Who deserves the Death Penalty?

[Patcat]

For me, one of the disturbing aspects of WANT was Carver's eagerness to get the death penalty for Tagman. We've seen many disturbed and depraved criminals on LOCI, and it seemed to me that many others deserved (if anyone does deserve it ) the death penalty more than Tagman. It also seemed to me that many others fit what I understand the definitions of the death penalty requirments in New York state more than Tagman. The leader of the criminals in ONE, the pilot episode, for one.

Who else deserves the death penalty?

And a caveat I feel compelled to reveal--I'm anti-death penalty for a variety of practical and moral reasons.

Patcat

[Sirenna]

always an interesting issue, this one.

Goren would say no murder merits the death penalty if there was no intent to kill, no matter how hienious the crime was. I'm still undecided as to whether he supports the DP himself or not.

I believe Carver made an error by not realizing tagman's intent was to keep the women alive but this was an error in fact not judgement and I believe the jury would have to acquit tagman if he did try based on this logic. But he was just doing his job here.

Carver's job is to act as representative to the people of the State of New York and they have decided the DP is a lawful punishment for 1st degree murder. Carver would be grossly out of line if he allowed his personal preferences the subject (which seem to be pro-DP, but that's just a guess on my part) to dictate how he tries a case. In other words if he sought the DP because he felt like it, Goren would get very tilty-headed.

Personally, I don't believe there is a level of deserving the dp that merits it being used in one area more than others.

[Patcat]

Venturing a little off my own topic--Goren strikes me as possibly being against the death penalty. There are more individuals involved in law enforcement than one might think who at least have serious reservations about the death penalty, and one reason is that they know what can go wrong in the system.

Sirenna, you hit on a point that troubles me about Carver's decision to go so vigorously for the death penalty for Tagman. If he's to represent the people of New York, Carver should work in their best interests (and let me add I think he usually does). And their best interests here would seem to mean making sure Tagman is never in a position to hurt another human being. Getting a confession means he's in prison, and the state is saved the expense of the whole death penalty process. I think Goren served the public interest better in this case. I wonder what might have happened if Goren had backed away from Tagman's intent, and instead presented his argument against the death penalty on practical grounds. Carver even concedes that Tagman's lawyer can argue regarding his intent.

Patcat (who apologize for her verbosity)

[Sirenna]

Patcat said:

I feel compelled to reveal--I'm anti-death penalty for a variety of practical and moral reasons.

Patcat

Practicality is one of the pros of the DP, according to it's propents anyway - saves time and money. It's those pesky 'lets-make-sure-he's-really-guilty-and-not-just-black-or-poor' do-gooders who draw the process out. That and if it turns out heads is really tales, there's a heck of a lot of paperwork to fill out.

[jaquetta]

Which is more expensive, housing someone for life or executing them? The only purpose I can see in the life without parole sentence is that it allows the prisoner hope that he'll get out someday and those opposed to the death penalty to assure themselves that they haven't killed anyone, just locked them up for life and taken away all their choices. I'm sure I'd feel differently if it really did come down to death or imprisonment but out here, I think I'd rather choose my own roomates and housing.

What really strikes me as funny/odd is that most of those people opposed to abortion - the killing of unborn children - are for the death penalty - the killing of grown ups. I guess because one had the possibility of being great and the other has proved that - not so much? And vice a versa. Abortion is fine because the rights of the mother over her own body take precedence, but the death penalty is bad because just because someone is out there killing other people, doesn't mean that we can do it to him. There's a deep disconnect in both sides, if you ask me.

[Patcat]

Actually, I'm anti-death penalty and anti-abortion, and would be happy to discuss this these stances with anyone off the board, unless people do want to discuss it on the board.

One of the practical arguments against the death penalty is that it doesn't deter crime.

Patcat (who hopes she's not offending anyone as we float into justly controversial waters)

[janetcatbird]

I don't think anyone can know what's really in anyone else's mind. I mean, Goren can point his finger and Skoda can interview (and of course their real-life counterparts as well), but ultimately the only people who know what tuly happened are the victim and the criminal. Who are we to judge? We're humans and fallible, and I don't think we ought to be killing people. I mentioned that I'm squeamish on the death penalty. I personally hate the idea of killing anyone, life without parole with solitary confinement, and for those who fuss about expense put the prisoners to work.

I will admit I have a knee-jerk reaction to rapists and those who abuse children. I mean, if we watch an episode of SVU my family will start in on "Did you order original recipe or extra crispy?", but I honestly don't want that applied. And it's strange that I have such a strong reaction because, thank God, I have not experienced this myself and I don't know people who have (not face-to-face knowledge, at least). Personally in cases like rape or sexual abuse I'd be pushing for castration--preferably by fire--but obviously that's not an option.

[Techguy]

Hmm, "deserves" is such a heavily loaded word that carries the connotation that somehow we can apply subjective judgments about mitigating or aggravating factors into an equation about who gets to live and who gets to die after a murder conviction.

As for the "cost" factor of housing a prisoner for life vs. carrying out the death penalty--depending on state laws, sometimes the appeals process is so long and complicated, it turns out that it actually costs more to bring about an execution compared to the cost of housing a prisoner for life.

