Lizzie Borden Society Forum

Posted: **Wed Dec 29, 2004 7:06 am**

Don't know if this has been discussed before and I have no idea how to create a "poll" so here goes:

Where do members of this forum stand on the death penalty.

I will start off by saying that I am opposed to it and can easy give 10 - 12 reasons why.

As an aside, it is my undersatnding that in 1892 the only punishment that Lizzie could have faced was hanging. Is this correct? I don't think there were varying degrees of murder in those days but not certain.

Our Governor here in Massachusetts is attempting to reinstate the death penalty. This is the second time in a few years and last time it was voted down but just a a vote or two.

Posted: **Wed Dec 29, 2004 7:56 am**

We had/have a poll going here:

viewtopic.php?t=256&highlight=penalty

Posted: **Wed Dec 29, 2004 11:16 am**

Harry @ Wed Dec 29, 2004 9:26 am wrote:We had/have a poll going here:

Not really a Lizzie question.

Actually, I was more interested in what members think about the death penalty now.

Just wanted a sampling of opinions pro or con.

Posted: **Wed Dec 29, 2004 2:23 pm**

I am strictly in favor of it. I have discussed this at great length in class with many of my professors and I can also cite many reasons why I am in favor of it. I believe that if someone takes another human life, it is not cruel or unusual punishment to put them to death.This is stated in the Bible, an "eye for an eye". The manner in which they are put to death is usually not as "cruel and unusual" as the one used by them to commit murder. My example would be Ted Bundy. His last victim was a child he abducted from a school, and then brutally raped and murdered her. I can't imagine the way that child felt at the last moments of her life, and picturing what she probably went through, I had no problems with his being put to death. No sympathy either. He was a monster who was beyond remorse or rehabilitation.I think Charlie Manson should have been put to death, along with the rest of his clan. But they over turned the death penalty after he was sentenced and now he is just sitting in prison wasting tax payers money.He will obviously never get out.I agree with the way things are done in Texas. They are the state that leads the nation in using the death penalty. If there are at least three credible eyewitnesses that saw you commit the murder, you die, no waiting on death row. You die. They have a very low crime rate in Texas, because they have a very low tolerance for crime.Serial Killers who commit 20-30 murders before caught, I think it is a joke to argue it is "cruel and unusual punishment" to put them to death. I realize there are some innocent people who have been put to death, and while I find that unfortunate, no system is ever fool proof. Our prisons are so over crowded today, we are the leading nation in the world when it comes to prison population.It costs over $25,000 a year to keep the average prisoner incarcerated.There are currently 1.4 million people incarcerated in the United States today. I think we need to take a step back and look at why, because it has not helped the crime rate any. If anything, it is sky rocketing.A study was conducted by a professor in which he tried to design a prison system which was doomed to fail. What he came up with, was the United States criminal justice system.

Posted: **Wed Dec 29, 2004 7:20 pm**

When I was younger I was for the death penalty. We in Florida killed Ted Bundy, after all.
As I am older, I don't think I agree with it anymore.
I, as a citizen, don't wish for anyone killed in my name.

I have read that in law enforcement circles they have seen the phnomenon of those citizens who are against the death penalty actually seeing a dead and raped and mutilated body of a child and they then become death penalty proponents- and that those who have witnessed a death penalty being enacted, have decided they are now against it.
This shows me that we can change our minds depending on the circumstances...and those are emotional and subjective. I think a penalty shouldn't be based on emotion and subjectivity.

Posted: **Wed Dec 29, 2004 7:36 pm**

Voltaire and the other "enlightened thinkers" had it right....

I am categorically against the death penalty.

The $$ argument does not wash-- it costs more in appeals and legal fees than to house a criminal all his life.

The Bible also teaches us "thou shall not kill" and "judge lest not ye be judged". People can find a Bible verse to suit whatever they wish it to suit.

Killing another human being in the name of justice should be 101% fool proof or it is simply not justice.

