Sad story in Oak Lawn...

[greg775]

Rights of the victims?

 

The victims are dead, no amount of speedy trial is going to fix that. No amount of lynchings, burnings, torture is going to bring them back.

 

I happen to think victims have a lot of rights. Family members are victims too.

I had a best friend brutally murdered by a moron many years ago. Her case was never brought to trial because the murderer was given life for some other murders and they didn't see a need to try him for her case since he got life. He's still rotting in jail. But I like to believe her mom, her dad, her sister, me and those who knew her were also victims.

Just because she's gone doesn't mean she doesn't have the right to have her murderer convicted and burned.

[Soxbadger]

In a perfect world, how should her case be handled in your opinion? Let's say she truly is guilty (which she damn well appears to be 100 percent). Give me a date when she will be sentenced and when in a truly caring society she SHOULD be sentenced. Thank u.

 

How should it go?

 

She should get an attorney, either private or state. The attorney should do everything in their power to either a) prove her innocent or b) work the best deal possible for her prior to trial. If for some reason a deal can not be worked it should go to trial and then a judgment should be rendered.

 

How long should it take?

 

I dont know, depends on the facts. A case like this, I cant imagine that there is need for a ton of discovery (written or oral), but who knows, Im not trying the case.

 

If we are a "truly caring" society, then we shouldnt care what date she is sentenced. We should care that she had every opportunity to defend her actions and then we still found her guilty.

 

Thats what I care about. The prosecution already has the wealth and power of the state behind it, it doesnt need anymore advantage.

[StrangeSox]

A friend of a friend waited something like two years, half of that in jail before his family could scrape together bail, for his murder trial (drunken brawl gone bad). I think it was just because Cook County has such a ridiculous backlog. But, FWIW, in cases like that, it's arguably the accused's right to a speedy trial that's being violated.

[Jenksismyhero]

No your first part isnt logical. Living in pain is not = to living. This is why people commit suicide (like many prisoners) because it offers an escape from pain.

 

Most people can not handle living in a cell for a night, let alone for years. No longer allowed to live presumes that living in and of itself is better than dieing, which I dont agree with.

 

As for its a waste of money/resources. Sure, if you just want to look at economically and not have punishment be part of it. I can obviously understand that if its truly cheaper.

 

(edit)

 

And best judicial system 100 years ago??? Were black people and women even allowed to testify back then? (Its sad that this is both a joke and serious question)

 

I think it's a leap to assume that jail time = pain. It's not ideal, but it's not the worst thing in the world. You have amenities to get by. You have food. You have shelter. You may get visitors. It absolutely sucks and would be horrible and I personally wouldn't last a day. But death, to me, would be worse. If there's an after-life, i'm going to hell faster than I would have if I had spent 50 years in jail. If there's no after-life, my existence is over.

 

And punishment is a part of it. A huge part. But the other significant factor for me is that it's also a complete waste of resources to keep such a horrible person living.

 

That's a valid point re: blacks/women. But the world was on more or less equal footing in that respect 100 years ago. So it was still one of, if not the, best in the world at the time.

 

[Soxbadger]

I happen to think victims have a lot of rights. Family members are victims too.

I had a best friend brutally murdered by a moron many years ago. Her case was never brought to trial because the murderer was given life for some other murders and they didn't see a need to try him for her case since he got life. He's still rotting in jail. But I like to believe her mom, her dad, her sister, me and those who knew her were also victims.

Just because she's gone doesn't mean she doesn't have the right to have her murderer convicted and burned.

 

Would be interesting to see how Jenks responds to this because he is more economically driven, and I presume the main reason for not going for the conviction is that economically it makes no sense to spend thousands of tax payer dollars on a verdict that is redundant.

 

So Ill put it back in your hands. Should the govt spend tax payer dollars on court cases that are redundant (Ie the convict is already going to be executed/life in jail)?

 

My answer is that depends on what you believe the justice system is built for. I do not believe its built for vengeance, or at least I hope that its not. I want to believe that it is built as a deterrent and that the hope is that no one will ever break the law, and if they do we are forced to punish them, but not because it makes us feel good about doing it.

 

So based on my belief, Id say if hes already being executed/life imprisonment, it probably doesnt make much sense to spend lots of time and money on another conviction, even if that means the victims family/friends wont get the closure that they want.

[Jenksismyhero]

A friend of a friend waited something like two years, half of that in jail before his family could scrape together bail, for his murder trial (drunken brawl gone bad). I think it was just because Cook County has such a ridiculous backlog. But, FWIW, in cases like that, it's arguably the accused's right to a speedy trial that's being violated.

 

Yeah that's totally unacceptable if the state was delaying it simply for being backlogged. What was the result? Or is it still going on?