I have no problem incarcerating a prisoner for the remainder of his natural life as long as there is absolutely NO chance he wil ever see the light of day. I also want his prison time to involve actual punishment--that means no cushy entertainment with TV, movies, etc. to keep the prisoner occupied. And if somehow, later on, new evidence (DNA?) proves that the convicted person could not have done it, how much better to find that out while the person is still alive.

As a practical matter, it has recently come to light via advanced DNA testing that there are a number of convicted felons who have been exonerated of their murder or rape convictions. How many executed convicted murderers could have been saved if this DNA evidence was available at the time of their trials? Carrying out a death sentence is absolutely final with not further appeal possible no matter what new evidence is uncovered.

My own opinion about the death penalty is: unless such decisions can be made without regard to race, economic status, or whether one can afford a better lawyer, ie, if the law can be applied equally to all--AND unless there is 100% certainty that the accused not only committed the crime, but intended to do so with premeditation--then I would prefer to level the playing field, abolish the death penalty altogether, and opt for life without possibility of parole for anyone and everyone convicted of such crimes.

[jaquetta]

Which is the best of all possible worlds, no one innocent gets puts to death (other than the original victims, of course) and no one in the justice system has blood on their hands.

I don't know. I never really thought about being for the death penalty, but there are a number of people who shouldn't be taking up space on the earth because of the heinous crimes they've committed.

As for who are we to judge? We're it. If not us, who?

We judge who gets put into prison for life and for what. We judge that it's wrong to kill someone, to have sex with a child, steal, kidnap, etc. Can we make those kind of judgments or are they equally unfair?

[trisha]

Personally in cases like rape or sexual abuse I'd be pushing for castration--preferably by fire--but obviously that's not an option.

LOL! No, the sweet little choir singing angle didn't write that! Metella and I must be rubbing off on you ;D

Techguy, I am very with you on the cost, both monetary and ethical.

I always like to quote JRR Tolkien when this topic comes up, "Many who live deserve death, and many who die deserve life. Can you give it them? Then do not be to eager to deal out death in judgment."

There has been no capital punishment in Michigan (where I live) for a looong time. When it was first voted into law, we had a capital trial where a man was found guilty and put to death. He was exonerated not long after. Capital punishment was removed from law here, but this year it's back on the ballot.

The topic of abortion is something else altogether, and a lot of it has to do with when, precisely, the "human" begins to exist. Obviously it's somewhere between when the egg and sperm meet, and when the fetus takes a breath, but there is a lot of time in between, and a lot of stress on the owner of the body in which it presides. Many of the affects of pregnancy and giving birth last for a lifetime, and some women still die from it.

The whole discussion reminds me of an episode of Stargate SG1 where Dr. Jackson's young brother-in-law is taken as a host for a Gwaould (sp?). There ends up being a trial to see who gets to "own" the body, the parasitic alien that will die without the body, or the boy to whom the body was born to. The judgment was for the original owner of the body, and I happen to vote that way, too. Not just for alien parasites, but for anything growing in anyone's body that they do not want there.

I don't think I could ever have an abortion, personally, and I think that there will be psychological consequences for anyone who does have one. But, that person ultimately owns their body and no one should be forced to be a host for anyone or anything else against their will.

My 2 cents.

[Sirenna]

trisha said:

LOL! The topic of abortion is something else altogether, and a lot of it has to do with when, precisely, the "human" begins to exist. Obviously it's somewhere between when the egg and sperm meet, and when the fetus takes a breath.

Then aren't sperm alive at least as much as feotuses? Feotusi?! (sic) Then I'll need to resurrect my Save the Sperm placard!

Incidentally, I read an article yesterday about a new sexual orientation. Asexuals or 'A' Pride are people who have never felt attracted to either men or women. They have a representative group called Asexual Visibility and Education Network and they sell t-shirts such as"Asexuality: it's not just for Ameboes anymore" and "They're just thongs. Get over it."

[NikkiGreen]

We don't have the death penalty in Canada. It's unfortunate when it comes to people like Clifford Olsen, a serial child killer in BC. An exception in cases with people like him would be ideal. Around 1980, Olsen was convicted for 11 deaths. He applied for parole in 1987 and was quickly turned down. When he was asked what he would do if he ever got out, his answer was "I'd take up where I left off."

In Vancouver, in the missing women case where 67 names are listed, Robert Pickton is charged with 15 deaths. His trial doesn't start until next Spring and he's been in jail for well over a year. Its likely more names will be added before the trial starts. The investigation on farm property took well over a year. Lots of earth moving equipment is involved and there aren't any body parts which can be used for identification. He's not housed in the general population...it costs a lot of money to keep him safe.

trisha said:

The whole discussion reminds me of an episode of Stargate SG1 where Dr. Jackson's young brother-in-law is taken as a host for a Gwaould (sp?). There ends up being a trial to see who gets to "own" the body, the parasitic alien that will die without the body, or the boy to whom the body was born to. The judgment was for the original owner of the body, and I happen to vote that way, too. Not just for alien parasites, but for anything growing in anyone's body that they do not want there...