Texas put Gary Graham to death in the summer of 2000 with one less than credible eye wittness. Not 3 credible anything....

Murder, in any name is most foul....

Posted: **Wed Dec 29, 2004 9:24 pm**

good argument Allen and well written. I change my
mind all the time, reading so many true crime stories, yes some should go right to death, others
not. Aileen Wournos and Ted Bundy in my opinion
should have lived, to pick their brains and let them
finally tell their stories in their old age in prison, it
would help society in learning how their brain process worked. Lizzie wouldn't hurt a fly, dear
girl, I'm glad she lived (as miserable as her life
probably was).

Posted: **Wed Dec 29, 2004 9:30 pm**

The death penalty:

1. Brutal, archaic and unconstitutional (Cruel and unusual)

2. Not administered fairly (people of color much more likely to be executed esp if the victim is white while the opposite is not true. Whites much less likely to be executed if victim is black or Hispanic)

3. Not a deterrent (Texas, which has the death penalty has a murder rate of 6.2 per 100,000 Massachusetts has no death penalty and a rate of 2.1 per 100,000)

4. How does execution teach others that it is wrong to kill

5. America is the only Western nation with a death penalty

6. The State has no right to execute its citizens

7. The death penalty is revenge and while I understand the desire for revenge personally but the State has no right to take revenge.

8. The government should issue no punishment that cannot be reversed

9. In January 2000, Governor George Ryan of Illinois imposed a moratorium on the imposition of the death penalty in Illinois. In reviewing death penalty cases since 1977, he determined that 13 death row inmates in the state had been cleared of murder charges, compared to 12 who had been put to death. Some of the 13 inmates were taken off death row after DNA evidence exonerated them; the cases of others collapsed after new trials were ordered by appellate courts. "There is a flaw in the system, without question, and it needs to be studied", Ryan said. Ironically, the Republican Governor had campaigned in support of the death penalty. Ultimately in January 2003, Governor Ryan commuted all death sentences to prison terms of life or less.

10. Those who quote the Bible (e.g.: an eye for an eye) ignore Thou shalt not kill!

Posted: **Wed Dec 29, 2004 9:53 pm**

As an aside, it is my undersatnding that in 1892 the only punishment that Lizzie could have faced was hanging. Is this correct?--Ron

I have an unknown newspaper item from the Crowell Collection which gives news of a case in New York, dated May 30, 1893, where Governor Flower, in the case of Martello and Osmond, "the murderers", which had been "under consideration" by him, but he decided to "let the law take its course, and they will both be killed by electricity."

The items headline:
"Two Victims for the Chair."

--Edit date= year is 1893, not 1892.

Posted: **Wed Dec 29, 2004 10:48 pm**

Massachusetts tho, I think at that time they were still using the gallows, hadn't yet "modernized" so to speak.

At least one source I have come across says that the first use of electrocution as a means of capital punishment in Massachusetts took place in 1898.

http://www.geocities.com/trctl11/chair.html

So, if she had in fact been convicted and sentenced to die, it would have been by the rope.

Posted: **Wed Dec 29, 2004 10:51 pm**

Please see edit- year, 1893, my last post.
It was above an item called "MURDER IN FALL RIVER" and it was the Bertha Manchester murder !
(Year of items are not specified- I had to deduce...)

Posted: **Wed Dec 29, 2004 11:04 pm**

...errrr, how can that relate to the Bertha Manchester case? The Governor you mentioned there, Roswell Pettibone Flower, was Governor of New York from 1892-94.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_of_New_York

Posted: **Wed Dec 29, 2004 11:52 pm**

Allen, I'm with you 100%. Just show me where the switch is.

Lizzie, if convicted, would have been sentenced to be hung. Ex-Gov. Robinson refers to it several times in his closing argument at the trial.

Whether an execution would have occurred is highly doubtful.

