Prosecutors Want Death Penalty for Lunsford's Killer

[Remus Lupin]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258443,00.html

Here is why I think Couey will get the needle. The jury isn't going to buy the fact that Couey is mentally retarded. The fact that he was able to commit the crime on his own and then fled on his own to Ga will disprove that big time. Also the jury isn't going to be swayed by the fact Coury was abused as a child and lived in poverty. It usually don't work and it certainly won't work in this case. Add the fact the crime itself is so heinious and so horrifying, I wouldn't been surprized if most of the juriors would of felt tempted to jump out of the box and choke the life out of him.

[Mortis]

Letting him color in court is a travesty.

[Remus Lupin]

Letting him color in court is a travesty.

I would like to know the true meaning of why the defense lawyers convinced the judge to allow Couey to color while in court.

[Dual867PowerMac]

I oppose the death penalty. Put him in prison for the rest of his life, but don't kill him.

[Mortis]

I oppose the death penalty. Put him in prison for the rest of his life, but don't kill him.

I don't oppose the death penalty.

I'd volunteer to put this dirtbag in the ground.

He didn't have too much regret when he buried the poor girl.

Alive.

[JediMindTrick]

I oppose the death penalty. Put him in prison for the rest of his life, but don't kill him.

Agreed.

I don't care how henious the crime is or how guilty he seems to be. Its not worth the risk of executing another innocent man like the State of Texas did when they murdered Ruben Cantu who just like Couey was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruben_Cantu

[Dual867PowerMac]

Agreed.

I don't care how henious the crime is or how guilty he seems to be. Its not worth the risk of executing another innocent man like the State of Texas did when the murdered Ruben Cantu who just like Couey was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruben_Cantu
That's a good reason, but I feel there is a far, far more important reason to oppose the death penalty: it's still killing someone.

All you pious Christians out there remember that commandment against killing someone?

[Pudge]

I don't know how Jessica's father sat in court day after day and didn't freak out on Couey.

He should die, period.

He buried a little girl alive after raping her. If this guy doesn't get the needle, then there is no such thing as justice.

[AugustGem]

I don't know how Jessica's father sat in court day after day and didn't freak out on Couey.

He should die, period.

He buried a little girl alive after raping her. If this guy doesn't get the needle, then there is no such thing as justice.

I agree, that man has strength. I seriously have nothing but respect for Mr Lundsford.

Regarding Couey being retarded, I thought it absolutely adorable that Jesse's daddy said on Nancy "If he was retarded and mentally deranged, why would they give him coloring pencils? Wouldn't they worry he would jab an eye out" I have said it before and I will said it again, that girl didn't die in vain, she is making her mark in her death and her father has a mission that will get him through day after day.

I have a lump in my throat just typing about it.

[Mortis]

That's a good reason, but I feel there is a far, far more important reason to oppose the death penalty: it's still killing someone.

All you pious Christians out there remember that commandment against killing someone?

That's easy.

I'm not a Catholic.

For me, he gets the Three Folds Rule.

[AugustGem]

That's easy.

I'm not a Catholic.

For me, he gets the Three Folds Rule.

I am a non practicing Catholic, hang him

[Steve Rogers]

Dude should be buried alive.

Thinking about the suffering and terror that girl went through makes me cringe.. he needs to suffer.

[DLaw911]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258443,00.html

Here is why I think Couey will get the needle. The jury isn't going to buy the fact that Couey is mentally retarded. The fact that he was able to commit the crime on his own and then fled on his own to Ga will disprove that big time. Also the jury isn't going to be swayed by the fact Coury was abused as a child and lived in poverty. It usually don't work and it certainly won't work in this case. Add the fact the crime itself is so heinious and so horrifying, I wouldn't been surprized if most of the juriors would of felt tempted to jump out of the box and choke the life out of him.
1. There is no argument that he is mentally retarded. The only issue is whether or not he was competent to stand trial. He did not raise and insanity defense so the jury cannot consider mental illness.

2. This happened in Florida. His chances of a life sentence in that state are less than zero.

3. He's ugly! That automatically qualifies him for the death penalty.

4. The jury is under public pressure to recommend death. Given his past record there is not a chance in the world they will give this guy a break.

[AugustGem]

1. There is no argument that he is mentally retarded. The only issue is whether or not he was competent to stand trial. He did not raise and insanity defense so the jury cannot consider mental illness.

2. This happened in Florida. His chances of a life sentence in that state are less than zero.

3. He's ugly! That automatically qualifies him for the death penalty.

4. The jury is under public pressure to recommend death. Given his past record there is not a chance in the world they will give this guy a break.

There is no argument that he is retarded? He didn't appear retarded not just in his confession but lets not forget the interview he did long before Jessica saying he would never be cured. I think the first "diagnosis" of being retarded came about one of the other times he was charged with being a sick perv. Funny, his entire family wasn't aware he was retarded until he was "diagnosed"

[Dual867PowerMac]

I'm not a Catholic.
What does that matter? Catholic or Protestant, Jew or Gentile, you're supposed to abide by the Decalogue.





For me, he gets the Three Folds Rule.
I have no idea what that is.

[DLaw911]

There is no argument that he is retarded? He didn't appear retarded not just in his confession but lets not forget the interview he did long before Jessica saying he would never be cured. I think the first "diagnosis" of being retarded came about one of the other times he was charged with being a sick perv. Funny, his entire family wasn't aware he was retarded until he was "diagnosed"When you're life's on the line you sometimes have a convenient refreshed memory. Frankly I am tired of hearing about this guy. He's certainly not the norm. He's a nut. Not a nut in an "insane" way but a creepy, ugly SOB who should be put in a cell and never see the light of day until the day he dies.

Obviously I am against the death penalty. On the other hand, if he has an ounce of honor in his body he would take his own life.

[AugustGem]

When you're life's on the line you sometimes have a convenient refreshed memory. Frankly I am tired of hearing about this guy. He's certainly not the norm. He's a nut. Not a nut in an "insane" way but a creepy, ugly SOB who should be put in a cell and never see the light of day until the day he dies.

Obviously I am against the death penalty. On the other hand, if he has an ounce of honor in his body he would take his own life.

Nobody claims he is the norm. I agree about being a nut. You have to be a nut to an extent to do what he did. Look at Dahmer, so calm and seemed collected in his thought... that man was a major nutter... but not "insane"

I believe in the DP, to me, your last sentence is good enough for me. But I wouldn't expect honor from a man who could do what he did.

May I ask what his being ugly has to do with anything? Not every ugly person is a wackadoodle and everyone can't be as handsome as you :razz:

[Dual867PowerMac]

When you're life's on the line you sometimes have a convenient refreshed memory. Frankly I am tired of hearing about this guy. He's certainly not the norm. He's a nut. Not a nut in an "insane" way but a creepy, ugly SOB who should be put in a cell and never see the light of day until the day he dies.
Exactly! I don't want this sick ****er out on the street any more than any of you other posters do. But I don't want him or any other prisoner executed.

[AugustGem]

Exactly! I don't want this sick ****er out on the street any more than any of you other posters do. But I don't want him or any other prisoner executed.

I appreciate where you are coming from. Lisa4catholics is Pro life as well. She makes it clear no life should be taken no matter how bad the crime and especially how innocent the victim.

For my own personal reasons, I believe in certain cases the DP is in order.

[Dual867PowerMac]

I appreciate where you are coming from. Lisa4catholics is Pro life as well. She makes it clear no life should be taken no matter how bad the crime and especially how innocent the victim.
I can't help but think the anti-abortion/pro-death penalty position is hypocritical.

[AugustGem]

I can't help but think the anti-abortion/pro-death penalty position is hypocritical.

I agree. Look at it both ways. How many people are pro abortion (oops thats called choice in those circles right?) and yet are anti DP. It seems less hypocritical to be against killing an innocent baby vs a murdering criminal who was given life and a choice to do wrong in it. I say anti abortion/pro life is more excusable than the other. The other just seems, quite honestly, stupid

Back on topic: This man deserves the most extreme punishment for what he did. I hope like heck he gets it. I hope Jesse is in peace and is looking down proudly on her daddy

[NascarGirl2448]

I don't know how Jessica's father sat in court day after day and didn't freak out on Couey.

He should die, period.

He buried a little girl alive after raping her. If this guy doesn't get the needle, then there is no such thing as justice.


I agree. Mark Lunsford must be a very strong man to sit there day after day and look at the creep who killed his little girl and not jump over the railing and beat the holy living daylights out of Couey. This creep shouldn't get the needle, though. It should be buried alive like it did to little Jessica. Also Mr Lunsford should be allowed to be the one to bury the creep.

[Mortis]

I have no idea what that is.

It's a catch-all reward/punishment in several pagan faiths.

What you sow, you will reap three fold.

Do good, you get good back and whatnot.

[Dual867PowerMac]

It's a catch-all reward/punishment in several pagan faiths.
Ah... :)

[Mortis]

Ah... :)

Mac, I'm a rather nice guy. But I am very short of patience. I admit (notice how I say I admit) that the arguement of innocent men being put to death stays my hand (for now) but as technology continues to improve, the "I didn't do it!" defense isn't going to work much longer.

I'm not a bloodthirsty man. I don't want him dead to make me feel better or to appease the girl's family.

I want him dead because he doesn't deserve to share my air anymore.

[jeepers]

I'm not a global death penalty fan. However, this guy deserves a state inflicted dirt nap more than anyone in recent memory.

He buried her alive in a garbage bag, clutching a stuffed toy that her Daddy got for her. There is evidence that she possibly tried to chew her way out of that bag.

No needle. Let Mark Lumsford stomp him into a bloody puddle.

[Mortis]

I'm not a global death penalty fan. However, this guy deserves a state inflicted dirt nap more than anyone in recent memory.

He buried her alive in a garbage bag, clutching a stuffed toy that her Daddy got for her. There is evidence that she possibly tried to chew her way out of that bag.