[Jenksismyhero]

Would be interesting to see how Jenks responds to this because he is more economically driven, and I presume the main reason for not going for the conviction is that economically it makes no sense to spend thousands of tax payer dollars on a verdict that is redundant.

 

So Ill put it back in your hands. Should the govt spend tax payer dollars on court cases that are redundant (Ie the convict is already going to be executed/life in jail)?

 

My answer is that depends on what you believe the justice system is built for. I do not believe its built for vengeance, or at least I hope that its not. I want to believe that it is built as a deterrent and that the hope is that no one will ever break the law, and if they do we are forced to punish them, but not because it makes us feel good about doing it.

 

So based on my belief, Id say if hes already being executed/life imprisonment, it probably doesnt make much sense to spend lots of time and money on another conviction, even if that means the victims family/friends wont get the closure that they want.

 

Yeah I mean there should be a finding that he did it, and maybe there's a quick way to do that without needing a full trial for the sake of the victims, but there's no point going through a whole trial just to add 100 years to a 1000 year sentence.

[StrangeSox]

Yeah that's totally unacceptable if the state was delaying it simply for being backlogged. What was the result? Or is it still going on?

 

He was convicted and sentenced two years ago.

 

http://host.madison.com/news/local/crime_a...1cc4c03286.html

 

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-09...brendan-scanlon

 

edit: he was the guy that killed Chicago street artist SOLVE, if anyone knows anything about that scene.

Edited October 14, 2013 by StrangeSox

[Iwritecode]

A quick time-line of the Ariel Castro case. 3 months from arrest to sentencing.

 

May 6, 2013 – women were rescued.

 

May 6, 2013 - Castro was arrested.

 

May 8, 2013 - he was charged with four counts of kidnapping and three counts of rape.

 

May 9 - Castro made his first court appearance in Cleveland Municipal Court, where bail was set at $2 million per kidnapping charge, for a total of $8 million.

 

May 14 - Castro's attorneys said he would plead "not guilty" to all charges if indicted for kidnapping and rape.

 

June 7 - a Cuyahoga County grand jury returned a true bill of indictment against Castro. It contained 329 counts, including two counts of aggravated murder (under different sections of the Ohio criminal code) for his alleged role in the termination of one of the women's pregnancies. The indictments covered only the period from August 2002 to February 2007.

 

June 12 - Enters a not-guilty plea.

 

July 3 - Castro was found competent to stand trial.

 

July 12 - a Cuyahoga County grand jury returned a true bill of indictment for the remainder of the period, after February 2007. It brought the total to 977 counts: 512 counts of kidnapping, 446 of rape, seven of gross sexual imposition, six of felonious assault, three of child endangerment, two of aggravated murder, and one of possession of criminal tools.

 

July 17 - Castro pled not guilty to the expanded indictment.

 

July 26, 2013 - Castro pled guilty to 937 of the 977 charges against him

 

August 1, 2013 - Castro was sentenced to life in prison, plus 1,000 years.

 

September 3, 2013 - Castro was found hanging by a bedsheet in his cell.

[Kyyle23]

He was convicted and sentenced two years ago.

 

http://host.madison.com/news/local/crime_a...1cc4c03286.html

 

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-09...brendan-scanlon

 

edit: he was the guy that killed Chicago street artist SOLVE, if anyone knows anything about that scene.

 

So, how do you view your friend now? I mean, you say drunken brawl that got out of control, but your friend stabbed him. I was thinking maybe he hit him in the head and the guy never woke up.

 

Im just curious, I really dont know how i would feel about my friend if something like that happened.

[StrangeSox]

So, how do you view your friend now? I mean, you say drunken brawl that got out of control, but your friend stabbed him. I was thinking maybe he hit him in the head and the guy never woke up.

 

Im just curious, I really dont know how i would feel about my friend if something like that happened.

He was a friend of a friend I met a few times. I never really liked that crowd and hadn't seen him for a couple of years prior to that murder.

[greg775]

Would be interesting to see how Jenks responds to this because he is more economically driven, and I presume the main reason for not going for the conviction is that economically it makes no sense to spend thousands of tax payer dollars on a verdict that is redundant.

 

So Ill put it back in your hands. Should the govt spend tax payer dollars on court cases that are redundant (Ie the convict is already going to be executed/life in jail)?

 

My answer is that depends on what you believe the justice system is built for. I do not believe its built for vengeance, or at least I hope that its not. I want to believe that it is built as a deterrent and that the hope is that no one will ever break the law, and if they do we are forced to punish them, but not because it makes us feel good about doing it.

 

So based on my belief, Id say if hes already being executed/life imprisonment, it probably doesnt make much sense to spend lots of time and money on another conviction, even if that means the victims family/friends wont get the closure that they want.