Posted: **Thu Dec 30, 2004 12:35 am**

at least two sources give the folowing:

The last woman executed (prior to 1892) was Rachel Wall, who was hanged on Boston Common.
http://www.boston.com/travel/articles/2 ... e_history/

Rachel Wall was a Beacon Hill maid, and her husband, George, was a Boston Fisherman. After stealing a ship at Essex, they began pirating off of the Isle of Shoals. Pretending to be in distress, Rachel would stand out at the mast and cry for help. When the rescuers arrived, George and his men would kill them, rob them of all valuables, and sink their ship. In 1782, George Wall drowned in a storm. Rachel was rescued. She returned to Boston where she continued to steal from the cabins of ships docked in Boston Harbor. She was accused and convicted of murdering a sailor - a crime that she denied. At her hanging on October 8, 1789, she confessed to being a pirate. She is the only known woman pirate of New England.
http://www.mayflowerfamilies.com/enquirer/bellamy.htm

Posted: **Thu Dec 30, 2004 12:36 am**

I am opposed and RonRico gives the reasons in a post above.

Here in Connecticut this question is an immediate one. The first execution in this state since circa 1960 is scheduled to take place in January 2005. It is a rather difficult situation for anyone opposed to the death penalty because the condemned individual is a serial killer about whom there is no question of guilt. In addition he no longer wants to appeal and has asked that the sentence be carried out. Apparently the Governor of Connecticut does not have the authority to commute a death sentence but can order an imminent execution delayed until after the next session of the state legislature. So far the Governor has resisited delaying this execution but legal and legislative pressure is on to do so in order that the question of capital punishment can be debated and capital punishment either affirmed or perhaps abolished prior to this sentence being carried out.

Posted: **Thu Dec 30, 2004 4:46 am**

The death penalty:

1. Brutal, archaic and unconstitutional (Cruel and unusual)
So are the murders committed by these people who are convicted,in most cases, far more "cruel and unusual" than the punishment they receive for committing the crime.
===============================================

2. Not administered fairly (people of color much more likely to be executed esp if the victim is white while the opposite is not true. Whites much less likely to be executed if victim is black or Hispanic)

A myth pure and simple:

From an article in USA today online from 2002.

"Sixty-six people were executed last year, compared with 85 the year before. Through Dec. 11 of this year, 68 people have been executed"

"The government figures show that 63 men and three women were put to death last year, all by lethal injection. The racial breakdown was 48 whites, 17 blacks and one American Indian."

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/806998/posts
===============================================
From the Bureau of Justice Statistics

In 2003, 65 persons in 11 and the Federal system, States were executed -- 24 in Texas; 14 in Oklahoma, 7 in North Carolina; 3 each in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and Ohio; 2 each in Indiana, Missouri, and Virginia; and 1 each in Arkansas and the Federal system.

Of persons executed in 2003:
-- 41 were white
-- 20 were black
-- 3 were Hispanic (all white)
-- 1 American Indian
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cp.htm
===============================================
3. Not a deterrent (Texas, which has the death penalty has a murder rate of 6.2 per 100,000 Massachusetts has no death penalty and a rate of 2.1 per 100,000)

Texas also has a larger population than Massachussetts. You have to break it down into the size of the population, or statistics can be very misleading.
===============================================
4. How does execution teach others that it is wrong to kill

This question is in my opinion redudant to me.
===============================================
5. America is the only Western nation with a death penalty.
Why should this be considered a reason? America is the only western nation to do alot of things.Our system of government is unique, should it be abolished?
===============================================

6. The State has no right to execute its citizens.
The serial murderers have no right to execute 20-30 INNOCENT people for absolutely no reason other than to satisfy their sick fantasies.
===============================================

7. The death penalty is revenge and while I understand the desire for revenge personally but the State has no right to take revenge.

I don't see it as taking revenge, I see it as justice being served.

