And how, precisely, is Life Without Parole not an adult punishment?
I’m against casual use of the death penalty. I support it as an option in extreme cases, where either the culprit has demonstrated a wanton disrespect for Human life & dignity, or the culprit is demonstratedly too dangerous to be allowed to live. In my book, serial murder qualifies for the death penalty.
With that said, it’s my religious and moral training to find some reason, however small, to avoid handing down a death sentence. Life w/o parole is the next best thing, and we should all be glad that Lee Malvo is out of society for good.
He’s young enough that he might – possibly – make amends for his crimes, and might (unlikely in VA, I would expect) eventually receive a commutation.
Back to the OP – based on my background, I concur that the prosecutor was WAY out of line to blame the holiday season (or anything else) as the jury’s reason for not handing down a death sentence.
(Aside: My opinion about John Muhammad, who ran the operation? Hang him, and good riddance.)
So your take on it is that Muhammed is the responsible party, and Malvo is the “innocent lamb” that was led astray?
What about the evidence that Malvo was actually the triggerman on the majority of the murders?
(Aside: I hope they try and fry Malvo in as many states as time will allow. I refuse to believe that you and I are even members of the same basic genetic coding as that monstrous, gloating murderer.)
I don’t think that’s what Scuba_Ben said. He simply said that Muhammed ran the operation, which evidence does seem to indicate. That doesn’t immediately presume that Malvo was an innocent lamb who was completely brainwashed, although that’s what the defense argued. They were both, IMO, complicit; it’s just that one exerted quite a bit of influence over the other, assuming a father-figure role.
Prior to Lawrence v. Texas in June 2003, oral sex between a consenting husband and wife could have resulted in a stiff sentence (excuse the flaccid pun) for a relatively minor crime in Alabama, Florida, Idado (a felony punishable by imprisonment for five years to life), Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Utah, and Virginia. Tack on several more states that specifically targeted same-sex actions. And that’s America, dude.
Was the proper response to that “don’t get a knob shine from your wife in Idaho”? Or was the proper response to take this to the Supreme Court to invalidate these sodomy laws?
The proper response would be to throw out, by means of elections, those state legislators that made those laws, and elect new legislators that would promptly repeal them.
The Supreme Court, and the federal constitution, should not serve as a second legislative house.
However, I freely admit that this isn’t the way it’s actually working out, and for the moment, asking the Supreme Court to invalidate a law you don’t like is a pretty fruitful course.
I’m not sure what relevance this one example has, especially considering I never mentioned it in the first place, or cited that article.
**
No, of course not. Anyone who cannot tell right from wrong would be committed as insane, rather than found guilty (in theory). I’m saying that reasoned thinking is not a strong point amongst kids and therefore they do not deserve to have the ultimate penalty meted out. They can be severely punished, e.g. life imprisonment, without going to the extreme of killing them. That at least allows for the possibility of the kid rehalibitating. That is supposed to be the purpose of a separate juvenile justice system - based on the belief that young offenders can be rehabilitated. There was a repeat of an interesting program on PBS last week called “Juvenile Justice”, if I remember correctly, which emphasized the difference between the juvenile and adult systems and the criteria under which a kid could be tried as an adult.
**
One of the more unseemly parts of the American judicial system is where they get the victim’s family to take part in the sentencing phase.
**
It is already accepted that the state of mind is relevant in determining the gravity of the offence of killing someone, hence murder 1, murder 2, man 1, man 2, insanity, immaturity. With respect to immaturity, Even the US does not execute 12 year-old killers, even though 12 year olds know that they have done wrong. I am saying that “immaturity” should extend through 17 year olds. Most of the world also agrees with this.
**
So you think I should not vote because I believe in the concept of a juvenile justice system?
**
I have accepted one set of statistics as being the best available. How is that “swallowing anything…unquestionably”? The statistics show the US to be in a very small minority of countries. Are you questioning that? If so, please provide your own cite with statistics.
My take on it is that John Muhammed was in charge, and therefore bears higher responsibility than Lee Malvo. To me, this is independent of whether Malvo was a corrupted innocent, a full partner in the concept and planning, or what have you. Even so, I would have no moral quibbles if Muhammed had gotted life w/o parole. (I’d be a touch disappointed, but only a touch.)
