No, it can’t ‘undo’ the crime, but it can make sure it damn well never happens again at the hands of this one (or in this case, these two) animals. I mean, isn’t that what we do to dogs which pose a threat to our neighborhoods? We put them down after we investigate whether these animals are considered dangerous. Thats for the bitch.
On the other hand, the bastard might not get it (as Mr. Blue Sky stated before.) Any whisper of it happening before the actual event, and conspiracy charges get tacked on to the accessory and flight charges. The other two will get the sentence extended, but (as far as I know) not until guilt is proven on a conspiracy charge will a warrant for execution be signed.
Oh, and on an aside, am I the only one who believes that firing squads and gallows ought to be brought back? I don’t believe that they are cruel and unusual (unlike say, the guillotine or stoning) seeing as death is quick and relatively painless in both cases.
Wait - firing squads and the gallows are quick and painless compared to the guillotine? Seriously? I had always thought the guillotine - as long as the blade was kept sharp and mechanism in good working order - was much faster than those two methods. Stoning definitely isn’t fast, you’re right.
I’m against the death penalty not only because of the chance of improper convictions and executing an innocent person (Illinois is a prime violator in this instance, with a number of instances of police torturing suspects to obtain confessions and inept public defenders not presenting a decent case) - not that this an issue in this particular case - but also because I think it’s getting off easy for a murderer to have their punishment over with through execution. This presumes that the alternative is true life in prison, of course. In this particular case, I hope that’s where these two end up, but I do understand those who’d like to see them executed.
This is a really thin analogy: we treat dogs in all sorts of ways that we don’t treat humans. If a puppy doesn’t have a home, we euthanize it; does that mean we ought to enact a Modest Proposal for human orphans? WHat about for the sick elderly? Should we not allow people to go out in public unless they’re appropriately leashed?
Well, okay, I like the leashed idea. But you get the point.
There are other ways to ensure that neither of these two will ever kill another person. I’d rather take those alternate methods.
Wouldn’t the date she committed the crime determine whether or not she gets the death penalty?
I’m for the death penalty in cases like this. She could have just threatened the guard while her husband got into the car. Hell, she could have even winged him in the leg, but she gunned him down like she was Bonnie Parker. It’s possible she didn’t mean to kill the guard, but she did and an aopology ain’t gonna cut it.
It also doesn’t matter that she had no prior record. She chose one helluva stupid way to start a criminal career.
And, no, killing her won’t bring back the guard. If we could reverse the damage done by criminals, we wouldn’t need a justice system.
Her husband should be charged as an accessory to murder and stay in prison whether it’s Ohio or Tennessee.
Personally, I favor the death penalty in situations such as this one. However, I would allow access to a hair stylist and make up artist prior to taking pics at booking. Talk about cruel/unusual!
Will her husband, the convicted felon fleeing prison and during such flight a peace officer was killed, also be facing murder charges?
Blue Sky: She could’ve just not committed the crime. Oh, and it’s not the start of her criminal career, is it? Didn’t she get fired for illegally providing her future hubby something when she worked at the prison?