==============================================

8. The government should issue no punishment that cannot be reversed.

The deaths of all those innocent people by the above mentioned serial killers cannot be reversed either.30 known victims is alot, and in most cases the only way these men are going to stop killing is when they die themselves.Prison doesn't stop the killing. Prison is a place where they have nothing to lose.The rate of recidivism for those released is extremely high.Most of the prison population are repeat offenders.

===============================================

9. In January 2000, Governor George Ryan of Illinois imposed a moratorium on the imposition of the death penalty in Illinois. In reviewing death penalty cases since 1977, he determined that 13 death row inmates in the state had been cleared of murder charges, compared to 12 who had been put to death. Some of the 13 inmates were taken off death row after DNA evidence exonerated them; the cases of others collapsed after new trials were ordered by appellate courts. "There is a flaw in the system, without question, and it needs to be studied", Ryan said. Ironically, the Republican Governor had campaigned in support of the death penalty. Ultimately in January 2003, Governor Ryan commuted all death sentences to prison terms of life or less.

Any system, no matter what it is, will have flaws.Nothing in this world is 100% guaranteed, if you think of something that is I'd like to know.
===============================================

10. Those who quote the Bible (e.g.: an eye for an eye) ignore Thou shalt not kill!

I do not ignore "thou shalt not kill", the people who choose to commit these crimes did, and then I believe in an "eye for an eye."
===============================================

"The $$ argument does not wash-- it costs more in appeals and legal fees than to house a criminal all his life."

These are necessary costs, there are no ways around them, there must be a trial unless a defendant pleads guilty or plea bargains.This is like saying I already have $10,000 on my charge card I might as well add another $20,000. To house the average prisoner right now, not looking at the rising costs in the future, is about $25,000 per year. If an inmate lives 30 years that $750,000 of tax payers money. Calculate 1.4 million inmates at $25,000 for just this year alone.Prisons are so overcrowded that one of the fastest growing industies in the United States is building prisons.
===============================================

Posted: **Thu Dec 30, 2004 4:48 am**

Please see edit- year, 1893, my last post.
It was above an item called "MURDER IN FALL RIVER" and it was the Bertha Manchester murder !
(Year of items are not specified- I had to deduce...)Back to top

doug65oh
Gender:
Age: 39
Zodiac:
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 10:26 am
Posts: 151
2.06% of total
The time here is: 4:42 am
Status: Offline
Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2004 11:04 pm Post subject:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
...errrr, how can that relate to the Bertha Manchester case? The Governor you mentioned there, Roswell Pettibone Flower, was Governor of New York from 1892-94.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_of_New_York

Preceding posts.

These Charlie Crowell pieces are stitched together, no rhyme or reason, no year, no source- just accidents, murders and suicides. Lovely New Year reading, hey?

I meant I deduced the year of the NY electric chair by another article included on the page which dealt with the Bertha Manchester murder and I know the year of that atrocity was 1893...hence my edit of the year to 1893 (as opposed to that other Fall River Murder, The Bordens...)

Posted: **Thu Dec 30, 2004 9:44 am**

Allen @ Thu Dec 30, 2004 6:16 am wrote:The death penalty:

1. Brutal, archaic and unconstitutional (Cruel and unusual)
So are the murders committed by these people who are convicted,in most cases, far more "cruel and unusual" than the punishment they receive for committing the crime.

yes, but we are better than them.

===============================================

2. Not administered fairly (people of color much more likely to be executed esp if the victim is white while the opposite is not true. Whites much less likely to be executed if victim is black or Hispanic)

A myth pure and simple:

From an article in USA today online from 2002.

"Sixty-six people were executed last year, compared with 85 the year before. Through Dec. 11 of this year, 68 people have been executed"

"The government figures show that 63 men and three women were put to death last year, all by lethal injection. The racial breakdown was 48 whites, 17 blacks and one American Indian."

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/806998/posts
===============================================
From the Bureau of Justice Statistics

In 2003, 65 persons in 11 and the Federal system, States were executed -- 24 in Texas; 14 in Oklahoma, 7 in North Carolina; 3 each in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and Ohio; 2 each in Indiana, Missouri, and Virginia; and 1 each in Arkansas and the Federal system.