No needle. Let Mark Lumsford stomp him into a bloody puddle.

That would make it too "revenge". Can we bargain and just let me do it with a hammer?

I promise to go slow.

[AugustGem]

I agree. Mark Lunsford must be a very strong man to sit there day after day and look at the creep who killed his little girl and not jump over the railing and beat the holy living daylights out of Couey. This creep shouldn't get the needle, though. It should be buried alive like it did to little Jessica. Also Mr Lunsford should be allowed to be the one to bury the creep.

He said he has been there for Jesse, she was alone that night but wont be for her justice. He is such a stand up guy. He explains if he were to react, it could ruin the case and give the creep a reason for appeal. He is a strong man.

[AugustGem]

I'm not a global death penalty fan. However, this guy deserves a state inflicted dirt nap more than anyone in recent memory.

He buried her alive in a garbage bag, clutching a stuffed toy that her Daddy got for her. There is evidence that she possibly tried to chew her way out of that bag.

No needle. Let Mark Lumsford stomp him into a bloody puddle.

That gets me too. On one hand her having that stuffed animal could give her daddy peace but on the flip side, that could tear him apart.

[Dual867PowerMac]

Mac, I'm a rather nice guy. But I am very short of patience. I admit (notice how I say I admit) that the arguement of innocent men being put to death stays my hand (for now) but as technology continues to improve, the "I didn't do it!" defense isn't going to work much longer.

I'm not a bloodthirsty man. I don't want him dead to make me feel better or to appease the girl's family.

I want him dead because he doesn't deserve to share my air anymore.
Mortis, you seem like a decent guy. :) But I oppose the death penalty because I believe that killing someone who is of no threat to me is wrong. I have all the sympathy for Mark Lundsford, but it's not enough for me to support killing Couey.

[AugustGem]

Mortis, you seem like a decent guy. :) But I oppose the death penalty because I believe that killing someone who is of no threat to me is wrong. I have all the sympathy for Mark Lundsford, but it's not enough for me to support killing Couey.

As long as you are against the DP across the board, in every aspect, I can respect that and disagree. It is all about opinion... even if mine is right! ;) j/k

[Dual867PowerMac]

Thanks, August. :)

[jeepers]

That would make it too "revenge". Can we bargain and just let me do it with a hammer?

I promise to go slow.


I have no problem with that if her Dad says that it's okay. He's got first crack at the slimemold by default.

[NascarGirl2448]

But make sure the creep is alive when you bury it, just like it did to little Jessie.

[melinda]

I don't oppose the death penalty.

I'd volunteer to put this dirtbag in the ground.

He didn't have too much regret when he buried the poor girl.

Alive.

I'm with you, Morty...this guy needs to die. period.

[Harmonious]

What does that matter? Catholic or Protestant, Jew or Gentile, you're supposed to abide by the Decalogue.
That means you can't murder someone. But lawfully executing capital punishment is not murder.

[Dual867PowerMac]

That means you can't murder someone. But lawfully executing capital punishment is not murder.
Oh? Explain the difference.

[JediMindTrick]

That means you can't murder someone. But lawfully executing capital punishment is not murder.

Except when the the person being executed is innocent as has happened far too many times in our countries sad sad history of the death penalty.

[Poisonshady313]

What does that matter? Catholic or Protestant, Jew or Gentile, you're supposed to abide by the Decalogue.


It says "thou shalt not murder".

This couey fellow did indeed murder. If we simply let this guy live, then what power does the commandment have, if there is no answering for the crime? Look at any ancient Hebrew document.... there was no such thing as "life inprisonment". for lesser crimes, there was financial restitution. For murder, death.

What does the bible say we do with those who do murder?

"Whomever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed" Genesis 9:6


You can look up for yourself the numerous instances in exodus, leviticus, and deuteronomy in which God prescribes death as the penalty for murder.

[Poisonshady313]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258443,00.html

Here is why I think Couey will get the needle. The jury isn't going to buy the fact that Couey is mentally retarded. The fact that he was able to commit the crime on his own and then fled on his own to Ga will disprove that big time. Also the jury isn't going to be swayed by the fact Coury was abused as a child and lived in poverty. It usually don't work and it certainly won't work in this case. Add the fact the crime itself is so heinious and so horrifying, I wouldn't been surprized if most of the juriors would of felt tempted to jump out of the box and choke the life out of him.
I say we introduce the guillotine to the US. Let people buy tickets to the event as they would a boxing match. Televise it on HBO.

[Poisonshady313]

Except when the the person being executed is innocent as has happened far too many times in our countries sad sad history of the death penalty.

I want a real number based on proven fact. Of the 1,030 people executed in this country since 1976, how many of them were really and trully innocent of the crime they were executed for?

[Dual867PowerMac]

Jesse Tafero (http://ejusa.org/grip/reasonabledoubt/Jesse%20J.%20Tafero.html) for one.

The people executing him even set the man's head on fire.

[Dual867PowerMac]

It says "thou shalt not murder".

This couey fellow did indeed murder. If we simply let this guy live, then what power does the commandment have, if there is no answering for the crime? Look at any ancient Hebrew document.... there was no such thing as "life inprisonment". for lesser crimes, there was financial restitution. For murder, death.

What does the bible say we do with those who do murder?

"Whomever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed" Genesis 9:6


You can look up for yourself the numerous instances in exodus, leviticus, and deuteronomy in which God prescribes death as the penalty for murder.
But then he says "thou shalt not kill"? :think: It's contradictory, wouldn't you say? ;)

[Poisonshady313]

Jesse Tafero (http://ejusa.org/grip/reasonabledoubt/Jesse%20J.%20Tafero.html) for one.

The people executing him even set the man's head on fire.

1030 executions... and you come up with one incident. in addition to the cantu fellow, a grand total of two. tragic as that is, i don't find it to be overwhelming support for the "risk of innocents' argument.

[Dual867PowerMac]

1030 executions... and you come up with one incident. in addition to the cantu fellow, a grand total of two. tragic as that is, i don't find it to be overwhelming support for the "risk of innocents' argument.
Are you saying it's okay if a few innocents die with all the guilty ones?

One innocent executed is too many.

[Poisonshady313]

But then he says "thou shalt not kill"? :think: It's contradictory, wouldn't you say? ;)

The first line in my post said "thou shalt not murder" There is a distinction between "murder" and "killing".

Murder
1. Law. the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder).

Kill
to deprive of life in any manner

All murder is killing, but not all killing is murder. God gives a multitude of situations in which killing is a lawful act, as the capital punishment for various crimes, and as a means of achieving a military victory. when God said "Whomever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed", apparently He instituted a form of killing that is NOT murder.


Self-defense, war, and capital punishment are biblically sanctioned incidents of killing which are not murder.

[Dual867PowerMac]

The first line in my post said "thou shalt not murder" There is a distinction between "murder" and "killing".
Really? They both mean to deliberately take the life of another. That's also the definition of "execution".

[Poisonshady313]

Are you saying it's okay if a few innocents die with all the guilty ones?

One innocent executed is too many.

Perhaps then we should outlaw airplanes. After all, innocent people die in plane crashes quite frequently, yet we still allow the barbaric institution of air travel to go on.

No system is perfect, but people who commit such heinous crimes should not be allowed to live. Plus, forensic technology these days is much more advanced, so more people can be accurately convicted by DNA samples than exhonerated.

[Dual867PowerMac]

Self-defense, war, and capital punishment are biblically sanctioned incidents of killing which are not murder.
Self-defense is not murder because the perpetrator forced the victim to do something they normally would find abhorrent.

[Dual867PowerMac]

Perhaps then we should outlaw airplanes. After all, innocent people die in plane crashes quite frequently, yet we still allow the barbaric institution of air travel to go on.
Strawman argument.




No system is perfect, but people who commit such heinous crimes should not be allowed to live. Plus, forensic technology these days is much more advanced, so more people can be accurately convicted by DNA samples than exhonerated.
If it isn't perfect, then the system should not be killing people knowing they might wrongfully execute an innocent person.

Hell, they shouldn't be executing people at all.

[Poisonshady313]

Really? They both mean to deliberately take the life of another. That's also the definition of "execution".

if one person kills another in an automobile accident... was it deliberate? If i'm being attacked, and in the interest of saving myself, I shoot or stab the attacker, not so as to kill him, but so as to hurt him enough to leave me alone... and the person dies... was it deliberate?


murder is particularly brutal and unlawful. lawful execution as capital punishment is nieither brutal nor unlawful.

[Poisonshady313]

Strawman argument.

Not at all. The analogy goes to show that the risk of the loss of innocent lives is relative in your eyes. Just as in captial punishment, air travel seeks to preserve the lives of innocent people. Innocent people also die in automobile accidents, during cosmetic surgery, bungee jumping, in wrestling matches... yet none of these activities have been abolished.

If it isn't perfect, then the system should not be killing people knowing they might wrongfully execute an innocent person.

Hell, they shouldn't be executing people at all.

nothing is perfect... it's a wonder people are let out of their own houses. 30 people die each year because of a vending machine falling on them. Innocent people die everyday, it's not fair, it sucks... but how many more innocent lives are you willing to sacrifice when criminals in prison organize for people on the outisde to have murders committed? or if a lifer gets a reduced sentence for testifying in a case? Or if a murderer escapes? or if a murderer murders a corrections officer? or if a prison decides it is too overpopulated, and so in an effort to make room, lifers get released, only to add a few more names to their victim list?

[Poisonshady313]

Self-defense is not murder because the perpetrator forced the victim to do something they normally would find abhorrent.

The victim could very well have simply let happen whatever would happen... why resort to violence?

Capital punishment is defense against a murderer having future victims. The state is forced to do something they would normally find abhorrent.

[DLaw911]

.....Capital punishment is defense against a murderer having future victims. The state is forced to do something they would normally find abhorrent.If you call executing someone 20 years after the person is convicted a "defense" than you should really just skip the trial and hang them upon arrest ... even before bringing them to jail.