 

We were all OK for him not going on trial for her murder. He already got what he deserved from the other cases. He actually got life in prison and they never even found the bodies of the 3 other girls he killed. Kudos to the jury. I doubt he'd be found guilty today.

 

Also the parents of my friend weren't crazy about all the specifics of her horrible injuries delivered by the coward coming out at trial. However, they did feel bad til this day that he didn't have to fess up to the murder, feeling their daughter may not have gotten her day.

The dad of my friend did want to kill the prick but never had a chance. the killer is one of those lowlifes that sneers at the victims families and acts like a macho piece of s*** that he thinks he is. Basically a guy who should have never been born. Or was "Born to Raise Hell" like I believe Richard Speck had written on his arm or something. In life if there's bad timing and we run into one of those mass murderer zeros it could be curtains for any one of us.

 

So everybody was OK with the decision, which like you said, was primarily based on economy. He already was convicted. The cases of the other 3 girls were not separate; I think lumped all into one murder case.

[greg775]

He was a friend of a friend I met a few times. I never really liked that crowd and hadn't seen him for a couple of years prior to that murder.

 

Interesting in your link how he yelled at the judge at sentencing. The judge told him if he keeps it up he'd re-think the 12 years and give him more. I think the friend of the friend got off pretty light. 12 years and he killed a guy. Sounds like a tragic case all around. I'd think he'd get more than that, though. Maybe 30 years. In this day and age, 12 years isn't that many in a life of a 27-year old. I could see him getting 12 if he hit him with a bar glass or something and by fluke he died, but a stabbing? 12 years is pretty thin I think.

[StrangeSox]

The article says he mumbled, not that he yelled, or at least one of the articles I found said that.

 

He was convicted of murder 2 because the other guy actually started the whole incident. He didn't just randomly stab some dude.

[greg775]

The article says he mumbled, not that he yelled, or at least one of the articles I found said that.

 

He was convicted of murder 2 because the other guy actually started the whole incident. He didn't just randomly stab some dude.

 

The one I read said one guy had him pinned then he stabbed him. Had he not overreacted, it probably would have just been a barfight. Sad if this guy had no prior violent tendencies, but the fact he stabbed a guy to death I would think would be minimum of 24 years, not 12.

Edited October 15, 2013 by greg775

[witesoxfan]

Interesting in your link how he yelled at the judge at sentencing. The judge told him if he keeps it up he'd re-think the 12 years and give him more. I think the friend of the friend got off pretty light. 12 years and he killed a guy. Sounds like a tragic case all around. I'd think he'd get more than that, though. Maybe 30 years. In this day and age, 12 years isn't that many in a life of a 27-year old. I could see him getting 12 if he hit him with a bar glass or something and by fluke he died, but a stabbing? 12 years is pretty thin I think.

 

12 years in the life of a 27 year old is a long time. First and foremost, it's just under half of what they've currently lived, but if they have kids, they don't get to see them grow up, and if they don't have kids, then they probably will never have kids at that point. It's not some in and out over the weekend because you got caught drinking and driving.

[southsider2k5]

12 years in the life of a 27 year old is a long time. First and foremost, it's just under half of what they've currently lived, but if they have kids, they don't get to see them grow up, and if they don't have kids, then they probably will never have kids at that point. It's not some in and out over the weekend because you got caught drinking and driving.

 

I hate to see that risk minimized. In my mind it is more dangerous than a bar fight.

[greg775]

What's going on with this story these days? Is she going on trial soon? Etc.

[caulfield12]

How or why do we presume the family even wants her to be executed?

 

Would that really make things better?

 

Greg, let's put this another way. If someone in your family was executed and it was later proven (let's say you were quite poor and you needed the Southern Poverty Law Center or the Northwestern University students to help even though it was after the fact) they were innocent, isn't this much worse than if this particular woman gets life in a psychiatric ward or in a regular prison instead of immediately being sentenced the day afterward to the death penalty?

 

Doesn't the fact that we no longer have posse/mob justice in our country to the extent we had 100-150 years ago (see the novel, the Ox-Bow Incident) make our country better than before?

 

Think of all the lynchings in the last 200 years, not only, in the US, but around the world...how many of those people actually deserved to die? Because that's the kind of world we would be living in....more Emmit Till's, not fewer.

 

 

 

I think, if anything, the Northwestern Center for Wrongful Convictions would make the argument that making ANY assumption in a death penalty case has proven to be a recipe for disaster in the last century.