Of persons executed in 2003:
-- 41 were white
-- 20 were black
-- 3 were Hispanic (all white)
-- 1 American Indian
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cp.htm

11% of the population and 50% of the executions. I'd call that disproportionate.
===============================================
3. Not a deterrent (Texas, which has the death penalty has a murder rate of 6.2 per 100,000 Massachusetts has no death penalty and a rate of 2.1 per 100,000)

Texas also has a larger population than Massachussetts. You have to break it down into the size of the population, or statistics can be very misleading.

Its per 100,00 so size of the state doesn't matter.
===============================================
4. How does execution teach others that it is wrong to kill

This question is in my opinion redudant to me.

"Killing others is wrong and just to prove it we're going to kill you!"
===============================================
5. America is the only Western nation with a death penalty.
Why should this be considered a reason? America is the only western nation to do alot of things.Our system of government is unique, should it be abolished?
Now that the US has dilved into torture all bets are off.

===============================================

6. The State has no right to execute its citizens.
The serial murderers have no right to execute 20-30 INNOCENT people for absolutely no reason other than to satisfy their sick fantasies.

If they are sick they should be put away for the protection of society.
===============================================

7. The death penalty is revenge and while I understand the desire for revenge personally but the State has no right to take revenge.

I don't see it as taking revenge, I see it as justice being served.

An Eye for an Eye is revenge.

==============================================

8. The government should issue no punishment that cannot be reversed.

The deaths of all those innocent people by the above mentioned serial killers cannot be reversed either.30 known victims is alot, and in most cases the only way these men are going to stop killing is when they die themselves.Prison doesn't stop the killing. Prison is a place where they have nothing to lose.The rate of recidivism for those released is extremely high.Most of the prison population are repeat offenders.

These sick people don't represent the State.

===============================================

9. In January 2000, Governor George Ryan of Illinois imposed a moratorium on the imposition of the death penalty in Illinois. In reviewing death penalty cases since 1977, he determined that 13 death row inmates in the state had been cleared of murder charges, compared to 12 who had been put to death. Some of the 13 inmates were taken off death row after DNA evidence exonerated them; the cases of others collapsed after new trials were ordered by appellate courts. "There is a flaw in the system, without question, and it needs to be studied", Ryan said. Ironically, the Republican Governor had campaigned in support of the death penalty. Ultimately in January 2003, Governor Ryan commuted all death sentences to prison terms of life or less.

Any system, no matter what it is, will have flaws.Nothing in this world is 100% guaranteed, if you think of something that is I'd like to know.

Life without parole is 100% guaranteed.

===============================================

10. Those who quote the Bible (e.g.: an eye for an eye) ignore Thou shalt not kill!

I do not ignore "thou shalt not kill", the people who choose to commit these crimes did, and then I believe in an "eye for an eye."

I might as well but the State doesn't have that luxury.
===============================================

"The $$ argument does not wash-- it costs more in appeals and legal fees than to house a criminal all his life."

These are necessary costs, there are no ways around them, there must be a trial unless a defendant pleads guilty or plea bargains.This is like saying I already have $10,000 on my charge card I might as well add another $20,000. To house the average prisoner right now, not looking at the rising costs in the future, is about $25,000 per year. If an inmate lives 30 years that $750,000 of tax payers money. Calculate 1.4 million inmates at $25,000 for just this year alone.Prisons are so overcrowded that one of the fastest growing industies in the United States is building prisons.
===============================================

I can't recall the exact figures right now but something like 8 million to execute with appeals and all.

