time ) should get a hefty fine and some community service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted May 22, 2006 Share Posted May 22, 2006 QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ May 21, 2006 -> 05:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> If it makes anybody feel better, he'll likely be paroled when the jail runs out of room because we've got so many non-violent possession drug offenders locked up in mandatory minimum sentences clogging the jails. But then again, how much more of that space is being "clogged" by serial killers who could be executed? (Something you are against.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted May 22, 2006 Share Posted May 22, 2006 QUOTE(santo=dorf @ May 21, 2006 -> 08:41 PM) But then again, how much more of that space is being "clogged" by serial killers who could be executed? (Something you are against.) Incarcerate violent criminals because it is cheaper to incarcerate than it is to execute. That is what prisons are for. Housing non-violent drug offenders in there for mere possession does not curb those that use drugs. Nobody comes out of prison wanting to do less drugs. There are hundreds of thousands more non-violent drug offenders in prisons than there are hardcore serial killers. It is much cheaper to run programs for addiction and have relatively cheap, regulated drugs than it is to execute people. Plus, the state does not have the right to take a life. But here I am waxing philosophical about that. Judge James P. Gray wrote a really interesting read "Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed and What We Can Do About It: A Judicial Indictment of the War on Drugs". Really discusses that these mandatory minimums have to go if we're serious about curbing drug use in this country because it is not effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts