PDA

View Full Version : the death penalty....



polydeuces
11-03-15, 21:29
Sitting here getting sick to my stomach reading this, where in (my short form) it says:

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday halted the execution of a Missouri man who murdered three people in a convenience store robbery in 1994 to allow an appeal on whether he may suffer undue pain from the lethal injection drug due to a medical condition.
Ernest Johnson, 55, was scheduled to die by lethal injection at the state prison in Bonne Terre, Missouri. The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a separate motion to halt the execution.
Johnson was convicted of bludgeoning to death Mary Bratcher, Mabel Scrubbs and Fred Jones using a hammer, a screw driver and a gun, according to court records. Defense attorneys have argued in unsuccessful appeals that he has an intellectual disability and is not therefore eligible for execution.
FULL ARTICLE (http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/us-supreme-court-halts-execution-of-missouri-man/ar-BBmMfF0?li=AAa0dzB&ocid=mailsignout)
OBSERVATION: Gleaning from this article we can lean that this convicted killer has had better healthcare than many of us law abiding citizens.

HERE HOWEVER ARE THE COLD HARD FACTS:

State of Missouri v. Earnest Lee Johnson
968 S.W. 2d 686 (Mo.banc 1998)
CASE FACTS (http://www.murderpedia.org/male.J/j/johnson-ernest-lee.htm)
At eleven o’clock, the morning of Saturday, February 12, 1994, Johnson bought a bottle of beer and a package of cigarettes at a Columbia, Missouri convenience store of which he was a frequent customer.

He went to the store a second time later that day, but did not make a purchase. On one of these trips, he questioned the cashier about who would be working the next shift. The cashier told Johnson that she would be relieved at 5:00 p.m. by Mabel Scruggs and that the store would close at 11:00 p.m.

Johnson left and returned a short time later, but stayed only a few minutes before leaving again. Just before the shift change at 5:00p.m., Johnson went to the store a fourth time, this time carrying a book bag over his shoulder.

The cashier noticed Johnson staring at her while she deposited the money from her shift into the store safe. He did not do anything.

Johnson went to his girlfriend’s house and purchased a twenty-dollar rock of crack cocaine from his girlfriend’s eighteen-year-old son, Rodriguez Grant. Johnson left and then later returned to buy two more rocks.

He asked Rodriguez to lend him the .25 caliber pistol Johnson had given to him a couple of weeks earlier in exchange for crack cocaine. Rodriguez agrees, and he and Johnson test fires the pistol in the back yard. Johnson returned the gun a while later, claiming that it did not work.

Still later, Johnson retrieved the gun and left again, wearing layers of clothing, a mask over his face, and black tennis shoes. Since January of 1994, Johnson had confided to Rodriguez his plans to hold up the convenience store, locking all but one employee in the back room and having the remaining employee open the safe.

The next time Johnson returned to the house, from the direction of the convenience store, around 11:45 p.m., his face and clothes were spattered with blood. He came in through the back door and went downstairs to Rodriguez’s room. Johnson gave the pistol back to Rodriguez.

Johnson then cleaned his tennis shoes, took off his clothes, put the clothes into a trash bag, and told his girlfriend’s sixteen-year-old son, Antwane Grant, to get rid of the bag.

Johnson had a large amount of money sorted by denomination and he and Rodriguez counted it. Johnson then hid the money in an air vent. Rodriguez went back upstairs and soon smelled something burning. On returning downstairs, he found Johnson burning paper.

At 1:12 a.m. the following morning, a deputy sheriff responded to a call to check on the convenience store for the possibility of a disturbance involving weapons. The store lights were still on. Through the windows, the officer saw that the cash register was open and the money vault was out and in the middle of the floor. He observed blood smears on the front door lock.

City police officers arrived with the keys. Upon entering, they discovered two dead bodies and a .25 caliber shell casing in the bathroom. Another body and another .25 caliber shell casing were found inside the walk-in cooler. The safe was empty.

All three victims were store employees: Mary Bratcher, age 46; Fred Jones, age 58; and Mabel Scruggs, age 57. Each victim died from head injuries that were consistent with a bloody hammer found at the scene.

