Explosions at end of Boston Marathon

[cabiness42]

Right so the US govt can not even say you either plea to death penalty or no deal.

 

Its he pleas guilty with or without a recommendation.

 

Which is why your hypothetical was funny.

 

He could plead guilty to the crime and still argue in the sentencing phase that he doesn't deserve the death penalty. There's no logical reason why he would do it, but it's possible.

 

[Soxbadger]

No they have an obligation to make the best decision given the current circumstances.

 

If they think that more exposure will in the end cause more harm, they can take a plea deal to make sure that it does not happen.

 

The govt doesnt even have to prosecute if it doesnt want. They can do whatever they want, its their case.

 

No where in the law does it say that the US govt MUST prosecute a criminal.

[cabiness42]

It's not about probability of guilt or acquittal, it's about creating a media frenzy with a month-long trial, re-kindling all the horrible emotions that resulted from the attack, creating risk for people wanting to kill this 19-year-old when he is transported to and from the courthouse everyday during said trial, etc.

 

It's still early in the information-gathering process, but I don't see this being anything close to a month-long trial.

[chw42]

i don't know if he is or isn't a citizen, but there's no way this guy is going to simply be deported.

 

He's not. His brother was. So he could get deported although I heavily doubt that.

[Soxbadger]

He's not. His brother was. So he could get deported although I heavily doubt that.

 

No Im 99% sure the younger brother is the US citizen.

 

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/04/19/bombi...-us-citizenship

[cabiness42]

No they have an obligation to make the best decision given the current circumstances.

 

If they think that more exposure will in the end cause more harm, they can take a plea deal to make sure that it does not happen.

 

The govt doesnt even have to prosecute if it doesnt want. They can do whatever they want, its their case.

 

No where in the law does it say that the US govt MUST prosecute a criminal.

 

At this point, I don't see a major downside to having a trial. I think people have watched too many legal dramas.

 

The government has an obligation to not only these victims but future victims of other crimes because sentences to past similar crimes are used by judges in future sentencing procedures.

 

[chw42]

No Im 99% sure the younger brother is the US citizen.

 

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/04/19/bombi...-us-citizenship

 

I had read that one of them was a citizen before, NVM.

[Soxbadger]

At this point, I don't see a major downside to having a trial. I think people have watched too many legal dramas.

 

The government has an obligation to not only these victims but future victims of other crimes because sentences to past similar crimes are used by judges in future sentencing procedures.

 

Right the govt has to protect its people. And you cant have terrorist propaganda that says "Even if you surrender they will kill you, so you should suicide bomb, you should never surrender."

 

We want them to surrender peacefully, we have to give some sort of incentive to that.

 

We need to be able to tell terrorists "If you turn yourselves in, it will be better than killing yourself and others."

[cabiness42]

Right the govt has to protect its people. And you cant have terrorist propaganda that says "Even if you surrender they will kill you, so you should suicide bomb, you should never surrender."

 

We want them to surrender peacefully, we have to give some sort of incentive to that.

 

We need to be able to tell terrorists "If you turn yourselves in, it will be better than killing yourself and others."

 

Your incentive to surrender is that you get a trial. If you don't surrender you get killed on the spot.

 

But you've been arguing that life in prison is more punishment then the death penalty, so without the death penalty shouldn't the bad guys have LESS incentive to surrender?

[maggsmaggs]

It's still early in the information-gathering process, but I don't see this being anything close to a month-long trial.

It would be an extremely long trial. Simple murder trials can take multiple weeks; here, you have multiple crime scenes, multiple charges, etc. Not to mention how long jury selection would take, which be a long ass process.

Edited April 20, 2013 by maggsmaggs

[Soxbadger]

Your incentive to surrender is that you get a trial. If you don't surrender you get killed on the spot.

 

But you've been arguing that life in prison is more punishment then the death penalty, so without the death penalty shouldn't the bad guys have LESS incentive to surrender?

 

No because if they are considering surrender they are implicitly valuing life over death.

 

Many terrorists dont care about living, so they are willing to die regardless.