Goa'uld.

I think I'd go the same way as you, Trisha. I'd choose Skaara and not Klorel.

[Sirenna]

NikkiGreen said:

We don't have the death penalty in Canada... It costs a lot of money to keep [Picton] safe.

I was a University of Toronto student while Paul Bernado was preying on women here and at the campus. I know Karla Homolka will be released after cutting an extremely favourable deal for the tortures, rapes and murders they both committed on kids in less than a year. She gets to live and work in Toronto, my city, close to where the parents of her victims still live. Sucks. I hate those two f****ers and I've never even met them.

But I love that Canada has no death penalty. I feel so proud of us. Tough sentences like life without parole and make it harsh time. but the death penalty brings us down to their level and they are animals.

I just think it makes a difference what colour you are, how much money you have and what connections you have. Cynic that i am, I really believe this.

I think "want" was very much about this issue. Life is not as perfectly relevant as CI, is it?

[janetcatbird]

trisha said:

LOL! No, the sweet little choir singing angle didn't write that! Metella and I must be rubbing off on you ;D


I always like to quote JRR Tolkien when this topic comes up, "Many who live deserve death, and many who die deserve life. Can you give it them? Then do not be to eager to deal out death in judgment."

Hee hee! If you want to be good, and I mean very very good, you've got to be willing to be just a little horrid! As a southern belle, I have to learn to balance my inner Melanie and Scarlett.

Like I said, knee-jerk reaction. About a month ago we had "Sexual Assault Awareness week" and a clothesline of t-shirts made by victims was strung across campus, where they were confronting their feelings. The one that jumped out at me, and I wish I'd had the chance to write the exact words down were "The fear of rape is about as effective as the real thing. We are afraid to walk alone, we hurry after dark, constantly looking over our shoulder." I think part of my reaction is fear--I mean, I got the "cover your drink" lecture three times before I even graduated high school, and I've never even set foot in a bar or club. You go to college and it's drilled into your head--don't walk by yourself, call campus escorts, here's who you talk to, etc. Obviously one shouldn't be reckless, but this constant concern wears on you. You want something to freak out your parents, wanted posters for an assault suspect plastered all over campus while this young-and-dumb freshman is first moving in. Yeah boy, that was reassuring...
I don't fear death as much as I do rape. TO be cynical about it, once you're dead, you're dead. If you're raped or abused you have to live with that the rest of your life, and I know enough about the havoc that wreaks on your identity to be terrified of that. Some people on this board have experience, so if I'm being presumptuous tell me to shut up.

I do like that quote from Tolkien, a very elouquent way to sum up my haphazard musings. I don't want people to die, especially with so many possibilities for error. Watch an old movie called "The Verdict", with Sydney Greenstreet as a Scotland Yard detective who is dismissed because he sent an innocent man to the gallows. Even if it is meant for entertainment rather than social criticism, it's an interesting showcase for the consequences.

As to abortion...I think the option needs to be available, although I don't think I'd be able to go through it myself if I wound up in that situation. People fuss about how it's irresponsible and the women shouldn't be in that position in the first place. Well, is it any more responsible to force a harsh life on a baby you cna't adequately care for? Personally I'd be more likely to offer my baby for adoption, although I have such a strong maternal instinct already even that would be difficult. Obviously counseling and some sort of support is to be reccomended, for me it'd be absolutely mandatory but I know those aren't options for everybody. #nosmileys#nosmileys

[Observer2]

Janetcatbird,

You’re not being presumptuous. The level of fear women are sometimes subjected to can be traumatizing in itself. You talk about being terrified, and fearing rape more than fearing death, so I think you’re in that traumatic realm, and you certainly have a right to your reactions and feelings around it.

I understand you being afraid of the effects of rape, especially if you’ve seen up close what some of those effects can be. But I’ll tell you something that it took me a long time to figure out. One of the reasons it can affect us so deeply is that in the moment that it happens we don’t believe that it’s bearable. So in various ways, at the time and afterwards, we literally tear ourselves apart psychologically, trying to get away from it, because we don’t believe we can bear the experience.

But the truth is that we can bear it. We can face it, encompass it, react to it, and allow ourselves to let the reactions go. It doesn’t have to have that long-term effect on our sense of self.

I hope it never happens to you. But if it does, it’s something you can bear, and heal from. Don’t go through your life always afraid that some stranger can take away from you forever your sense of self, or the qualities of life that make it worth living. As long as you’re alive, you can reclaim what is yours.

Trust me on this. There are aspects of my childhood abuse that I have not yet fully recovered from, but the rapes are not among them. Rape is a terrible experience, but it’s not as bad as living your life in constant fear. I’ve experienced both, so I know.

I’ve been there, and I tell you this – if it ever happens, you can bear it, and you can recover. So don’t let fear of it have such a terrible hold on you. A “constant concern [that] wears on you” is something that can drain the joy out of your life. It’s not worth that. Live your life. If it happens, put the work into recovery and then get back to living your life. It really doesn’t have to be the end of the world. I give you my word on that.