In addition, Mary Bratcher suffered at least ten stab wounds to her left hand consistent with a bloody flat-head screwdriver found in a field neat the store, and Fred Jones suffered a nonfatal, facial gunshot wound.


LETS MAKE SURE WE GET THIS AND PUT IT IN CONTEXT:
AGAIN: Each victim died from head injuries that were consistent with a bloody hammer found at the scene.
In addition, Mary Bratcher suffered at least ten stab wounds to her left hand consistent with a bloody flat-head screwdriver found in a field neat the store, and Fred Jones suffered a nonfatal, facial gunshot wound.

So the execution is halted because:
to allow an appeal on whether he may suffer undue pain from the lethal injection drug due to a medical condition.
WOW!!!

HERE IS MY MORAL DILEMMA.
The death penalty.
It is unquestionably a very contentious issue. Too many have been put to death with questionable evidence, set free after lifetimes behind bard being innocent proving hands down the death penalty is flawed. Period
There is bias and some serious imperfections with our justice system, we can all agree, where financial status race and location very much can and will determine outcome.
Within this context, is the death-penalty a reasonable form of punishment?
And I use the word punishment very deliberate, since it should be obvious there is no deterrent value.
When a legal system overburdened by oxygen thieves like this clearly fails to protect those that deserve a fair trial but didn't get one, yet allows this kind of travesties to occur?
Bureaucracy gone ape-shit?
How on earth is it possible for any person in their right mind to even remotely entertain the thought this person deserves any form of consideration? His guilt isn't questioned, nor his due process.
No. The legal imperative here is we want him to not suffer.
Really:
Defense attorneys had appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, on both the disability issue and on the argument that because Johnson has a slow-growing brain tumor, the pentobarbital used in lethal executions in Missouri could cause him to suffer seizures and pain.

Shall we reference the case report once more?

All three victims were store employees: Mary Bratcher, age 46; Fred Jones, age 58; and Mabel Scruggs, age 57. Each victim died from head injuries that were consistent with a bloody hammer found at the scene.
In addition, Mary Bratcher suffered at least ten stab wounds to her left hand consistent with a bloody flat-head screwdriver found in a field neat the store, and Fred Jones suffered a nonfatal, facial gunshot wound.

Yeah, as in sure they didn't suffer, right?

It really makes my head spin.

Part of me wants to say - unless we can absolutely GUARANTEE no one innocent will EVER be executed it's just not good policy..... but then some utterly debased wasted sack of meat comes along, where the ONLY reasonable remedy is to just eliminate it, which clearly is not possibe within our system - worse yet - just think of the staggering amount of resources this thing has been allowed to gobble up. FOR 20 YEARS!!! WHILE ON DEATH ROW!!!
Like.....'before the state kills you for being the miscreant you are, we first have to spend good money and care, better care than available to many NOT incarcerated, ON DEATH ROW...! to make sure you're healthy before we send you gently into that dark night....REALLY!?!?!??!
There is no reason in this, whatsoever.
So yeah, if possible someone, anyone, help me make sense of this.
Or not. I can accept that too, I guess. Which is why I never leave home unprotected, always try to see left of bang....

Firefly
11-03-15, 21:47
My personal views on the death penalty:

If there's absolutely any doubt, don't pursue it.
If no doubt, like he did it and it's cut and dry...

Well, hanging. The Japanese are always upheld as a peaceful society and they hang people.

Or the electric chair. Or bomb blast experiments.

Ever watch this movie Men Behind the Sun?

austinN4
11-03-15, 21:58
Got no problem with it, even if he suffers, if for sure he did it.

SteyrAUG
11-03-15, 22:03
"Cruel and unusual punishment" does not mean a pain free execution.

The first problem with most executions is doctors are involved and that is a conflict of interest since doctors save lives, not end them. A stress and pain free execution is probably impossible, but that doesn't mean it violates someone's rights.

And yes it's offensively absurd to claim an injection is a violation when somebody is guilty of barbaric forms of murder.

Firefly
11-03-15, 22:06
The point of the death penalty is that you will die.
It's a deterrent.