I personally don’t care which one of them was the triggerman in which shooting. This was a team effort, like any good sniper operation should be, and so both members of the team should be damned. Malvo could have been the shooter in all the murders, and I’d still support executing Muhammed as team leader.
More state charges will be brought. The federal charges were dropped to allow the prosecutions in VA. They might be renewed at a later date.
The death penalty is still possible in this case. Very possible, if a jury is so inclined.
I think this jury did a good job. Life without parole is a serious punishment. If total loss of liberty for a lifetime is not sufficient punishment, the society needs more liberty, or the incarcerated loves the institutional life. Realistically, 18 + 60 = one human lifetime (roughly).
Malvo is a great example of why there are long sentences, or the death penalty: a stealthy sniper with no remorse. In this case I could have seen the jury going either way. I’m guessing they spared his life because he is young, or so as not to “martyr” him in his fantasyland of a brain.
The defense was concentrated on sparing his life, as “not guilty” wasn’t really in the cards with a sentient jury. In that sense, only (avoiding death), the defense “won” the case. Big deal.
Just federal sentencing is not exactly easy to explain.
In the federal system there are sentencing guidelines (last year, but free) the judge must follow based on criminal history of the defendant and the conviction. The judge may “depart” up or down from the sentence in the guidelines, and may be reversed by a higher court. Basically, life means life. There is a federal death penalty now as well (Timothy McVeigh was the first federal execution since 1963).
So Amnesty.org has 2 conflicting articles.
Just consider how AI is going about getting these facts. Out of all the foreign governments they consult with, the US is probably the most forthcoming and accessible with their data. I don’t think governments who typically oppress and limit what their press can make available to the public will be as truthful.
I assumed you meant the other article, which I found to be flawed anyway. It demonstrates Amnesty.org’s reliability as a source of facts.
Maybe they can’t do calculus or complex physics yet, but at that age they should know KILLING IS WRONG! How “reasoned” do they have to be?
Let’s pretend your boss introduces you to a new co-worker. “Hi amarone, this is John. He murdered 10 people when he was 17, but that was during his wild teenage years when he didn’t have the ability to tell right from wrong. He’s been rehabilitated and he’s all better now.” You gonna stay at your desk?
If they commit what constitutes as juvenile level crimes, like theft, drugs and vandalism, sure. Murder has a higher level of severity.
Hello? Judge and jury? Judicial process? Remember what do they do?
According to Amnesty.org, which we’ve already seen is flawed.
You apparently believe a murderer is as good a candidate to be rehabilitated and sent back out into society as a former thief, drug user or vandalizer. Oh well, I’ll get to cancel out your vote.
I’m leaving for Xmas shortly, so I won’t be able to continue this discussion, but I highly recommend you pick up any book by John E. Douglas. He’s a former profiler for the FBI. He’s gotten into the minds of murderers to understand their motives in order to aid police work. He’s worked with juvenile offenders as well. His perspective is from somebody who actually works in the field. It’s not the pie-in-the-sky perspective you’re used to. Douglas does not preach or advocate any political philosophy. He just sticks to facts. I highlly recommend you look into a another point of view before you finalize your opinions on the juvenile justice system.
And I agreed with that. A 10 year old knows that killing is wrong. Would you execute a 10 year old? You didn’t respond to any of my points about age or mind-set already affecting the degree of severity under the current system.
**
Dunno. I still wouldn’t want him to have been killed by the state for something he did as a kid, though.
**
Please identify where I said or even indicated that. The only thing I have said is that a juvenile murderer is a possible candidate. I did not say anything about how likely that is compared with other offenders.
**
Really? Are you a pro-DP Democrat then?
**
And what perspective would that be? Are you a profiler or some sort of psychic as you seem to have discerned a lot about what I do beyond what I have written here. I used Amnesty for some statistics, not perspective. You have pooh-poohed Amnesty as a source, yet did not respond to my request that you provide sources and statistics of your own.
**
I wouldn’t say that my opinions on these sorts of complex issues are ever truly finalized. I have indeed put a Douglas book on my Amazon wish list. You can buy it for me if you like.
Heh. Weren’t all the pundits back when it was decided where to try them first saying that the choice was Virginia, rather than Maryland (where more of the shootings took place), because VA was likelier to mete out the Death Penalty?
It’s not “evil” but I can see how it would be disturbing to an outside observer that the system seemed to be played precisely to maximize the chances of a DP.
