CA executes old blind cripple

[E-Sabbath]

pjen, do you really want to go into the failings of your nation? Really? Especially those that you may not think are failings? Let’s say, drinking age? Any civilized country would have raised it to 21, you know. Wine at 16? Scandalous!

Pointing and saying ‘Other nations don’t do it’, isn’t really an argument with much value to most Americans. We come from a similar legal tradition, but it is not the same. Not the same at all. Especially in matters of life and death. I suppose it’s a matter of when we finally conquered the land. You did it in the 1600s. We didn’t do it till near 1900. Now, we may naturally progress to eliminate capital punishment, but Europe’s example only applies for Europe.

[Pjen]

@Larry Borgia

And what have you got against Thailand, Singapore, Japan, Barbados or the Bahamas anyway?

I highlighted the least democratic countries.

[lieu]

@Pjen

I’ll trade you a miserable failure in the Balkans against the US treatment of its African American Population prior to 1950.

Will some kind soul tie three lifelines together, secure it to the OP and then toss it to Pjen?

[Pjen]

@E-Sabbath

pjen, do you really want to go into the failings of your nation? Really? Especially those that you may not think are failings? Let’s say, drinking age? Any civilized country would have raised it to 21, you know. Wine at 16? Scandalous!

1/ Not in the same league as killing prisoners
2/ The UK is in the middle of the lax/strict rules about age and alcohol compared with Western Countries, once again the US is at the very extreme.

@E-Sabbath

Pointing and saying ‘Other nations don’t do it’, isn’t really an argument with much value to most Americans. We come from a similar legal tradition, but it is not the same. Not the same at all. Especially in matters of life and death.

This is not an argument to necessarily persuade Americans that they are wrong about the Death Penalty or should do things differently. It is just pointing out that one of the feelings about them that Americans will face when interacting with people from civilized nations will be similar to the feelings they may have about interacting with people from other similar pariah states.

@E-Sabbath

I suppose it’s a matter of when we finally conquered the land. You did it in the 1600s. We didn’t do it till near 1900. Now, we may naturally progress to eliminate capital punishment, but Europe’s example only applies for Europe.

I think that I have covered that specious argument above. Consider Canada which has been properly settled by Europeans by about 200 years less.

[Jackmannii]

Hmm…this guy was sentenced to death 23 years ago, and has been busy appealing and delaying his sentence since then. The last-ditch strategy? “I’m too old and feeble to be executed”.

It’s sort of like murdering your parents and then throwing yourself on the mercy of the court because you’re an orphan.

@Pjen

Shame. Shame. Shame.

*I’m gonna have my say
I’m goin’ to every discotheque
I’m gonna dance
dance
dance - ooh -
'Til the break of day.
I say :
Shame
shame
shame
shame on you.
If you can’t dance too.
I say :
Shame
shame
shame
shame

Shame
shame
shame
shame on you.
If you can’t dance too.* (A-Teens)

There are those who would find the greatest shame in the fact that four human beings died because of this killer. But some have different priorities.

[Blackclaw]

@Pjen

I’ll trade you a miserable failure in the Balkans against the US treatment of its African American Population prior to 1950. People who live in glass houses… .

And I’ll raise you the holocaust. Really, at our current rate it’s going to take us a while to catch up to Europe.

Stop throwing bricks through your glass house just to smash the windows in ours.

It is possible to argue against the death penalty in a manner that won’t automatically put Americans on the defensive. Why make the arguement harder than it has to be? You have me arguing with you and I abandoned my support for the death penalty several years ago.

[Pjen]

@Jackmannii

There are those who would find the greatest shame in the fact that four human beings died because of this killer. But some have different priorities.

Whereas there are others who would see the greatest shame in a State deciding to kill a prisoner.

[Revtim]

Speaking as somebody who’d love the US to abolish the death penalty, shut the fuck up other countries Pjen. You’re not helping the case.

Your approach is akin to saying making trains run on time is bad because Mussilini made them run on time too. If you really wish to try and change minds, give actual reasons why it’s wrong. The people on this board are too logical, for the most part, to be swayed by fallacious association.