"Gee DeLondrius, we shouldn't rob that liquor store with arms. We'll get executed within two years."
"Quite right, Jarmekus. Let us make resumes and apply for an entry level position whereupon we shall network, gain workplace experience, and be productive citizens"
"Capital idea. DeLondrius. Perhaps if we petition for a name change to have less ridiculous names, it may sway potential employers into seeing us as responsible, well-mannered adults."
"Indeed, Jarmekus."

TAZ
11-03-15, 23:01
My only concern with the death penalty is the proof of guilt. Given how many folks seem to have been released over time makes me want improved system of guilt determination. The idea that some asshole prosecutor can end ones life cause they have no character or your lawyer sucks or you don't have cash for DNA tests... or whatever isn't a pleasant one.

At the same time I thin it would be a deterrent if it were actually used and not dragged out over a span of generations. Heck at the rate we are going some survivors may end up dying before their attackers are killed.

As for the mode, I don't really care as long as its quick and not intended to inflict pain and suffering. So no burning at the stake or being run through a woodchopper, eaten by dogs or melted into goo in a HF bath or anything like that. Hanging, 22 to the head, electric chair, OD on some narcotic... I'm OK with. Public may not be a bad idea. People need to see it to fear it.

Bulletdog
11-03-15, 23:15
Here is a concept: Because Hitler and his followers did horrible torturous experiments on human beings, does that make it okay for us to do horrible torturous things to them when we catch them and bring them to justice. I say no. I say we are a civilized people and we do not need to behave like barbarians because some barbarian did something barbaric. Because this maniac tortured his innocent victims, does not give us license to tortoure him back. We are better than that.

I have no problem with terminating murderers like Mr. Johnson, but I do think that for our own mental well being we should conduct our executions in a reasonably humane way. We don't need to stoop to Mr. Johnson's level. It would not be beneficial to our society if we stooped to Mr. Johnson's level.

I agree with Steyr's assessment that we cannot guarantee a pain or stress free execution, but we should conduct ourselves with a high degree of professionalism as we undertake this grisely task. If the guy has some seizures on his way to hell, or experiences some discomfort, I don't think that we have done him any sort of injustice and I don't find it to be intentionally cruel or unusual punishment in any way. We should be ending the lives of these criminals in the quickest most humane way we know of. Because they were unspeakably inhumane doesn't mean WE should be too.

I also agree with Firefly the the death penalty is a deterrent to other criminals. Even criminals don't wanna die. I think it would be MORE of a deterrent if the system was more streamlined and didn't take so long or excuse so many criminals on technicalities even though they are guilty of the crime.

Dist. Expert 26
11-03-15, 23:32
The point of the death penalty is that you will die.
It's a deterrent.

"Gee DeLondrius, we shouldn't rob that liquor store with arms. We'll get executed within two years."
"Quite right, Jarmekus. Let us make resumes and apply for an entry level position whereupon we shall network, gain workplace experience, and be productive citizens"
"Capital idea. DeLondrius. Perhaps if we petition for a name change to have less ridiculous names, it may sway potential employers into seeing us as responsible, well-mannered adults."
"Indeed, Jarmekus."

It's not often that I laugh out loud at something I read online, but you got me. Bravo sir.

Honu
11-04-15, 00:29
admited YES I ddi it or %100 evidence no question
then first any medical testing is now open to this person and when his use is over death by the same way they killed the person

also if someone molest any child under 14 then the same above
problem is a 15 year old and 18 year old IMHO might not count for molestation but any kid 12 and under or so is %100 off limits so something a bit more in depth would be needed and this is just brain dump ideas :)

if its not cut and dry then no death penalty

Moose-Knuckle
11-04-15, 00:31
It's not about deterring others from committing crimes (that is and added bonus) its about a little known concept called P U N I S H M E N T for what they did. As it so happens when you execute a murderer they don't tend to go out and do it again.

I love all the bleeding hearts that decry the prison industry in this country and use the analogy that in Red Chine they have fewer people incarcerated. Hmm let's see that because Red China executes a lot people. If we executed every murderer, rapists, pedophile we would not have over crowding in our prisons.

The Romans had it down to a f'n fine art . . .

thepatriot2705
11-04-15, 00:52
"Cruel and unusual punishment" does not mean a pain free execution.

The first problem with most executions is doctors are involved and that is a conflict of interest since doctors save lives, not end them. A stress and pain free execution is probably impossible, but that doesn't mean it violates someone's rights.

