Bill from NYC Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 I have jury duty in a couple of weeks. I hope I don't get a murder trial or anything like that because I can't give another human being the death penalty. 276909[/snapback] That is your choice, but there are scads of people who would kill you or your loved ones (God Forbid) for 5 bucks or less. Something to think about?
TheMadCap Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 He was convicted in a court of law. He's guilty...
Tux of Borg Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 You guys are forgetting the 50,000 appeals he has coming to him. All of which the tax payers are paying for.
stevestojan Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 He was convicted in a court of law. So was Rubin Carter. He's guilty... He wasn't.
PastaJoe Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 You guys are forgetting the 50,000 appeals he has coming to him. All of which the tax payers are paying for. Which would be much less expensive for the taxpayers if he was just given life instead of death.
Bill from NYC Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 So was Rubin Carter.He wasn't. 277050[/snapback] Are you sure?
stevestojan Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 Are you sure? 277052[/snapback] no. not at all. the point is, quite obviously neither was the judge and jury that sentenced him. The whole thing is, we're dealing with people's lives here. Im not saying they shouldn't be punished. But life in prison should be the max if there is nothing but circumstantial evidence. Just my opinion. A guy like this !@#$ in Atlanta who killed the judge should be hung. We know for a fact he did it. kill him.
Bill from NYC Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 no. not at all. the point is, quite obviously neither was the judge and jury that sentenced him. 277054[/snapback] Well, I am guessing that they WERE pretty sure. He got off on an appeal. Hey, I am not sure he did it, but my mind is not swayed one way or the other by Bob Dylan and a movie, you know?
stevestojan Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 Well, I am guessing that they WERE pretty sure. He got off on an appeal. Hey, I am not sure he did it, but my mind is not swayed one way or the other by Bob Dylan and a movie, you know? 277059[/snapback] It wasn't bob dylan and an appeal that got him off. It was bob dylans song that let people see how ridiculous his case was. . . it opened eyes. They didn't just hear the song and say "let him free"... come on now. .
Justice Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 He was convicted in a court of law. He's guilty... 277026[/snapback] Using that logic, I guess that means OJ really isn't the killer and he still is searching for "the real" killers.
stevestojan Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 well, after reading this, I will second guess my stance on Rubin Carter: http://graphicwitness.com/carter/ I thought he had another trial... The point is, though, that I still don't believe a man should go to death row without solid evidence against him.
Bill from NYC Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 It wasn't bob dylan and an appeal that got him off. It was bob dylans song that let people see how ridiculous his case was. . . it opened eyes. They didn't just hear the song and say "let him free"... come on now. . 277063[/snapback] He had a good legal team. As for Dylan's song having influence, my friend, you weren't around in those days. It mattered. Besides, who is to really say that the case was ridiculous? Me? You? I dont think so. Btw, congrats. I am impressed, and proud of you with the career switch.
stevestojan Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 Btw, congrats. I am impressed, and proud of you with the career switch. 277068[/snapback] Thanks, and check out my post above. Some pretty damning stuff about Carter... Sorry, I was under the direct impression he was retired.
TheMadCap Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 So was Rubin Carter.He wasn't. 277050[/snapback] At some point, you have to put some measure of faith in the justice system. Apparently the jury thought there was enough evidence to convict. Of course mistakes are made, especially given the sheer number of cases. I have no knowledge whatsoever of this case. But if a jury finds someone guilty, then in the eyes of the law, by definition, they are guilty. Maybe life in prison for circumstantial evidence is fair, maybe not.
TheMadCap Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 Using that logic, I guess that means OJ really isn't the killer and he still is searching for "the real" killers. 277065[/snapback] Not always. You can be guilty as sin and get off on a technicality, like OJ. Boy, I love fanning the flames.
UConn James Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 Very shortly after her death he was found trying to leave the country with his hair dyed, a goatee, and $10,000 in cash...after they found her corpse but while they were looking for her murderer. This was after, of course, he was cheating on his pregnant wife with a woman who, upon hearing of Laci's death, immediately suspected Scott had killed her and was worried she was next. Good enough for me. 276902[/snapback] There was also the fact that when he was arrested, he had a large knife, a hacksaw, plastic bags, etc. in his trunk, and directions to Amber Frye's workplace that he'd downloaded that day. Think he wanted to take her out to dinner at the Roadkill Cafe?
jester43 Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 Is he guilty? Yes. That makes him a murderer. How did he get found guilty? Who cares. He's guilty. He should die. Maybe if we didn't have so many loophopes and got to the executions quicker, we'd have less Scott Petersons in this world and more Laci Petersons. 276864[/snapback] while i would not care one bit if this guy was executed, i have two problems with the death penalty: 1. first, i think life in prison is a worse punishment. i think a life of incarceration, despair and regret... sprinkled with an regular dose of a$$rape...has to be more miserable than the quick painless method they use now. but also... 2. I DO NOT TRUST THE GOVERNMENT TO ADMINISTER IT FAIRLY! there have been too many innocent people found on death row to justify state executions.
Alaska Darin Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 I'd much rather see him in general population in Chino or Vacaville. Chances are he'd noose up or get whacked in short order, saving taxpayers a ton of bread to spend on other boondoggles. Plus he'd have a hard time sitting down much.
Typical TBD Guy Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 I don't agree with that decision. He should be given life in prison. Nobody should be given the death penalty based only on circumstantial evidence. 276789[/snapback] Agreed, but only because of 2 words: Jeffrey Dahmer.
IDBillzFan Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 There was also the fact that when he was arrested, he had a large knife, a hacksaw, plastic bags, etc. in his trunk, and directions to Amber Frye's workplace that he'd downloaded that day. Think he wanted to take her out to dinner at the Roadkill Cafe? 277297[/snapback] No, no, no. He was clearly innocent since all the evidence was circumstantial, regardless of the fact that a jury of his peers found him guilty. Who cares that he was going after Amber Frye next? Who cares that he was disguising himself to make a run for it in Tijuanaz? No one saw him kill her. No one saw him kill his child. They only saw him run. That's not enough. He should get to hang out in prison so we can all pay his way for the rest of his pathetic piece of crap life...and then let's complain about all the taxes we're paying. Kill the mutherfugger. Kill him now. Today. On TV. Pay per view. And then give the money to Laci's family. Once again the world would be a different place if I were in charge.
Recommended Posts