For example, I argue that the death penalty is wrong because the system is not 100 percent fail proof, and hence innocents will be executed. Whether St. Kitts and Nevis also executes people means fuck-all to anybody with a brain.

[Pjen]

@Revtim

Speaking as somebody who’d love the US to abolish the death penalty, shut the fuck up other countries Pjen. You’re not helping the case.

Your approach is akin to saying making trains run on time is bad because Mussilini made them run on time too. If you really wish to try and change minds, give actual reasons why it’s wrong. The people on this board are too logical, for the most part, to be swayed by fallacious association.

For example, I argue that the death penalty is wrong because the system is not 100 percent fail proof, and hence innocents will be executed. Whether St. Kitts and Nevis also executes people means fuck-all to anybody with a brain.

One of the main arguments used against Apartheid was that it was a system maintained by a State that was behind the times compared to other countries pretending to Western sensitivities. The International pressure applied by various people and nations were based on the fact that those other people and nations felt that South Africa was making a fundamental error- a State dividing its people by Race is just wrong in a civilized Western World.

Does that sound logical and rational?

Then try:

One of the main arguments used against Killing Prisoners is that it is a system maintained by a State that is behind the times compared to other countries pretending to Western sensitivities. The International pressure applied by various people and nations are based on the fact that those other people and nations felt that the USA is making a fundamental error- a State killing its prisoners is just wrong in a civilized Western World.

[Revtim]

@John Mace

I’m anti-death penalty, but as long as we have it, you can’t say it doesn’t apply to some people. Fry the fucker. He deserved the most severe sentence available.

Well put, I agree on both counts.

And how ridiculous is it to take into account the physical condition of the prisoner, especially one who hired hitmen and didn’t do the deed himself.

And if he did do it himself, so what? Was he too decrepit to even lift a gun? Or too mentally feeble to consider the idea of hiring a hitman, even though that wasn’t how he did his original crime? This whole “he was old and weak” crap really makes no sense.

[John_Mace]

@Pjen

Worth bearing in mind that the US governments’ decisions to continue to kill people in prison is a major concern in the civilized world- Europe, Australasia, Canada etc…

Those of us who keep to civilized standards can only look on and weep as you continue to kill juvenile offenders, the mentally ill, the mentally retarded, elderly cripples and proportionately more people of color than anglos, in your charnel houses.

There are an adequate number of models in those civilized nations to show that the killing criminals is not necessary.

One day people will look back on this type of killing and see it as we now see child labor, slavery, female exclusion, state racism, and corporal punishment.

The USA will, to history, look like the ante-bellum USA, Victorian Britain, and Apartheid South Africa look to us today.

Shame. Shame. Shame.

What part of WE DON’T FUCKING CARE do you not understand?

[Revtim]

@Pjen

One of the main arguments used against Apartheid was that it was a system maintained by a State that was behind the times compared to other countries pretending to Western sensitivities. The International pressure applied by various people and nations were based on the fact that those other people and nations felt that South Africa was making a fundamental error- a State dividing its people by Race is just wrong in a civilized Western World.

Does that sound logical and rational?

Apartheid was wrong, regardless of whether nobody else did it, or if everybody else did it.

The “but all the cool countries are not doing it anymore!” argument may get results in the real world, but I’m talking about the people here on this board.

We generally are not going to take a position unless there are arguments to support position, regardless of what majority opinion is. I don’t know what the majority opinion on the death penalty is in my country, or my state, or my county. Why should I care? I’m basing my opinion on facts and data, not opinion polls.

Feel free to use the majority opinion argument in the real world, but don’t expect to gain any traction here with it.

[Jackmannii]

@Pjen

Whereas there are others who would see the greatest shame in a State deciding to kill a prisoner.