Posted: **Thu Dec 30, 2004 1:09 pm**

What happens when a murderer is sent to prison? It doesn't mean they are safely tucked away unable to harm anyone.Prison is a place where they have nothing to lose. They can commit murders. They commit prison rape, mutilations, a whole host of other offenses. Leaving them to live in a far more dangerous environment than the one they were in when they committed the offense is a bad idea.And this was the total number of executions for an entire year. I don't understand how you still say its disproportionate. Are you saying no blacks or members of other races should be executed, only whites? Per 100,000 when you consider the population of Texas in 2002 was 22,118,509, the population of Massachussetts was 6,433,422. There are more people in Texas. You could say there were more crimes in Ohio than in Alaska. You have to take into account alot of other factors. Size of population, how many people were old enough to commit a crime, were too old, handicapped, and you will never know how many cases go undiscovered. 6.2 out of 100,000 is still pretty vague. I could say 6 out of 10 doctors agree that Colgate is the best toothpaste. You wouldn't know that 6 doctors were dentists, 1 an orthepodist, a podiatrist, and two gynecologists.You know nothing about the population.Not just the US. that has the death penalty. In some nations, they still do things like cut off the hands of a thief. That is taking it too far. What society are you protecting? There are no guarantees a murderer will not get out. Murder sentences are not always LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE.And there are still members of society inside a prison. People there for non-violent crimes and correctional employees, are forced to intermix with highly violent people,often with devastating results. Do you have any idea of the scope of prison rapes alone? The sick do not represent the state. But it is people who feel we should not impose harsh sentences which allow the steady rise of the crime rate. Incarceration is not a deterrent. What is prison life for an offender who is there for LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE, and does not live by rules of society? Prison inmates build their own society. They get 3 meals a day, access to television, can pursue and education, get a college degree which we pay for, comprehensive medical care which we pay for, better than the health care I receive on the outside, conjegal visits in some cases, some even get married in prison, recreational facilities, libraries, and they commit violent acts on other inmates and there is nothing that can be done about it. They are already in prison. Anyone who spends alot of time in prison can become "institutionalized", and are unable to make it if they are released and reoffend.We are tying the hands of our government. LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE is not always the case, even Charlie Manson comes up for parole. We cannot keep incarcerating.There are only so many beds in each prison.If we do, be prepared to have a prison built near you, we will keep building them to accomodate the growing population.Another side effect to prison over crowding is, if a prison becomes too full, they have to start releasing to make room, and it is not always petty criminals who are released.

Posted: **Thu Dec 30, 2004 4:41 pm**

Here's a thought...Would those of you who so strongly support the death penalty still be so in favor of it if one of your close friends, family members, or even your own child perhaps, were convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to die ?

Tracy...

Posted: **Thu Dec 30, 2004 7:18 pm**

Yes, if I support it, I support it for all.If I found out they committed a crime as heinous as murder, then I believe they should receive the same punishment as anyone else.

Posted: **Fri Dec 31, 2004 12:21 am**

I do abhor what I understand goes on in prisons and hope for reforms there,- tho that may be naive- I think it is necessary. Some of that is inhumane, and the fact that it is accepted practice (rape in prison) seems beyond cruelty.
I would also like sentencing reforms.
I see a need to overhaul the prison systems, but not to the extent of being a proponent of capital punishment.

Actually, those who don't believe in it will never change their minds and those that do seem to have weighed in already.
I think it's easier to sway a person who is for death to accept its abolishment, than it is to sway a person already against the death penalty toward the death penalty.
After that, it's moot.

Posted: **Fri Dec 31, 2004 1:17 am**

OK...another thought...for those who are 'pro-death penalty', no matter even if it is concerning a close friend, family member, or even one's own child, could you "pull the switch" ? (Yes, I know that now most state-sanctioned executions are via lethal injection.)

Tracy...

Posted: **Fri Dec 31, 2004 1:26 am**

They have this funny way of making sure that one does not know who "pulled the switch."
In firing squads they have dud bullets and one live round. No one knows who shot the guy. Now in lethal injections, I just saw on TV they had 2 persons administering the drugs thru their own lines and neither knew whose drug was lethal.
This should tell us something about taking responsibility for the death. We don't even do that as a society. It is not straightforward at all.

