Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How do you determine who gets death and who gets life without parole?
Do you want a justice system which applies the laws differently to different people.......a different standard of proof for one type of case, or one groups of cases? If you do, then start lobbying for that.
The problem is that there is ONE standard of proof for criminal cases. So which ones of those who are convicted of the crime "beyond a reasonable doubt" would you classify for death and which ones for life..........if you are opposed to a sentence of LWOP for some of them?
Texas revised their system AFTER the McDuff case, and there are now laws in Texas named after him......McDuff laws.
"How do you determine who gets death and who gets life without parole?"
When i see how convicted murders are put to death and how many Americans die through terrible illnesses i feel that the murderer gets the better deal. To watch someone die a slow painful death through illness is horrific. Many of these innocent lovely people would want a quick dignified death. I have seen people slowly starve to death when their life support is turned off, yet a conicted murderer who tortures and kills their victims are given a quick "dignified" death.
Execution is the only real answer for these psychopaths and long slow death is NOT how our loved ones should die.
We should be debating the right to die in dignity for our loved ones destined for slow painful deaths and NOT whether the Scum of the world should get a free pass by just going to prison and living each day... a right they took away from innocent people.
Perhaps you should start a thread about the "right to die"......then we could debate that issue.
This thread is about whether or not people support the death penalty. IMO, there is no connection whatsoever between someone dying due to a terrible illness and the death penalty. Just don't see it.
Absolutely NO ONE is advocating a "free pass" for someone who has been convicted of first degree murder. Spending your life in prison is not a "free pass." Some here have even argued that life in prison is probably much more difficult than death. Prison is NOT A PLAYGROUND. Prison is dangerous. Prison is hard. Prison is PUNISHMENT, as well it should be. I've been to a number of prisons interviewing people. I've seen it firsthand.....and I've only seen the "good part." One couldn't pay me enough money to eat prison food! I fear that many people these days buy into propaganda that prison life is easy and good. That is just plain old BS.......especially in high security prisons, which are the places where people convicted of first degree murder are sent.
Perhaps you should start a thread about the "right to die"......then we could debate that issue.
This thread is about whether or not people support the death penalty. IMO, there is no connection whatsoever between someone dying due to a terrible illness and the death penalty. Just don't see it.
Absolutely NO ONE is advocating a "free pass" for someone who has been convicted of first degree murder. Spending your life in prison is not a "free pass." Some here have even argued that life in prison is probably much more difficult than death. Prison is NOT A PLAYGROUND. Prison is dangerous. Prison is hard. Prison is PUNISHMENT, as well it should be. I've been to a number of prisons interviewing people. I've seen it firsthand.....and I've only seen the "good part." One couldn't pay me enough money to eat prison food! I fear that many people these days buy into propaganda that prison life is easy and good. That is just plain old BS.......especially in high security prisons, which are the places where people convicted of first degree murder are sent.
Have you ever seen the conditions a lifer has or even the ones on death row going through their appeal process. They are doing very nicely. Can even get religion or education. The same cannot be said for the dead victim or their family. They will never have a complete life ever again.
You gave me a link to the aggravating circumstances REQUIRED before the prosecutor can ask for the death penalty. I don't understand what you mean, unless you mean that EVERYONE convicted of first degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt (not BEYOND ALL DOUBT) should get a death sentence and be executed. Is that what you are saying?
Btw, prosecutors cannot even ask for the death penalty if the aggravating circumstances are not present. They are called "aggravators"......after conviction in the guilt/innocence trial, then there is a trial to determine what the sentence will be. In that trial, the prosecutor presents the "aggravators" to the jury, and the defense presents the "mitigators" to the jury, then the jury deliberates and in a number of states gives only a RECOMMENDATION to the Judge as to whether or not the sentence should be life or death.
Do you have any statistics on the numbers of people released/paroled who were convicted of murdering someone?
Looks like McDuff's sentence was "commutted" because the USSC banned the death penalty in the 1970s so everyone on death row at that time had their sentences changed to life. That's why Charles Manson has never been executed.
So you would prefer to see innocent people executed in order to make sure that one Kenneth McDuff would not be released? I find it interesting that there has been no problem keeping Charles Manson in prison.
I'd really like to see the number of people who have actually been released from death rows without being exonerated by DNA evidence or some other type of strong evidence. I don't believe you will find people being paroled from death row since the death penalty was reinstated in the late 1970s.
The problem in the McDuff case was the way Texas chose to handle their prison problems. I took this quote from your link above:
"Effect on the Texas penal system
After McDuff's second arrest for murder in 1992, Texas launched a massive overhaul of its prison system to prevent violent criminals from winning early parole. The tightened parole rules, extensive prison building projects and improved monitoring of violent parolees are collectively known in Texas as the McDuff Laws".......
WHO is debating why he got out, the point is that he did... laws and rules are changed all of the time to fix the problems with them... Had it not been for the Supreme Court he would have never been released in the first place... If you want to play the blame game you may want to start there, and not with Texas!
You gave me a link to the aggravating circumstances REQUIRED before the prosecutor can ask for the death penalty. I don't understand what you mean, unless you mean that EVERYONE convicted of first degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt (not BEYOND ALL DOUBT) should get a death sentence and be executed. Is that what you are saying?
Btw, prosecutors cannot even ask for the death penalty if the aggravating circumstances are not present. They are called "aggravators"......after conviction in the guilt/innocence trial, then there is a trial to determine what the sentence will be. In that trial, the prosecutor presents the "aggravators" to the jury, and the defense presents the "mitigators" to the jury, then the jury deliberates and in a number of states gives only a RECOMMENDATION to the Judge as to whether or not the sentence should be life or death.
If you DO NOT like how the system works I suggest that you have these two documents changed...It seems that nothing else will work for you!
You gave me a link to the aggravating circumstances REQUIRED before the prosecutor can ask for the death penalty. I don't understand what you mean, unless you mean that EVERYONE convicted of first degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt (not BEYOND ALL DOUBT) should get a death sentence and be executed. Is that what you are saying?
Btw, prosecutors cannot even ask for the death penalty if the aggravating circumstances are not present. They are called "aggravators"......after conviction in the guilt/innocence trial, then there is a trial to determine what the sentence will be. In that trial, the prosecutor presents the "aggravators" to the jury, and the defense presents the "mitigators" to the jury, then the jury deliberates and in a number of states gives only a RECOMMENDATION to the Judge as to whether or not the sentence should be life or death.
Your question was:
"How do you determine who gets death and who gets life without parole?"
AND ONCE AGAIN.....Texas does NOT have life without parole.
You will have to ask a jury why they choose to send someone to death row or not....I cannot answer that for them if that is what you are getting at!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