Further, the death penalty does nothing to say that violence is bad. In fact, since it is government sanctioned and sponsored, it is a literal seal of approval on killing human beings.

Finally, although this case is cut and dry (the man confessed and there was corroborating evidence), many death penalty cases are FAR from this. The various Innocence Projects around the US have freed dozens of convicted murderers, as well as many serving life sentences, upon proof of exonnerating evidence (usually DNA). Unfortunately, DNA evidence is only found in a small number of cases. Thus, I cannot say "do the math" but is is crystal clear that hundreds of innocent people have died in prison, are currently serving long to life sentences, are on death row or have been executed. At a minimum those allowed to life have a chance to prove their innocense.

[JediMindTrick]

I want a real number based on proven fact. Of the 1,030 people executed in this country since 1976, how many of them were really and trully innocent of the crime they were executed for?

So it doesn't count if we killed an innocent man before 1976? Yes, I do happen to know all about Furman vs Georgia and what the year 1976 means to the death penalty. But that by no means alleviates those innocents we murdered before 1976.

I can give you one case, Ruben Cantu, where even the prosecutor (now retired) now admits that Cantu was probably innocent based on new evidence and admissions of witnesses at the trial that they were lying. Of course no one official is going to look into it very hard because doing so means admitting the real killer is still out there and that the state killed an innocent man. That would also mean astronomical lawsuits. So all you can give is cases where its possible the person was innocent. Its like this on all the cases where we've executed someone. The state is going to fight tooth and nail against reopening the cases or allowing anyone to look at them because its not in their interests to do so.

Lastly, I'm sure 95% or more of those executed were in fact guilty. But I'm also sure that not all of them were and thats unacceptable when your dealing with a completely irreversible penalty.

[DONTTREADONME]

Just put him in general population and allow the "inmate justice system" to handle it.

[Pudge]

Mortis, you seem like a decent guy. :) But I oppose the death penalty because I believe that killing someone who is of no threat to me is wrong. I have all the sympathy for Mark Lundsford, but it's not enough for me to support killing Couey.

Would you still have that same position if Couey or someone else did something similar to your child?

It's not about Couey being a threat, it's about justice. An innocent girl is dead, raped and horribly murdered by this man. He gets to live (on our dime, nonetheless) the rest of his days on Earth in a small cell. May not be much, but it's more than he gave little Jessica and the point is, he doesn't ****ing deserve one more breath of air.

And no, I don't support all these Biblical revenge type punishments, just take him to a washable room, put one bullet in his head and two in his heart and bury him in a pine box in an unmarked grave.

[Pudge]

Are you saying it's okay if a few innocents die with all the guilty ones?

One innocent executed is too many.

I agree here, which is why I believe that the DP should never become assembly-line. It should apply only in the most heinous of murders. The accused should get the best representation availaible and a neutral venue for the trial, but once you get through your first string of appeals and you're still guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, even with every possible benefit given to your defense as to that doubt, then you get the three bullets.

[ThrowCop]

Mr. Lunsford has been the epitome of class & restraint from the very beginning of this case. Cases like this make me almost rethink my anti death penalty stance!

[DLaw911]

It's not about Couey being a threat, it's about justice. An innocent girl is dead, raped and horribly murdered by this man. He gets to live (on our dime, nonetheless) the rest of his days on Earth in a small cell. May not be much, but it's more than he gave little Jessica and the point is, he doesn't ****ing deserve one more breath of air.Pudge, my response should be very predictable to you, but I am breaking it into several key points.

FIRST, if Couey is sentenced to die (and he will be), that starts and automatic appeal process that will cost the taxpayers 2-5 times what it would cost to lock him up for the rest of his life. And if his death sentence is eventually overturned then he gets life without parole AND look what it cost to get there.

SECOND, you might argue that appeals should be fast and certain, maybe take 30 days or less, thus reducing the cost of the appeals process. Well, that is dreamland. There are very few appellate lawyers qualified to handle death penalty cases. Most appeals lawyers refuse to handle these cases for various reasons. So when a lawyer is found (and sometimes it takes over a year until that lawyer is assigned the case) the first thing he has to do is find out what happened at the trial, the pretrial and the sentencing. That means getting transcripts. In a typical capital murder case the transcripts are the product of more than more reporter and they are voluminous. I have seen stacks of transcrips that are over 6 feet high that represent a single case. The appeals lawyer typically knows nothing about the case, so he has to read the transcripts over and over and determine what, if any issues are appealable.

As an example, the lawyer for one notarious California murder case took over 2 years to obtain and review all the transcripts and evidence. When he filed his opening brief in the Court of Appeals that triggered an assignment of the case to a Deputy Attorney General in California. Again, someone who knew nothing about the case and had never seen it before is not handed a 6 foot high stack of transcripts, a copy of the opening appellate brief, and told to respond to it. Typically he will ask for 5 or more continuances until he has had time to properly go over the materials and respond. The lawyer for the defendant can respond to the AG's response. There might be several responses and counter-responses until the case is finally submitted and they the case is scheduled for oral arguments, that is, WHEN THE COURT HAS TIME to hear the case. That might be in 6 months, it might be in a year. But it is not going to be soon because the justices also need time to review the briefs before the case is argued (keep in mind that justices need to know what's in the briefs so they can ask questions of the lawyers).

Once the case is argued it is submitted for a ruling. Again, the justices are not going to jump up and say to one side, "You lose" or "You win."" They refer the cases to their law clerks, case citations are checked for accuracy (lawyers on both sides sometimes inadvertently cite cases which have been modified, affirmed or overruled by other cases), and the justices eventually vote. Once they vote one of them is assigned the job of writing the majority or the unanimous decision.

And all of this is the FIRST level of appeal. Then there is the highest court of the state and possible federal appeals. And along the way new lawyers are going to get involved and THEY have to read and try to make sense out of all the transcripts and pleadings. So it is a very time consuming and expensive adventure. Most skilled death penalty lawyers are highly paid by the courts and, if privately retained, usually start at $250,000 and go up from there. After all, they are commiting themselves to over a decade of work.

THIRD, people talk about the death penalty as if it prevents crime or enacts justice. But in fact the death penalty is nothing more than hastening the inevitable. Everyone dies. Most people who live out their lives in prison die old and sick and they suffer and they meet their maker. But during that time they are out of sight and out of mind, and the public is not forced to endure hearing about their crimes while they appeal from one court to another. Life without parole IS finality, and it is just in that it leaves the door open for discovery of exonnerating evidence. Today we have DNA, which is useful in a small percentage of cases in which people are wrongfully accused. Thirty years ago no one would have thought DNA could be used in this matter. Who knows that other scientific breakthroughs will help exonnerate other wrongfully convicted defendants! This is not about John Couey. It's much bigger than him. The evidence against him was overwhelming and powerful. But in many cases the evidence is weak and based merely upon eyewitness identification (which is known to be highly suspect and unreliable).

Of course there are other reasons to oppose the death penalty, but I wanted to keep my points in direct reply to yours.

And no, I don't support all these Biblical revenge type punishments, just take him to a washable room, put one bullet in his head and two in his heart and bury him in a pine box in an unmarked grave.[/quote]

[Remus Lupin]

While I'm not overly fond of the death penalty, it wouldn't hurt my feelings if he got the gilotine for what he did to that child. Personally, I rather throw the scumbag into the general population see how long he lasts.

[DLaw911]

While I'm not overly fond of the death penalty, it wouldn't hurt my feelings if he got the gilotine for what he did to that child. Personally, I rather throw the scumbag into the general population see how long he lasts.The guillotine is actually a very humane method of execution, however, not too many people related to crime victims care to watch someone's head be cut off and blood squirt across the room.

[Scarred1]

Couey should die. There is no doubt and there was a confession. I am a registered sex offender. For something that happened 16 years ago I am still punished & scarred for life because of all the media attention and ensuing laws that target SO's for no other reason than misguided knee-jerk revenge reaction and do not protect us any better at all. SO's don't kill, killers kill. Two different profiles entirely. I won't go into all that now.

Couey is a killer, he does not deserve to live. All the pain and suffering by the victim, family, friends and the nation that followed this tragedy is also shared by me. I was in tears over it too. I have a wife and two wonderful little children and if they get hurt, I hurt.

This crime was brutal in it's savagery. He knew full well what he was doing. He knew he would get caught and go to jail for life. He decided to commit murder so there was no witness. Cold, cruel, calculating. To say he had no control over his actions is insane. He had a choice, he KNEW what his choices were. He knew the result of what his choices might bring. He clearly thought it out in advance and knew the child would suffocate and die. He had no care in the world for the little life he was taking.

We are a "sophisticated" society and do not as a whole believe that the punishment should fit the crime. We do not believe in punishing anymore. Punishing is vengeful. Instead we term it "protection" or "corrections". It is both a combination of protection AND punishment that we use to determine sentencing guidelines for various infractions.

The ultimate crime for which there is no undoing or making right is murder. Cold blooded, pre-meditated capital murder. There is no "correcting" this. There ARE innocents that have died by execution after wrongfully being found guilty. We should, as a nation, look at strengthening execution guidelines much tighter to prevent this from happening. Unfortunately, the first person executed in Florida when the death sentence was brought back was found innocent years later of that particular offense.

This Couey case has no mistake about guilt. All the legalese about mental states and the like to lessen the sentence is mumbo jumbo. One side of the issue, mentally incompetent to face the death sentence. That makes no sense. You want them to be mentally competent to realize they are being put to death for what they did? What difference does it make? They are being put to death! They made the choice to take a life, the price to pay for that choice is their own life. The other side of the issue, mental competence at the time of the offense. Didn't know what they were doing or couldn't help themselves. Those are ok arguments in most cases, but NOT in the case of murder such as this. If a person can't help themselves and has an impulse to murder, there is no cure for that and no sense in keeping them caged like wild animals for life. Terminate their existence.