And yes it's offensively absurd to claim an injection is a violation when somebody is guilty of barbaric forms of murder.

A 9mm to the spinal cord seems like it would be fairly painless. And fairly cheap

titsonritz
11-04-15, 01:49
I am all for the death penalty, the only slight reservation I have is I know the system has its flaws mostly human.

RazorBurn
11-04-15, 08:17
It's not about deterring others from committing crimes (that is and added bonus) its about a little known concept called P U N I S H M E N T for what they did. As it so happens when you execute a murderer they don't tend to go out and do it again.

I love all the bleeding hearts that decry the prison industry in this country and use the analogy that in Red Chine they have fewer people incarcerated. Hmm let's see that because Red China executes a lot people. If we executed every murderer, rapists, pedophile we would not have over crowding in our prisons.

The Romans had it down to a f'n fine art . . .

I'm all for letting them "ride the lightning" myself. I don't have a problem with them using a noose or a firing squad either. I could care less if someone with a death sentence suffers a little bit, they've earned what they get in my book.

usmcvet
11-04-15, 08:22
I read a post on another forum from an anti death penalty proponent. I suspect he is also anti gun. He claimed the firing squad was the least painful and provided the quickest death. I'm all for it. Line the person up and shoot them.

sevenhelmet
11-04-15, 08:39
I read a post on another forum from an anti death penalty proponent. I suspect he is also anti gun. He claimed the firing squad was the least painful and provided the quickest death. I'm all for it. Line the person up and shoot them.

As I was reading the OP, I was thinking bring back the firing squad or "trapdoor" hangings... or even something like that needle-gun thing they used to prevent zombie resurrections on "fear the walking dead". I think that's a real device, or it could be easily constructed. A hand-held guillotine of sorts- place near the back of the skull, and zap to sever the spinal cord. No pain, no delay, and on the surface it seems less susceptible to malfunction than say, the electric chair, lethal injection, or the firing squad.

As an aside, we are always seeing "painless" and undetectable poisons used in the movies. Do those not exist for real? Put another way, Dogs can be put to sleep for a pittance and they don't appear to suffer...

If we're going to do this, let's do it right. Streamline the appeals system to a couple years', not decades. Right now we have a prison system that doesn't rehabilitate, and a capital punishment that doesn't deter. The only crimes which are capital crimes are so grotesque, and the death penalty is so rare, that I doubt it fazes the ordinary criminal in the least.

26 Inf
11-04-15, 08:47
The point of the death penalty is that you will die.
It's a deterrent.

"Gee DeLondrius, we shouldn't rob that liquor store with arms. We'll get executed within two years."
"Quite right, Jarmekus. Let us make resumes and apply for an entry level position whereupon we shall network, gain workplace experience, and be productive citizens"
"Capital idea. DeLondrius. Perhaps if we petition for a name change to have less ridiculous names, it may sway potential employers into seeing us as responsible, well-mannered adults."
"Indeed, Jarmekus."

You do have a way with the words, still chuckling.

I don't think the death sentence is a deterrent - most killings aren't well planned in advance - this Johnson guy planned more than most. Opportunity killings, spur of the moment passion killings are PROBABLY more prevalent than planned killings.

Folks that commit crimes don't intend to get caught, when they are caught they behave irrationally, the consequences of their actions are the last thing on their minds in the heat of passion or the frenzy to escape.

So I don't think it is a deterrent, I do think it is just in many cases.

The human side of me says the Carr brothers should be made to have sex with each other, then led to the same field that they led their victims to, made to kneel and then shot in the back of the head. The Christian side of me struggles with the issue, but ultimately I go with 'render unto Caesar' and the interpretation that 'thou shalt not kill' means thou shall not murder.

All that being said, pragmatic me says, that unless we change the rules to deny appeals to persons convicted on scientific evidence (versus eyewitness or circumstantial evidence), it is cheaper to just lock those folks away until they die. I would treat them humanely, nothing beyond that, the life they live in captivity is their penance.

Remember the stories of pickpockets working the crowds during public executions in England? The death penalty has little deterent effect, it is simply just is many cases.

JMO

ETA - WOW! Auto Correct and Spell Correct are way more trouble than they are worth!