 

 

 

 

 

Research

The CWC has produced several groundbreaking articles on the causes of wrongful convictions and is the co-creator of the National Registry of Exonerations, a database which provides detailed information about the more than 2,000 exonerations in the United States since 1989. Our research focuses on individual cases and identifying systemic problems with the criminal justice system including:

 

erroneous eyewitness identification

false and coerced confession

official misconduct

inadequate legal defense

false forensic evidence

perjury and incentivized testimony (snitches)

 

Reform

The CWC raises public awareness about the prevalence, causes, and social costs of wrongful convictions and uses casework and research to seek policy reforms aimed at preventing future wrongful convictions. The Center on Wrongful Convictions has blazed a trail of revolutionary reforms, including:

 

Moratorium on Illinois executions declared by former Governor Ryan in January 2000 and his decision to commute all Illinois death sentences in January 2003

 

A comprehensive package of criminal justice reforms approved by the Illinois General Assembly in November 2003, perhaps most significant of which was that police must record all custodial interrogations of suspects in murder cases. Illinois was the first state to address the problem by statute, which makes statements inadmissible unless the entire interrogation has been recorded. Twelve other states have since followed the Illinois lead.

 

Expanded DNA testing in criminal cases

 

Provision of adequate funding for the defense of indigent clients

 

Governor Quinn's abolition of Illinois' death penalty (2011)

 

Online National Registry of Exonerations Database which documents and publicizes the nation's roster of wrongful convictions, providing data with which to determine factors and trends in convictions and exonerations

 

U.S. Supreme Court decisions. The Center has been amicus curiae (friend of the court) in seven cases before the U.S. Supreme Court and the supreme courts of various states in support of issues of importance to the wrongfully convicted.

 

International reform. In 2008, the Japanese Supreme Court accepted a Center brief in a notorious mass murder case in which a confession may have been coerced. It was the first such brief ever filed in Japan by a U.S. legal organization.

 

Compensation for wrongfully convicted exonerees. Following a CWC public forum (2008), the Illinois General Assembly approved a bill so courts may speed the compensation process.

 

 

Challenges

Reforming the criminal justice system to reduce the numbers of men and women sentenced to prison for crimes they did not commit will remain a Center priority for the foreseeable future. Needed reforms include:

 

Expand recorded interrogations. Require police to electronically record interrogations - not just in murder cases but in ALL cases, particularly child sexual assault cases.

 

Improve interrogation procedures. Place limits on the length of interrogations and on tactics which are known to contribute to false confessions, including the use of lies about evidence and the use of polygraphs during interrogations. Develop best practices for interrogating juveniles and other vulnerable suspects.

 

Reform police lineups. Change procedures to reduce erroneous identifications by victims and eyewitnesses. (Psychological research has shown that replacing traditional lineups with a sequential double blind process reduces misidentifications by half.)

 

Improve accountability. Hold police and prosecutors accountable for misconduct in criminal investigations and prosecutions.

 

Increase and expedite compensation for those wrongfully convicted.

Edited October 29, 2013 by caulfield12

[cabiness42]

There was a case down here of a former state cop accused of murdering his wife and two children. He got convicted, the conviction got overturned on appeal, got convicted again, the second conviction got overturned on appeal, and finally on the third trial was found not guilty.

 

If we had immediate executions, he'd have been dead before even getting to the second trial.

Edited October 29, 2013 by HickoryHuskers

[caulfield12]

There was a case down here of a former state cop accused of murdering his wife and two children. He got convicted, the conviction got overturned on appeal, got convicted again, the second conviction got overturned on appeal, and finally on the third trial was found not guilty.

 

If we had immediate executions, he'd have been dead before even getting to the second trial.

 

 

Instead of the "greatest good for the greatest number" (libertarianism), it's protecting the minority (in this case, one person in danger of being railroaded) from the majority.

 

Unfortunately, it's working in the opposite way in Congress, where the entire system is being held hostage by a minority...

[StrangeSox]

Instead of the "greatest good for the greatest number" (libertarianism),

 

[greg775]

There was a case down here of a former state cop accused of murdering his wife and two children. He got convicted, the conviction got overturned on appeal, got convicted again, the second conviction got overturned on appeal, and finally on the third trial was found not guilty.

 

If we had immediate executions, he'd have been dead before even getting to the second trial.

 

Who murdered those poor people? Did he get off on technicalities or ?

[caulfield12]

Who murdered those poor people? Did he get off on technicalities or ?

 

 

I'm sure he was completely exonerated by RNA/DNA evidence or the example wouldn't have been chosen to support the position.

[cabiness42]

Who murdered those poor people? Did he get off on technicalities or ?

 

Sometime between the first and second convictions, a different man was arrested and convicted of the murders. During the husband/father's second and third trials, the state alleged that he was also in on it as part of a conspiracy. There were a lot of shady dealings on the part of the prosecution that leads many to believe they had it in for him, but there are still a large number of people who firmly believe he's gotten away with it.