Don't lump all sex offenders with the scum murderers like Couey. Nor should all SO's be stuck in with the real predators that actively seek out young children and destroy their lives. Just as in anything, there are different levels of offenses. Again, a topic for another thread. I am always in fear for the welfare of my family and we have to go through a LOT because of this Sexual Offender vendetta that the media has helped to sweep the nation. I try to lay low and remain annonymous. I have rebuilt my life as a family man and upstanding citizen, business owner, contributor etc, etc... But when dirtbags like Couey surface, it's about brutal murder and I felt compelled to say something.

It boils down to differentiating what really is at stake here. It's not about a child molestor, predator or sex offender. It's about a MURDERER! I would be happy to volunteer to be the executioner for the likes this murderer as are most other people that feel those that kill should face the penalty of being killed.

[pdmike]

REVENGE!!!! Let's get some plain, old-fashioned PAY BACK on this JERK!!!

SNUFF HIM!!!!

:rolleyes:

[pdmike]

Let me ask all of you pro-death penalty folks a question. I note there is some evidence here that the killer is mentally retarded. That doesn't seem to bother too many of you, who would still put him to death.

The question is this: Is there EVER a capital murder committed where any of you would NOT think the defendant should be executed? Suppose a totally insane person (thinks all other human beings are monsters from outer space, totally out of touch with reality, no question that he is totally and completely insane) kills another person in the most horrible way imaginable. Suppose it is clearly established at trial that the killer was totally nuts.

Should that guy get the death penalty?

[ValricoKate]

REVENGE!!!! Let's get some plain, old-fashioned PAY BACK on this JERK!!!

SNUFF HIM!!!!

:rolleyes:

this would be revenge...

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://impressive.net/people/gerald/2002/10/08/11-44-07-sm.jpg&imgrefurl=http://impressive.net/people/gerald/2002/10/08/11-44-07-sm.html&h=300&w=400&sz=24&hl=en&start=3&um=1&tbnid=w4hlYE75MGDZcM:&tbnh=93&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dburied%2Balive%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26c lient%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN

I wouldn't hesitate giving this man death. (although my method of choice wouldn't be allowed)

[birdonawire]

I think he deserves the same kind of death as the one he forced on her.
He sure didn't give her the option of "the needle" so why should he get the easy way out?

[Scarred1]

Suppose it is clearly established at trial that the killer was totally nuts.

What difference does it make? With a "smoking gun" situation, no way it can be anyone else, no way it's a mistake, impossible to refute they did it AND they showed the mental capacity to decide, plan and carry out the act. What does it matter if the person was insane or mentally incapacitated? They have shown they can kill, will kill, believe it's ok for them to kill, can plan and carry out the killing, have no remorse over it, see nothing wrong with what they did and there is no reason they should be allowed to live longer than it takes to get from the court to the execution chamber.

Certainly there are mitigating circumstances in SOME cases. Which is why we really should look at how the death penalty is allowed to be used as the ultimate penalty. There was a movie once. A young man with the mentality of an 8 year old, read in the bible that adulterers should be put to death. He killed his parents for cheating on each other. He got the death penalty. That would be an highly unusual circumstance in the case of a "smoking gun for sure he did it put him to death" scenario. That would be a mitigating circumstance that had that person been "normal" that crime would never have taken place. That person cannot be allowed freedom ever and should be kept under lock and key for his and societies saftey. Not necessarily at prison but a high security facility for such types that can handle these type people and allow them to live a secluded life without the torture life in prison would bring on a person like that to be brutalized and victimized for life while incarcerated. Because that is what would happen. But that is fiction, could happen, but fiction none the less.

There is the case of the woman that snapped and drowned here children. Yes, mitigating circumstance for lifetime sentence OR a sentence in a mental prison with treatment.

Yes, there are circumstances when mental health come into the picture that would commute someone from the death penalty to life or life to a lesser sentence once treated and can PROVE thay can safely return to society in a structured, monitored and secure transition. These type cases are the exception not the norm.

But ALL of those above have "mitigating" circumstances. In this case, there ARE no mitigating factors, only aggravating factors. While his rape crime MIGHT have been mitigated if proven his feeble mental state at the time of the act and his abusive childhood. THAT is not the issue. The issue is the murder! He CHOSE to kill her because he didn't want to pay the price and face the law if caught for the rape. That is NOT the sign of someone without mental facalties.

He didn't become the vision of the babbling itiot on TV until AFTER his attornies got hold of him. He was completely lucid, coherent and functioning in regular normal day to day life before he got caught AND shortly after he was arrested.

He deserves death and nothing less.

[sgtmac_46]

Agreed.

I don't care how henious the crime is or how guilty he seems to be. Its not worth the risk of executing another innocent man like the State of Texas did when they murdered Ruben Cantu who just like Couey was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruben_Cantu Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah...

Kill Couey in the most painful way possible......they can do it in my name, Jedi, so your conscience can be clean. ;)

[sgtmac_46]

Let me ask all of you pro-death penalty folks a question. I note there is some evidence here that the killer is mentally retarded. That doesn't seem to bother too many of you, who would still put him to death.

The question is this: Is there EVER a capital murder committed where any of you would NOT think the defendant should be executed? Suppose a totally insane person (thinks all other human beings are monsters from outer space, totally out of touch with reality, no question that he is totally and completely insane) kills another person in the most horrible way imaginable. Suppose it is clearly established at trial that the killer was totally nuts.

Should that guy get the death penalty?
Doesn't bother me in the least......he's intelligent enough to kidnap a little girl from her home, conceal her, rape her, and murder her......he's intelligent enough to DIE FOR IT!

And, suppose someone IS totally insane......if a dog becomes rabid, do we care if it's his fault before we put him down? :rolleyes:

[sgtmac_46]

REVENGE!!!! Let's get some plain, old-fashioned PAY BACK on this JERK!!!

SNUFF HIM!!!!

:rolleyes: I'd love for you to have been present when the body of this young girl was pulled out of the trashbag Couey stuffed her in after he raped and murdered her.....see how DAMNED smug you'd be then! :evil:

[Remus Lupin]

I'd love for you to have been present when the body of this young girl was pulled out of the trashbag Couey stuffed her in after he raped and murdered her.....see how DAMNED smug you'd be then! :evil:

+1

[sgtmac_46]

The guillotine is actually a very humane method of execution, however, not to many people related to crime victims care to watch someone's head be cut off and blood squirt across the room. Couey needs a death involving a power tool.

I will accept a compromise, however........life in prison IF Couey gets a maximum security prison and NO protection from other violent offenders......who know what he's done. If the shrinking violets here simply don't want the state to kill this guy because it 'makes them feel bad'.......let his fellow criminals carve him in to little jig-saw puzzle pieces and flush him down the toilet!

[Remus Lupin]

Couey needs a death involving a power tool.

What kind of power tool do you have in mind? :think:

[sgtmac_46]

Why is violent and bloody revenge an adaptive trait?

Lets say you find yourself in the wilderness, STARVING to death, with nothing but a pocket knife and a box of matches as tools. You come across two nests.....ONE is full of baby rabbits.......the other contains two grizzly bear cubs. The mothers are not around....yet!

Now, you're starving, and these are your only choices for food......the rabbits will provide some sustenance.....the bears MORE! Which will you kill and eat?

[Remus Lupin]

Let me ask all of you pro-death penalty folks a question. I note there is some evidence here that the killer is mentally retarded. That doesn't seem to bother too many of you, who would still put him to death.

The question is this: Is there EVER a capital murder committed where any of you would NOT think the defendant should be executed? Suppose a totally insane person (thinks all other human beings are monsters from outer space, totally out of touch with reality, no question that he is totally and completely insane) kills another person in the most horrible way imaginable. Suppose it is clearly established at trial that the killer was totally nuts.

Should that guy get the death penalty?

I have Asperger.
I say have Couey face the firing squad.

[sgtmac_46]

I have Asperger.
I say have Couey face the firing squad. If I were on that firing squad, i'd 'miss' low. ;)

'Oooops.....Sorry, sir....I think there's something wrong with this damn rifle!' ;)

[bella-day]

I'd love for you to have been present when the body of this young girl was pulled out of the trashbag Couey stuffed her in after he raped and murdered her.....see how DAMNED smug you'd be then! :evil:

He didn't murder her before he stuffed her in the trash bag.

When the police found Jessica, there was evidence that the child had tried to claw her way out.

Murdering her first would have been a kindness, relatively speaking.

Couy made certain that her final moments were filled with terror and more anxiety than any of us can imagine.

The needle is too good for this sack of ****.

Excuse my language please. This case strikes me right to the bone.

How could anyone be so cruel to a child?

[Remus Lupin]

If I were on that firing squad, i'd 'miss' low. ;)

:)) :))

[sgtmac_46]

He didn't murder her before he stuffed her in the trash bag.

When the police found Jessica, there was evidence that the child had tried to claw her way out.

Murdering her first would have been a kindness, relatively speaking.

Couy made certain that her final moments were filled with terror and more anxiety than any of us can imagine.

The needle is too good for this sack of ****.

Excuse my language please. This case strikes me right to the bone.

How could anyone be so cruel to a child? You're right....he murdered her BY putting her in the trash bag......and the rest.....we are in complete agreement!

I'd love to see Couey doused in gasoline and set on fire!

[Remus Lupin]

You're right....he murdered her BY putting her in the trash bag......and the rest.....we are in complete agreement!

I'd love to see Couey doused in gasoline and set on fire!

How about we get some branding iron that are used for cattle?

[bella-day]

Couey should die. There is no doubt and there was a confession. I am a registered sex offender. For something that happened 16 years ago I am still punished & scarred for life because of all the media attention and ensuing laws that target SO's for no other reason than misguided knee-jerk revenge reaction and do not protect us any better at all. SO's don't kill, killers kill. Two different profiles entirely. I won't go into all that now.*snip*

You speak of YOUR pain and how you are scarred for life.

Do you think that your victim came out of this scar free?

BTW, Couey was a child molester with a history. He just decided to kill Jessica so that he may have been able to avoid facing the consequences of his actions.

