Death Sentence Overturned For Stupidity
Am I the only one who believes our judicial powers-that-be, have too much power? For as long as I can remember, I have wondered why we lack uniformity in our court system.
I am amazed that someone in this country can either get the death sentence in one state for brutally murdering someone, while in another state, someone committing a similar crime might get a life sentence. What's worse, how does a life sentence equate to 6 or 8 years in other states?
While I don’t know all the ins and outs of U.S. law and probably don’t need to, to make this point.
Let’s say a murderer confesses to a crime and all the hard evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt, this person murdered someone in cold blood. It was no accident, and we’re not talking about abuse cases where the victim fights back. We’re talking about people that break into homes, searching for anything of value to steal, and stumble upon the residents of that home. We’re talking about those individuals who feel it is necessary to murder an innocent convenience store clerk over a few bucks in the cash register. How about the car-jacker who takes your relative for a ride in their own car and then murders them? Why on earth should this person’s sentence be different from state to state? Why on earth would a Supreme Court in Georgia overturn a death sentence for a murderer of this caliber? For stupidity, that’s why.
A recent AP story detailed how the Supreme Court in Georgia overturned the death sentence given to a man who committed such a murder. He was convicted of beating and murdering an 81 year old woman after breaking into her house to steal a television. Not only was he convicted of beating and murdering this defenseless elderly woman, the creep was also convicted of beating and raping the woman’s 60 year old daughter, who was also in the home.
It’s criminals like this, that make me wish society could just walk up to, after the conviction, and put a bullet through their head. They are disgusting individuals. Now remember, we are not throwing cases in here where there is any doubt to the crime whatsoever.
It’s cases like this that make me want to cheer for the death penalty - without the several-years-worth of petitions made after the sentencing. I do however, try my best to be against the death penalty, because ideally, that decision should be left up to God. But honestly, when you have a true gutless individual like this Georgia guy and good solid evidence, then why waste the taxpayer's money - end it quickly.
So why did the Supreme Court throw out the death penalty in this particular case?
Because the attorneys for the defendant found a newspaper article printed two years prior, spotlighting the defendant for being a “Good Samaritan” after saving two
lives (one co-worker and one hospital patient he happened to be passing by).
Where does the stupidity come in? The defense team knew about the “Good Samaritan” article before the trial began, but failed to verify the story or find the survivors or their relatives.
The “Good Samaritan” acts were probably acts that almost any human would do. For the first “act”, the defendant kicked the ladder out from under his co-worker to save him from being electrocuted. For the second “act”, the defendant and his brother helped rescue a disturbed hospital patient while the defendant was visiting his co-worker.
The Georgia Supreme Court apparently thinks the jury should know that the defendant was a “Good Samaritan” before he traumatized and beat up his two innocent victims, murdering one then raping the other.
The “Good Samaritan” plea would look good in a case where a homeowner kills an intruder. It helps to show that the homeowner is a nice person all around.
The “Good Samaritan” plea should have no bearing whatsoever in a case so heinous as the one in Georgia. Sorry Georgia, a real "Good Samaritan" would never commit such a crime.
If the jury must re-evaluate the case in light of the “Good Samaritan” plea and alter their sentence because of this, then I vote to line the jury up in front of a firing squad.
© 2005 kalyhan All Rights Reserved.
I am amazed that someone in this country can either get the death sentence in one state for brutally murdering someone, while in another state, someone committing a similar crime might get a life sentence. What's worse, how does a life sentence equate to 6 or 8 years in other states?
While I don’t know all the ins and outs of U.S. law and probably don’t need to, to make this point.
Let’s say a murderer confesses to a crime and all the hard evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt, this person murdered someone in cold blood. It was no accident, and we’re not talking about abuse cases where the victim fights back. We’re talking about people that break into homes, searching for anything of value to steal, and stumble upon the residents of that home. We’re talking about those individuals who feel it is necessary to murder an innocent convenience store clerk over a few bucks in the cash register. How about the car-jacker who takes your relative for a ride in their own car and then murders them? Why on earth should this person’s sentence be different from state to state? Why on earth would a Supreme Court in Georgia overturn a death sentence for a murderer of this caliber? For stupidity, that’s why.
A recent AP story detailed how the Supreme Court in Georgia overturned the death sentence given to a man who committed such a murder. He was convicted of beating and murdering an 81 year old woman after breaking into her house to steal a television. Not only was he convicted of beating and murdering this defenseless elderly woman, the creep was also convicted of beating and raping the woman’s 60 year old daughter, who was also in the home.
It’s criminals like this, that make me wish society could just walk up to, after the conviction, and put a bullet through their head. They are disgusting individuals. Now remember, we are not throwing cases in here where there is any doubt to the crime whatsoever.
It’s cases like this that make me want to cheer for the death penalty - without the several-years-worth of petitions made after the sentencing. I do however, try my best to be against the death penalty, because ideally, that decision should be left up to God. But honestly, when you have a true gutless individual like this Georgia guy and good solid evidence, then why waste the taxpayer's money - end it quickly.
So why did the Supreme Court throw out the death penalty in this particular case?
Because the attorneys for the defendant found a newspaper article printed two years prior, spotlighting the defendant for being a “Good Samaritan” after saving two
lives (one co-worker and one hospital patient he happened to be passing by).
Where does the stupidity come in? The defense team knew about the “Good Samaritan” article before the trial began, but failed to verify the story or find the survivors or their relatives.
The “Good Samaritan” acts were probably acts that almost any human would do. For the first “act”, the defendant kicked the ladder out from under his co-worker to save him from being electrocuted. For the second “act”, the defendant and his brother helped rescue a disturbed hospital patient while the defendant was visiting his co-worker.
The Georgia Supreme Court apparently thinks the jury should know that the defendant was a “Good Samaritan” before he traumatized and beat up his two innocent victims, murdering one then raping the other.
The “Good Samaritan” plea would look good in a case where a homeowner kills an intruder. It helps to show that the homeowner is a nice person all around.
The “Good Samaritan” plea should have no bearing whatsoever in a case so heinous as the one in Georgia. Sorry Georgia, a real "Good Samaritan" would never commit such a crime.
If the jury must re-evaluate the case in light of the “Good Samaritan” plea and alter their sentence because of this, then I vote to line the jury up in front of a firing squad.
© 2005 kalyhan All Rights Reserved.
posted by kalyhan at
10:50 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home