Posted: **Fri Dec 31, 2004 1:37 am**

Good point Kat. I knew that, but didn't put it in my question. OK...so the same question, but rephrased...could you be part of the execution group where it might be you who "pulled the switch" ?

Tracy...

Posted: **Fri Dec 31, 2004 2:07 am**

Yes, and as part of my career one day, I might actually have this duty if it is assigned to me, depending on which avenue I decide to pursue once I obtain my degree. What I would like to do is obtain my first degree, and become employed as a State Trooper. Then I will work on my Bachelors and Masters degrees and on becoming a crime scene technician.But if for some unforseen reason it would not work out as I plan, I could also become employed as a parole officer, or a corrections officer, or many carreers on an entry level position in the field of criminal justice. And if this task would be assigned to me as part of my duty, yes I would be able to do it. As a State Trooper, I would not be permitted to fire my weapon unless I meant to shoot to kill. You do not shoot to wound.That is the only reason a weapon is fired, to shoot to kill if you feel that your life or the life of another is in danger. I could do this also.

Posted: **Fri Dec 31, 2004 3:00 am**

Since I am not a proponent of the death penalty, I could never be involved in any part of the 'pulling the switch' aspect anyway, and ESPECIALLY if it involved someone I knew and loved. Defending my loved ones or myself is another story.

Tracy...

Posted: **Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:19 am**

Allen @ Fri Dec 31, 2004 1:07 am wrote: As a State Trooper, I would not be permitted to fire my weapon unless I meant to shoot to kill. You do not shoot to wound.That is the only reason a weapon is fired, to shoot to kill if you feel that your life or the life of another is in danger. I could do this also.

Is this just in your state?

Posted: **Fri Dec 31, 2004 12:55 pm**

I will only speak for my state, and the policy and procedure I have been taught myself.I also know that anytime a weapon is discharged, a report must be filed, every bullet of your gun must be accounted for through paper work.

Posted: **Fri Dec 31, 2004 2:04 pm**

I respect the fact that you profess so much respect for the criminal justice system.

My education is in forensic psychology. I am a very "gray area" oriented person.

Police, detectives, probation officers, etc are usually very black and white in their opinions and thoughts. I would think that, if this were the case-- you would readily accept Lizzie's innocence since there was, and still is lack of evidence to convict her.

Posted: **Fri Dec 31, 2004 2:11 pm**

Well I do not believe in Lizzie's innocence. There are many cases where there is a lack of physical evidence to conclusively prove a persons guilt. This does not in my opinion mean that the person is free from guilt, it just means that in a court of law, it cannot be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. This is called, getting away with murder or committing the perfect crime. There was a lack of evidence to convict any one of the suspects of the crimes, and yet someone did commit them. There are some cases where there is a stunning lack of evidence period.

Posted: **Fri Dec 31, 2004 4:27 pm**

This is a good example of the system of justice by
a "jury of your peers" which may be flawed at times
yet still much more fair than letting "law enforcement types" decide your fate. Reasonable
doubt was certainly the case in Lizzie/OJ and many
others. Sure, someone did it, but if it can't be sold
to a jury... (and 113 years later we the jury here on
this forum still can't decide)

Posted: **Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:04 pm**

That's a coincidence, Nancie: I am reading about OJ right now.
My Holiday reading.

I am sorry to say that I still think a person being tried is probably guilty. I can't think why else they would be in the dock and with all the resources of the state thrown at them. I think in more cases than not, the correct person is on trial...

Posted: **Sat Jan 29, 2005 5:35 pm**

Michael Ross, a serial killer from Connecticut who was scheduled to be executed a few days ago is still alive at this writing (Saturday afternoon, January 29). Appeals made on his behalf have resulted in delays and his execution is now scheduled for Monday evening. The Governor of Connecticut refused to delay the scheduled execution, the Connecticut Supreme Court would not stop it, and neither would the U.S. Supreme Court. Now a U.S. District Court judge has postponed it for reasons apparently having to do with Michael Ross' lawyer possibly acting in an unethical way regarding the case.