[Remus Lupin]

You speak of YOUR pain and how you are scarred for life.

Do you think that your victim came out of this scar free?

BTW, Couey was a child molester with a history. He just decided to kill Jessica so that he may have been able to avoid facing the consequences of his actions.

What do you expect, Bella?
Scumbags who raped children don't give a **** about their victims pain. ONLY HOW HARD THEIR LIFE IS BECAUSE THEY ARE BRANDED AFTER BEING CONVICTED OF DESTROYING A CHILDS LIFE.

[bella-day]

What do you expect, Bella?
Scumbags who raped children don't give a **** about their victims pain. ONLY HOW HARD THEIR LIFE IS BECAUSE THEY ARE BRANDED AFTER BEING CONVICTED OF DESTROYING A CHILDS LIFE.

We do not know what crime he committed.

I am curious just what kind of scars he feels his victim may carry as a result of that crime.

[pdmike]

And, suppose someone IS totally insane......if a dog becomes rabid, do we care if it's his fault before we put him down? :rolleyes:

So you think that humans should be treated the same as dogs? You don't see a distinction between a rabid dog and an insane human being?

[pdmike]

I'd love for you to have been present when the body of this young girl was pulled out of the trashbag Couey stuffed her in after he raped and murdered her.....see how DAMNED smug you'd be then! :evil:

I am not saying he should not be punished and/or dealt with according to his mental state. And please don't accuse me of being "smug" - I am anything but smug when it comes to something like this.

I would point out, however, that your post here pretty much establishes the point I was attempting to make in my original post - which is, that revenge seems to be the primary motivating factor that I see so often in conservative posts on the issue of the death penalty.

[bella-day]

I am not saying he should not be punished and/or dealt with according to his mental state. And please don't accuse me of being "smug" - I am anything but smug when it comes to something like this.

I would point out, however, that your post here pretty much establishes the point I was attempting to make in my original post - which is, that revenge seems to be the primary motivating factor that I see so often in conservative posts on the issue of the death penalty.


Mike,
There are those of us that view the death penalty as something that should be used in very specific cases only.

One of the many problems with our prison system is that people like Couey are released so they have the opportunity to re-offend.

Had this pig been kept in prison where he belonged...Jessica would not have spent days being raped and tortured only to end up buried alive. I can't imagine the horror this child was subjected to at the hands of this most despicable being.

My biggest regret where this case is concerned is that the other pigs that lived in that trailer and heard this child's pleas for help as they smoked their crack have been given a pass. Their part in hiding this waste of space and covering for him while the police went door to door desperately searching for this poor child sickens me to no end.

They too should be held responsible for their part in this crime.

I know you to be a man of good heart. I know you to be very sympathetic to the plight of others.

Given that, could you please answer a question for me?

Where is the sympathy for the real victim of this crime? How about a concern for the family that still mourns her death to this day. Like me, you have children...as parents, we know this family will never outlive their grief.

I'm consistently amazed at people that will step forward to plead for the life of someone the so callously took the life of an innocent child for their own pleasure.

There is a difference between justice and revenge. We want justice in this case. There is no way justice can be served if this excuse for human life is allowed to bring such horror to another innocent child.

The death penalty assures us that he will never harm another human being. It is the ultimate deterrent.

BTW, I don't buy his "retarded" act. He was sharp enough to walk out of that trailer with that little girl and keep her captive for days on end.

But even if he is retarded as he claims...do you want him to have an opportunity to do something like this again? He knew he was doing wrong or he would not have lied to the police or tried to cover his crime.

[Scarred1]

I am curious just what kind of scars he feels his victim may carry as a result of that crime.

Yes I do know. Having been an abused child myself and also the various courses and therapies I received as an adult. Teaching the difference between empathy and sympathy. To not only look at but know & feel the myriad of ramifications from not only the victim but the victims family. Scars can be for life but scars can also heal if tended to properly. Of COURSE I care about what happens to children. I have two little ones myself!

Not everyone is the same. Every case is different and there are levels involved. Lumsford himself was a sexual offender according to law. He just never got in trouble for it. As an adult he was "dating" his minor girlfriend and then married her over a year later and she was still a minor when married according to some news articles. His son is a sex offender and was caught. All that was swept under the rug and people either don't know it or chose to ignore those facts.

So, according to some posts here, they both should be branded with a cattle iron? What about the person that had too much to drink and urinates in the alley? Indecent exposure also carries the sex offender label along with an extremely long list of infractions. From something we USED to all laugh at as a nation such as Streaking, to the most violent and brutal forced types of actions.

The whole point is, Couey as at the extreme highest worst level imaginable. On top of ALL of that He is a kidnapper AND a murderer.

I also understand the pain of the one gentelmen and his feelings on the issue. My cousin, who was abused when younger by her father, also committed suicide some years later. Neither of them received any help and both suffered long term effects from the lack thereof. His children all suffered to various degrees for various issues for many years. Some, as adults, got the help they needed to heal themselves and have a more normal and happy life.

This issue regarding sexual abuse of minors, whatever the level, is nothing new. It has been going on for centuries. In the past it was ignored and no one wanted to look at it or deal with it. No one wanted to believe it could happen. It is only in the last two decades that more and more work is being done by child advocates to help the victims. In the case of family members, there were work arounds to treat both at the same time and maintain a family unit IF there was a treatable issue at hand. Only in the last decade has work been done to identify causes and effects with long term studies reviewing the fact there ARE levels of offenders and work began to take those in the lower tier with the least amount of threat or danger to the public and provide them therapy to correct flawed thinking or behaviors.

Animals like Couey and the yellow journalism that comes along in the years to follow flame the fire of lynch mob mentality. Even now, some years later, some Florida lawmakers have said they may have acted to hastily with a knee jerk reaction in passing some laws and are looking at tiers now in the statutes. So far it is just rhetoric and no matter the tier or title, all the verbiage below is the same. Very few of them do anything to protect our children one bit more than the laws we had in effect at the time of Couey's offense. A couple would have helped even more that is for sure. But that is a whole different topic for discussion.

The point here is should the death penalty be used for Couey. Even from the perspective of a registered sex offender, the answer is yes. There are levels or tiers of an offense. According to pschological testing and proven statistics, I am categorized in the lowest tier IF such a tier system ever becomes enacted. Couey is in the highest.

If it were just a sex offense, he should get life without parole. Multiple life without parole in this case. One for kidnapping, one for rape. But for his cold blooded ruthless murder, he should get death.

[birdonawire]

Scarred1 are you going to answer and tell us what sort of crime it was YOU committed? You say you are a sex offender and don't think they should all be categorized the same , so what niche do you fit into?

[Scarred1]

Attempted L&L...family member...not likely to cause injury... etc... etc...

[bella-day]

You know Scarred, I find it very interesting that you claim to sympathize with the victim of your crime and then go right into a litany about what a victim you are...and then to show your concern for your victim you come back with this comment?

Attempted L&L...family member...not likely to cause injury... etc... etc...

Define injury please. Not all injury is physical in nature. Emotional and mental injury runs much deeper in many cases.

Oh and uh, there are many of us that would have not a clue what L & L is an acronym for anyway.

Yeah, I'm aware there are different levels of sexual offenses. The behavior escalates over time like so many behaviors do. Couey decided to cover up his crime quite well.

I've known victims of these crimes that have been deeply affected. They will carry it with them for life. I'm sure their offenders would probably act like they should just get over it...in one case there was no physical injury. And you are right, people didn't discuss this subject 25 years ago. It was a subject considering so disgusting few would broach it. That wasn't a form of silent acceptance...it just was a sign of the times.

And then Adam Walsh's son was raped and beheaded. The subject got the attention of a nation. People began talking about the subject and demanded that the legal system address it harshly.

Your comments show little sympathy for the victims of these crimes...all you are worried about is someone lumping child molesters in a single category.

The law doesn't do it, so don't worry about it.

In my opinion...if you are molesting a kid you deserve whatever punishment the legal system dishes out. If doesn't matter if you are related or not. It doesn't matter if you feel it is "unlikely to cause injury" or not.

[birdonawire]

Well Bella-Day I am one of those who does not have a clue what L&L means.
Scarred1 could you please explain what it means?

[Scarred1]

I was asked a question and answered it. The legal term is L & L, Lewd and Lascivious and covers a broad spectrum over several pages of statutory text. The answer to the question had no bearing on my empathy. Empathy goes much deeper than sympothy. Sympothy only goes as far as feeling sorry for someone. You can have sympothy without having empathy but you cannot have empathy without having sympothy and yes, I have both.

With regards the other posting... Of course there is mental and emotional suffering and the effects go far beyond that. The description from the statute convered if there was injury. The differentiation being a non-violent offense without bodily harm for this lower tiered offense level.

[birdonawire]

I was asked a question and answered it. The legal term is L & L, Lewd and Lascivious and covers a broad spectrum over several pages of statutory text. The answer to the question had no bearing on my empathy. Empathy goes much deeper than sympothy. Sympothy only goes as far as feeling sorry for someone. You can have sympothy without having empathy but you cannot have empathy without having sympothy and yes, I have both.

With regards the other posting... Of course there is mental and emotional suffering and the effects go far beyond that. The description from the statute convered if there was injury. The differentiation being a non-violent offense without bodily harm for this lower tiered offense level.


Thank you for clearing that up for me.

[Dreamy]

I have personally never understood why being declared retarded or mentally deficient by the law matters when you do what this creep did. Not all mentally ill people do what he did so why should it be a factor?

[birddog1]

Let me ask all of you pro-death penalty folks a question. I note there is some evidence here that the killer is mentally retarded. That doesn't seem to bother too many of you, who would still put him to death.

The question is this: Is there EVER a capital murder committed where any of you would NOT think the defendant should be executed? Suppose a totally insane person (thinks all other human beings are monsters from outer space, totally out of touch with reality, no question that he is totally and completely insane) kills another person in the most horrible way imaginable. Suppose it is clearly established at trial that the killer was totally nuts.