 

 

 

 

[StrangeSox]

f*** the barbaric death penalty

[Y2HH]

I may be a sheep that got lost, but I actually hope Hell exists so they can both burn there for f***ing eternity. Asshole f***face coward pieces of s***.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

f*** the barbaric death penalty

 

I'd argue keeping a 19 year old in a federal max prison, most likely 23 hours a day in a jail cell, for the next 50-60 years is MORE barbaric.

 

That said, f*** this guy. Hang him in a public square. He's not worth the cost of keeping alive in jail for the rest of his life.

[StrangeSox]

I'd argue keeping a 19 year old in a federal max prison, most likely 23 hours a day in a jail cell, for the next 50-60 years is MORE barbaric.

 

That said, f*** this guy. Hang him in a public square. He's not worth the cost of keeping alive in jail for the rest of his life.

Yeah that's also barbaric.

[Jenksismyhero]

Yeah that's also barbaric.

 

But you know whats even MORE barbaric? Setting off bombs in a crowd and mutilating/killing hundreds of innocent people, and then assassinating an innocent cop.

[StrangeSox]

But you know whats even MORE barbaric? Setting off bombs in a crowd and mutilating/killing hundreds of innocent people, and then assassinating an innocent cop.

Yep! I prefer the moral high ground, though. Having the state kill this person on my behalf doesn't actually do anything for me. Nor does subjecting him to 60 years of solitary.

[Jake]

 

Right the govt has to protect its people. And you cant have terrorist propaganda that says "Even if you surrender they will kill you, so you should suicide bomb, you should never surrender."

 

We want them to surrender peacefully, we have to give some sort of incentive to that.

 

We need to be able to tell terrorists "If you turn yourselves in, it will be better than killing yourself and others."

 

 

These moments are when we should let our justice system WORK. Show the world that we handle things civilly, methodically, and we don't let our emotions cause the rules to change. The rules outlaw blowing people up and we don't need to bend them to enforce them.

[southsideirish71]

Yep! I prefer the moral high ground, though. Having the state kill this person on my behalf doesn't actually do anything for me. Nor does subjecting him to 60 years of solitary.

 

I say put him in general population. I see romance in his future.

[LittleHurt05]

From the evidence I have seen, it seems like the older brother was the brains & motive behind the operation and he convinced his little brother to join the cause.

[Jake]

From the evidence I have seen, it seems like the older brother was the brains & motive behind the operation and he convinced his little brother to join the cause.

 

There's very little evidence, but from what we have that seems likely.

[Reddy]

I say put him in general population. I see romance in his future.

 

a friend of mine suggested putting him in a yankee jersey in the middle of fenway park.

[IlliniKrush]

Maximum penalty is life sentence solitary confinement.

 

Its objectively provable that solitary confinement is terrible.

 

There is a possibility that dieing is great. I dont want to take that risk.

LOL dying is great?

 

I don't think life in hell is great.

 

Right the govt has to protect its people. And you cant have terrorist propaganda that says "Even if you surrender they will kill you, so you should suicide bomb, you should never surrender."

 

We want them to surrender peacefully, we have to give some sort of incentive to that.

 

We need to be able to tell terrorists "If you turn yourselves in, it will be better than killing yourself and others."

We're not a country that should bargain with terrorists. You're already dealing with crazy people as it is. You get a justice system to play it out if you surrender.

 

You can just as easily argue that the death penalty could help be a bigger deterrent beforehand. Don't want to die? OK, don't kill innocent people.

 

Anyway, he doesn't deserve to take another breath. It's your opinion that solidarity is worse, many people don't share that opinion with you.

[MexSoxFan#1]

lol, with every post this guy is really out to convinve the world just what a POS he is.

[Milkman delivers]

Right the govt has to protect its people. And you cant have terrorist propaganda that says "Even if you surrender they will kill you, so you should suicide bomb, you should never surrender."

 

We want them to surrender peacefully, we have to give some sort of incentive to that.

 

We need to be able to tell terrorists "If you turn yourselves in, it will be better than killing yourself and others."

 

But you just said that life imprisonment is a death sentence and worse than death row. So, what's the difference?