Well, let’s see what some others have said in this case. From Wikipedia:

*"In 1974, Allen plotted the burglary of Fran’s Market, a Fresno area supermarket, owned by Ray and Fran Schletewitz, who Allen had known for years. The plot involved Roger Allen, Clarence Ray Allen’s son, Carl Mayfield and Charles Jones. Mayfield and Jones worked for Clarence Ray Allen in his security guard business as well as part of a burglary enterprise allegedly operated by Allen. As part of the burglary plot against Fran’s Market, he arranged for someone to steal a set of door and alarm keys from the market owner’s son, Bryon Schletewitz, age 19, while Schletewitz was swimming in Allen’s pool. Allen then arranged a date between Schletewitz and Mary Sue Kitts (his son Roger’s girlfriend) for the evening, during which time the burglary took place. The burglary netted $500 in cash and $10,000 in money orders from the store’s safe.

Following the commission of the burglary, Kitts told Schletewitz that Allen had committed the crime, which she knew as she had helped Allen cash money orders that had been stolen from the store. Bryon Schletewitz confronted Roger Allen, informing him that he had been told of the crime by Kitts, and Allen admitted the crime. When Roger Allen told his father Clarence of Bryon’s accusation, Clarance Allen stated that they (Schletewitz and Kitts) would have to be “dealt with” Allen then ordered the strangulation of Kitts by Charles Furrow, after an unsuccessful attempt to poison her with cyanide capsules. Furrow threw Kitts body into the Friant-Kern Canal, and it has never been found. In 1978, Allen was tried and convicted for the burglary itself , the murder of, and the conspiracy to murder Kitts. For these crimes, Allen was sentenced to life in prison without possiblity of parole."*

Note: despite the loathsome nature of his acts, Allen was sentenced to life in prison. Not the death penalty.

*"While in Folsom Prison, Allen conspired with fellow inmate Billy Ray Hamilton to murder witnesses who had testified against him, including Bryon Schletewitz. Allen intended to gain a new trial, where there would be no witnesses to testify to his acts. When Hamilton was paroled from Folsom Prison, he went to Fran’s Market where Bryon Schletewitz worked. There, Hamilton murdered Schletewitz and fellow employees Josephine Rocha, 17, and Douglas White, 18, with a sawed-off shotgun and wounded two other people, Joe Rios and Jack Abbott. Hamilton shot Schletewitz at near point-blank range in the forehead and murdered Rocha and White after forcing them to lie on the ground within the store. A neighbor who heard the shotgun blasts came to investigate and was shot by Hamilton. The neighbor returned fire and wounded Hamilton, who escaped from the scene.

Five days after the events at Fran’s Market, Hamilton was arrested while attempting to rob a liquor store. Hamilton carried a “hit list” with the names and addresses of the witnesses who testified against Allen at the Kitts trial, including the name of Schletewitz.

[edit]
Legal proceedings
In 1981, the Attorney General filed charges against Allen and prosecuted the trial in Glenn County, CA due to a change of venue. The trial lasted 23 days, and 58 witnesses were called to testify. Ultimately, the jury convicted Allen of triple murder and conspiracy to murder eight witnesses."

As special circumstances making Allen eligible for the death penalty, the jury also found that Allen had previously been convicted of murder, had committed multiple murder, and had murdered witnesses in retaliation for their prior testimony and to prevent future testimony. During a seven-day penalty phase, the Attorney General introduced evidence of Allen’s career orchestrating violent robberies in the Central Valley, including ten violent crimes and six prior felony convictions. The jury returned a unanimous verdict of death, and the Glenn County Superior Court sentenced Allen on November 22, 1982."*

Note: a jury of his fellow citizens sentenced Allen to death. Not “the State”.

“In 1987, the California Supreme Court affirmed Allen’s death sentence. Associate Justice Joseph Grodin’s opinion referred to Allen’s crimes as “sordid events” with an “extraordinarily massive amount” of aggravating evidence…”

A federal appeals court last year felt that Allen’s legal representation had been substandard, but declined a rehearing in his case. The judge issuing the opinion for that panel stated:

“Evidence of Allen’s guilt is overwhelming. Given the nature of his crimes, sentencing him to another life term would achieve none of the traditional purposes underlying punishment. Allen continues to pose a threat to society, indeed to those very persons who testified against him in the Fran’s Market triple-murder trial here at issue, and has proven that he is beyond rehabilitation. He has shown himself more than capable of arranging murders from behind bars. If the death penalty is to serve any purpose at all, it is to prevent the very sort of murderous conduct for which Allen was convicted.”