SomeOtherGuy
11-04-15, 09:09
My personal views on the death penalty:
If there's absolutely any doubt, don't pursue it.
If no doubt, like he did it and it's cut and dry...

I agree.


My only concern with the death penalty is the proof of guilt. Given how many folks seem to have been released over time makes me want improved system of guilt determination. The idea that some asshole prosecutor can end ones life cause they have no character or your lawyer sucks or you don't have cash for DNA tests... or whatever isn't a pleasant one.

I agree with this also. There is no reason to have much if any confidence in the accuracy of verdicts in death penalty cases. And it seems that death penalty cases are tried mostly for the prosecutor's political gain. Also, in case you hadn't seen it, a recent scientific study indicates that DNA testing is a lot less definitive than it had been thought to be.


As for the mode, I don't really care as long as its quick and not intended to inflict pain and suffering. So no burning at the stake or being run through a woodchopper, eaten by dogs or melted into goo in a HF bath or anything like that. Hanging, 22 to the head, electric chair, OD on some narcotic... I'm OK with. Public may not be a bad idea. People need to see it to fear it.

Mostly agree, except that it's unclear whether the electric chair is also a form of torture. Anyway, if the government is going to do executions, I think guillotine would be best, with long-drop hanging and firing squad as other options that are practical without being especially torturous. These are all simple, effective, and don't require medical personnel or supplies. I think the "lethal injection" method was a terrible idea and getting worse with time.

MegademiC
11-04-15, 10:44
Nitrogen gas chamber. Quick, painless, effective.

Lethal injection should be good if done right. Anastesia(sp?) Knocks em out, then the kno3 or kclo3 (forget which, may be off), stops the hart. If they convulse, they are still unconscious, so it may look bad, but there isn't any suffering... at least in theory. A doc may know more.

Averageman
11-04-15, 12:03
I don't have an issue with the Death Penalty, I look at it as a necessary evil in a civilized world. I don't care if it is a deterrent, it doesn't need to be. If you're so evil and unable to live within our society without committing a crimes such as rape pedophilia or murder, well then you just do not need to be here among us any longer.
That being said, I really am not concerned if some rare mental or physical condition brought you to this place where you have become a Monster.
My only caveat to the whole question would be:
Did you receive a fair trial?
Has all the DNA evidence been tested?
Admitting guilt in a confession should move you right to the front of the line, as in within 24 hours of the gavel being dropped.
We waste a lot of time, energy, empathy and sympathy on folks who would cut your throat upon release if it were to their desires or advantage.
I will save all of my sympathy for the victim's of these crimes.

SteyrAUG
11-04-15, 13:56
http://www.fkoester.de/kreiten/img/guillotine.jpg

Doesn't even need electricity.

Moose-Knuckle
11-04-15, 14:10
If we could all be so lucky to feel a little prick in an arm and fall asleep . . .

I think killers should be executed in the same manner in which they tortured/murdered their victims. An "eye for an eye" . . . that's JUSTICE not a bunch of f'n legalese.

Firefly
11-04-15, 14:47
I'm not even opposed to crucifixion.

Realistically, a moment of pain is nowhere near as bad as raping someone and then strangling them.

I remember like in high school, I had this hippie dippie teacher who showed us Dead Man Walking. It was about Sean Penn who murdered someone and the blonde bimbo from Rocky Horror was a nun and tried to get him off.

They portrayed him as a sad, tragic creature. Anyways we had to do a report on on why the death penalty was wrong (90s PC at its Clintoniest).

I wrote that it wasn't wrong. Dude could've easily NOT murdered anyone and wouldn't have been on death row. That, if anything, he was treated better than he treated his victims and that he should've died sooner.

I got an F and a cute loopy cursive note asking "What if YOU were on Death Row"?

Good Times.

Averageman
11-04-15, 15:01
http://www.fkoester.de/kreiten/img/guillotine.jpg

Doesn't even need electricity.

Well that should make the Hippies beam magic rainbow smiles, it wont hurt the environment, emit Greenhouse gases or make the Polar Bears swim for their lives as the Glaciers melt.