Should that guy get the death penalty?

Such a person would be the poster child for execution in my eyes. After all such a person would certainly be very likely to kill again if he ever gained freedom. I personally see no reason to spare a person becuase he or she has a diminished mental capacity if they indeed commited the crime.

[ValricoKate]

http://cbs3.com/topstories/Jessica.Lunsford.John.2.286675.html

Judge: Sex Offender Faked Mental Retardation

INVERNESS, Fla. (CBS) ― The man convicted of kidnapping and raping 9-year-old Jessica Lunsford before swaddling her in garbage bags and burying her alive in his yard was likely faking mentally retardation in earlier tests, a court-appointed psychologist said Tuesday.

that's why he was cleared to proceed to the death phase.

[Remus Lupin]

Don't care if it was a family member or not. If you molest a child, you should get firing squad.

[Claymore]

I have Asperger.
I say have Couey face the firing squad.

Double-tap to the forehead with a .45.
Toss the carcass into an incinerator.

[Vaard]

Agreed.

I don't care how henious the crime is or how guilty he seems to be. Its not worth the risk of executing another innocent man like the State of Texas did when they murdered Ruben Cantu who just like Couey was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruben_Cantu

there are alot of problems with that case........


there are not the same problems with this one..........


i vote for the double tap........

[ValricoKate]

Don't care if it was a family member or not. If you molest a child, you should get firing squad.

If you molest a child in Florida, I think a boattrip to the Middle Grounds to "swim w/ the fishes" works for me.

[ValricoKate]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294371,00.html
Judge Sentences John Couey to Death for Murdering Jessica Lunsford

Friday, August 24, 2007


By the way, he is just waiting for it.

Unless he won an appeal that I am unaware of he will get the death penalty.

[ValricoKate]

http://www.dc.state.fl.us/ActiveInmates/Detail.asp?Bookmark=1&From=list&SessionID=486811214

here is his page on the active dealth row inmates site.

Head's all shaved ...
ready for "ole sparky"?

I think you can request "ole sparky"' if you want.

note his priors.

[Dreamy]

http://www.dc.state.fl.us/ActiveInmates/Detail.asp?Bookmark=1&From=list&SessionID=486811214

here is his page on the active dealth row inmates site.

Head's all shaved ...
ready for "ole sparky"?

I think you can request "ole sparky"' if you want.

note his priors.

Justice served.


Current Release Date: DEATH SENTENCE

[247]

I have no remorse nor compassion for murderers no matter insane or not.

[Pudge]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258443,00.html

Here is why I think Couey will get the needle. The jury isn't going to buy the fact that Couey is mentally retarded. The fact that he was able to commit the crime on his own and then fled on his own to Ga will disprove that big time. Also the jury isn't going to be swayed by the fact Coury was abused as a child and lived in poverty. It usually don't work and it certainly won't work in this case. Add the fact the crime itself is so heinious and so horrifying, I wouldn't been surprized if most of the juriors would of felt tempted to jump out of the box and choke the life out of him.

The needle.

What a joke.

They ought to bring Old Sparky out of retirement for this *******.

[Pudge]

I oppose the death penalty. Put him in prison for the rest of his life, but don't kill him.

He raped a 9 year old girl and buried her- alive- in a trash bag.

He doesn't deserve to live.

[Pudge]

Agreed.

I don't care how henious the crime is or how guilty he seems to be. Its not worth the risk of executing another innocent man like the State of Texas did when they murdered Ruben Cantu who just like Couey was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruben_Cantu

Couey is not Cantu, there's no doubt to Couey's guilt. Couey admitted to killing Jessica Lunsford and tried a diminished capacity defense.

Sorry, bubye.

[SUVRon]

He raped a 9 year old girl and buried her- alive- in a trash bag.

He doesn't deserve to live.

The sooner they do it the better in my opinion.

[LoneStarHero]

I was asked a question and answered it. The legal term is L & L, Lewd and Lascivious and covers a broad spectrum over several pages of statutory text. The answer to the question had no bearing on my empathy. Empathy goes much deeper than sympothy. Sympothy only goes as far as feeling sorry for someone. You can have sympothy without having empathy but you cannot have empathy without having sympothy and yes, I have both.

With regards the other posting... Of course there is mental and emotional suffering and the effects go far beyond that. The description from the statute convered if there was injury. The differentiation being a non-violent offense without bodily harm for this lower tiered offense level.

In case anyone has forgot to say this:

Welcome to the Sean Hannity Message Boards!

Your point of view is unique for these forums and I look forward to more of your input.

[Scarred1]

LoneStarHero
Thank you very much. I do care about others and what is going on in society in general like any other citizen would. I have a wife, kids, home, work, etc... pretty much like any other average American and want the best for them too like everyone else does. As you pointed out, unfortunately, I have a unique perspective to see things from more than one viewpoint.

Again, thanks for the welcoming comments.

[LoneStarHero]

LoneStarHero
Thank you very much. I do care about others and what is going on in society in general like any other citizen would. I have a wife, kids, home, work, etc... pretty much like any other average American and want the best for them too like everyone else does. As you pointed out, unfortunately, I have a unique perspective to see things from more than one viewpoint.

Again, thanks for the welcoming comments.

I don't believe in shunning people who have paid their debt to society. As far as the term "Sex Offender" goes, it covers a wide spectrum. Everything from urinating in a bar's parking lot at 2:45 am to the abominable acts that the scumbag in this thread perpetrated.

I don't intend on digging out my pitchfork and torch.

[chumley]

This is why I believe in it:

Not to punish but rather to protect the innocent. As long as a person who kills lives, there is a chance he may escape or be mistakenly freed to do it again. Please read the following as a very sad example.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9811/17/texas.execution/


Just another viewpoint on the subject.

[Vindicator]

... As far as the term "Sex Offender" goes, it covers a wide spectrum. Everything from urinating in a bar's parking lot at 2:45 am to the abominable acts that the scumbag in this thread perpetrated.

Since when is "Urinating in Public" a "sex crime"? Even if it is seen by 1000 kids it is NOT a crime where a person can be charged with a sexual offense.

IF the perp PURPOSELY sought out kids/women, then pulled out his penis and shook it while urinating - YES that would be and should be considered Lewd and Lascivious Behavior, with an added charge of "Urinating in Public." But going to the side of the building or against a car and taking a leak IS NOT A SEX CRIME.

I don't intend on digging out my pitchfork and torch.

How about digging out a law dictionary and looking up Sex-Offender and Urinating in Public?

ETC(SW/AW)
USN Ret.

[birdonawire]

Since when is "Urinating in Public" a "sex crime"? Even if it is seen by 1000 kids it is NOT a crime where a person can be charged with a sexual offense.

IF the perp PURPOSELY sought out kids/women, then pulled out his penis and shook it while urinating - YES that would be and should be considered Lewd and Lascivious Behavior, with an added charge of "Urinating in Public." But going to the side of the building or against a car and taking a leak IS NOT A SEX CRIME.



How about digging out a law dictionary and looking up Sex-Offender and Urinating in Public?

ETC(SW/AW)
USN Ret.

Uh.....where I live it is considered a sex crime to pee in public, you also get you self on the sex offenders list for it.

[sgtmac_46]

So you think that humans should be treated the same as dogs? You don't see a distinction between a rabid dog and an insane human being? I like dogs better than the 'humans' you're referring to.....a dog is a noble animal.

An incurably insane human being is no different than incurably rabid dog......best to put them out of their misery. If they were sane they wouldn't wish to live like that.....it's just like Terri Schiavo. ;)

Also, insanity as justification for murder is MOSTLY a myth.....it's a fabrication of defense attorney's looking to justify their hourly rate. ;)

[sgtmac_46]

I am not saying he should not be punished and/or dealt with according to his mental state. And please don't accuse me of being "smug" - I am anything but smug when it comes to something like this. Oh no....your post was VERY SMUG! Like most attorneys, you wish to seperate the ACTOR from the ACT.....but you can't in reality. ;)


I would point out, however, that your post here pretty much establishes the point I was attempting to make in my original post - which is, that revenge seems to be the primary motivating factor that I see so often in conservative posts on the issue of the death penalty. Play whatever game you want, but at the end of the day remember who's DEFENDING a man who stuffed a little girl in a trashbag after he was done sexually assaulting......and who that REALLY makes a 'monster'.

I defend little girls.....who do you defend? ;)

[sgtmac_46]

I have personally never understood why being declared retarded or mentally deficient by the law matters when you do what this creep did. Not all mentally ill people do what he did so why should it be a factor? Being mentally retarded or mentally deficient is not the same as not being responsible for your actions.......it's merely a fallacy drummed up by clever defense attorney's to try to garner sympathy for the unsympathetic.

Couey was intelligent enough to carry out his act, and intelligent enough to attempt to cover it up.......that shows intelligence AND awareness that his actions were wrong......GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME!

[sgtmac_46]

I don't believe in shunning people who have paid their debt to society. As far as the term "Sex Offender" goes, it covers a wide spectrum. Everything from urinating in a bar's parking lot at 2:45 am to the abominable acts that the scumbag in this thread perpetrated.

I don't intend on digging out my pitchfork and torch.
Then you have a problem with what categorizes 'sex offender' not that there is such a thing as 'registered sex offender'.

You got a problem with a guy like Couey being registered for life? ;)

Moreover, Couey's HISTORY is a poster history for why there ARE registrations.

[sgtmac_46]

Couey is not Cantu, there's no doubt to Couey's guilt. Couey admitted to killing Jessica Lunsford and tried a diminished capacity defense.

Sorry, bubye. You noted the bait and switch game too, huh? Whenever discussing the death penalty, SOMETIMES the opponents must bring up someone other than the subject who is OBVIOUSLY GUILTY! ;)

There ain't no defending Couey.....and any effort to do so paints the defender in a bad light.