Would you have found it shameful if Allen had succeeded in arranging even more murders behind bars? Do you have a gag limit?

[dbuzman]

@Johnny L.A.

What I’m saying is this: He was locked up for 23 years. He was not a threat to society. If he has been neutralised as a threat, then what’s the point of killing him? What purpose does it serve? That it took so long to kill him only points to the effectiveness of incarceration instead of execution.

But he WAS a threat to society. He had people killed WHILE HE WAS IN PRISON. Read the links. Quit saying something that is blatantly false!

[Pjen]

@Revtim

Apartheid was wrong, regardless of whether nobody else did it, or if everybody else did it.

Why was Apartheid ‘Wrong’ anymore than killing prisoners is ‘Wrong’. Both were accepted practice within our shared cultural history and were therefore ‘Right’. Apartheid became ‘Wrong’ as cultural sensitivities changed. I would argue that the same has happened for killing prisoners and that current US opinion is similar to pre-Mandela South Africa.

@Revtim

The “but all the cool countries are not doing it anymore!” argument may get results in the real world, but I’m talking about the people here on this board.

It’s not ‘being cool’ but being acceptable to the western civilized community. The USA currently stands outside this mainstream.

@Revtim

We generally are not going to take a position unless there are arguments to support position, regardless of what majority opinion is. I don’t know what the majority opinion on the death penalty is in my country, or my state, or my county. Why should I care? I’m basing my opinion on facts and data, not opinion polls.

This is not a ‘majority opinion’. It is a clear statement that the USA is ‘out of time morally’ on this issue as Apartheid South Africa was.

@Revtim

Feel free to use the majority opinion argument in the real world, but don’t expect to gain any traction here with it.

Repeat, this is a moral argument, not a majoritarian argument. We don’t all need to be the same, but to be accepted into the company of Western Civilized nations we require a level of democracy (including women and minorities), a justice system that exhibits fairness and the rule of law, support of human rights etc. etc… In most of the civilized Western World, those requirements include the abolition of judicial killing. The USA stands outside this system in the same way as would a state that lacked democracy, inclusion of women and minorities, lack of rule of law or protection of fundamental human rights.

[Pjen]

@Jackmannii

Well, let’s see what some others have said in this case. From Wikipedia:
…
Would you have found it shameful if Allen had succeeded in arranging even more murders behind bars? Do you have a gag limit?

However shameful his deeds, no other Western Civilized state would have done to him what you have chosen to do.

The killing of a prisoner in cold blood is, IMHO, more shameful than all of his crimes.

[Pjen]

@John Mace

What part of WE DON’T FUCKING CARE do you not understand?

And as an addition to my previous comments about moral equivalence of Apartheid and judical killing, this was exactly the response expected from South African White Apartheid apologists.

[Pjen]

@dbuzman

But he WAS a threat to society. He had people killed WHILE HE WAS IN PRISON. Read the links. Quit saying something that is blatantly false!

However much of a risk to society he was, there would have been other ways to deal with it- if he was still seen as a threat, why was he not in a Super-Max?

No Civilized Western Nation would have needed to kill him, threat or not.

[John_Mace]

@Pjen

And as an addition to my previous comments about moral equivalence of Apartheid and judical killing, this was exactly the response expected from South African White Apartheid apologists.

Which proves EXACTLY nothing, btw. Nothing.

The moral equivalence of two acts is not determined by the response to criticism towards those acts. You don know that, don’t you?

[Pjen]

@John Mace

Which proves EXACTLY nothing, btw. Nothing.

The moral equivalence of two acts is not determined by the response to criticism towards those acts. You don know that, don’t you?

I am not depending on response to criticism. I am depending on the common history of Western Civilized Nations and the manner in which such nations have come into being and seen themselves as part of the same polity. South Africa was ouside that polity and then returned to it. Jim Crow laws in 19th/20th C USA meant that the USA was outside the polity. With things as they are currently, the USA is outside this polity on grounds of its retention of judicial killings.