Kain
11-06-15, 19:51
I am going to piss some people off with this, but whatever.
As it is currently done, I don't agree with the death penalty.
Why? Cost and time. It is that simple, most death row inmates are indigent and the legal costs to kill them are actually greater than if we let them rot in a cell(If that mentality isn't exactly vicious I don't know what is.). I don't think their lives are worth that much, in all honestly. Also, the death penalty takes forever. I mean how many of these assholes are been on death row, 15, 20, or more years before they come up? Sorry, I understand deterrence, but the real deterrence of turning the lights out on these people isn't to deter them but others, and chances are after even 10 years any of their would be contemporaries who might be deterred are either dead, in prison, or in the ****ing cell next to them, at least in regards to gang related shit, lots of others, not so much. I could go on, but my point is that these assholes don't deserve the money to be spent on them. I am also for making these mother****ers work for their food too, but that another discussion for another time.

Mr blasty
11-06-15, 20:15
Well that should make the Hippies beam magic rainbow smiles, it wont hurt the environment, emit Greenhouse gases or make the Polar Bears swim for their lives as the Glaciers melt.

Sorry but rotting corpses, cremation and embalming chemicals are all toxic and release gases. :p

Sent from my SM-G900T using Xparent BlueTapatalk 2

T2C
11-06-15, 20:30
I am going to piss some people off with this, but whatever.
As it is currently done, I don't agree with the death penalty.
Why? Cost and time. It is that simple, most death row inmates are indigent and the legal costs to kill them are actually greater than if we let them rot in a cell(If that mentality isn't exactly vicious I don't know what is.). I don't think their lives are worth that much, in all honestly. Also, the death penalty takes forever. I mean how many of these assholes are been on death row, 15, 20, or more years before they come up? Sorry, I understand deterrence, but the real deterrence of turning the lights out on these people isn't to deter them but others, and chances are after even 10 years any of their would be contemporaries who might be deterred are either dead, in prison, or in the ****ing cell next to them, at least in regards to gang related shit, lots of others, not so much. I could go on, but my point is that these assholes don't deserve the money to be spent on them. I am also for making these mother****ers work for their food too, but that another discussion for another time.

I agree with your point of view in that it takes too much time before the subject is put to death. There should be a 24 month time frame from first conviction to last appeal. As time runs short, the cases should be pushed to the top of the court docket.

I have had the misfortune of investigating homicides carried out in the most heinous and violent nature that were committed by repeat offenders who should have been executed after the first or second conviction for Homicide. A weak willed system staffed by weak willed people permitted the offenders to walk free and murder a second or third time.

Once it has been determined without a doubt in a court of law that a suspect killed someone without legal justification, the sentence should be carried out without delay. It should be done quickly and in private.

Moose-Knuckle
11-07-15, 00:58
I am going to piss some people off with this, but whatever.
As it is currently done, I don't agree with the death penalty.
Why? Cost and time. It is that simple, most death row inmates are indigent and the legal costs to kill them are actually greater than if we let them rot in a cell(If that mentality isn't exactly vicious I don't know what is.). I don't think their lives are worth that much, in all honestly. Also, the death penalty takes forever. I mean how many of these assholes are been on death row, 15, 20, or more years before they come up? Sorry, I understand deterrence, but the real deterrence of turning the lights out on these people isn't to deter them but others, and chances are after even 10 years any of their would be contemporaries who might be deterred are either dead, in prison, or in the ****ing cell next to them, at least in regards to gang related shit, lots of others, not so much. I could go on, but my point is that these assholes don't deserve the money to be spent on them. I am also for making these mother****ers work for their food too, but that another discussion for another time.

That's because we do it all wrong.

No way in hell these 02 thieves should be sitting on death row for decades filing appeal after appeal while getting room and board, cable TV, continuing education, medical care, etc.

Take them out behind the courthouse and shoot them dead right there. Hell, I'll even pay for the ammo just cause.

ABNAK
11-07-15, 14:46
While this might not sit well with some of the "Moral High-Roaders"/"We're better than that" crowd in this thread, forget deterrence, it's about payback. You take a life in cold blood you forfeit yours. Simple as that. And those in favor of life without parole instead? Well, when the victim can get up out of their coffin then I'll agree. But we all know murder is irreversible......so should be the penalty.