[sgtmac_46]

Note the prior 'Burglaries'......I bet Couey has committed DOZENS...maybe HUNDREDS! Most burglars don't get caught for most of the burglaries they commit, and he's been convicted of several.

Burglary and violent sexual predators go HAND IN HAND!

This is why we have 'CASTLE DOCTRINE' laws to deal with guys like Couey......so if found in someone's home, instead of going to prison for 6 months, they get send STRAIGHT TO THE BONEYARD with a 12 gauge to the CHEST!

Shooting burlgars is about MORE than just 'keeping them from stealing your stuff'......burglaries are VIOLENT CRIMES waiting to happen!

[pdmike]

One of the many problems with our prison system is that people like Couey are released so they have the opportunity to re-offend.

Couey was a sex offender who (presumably) did his time on a determinate sentence and was then released. Here, it sounds as though you are arguing for either the death penalty or life without parole for first time sex offenders, i.e., you apparently feel that it is wrong for them to be released (once they have served their sentence) "so they have the opportunity to re-offend."

Had this pig been kept in prison where he belonged...Jessica would not have spent days being raped and tortured only to end up buried alive.

Yes - I see that is precisely what you are arguing. That is a different issue than the one presented by this thread, as I am sure you are aware. At present, the sex offender laws are very, very strict - but none of them that I know of provide for life in prison without the possibility of parole or the death penalty.

My biggest regret where this case is concerned is that the other pigs that lived in that trailer and heard this child's pleas for help as they smoked their crack have been given a pass. Their part in hiding this waste of space and covering for him while the police went door to door desperately searching for this poor child sickens me to no end.

They too should be held responsible for their part in this crime.

If it went down as you say here, then I totally agree. Anyone who assists a principal in a crime by helping them evade detection following the commission of the crime, is at best an accessory after the fact and possibly a principal as well.

I know you to be a man of good heart. I know you to be very sympathetic to the plight of others.

Given that, could you please answer a question for me?

Where is the sympathy for the real victim of this crime? How about a concern for the family that still mourns her death to this day. Like me, you have children...as parents, we know this family will never outlive their grief.

I'm consistently amazed at people that will step forward to plead for the life of someone the so callously took the life of an innocent child for their own pleasure.

Accusing someone who opposes the death penalty of lack of sympathy for the victims and their families is similar to claiming that pro choice people are "in favor of abortion" or that separation of church and state people "hate religion." I have the deepest sympathy for the victim in this case and her family. I am , however, also opposed to the death penalty on moral grounds, i.e., in my opinion, the death penalty demeans any society that utilizes it.

Ample punishment exists for capital murder short of the death penalty itself. LWOP both punishes severely and prevents further crimes (at least against members of the general public as opposed to other prison inmates and/or prison personnel).

I think that LWOP is a worse punishment than death - especially now, that the death penalty is imposed by way of lethal injection.

There is a difference between justice and revenge. We want justice in this case. There is no way justice can be served if this excuse for human life is allowed to bring such horror to another innocent child.

With all due respect, my friend, you call it "justice" but there are those who think it looks an awful, awful lot like plain, old revenge. I would counter by arguing that LWOP is justice whereas the death penalty is revenge, pure and simple.

The death penalty assures us that he will never harm another human being. It is the ultimate deterrent.

Can't argue with that. But at what price? It has been said that imprisoning capital murderers for the rest of their life without the possibility of parole (as opposed to executing them) is the price we must pay for calling ourselves a civilized society. I agree with that.

BTW, I don't buy his "retarded" act. He was sharp enough to walk out of that trailer with that little girl and keep her captive for days on end.

But even if he is retarded as he claims...do you want him to have an opportunity to do something like this again? He knew he was doing wrong or he would not have lied to the police or tried to cover his crime.

Sure, if he is only pretending to be retarded, he should not be given the consideration a retarded person gets in the criminal justice system (whatever that is, these days). But whether he is faking retardation or not is a factual question.

The more significant question is, assuming he IS mentally retarded - should he still be executed? You seem to feel it doesn't make any difference: "But even if he is retarded as he claims...do you want him to have an opportunity to do something like this again?"

In other words, even if he is mentally retarded - snuff his fanny anyway so he can't do something like this again! I don't buy that. If we claim that we are a civilized society, surely we would not put someone to death who commits a crime while mentally retarded or insane to the extent they were uanble to tell the difference between right or wrong.

[Andrew_980]

Let me ask all of you pro-death penalty folks a question. I note there is some evidence here that the killer is mentally retarded. That doesn't seem to bother too many of you, who would still put him to death.

The question is this: Is there EVER a capital murder committed where any of you would NOT think the defendant should be executed? Suppose a totally insane person (thinks all other human beings are monsters from outer space, totally out of touch with reality, no question that he is totally and completely insane) kills another person in the most horrible way imaginable. Suppose it is clearly established at trial that the killer was totally nuts.

Should that guy get the death penalty?

Yes, he is too dangerous to let live. I put down the rabid dog not because i lack sympathy or i hate it, it will never beat the rabies and will be a threat untill dead.

[JenT]

I oppose the death penalty. Put him in prison for the rest of his life, but don't kill him.

He killed that little girl. I vote they Kill him.

[JenT]

That's a good reason, but I feel there is a far, far more important reason to oppose the death penalty: it's still killing someone.

All you pious Christians out there remember that commandment against killing someone?

Do you realize pious is a positive? Somehow in your context, sounds odd.

I'm a Christian and I remember what God said about murder and how to deal with it.

Kill him.

[JenT]

I can't help but think the anti-abortion/pro-death penalty position is hypocritical.

On the day an unborn infant rapes and brutally murders an innocent little girl, then I'll consider the hypocrisy of being pro-life/pro death penalty.

[JenT]

But then he says "thou shalt not kill"? :think: It's contradictory, wouldn't you say? ;)

It's actually thou shalt not murder. Killing a murderer is not murdering him, it's just. That's why we spend so much on having trials and juries. To avoid any mistakes. They do happen but they are rare, and much fewer deaths than letting murderers run rampant, or murder in prison as well.

[JediMindTrick]

You noted the bait and switch game too, huh? Whenever discussing the death penalty, SOMETIMES the opponents must bring up someone other than the subject who is OBVIOUSLY GUILTY! ;)

There ain't no defending Couey.....and any effort to do so paints the defender in a bad light.

Its because some of us are big picture people. We realize that if you allow the death penalty in one case then its going to be a possibility in other cases as well. Little picture people, like anyone who isolates a single case as a justification for the death penalty, are the reasons we get such screwed up disparities in the justice system. Couey is a monster and to be honest I don't care what happens to him from a personal standpoint. But in the big picture sense I realize that if you allow the death penalty in his case then the death penalty could happen to someone in a less clear case. And thats what I'm not willing to accept. I'd rather a monster like Couey be allowed to live in a jail cell for the rest of his life than risk the execution of an innocent person.

[bella-day]

Couey was a sex offender who (presumably) did his time on a determinate sentence and was then released. Here, it sounds as though you are arguing for either the death penalty or life without parole for first time sex offenders, i.e., you apparently feel that it is wrong for them to be released (once they have served their sentence) "so they have the opportunity to re-offend."

Life in prison doesn't really mean that the prisoner will spend the rest of their life in prison. We all know that.

Life without possibility of parole? Yeah, works until the prison becomes overcrowded. Read this link:

http://www.cnn.com/US/9811/17/texas.execution/

The article is written about Kenneth McDuff. The poster child for life without the possibility of parole. He was paroled due to overcrowding.

He and his side kick Otis Toole raped and murdered my niece's Godmother.


Yes - I see that is precisely what you are arguing. That is a different issue than the one presented by this thread, as I am sure you are aware. At present, the sex offender laws are very, very strict - but none of them that I know of provide for life in prison without the possibility of parole or the death penalty.

I realize that. IMHO, any adult that rapes a little kid needs to be locked up for good.

It isn't something someone decides to do because they've never tried it. It's most likely something they have been doing for some time before they finally got caught.

If it went down as you say here, then I totally agree. Anyone who assists a principal in a crime by helping them evade detection following the commission of the crime, is at best an accessory after the fact and possibly a principal as well.

His sister knew he was supposed to register and she knew he had not.

The walls in a typical house trailer do not allow for much privacy. Pass gas in the bathroom and everyone in the place gets to listen to the music.

He kept that child in a closet in his bedroom for 2 or 3 days. There is no way in hell those people were unaware.

Accusing someone who opposes the death penalty of lack of sympathy for the victims and their families is similar to claiming that pro choice people are "in favor of abortion" or that separation of church and state people "hate religion." I have the deepest sympathy for the victim in this case and her family. I am , however, also opposed to the death penalty on moral grounds, i.e., in my opinion, the death penalty demeans any society that utilizes it.

I haven't accused you of anything. I was merely pointing out that it is typical for people to step up with the we are being so cruel thing without stopping to think that the life of the person that was murdered also has a huge impact on completely innocent people. It's like some people want to brush the victim and the family of the victim aside without considering just what it is they are still enduring.

The perpetrator suddenly becomes the victim.

It's twisted Mike.

Ample punishment exists for capital murder short of the death penalty itself. LWOP both punishes severely and prevents further crimes (at least against members of the general public as opposed to other prison inmates and/or prison personnel).

If LWOP was doled out before someone is murdered maybe it would make a difference. If LWOP of meant what the acronym indicates maybe it would make a difference...unfortunately it doesn't.

I think that LWOP is a worse punishment than death - especially now, that the death penalty is imposed by way of lethal injection.

Then why would you wish it on someone? Isn't that being cruel and vengeful?

Again, you have revenge confused with ... No way in hell will you ever get a chance to do this to another human being.

That is the message of the death penalty.

With all due respect, my friend, you call it "justice" but there are those who think it looks an awful, awful lot like plain, old revenge. I would counter by arguing that LWOP is justice whereas the death penalty is revenge, pure and simple.

See above.

Can't argue with that. But at what price? It has been said that imprisoning capital murderers for the rest of their life without the possibility of parole (as opposed to executing them) is the price we must pay for calling ourselves a civilized society. I agree with that.

Allowing these pigs even the slightest opportunity to re-offend is not civilized.

It's naive.

Sure, if he is only pretending to be retarded, he should not be given the consideration a retarded person gets in the criminal justice system (whatever that is, these days). But whether he is faking retardation or not is a factual question.

The more significant question is, assuming he IS mentally retarded - should he still be executed? You seem to feel it doesn't make any difference: "But even if he is retarded as he claims...do you want him to have an opportunity to do something like this again?"

Even if he were retarded I would not want him to have another chance to rape, torture, and murder another child.

You see...I do not see the perpetrator as the victim.

In other words, even if he is mentally retarded - snuff his fanny anyway so he can't do something like this again! I don't buy that. If we claim that we are a civilized society, surely we would not put someone to death who commits a crime while mentally retarded or insane to the extent they were uanble to tell the difference between right or wrong.

If you too damned stupid to know that you do not kidnap a child, hold her prisoner in a closet for days so you can torture and rape her just to end her life when you are done with her.

Yeah, he took a living, breathing, beautiful, little girl and stuffed her into a garbage bag with her favorite stuffed toy and then buried her alive. That poor baby's final moments were spent trying to claw her way out. Her father and grandmother have a lifetime to be tortured by that fact.

No, I don't care if he is retarded, stupid, sick, evil, or even had a horrible childhood...we have given him far more consideration than he did his victim...it's more than we owe him in my estimation.

I'm going to use the same argument you use for abortion. It's legal and yes, it is a choice that we as a society have.

But hey, look at it this way.

Just how many are actually put to death in this country each year?

Couldn't be more than a couple of hundred don't you think?

Now consider the number of abortions performed on a daily basis.

Something to think about huh?

A couple of hundred that went out of their way to earn the right to be executed compared to the millions that did nothing to deserve it.

I guess that makes us civilized...

[JediMindTrick]

Life in prison doesn't really mean that the prisoner will spend the rest of their life in prison. We all know that.

Life without possibility of parole? Yeah, works until the prison becomes overcrowded. Read this link:

http://www.cnn.com/US/9811/17/texas.execution/

The article is written about Kenneth McDuff. The poster child for life without the possibility of parole. He was paroled due to overcrowding.

He and his side kick Otis Toole raped and murdered my niece's Godmother.


So the solution is to fix the life without parole system rather than use a system where we'll risk killing more innocent people. And yes innocent people have been executed. Not so many since Fuhriman vs Georgia but I can cite many cases since there where there clearly was reasonable doubt and it wasn't a cut and dry case like Couey. Ruben Cantu, who has been brought up in this thread for instance. Cantu may have done it but there is also a mountain of uncertainty about it as well and he may well have been innocent as the co defendant claims, as the surviving victim claims, and even as the prosecutor who tried him now claims.

[Lee Kington]

I oppose the death penalty. Put him in prison for the rest of his life, but don't kill him. Both are expensive and a drain on the emotions of the surviving family. There is no piece for them in a life sentence, the book is never closed.

I think such offenders should be given the most lenient sentence possible. Put them back out on the streets as soon as possible providing the surviving family is given the time, date, and location of release.

[bella-day]

So the solution is to fix the life without parole system rather than use a system where we'll risk killing more innocent people. And yes innocent people have been executed. Not so many since Fuhriman vs Georgia but I can cite many cases since there where there clearly was reasonable doubt and it wasn't a cut and dry case like Couey. Ruben Cantu, who has been brought up in this thread for instance. Cantu may have done it but there is also a mountain of uncertainty about it as well and he may well have been innocent as the co defendant claims, as the surviving victim claims, and even as the prosecutor who tried him now claims.

There is absolutely no doubt in this would that Couey committed this crime.

Don't worry. An innocent man is not being put to death.

On the other hand, he viciously murdered an innocent child for his own amusement.

You do understand we are discussing a very specific case right?

[JediMindTrick]

There is absolutely no doubt in this would that Couey committed this crime.

Don't worry. An innocent man is not being put to death.

On the other hand, he viciously murdered an innocent child for his own amusement.

You do understand we are discussing a very specific case right?

As I said a few posts ago I'm a big picture guy who considers the whole death penalty system. You and some of the others are little picture people who want to isolate cases. I think Couey is a monster and from a personal standpoint I don't care about his fate at all. But I realize that if you allow the death penalty in this case then it will be allowed in other cases as well. And in some of those cases it won't be so obvious about guilt. Thats the point of looking at the big picture - the system is flawed and mistakes will be made and an execution cannot be taken back. And you can't create a system where you only execute the "really" guilty ones like Couey because that implies then that the rest aren't as guilty which undermines the whole concept of beyond a reasonable doubt. And you can't execute only those who confess but so many confessions are false or coerced (we've had 30 separate confessions to a twelve year old unsolved murder in my town).

[sgtmac_46]

As I said a few posts ago I'm a big picture guy who considers the whole death penalty system. You and some of the others are little picture people who want to isolate cases. I think Couey is a monster and from a personal standpoint I don't care about his fate at all. But I realize that if you allow the death penalty in this case then it will be allowed in other cases as well. And in some of those cases it won't be so obvious about guilt. Thats the point of looking at the big picture - the system is flawed and mistakes will be made and an execution cannot be taken back. And you can't create a system where you only execute the "really" guilty ones like Couey because that implies then that the rest aren't as guilty which undermines the whole concept of beyond a reasonable doubt. And you can't execute only those who confess but so many confessions are false or coerced (we've had 30 separate confessions to a twelve year old unsolved murder in my town).
Sure you can, Jedi....Couey is guilty, execute him. I know you don't want to discuss Couey, because he's indefensible......but that's the subject, no bait and switch allowed. ;)

[sgtmac_46]

Its because some of us are big picture people. We realize that if you allow the death penalty in one case then its going to be a possibility in other cases as well. Little picture people, like anyone who isolates a single case as a justification for the death penalty, are the reasons we get such screwed up disparities in the justice system. Couey is a monster and to be honest I don't care what happens to him from a personal standpoint. But in the big picture sense I realize that if you allow the death penalty in his case then the death penalty could happen to someone in a less clear case. And thats what I'm not willing to accept. I'd rather a monster like Couey be allowed to live in a jail cell for the rest of his life than risk the execution of an innocent person. No, it's because you don't want to discuss THIS case because it doesn't support your argument......so you bait and switch to try and stack the deck. ;)

I can understand that you don't want to be in the position of defending Couey, so you have to change the subject to not being about Couey.....I understand that very well.....i'm just here to keep the conversation honest. ;)

[sgtmac_46]

So the solution is to fix the life without parole system rather than use a system where we'll risk killing more innocent people. And yes innocent people have been executed. Not so many since Fuhriman vs Georgia but I can cite many cases since there where there clearly was reasonable doubt and it wasn't a cut and dry case like Couey. Ruben Cantu, who has been brought up in this thread for instance. Cantu may have done it but there is also a mountain of uncertainty about it as well and he may well have been innocent as the co defendant claims, as the surviving victim claims, and even as the prosecutor who tried him now claims. Warehousing an innocent man in a cage is more cruel and inhumane than killing him........the reason some folks don't want a death penalty is moral cowardice.........so they don't have to live with the tough decisions.......they want it both ways. "

Yeah, living in a cage for life is bad.....but if for some reason we turn out to be wrong, we can always just let him out with an 'i'm sorry' and it will be all better!"

It's the ILLUSION of being humane. ;)

Cantu isn't the subject.....COUEY is......defend Couey or drop out of the discussion.

[sgtmac_46]

Both are expensive and a drain on the emotions of the surviving family. There is no piece for them in a life sentence, the book is never closed.

I think such offenders should be given the most lenient sentence possible. Put them back out on the streets as soon as possible providing the surviving family is given the time, date, and location of release. Death is best for both families involved.......it allows closure.

The victims family can move, doesn't have to worry about appeals, hearings, set execution dates, canceled execution dates....PAROLE HEARINGS! Justice is done and over with.

The murderers family can bury their loved one and begin the grieving process.......doesn't have to live their life visiting a loved one in a cage.

Those claiming the death penalty is the 'cruel' option are mistaken.........living in a cage because of the moral cowardice of those who fear every decision is the worst fate.

[pdmike]

Life in prison doesn't really mean that the prisoner will spend the rest of their life in prison. We all know that.

Life without possibility of parole? Yeah, works until the prison becomes overcrowded. Read this link:

http://www.cnn.com/US/9811/17/texas.execution/

The article is written about Kenneth McDuff. The poster child for life without the possibility of parole. He was paroled due to overcrowding.

He and his side kick Otis Toole raped and murdered my niece's Godmother.

There is a difference between "life" and "life without possibility of parole." Yes, if a murderer gets life, it is PROBABLE he will not spend the rest of his life in prison. Life sentences are routinely handed out in NON-capital murder cases.

LWOP, on the other hand, means what it says - believe me. LWOP is the alternatiave to the death penalty in a capital case.

Kenneth McDuff did not receive an LWOP sentence.

But as he was awaiting execution in 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the death penalty as unconstitutional. McDuff's sentence was commuted to life. After 21 years in prison, McDuff was paroled in 1989, when Texas freed thousands of inmates to free up space in their overcrowded prisons for newly convicted inmates.

When McDuff's sentence was commuted to life (as opposed to LWOP, or life without possibility of parole) he IMMEDIATELY became eligible to be paroled. So you cannot cite McDuff's case as authority for the proposition that life witout the possibility of parole doesn't mean anything, because McDuff never was sentenced to LWOP. He went from the death penalty to a sentence of life - not life without possiblity of parole.


I haven't accused you of anything. I was merely pointing out that it is typical for people to step up with the we are being so cruel thing without stopping to think that the life of the person that was murdered also has a huge impact on completely innocent people. It's like some people want to brush the victim and the family of the v