Connecticut and New Hampshire are the only New England states with the death penalty. The last execution in New England took place in Connecticut in 1960 when Joseph "Mad Dog" Taborsky was electrocuted for killing five men and one woman while committing a series of robberies during the 1950s. Michael Ross has admitted to killing eight women in the 1980s.

Posted: **Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:04 pm**

I'd love to see the most recent documents in this case. Quite a few fireworks going on. I had read earlier this morning - well, I'll let the story speak for itself:

"Paulding's request for a delay followed angry words on Friday from the judge who issued the stays.

U.S. District Judge Robert Chatigny in Hartford, Connecticut, threatened on Friday to seize Paulding's law license if evidence emerged after the execution that Ross was indeed incompetent.

During a telephone conference, Chatigny warned Paulding that advocating for the killer's right to die was "terribly, terribly wrong" if there was such evidence.

"So I warn you Mr. Paulding ... you better be prepared to live with yourself for the rest of your life. And you better be prepared to live with me ... because I'll have your law license," Chatigny said, according to a transcript of the court records.
http://news.yahoo.com/newstmpl=story&u= ... eath_dc_18

I have no idea of Judge Chatigny's record, but I've got to admire the man. He's absolutely right.

Posted: **Sat Jan 29, 2005 9:12 pm**

I have been following this case, confusing because
the killer says he wants to die and save his victims
family the grief, what is the lawyer trying to do> Just spend more taxpayers money?

Posted: **Sun Jan 30, 2005 6:40 pm**

Last year Michael Ross chose to discontinue his appeals process, dismissed the lawyers who were handling that part of his case, and hired another lawyer for the purpose of seeing that his, Ross', execution would be carried out. For a reason or reasons that I do not yet understand the U.S District Court judge has indicated that this new lawyer may have acted in an unethical way in representing Ross' apparent desire to be executed. The sentence is now scheduled to be carried out on Monday, January 31, at 9:00 PM. To complicate an already complicated situation the so-called "death warrant" issued by the state expires at 11:59 PM on Monday night. We are told this means that Ross cannot be executed after that time unless a new warrant is issued and this could take months to accomplish. On top of it all, the Connecticut General Assembly is or at least was scheduled to begin considering the issue of whether to abolish the death penalty in this state starting on Monday.

Posted: **Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:49 pm**

Thanks Doug, that explains it well. The lawyers want to keep him alive to make a name for themselves? It is a big case. Oye, I'll be watching it, thanx

Posted: **Sun Jan 30, 2005 11:33 pm**

Here's another link that pretty well explains Paulding's Pickle... the ethical questions and the apparent conflict of interest.
http://www.theday.com/eng/web/news/re.a ... 891d2e4426

Posted: **Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:42 pm**

The execution of Michael Ross has been canceled. Following is a statement issued this afternoon (Monday, January 31) by the Connecticut Department of Correction.

"Based on advice from both the chief state's attorney and the attorney general that a legal impediment does now exist prohibiting the administration of capital punishment in the case of Michael Ross, the Department of Correction has canceled tonight's scheduled execution."

The Connecticut Supreme Court issued a stay of execution this afternoon as well.

Thanks, doug65oh, for posting the link to the New London Day newspaper article. This article recounts what happened over the past weekend regarding the Ross case.

Posted: **Mon Jan 31, 2005 9:42 pm**

Do you suppose, when a death row inmate says they want to die, that they really mean it?

Posted: **Mon Jan 31, 2005 9:48 pm**

Maybe by the time the issue rolls around again (if indeed it does) ol' TR will have figured out whose side he's really on!

Posted: **Mon Jan 31, 2005 9:59 pm**

So.....

If a convicted felon sentenced to death truly does want to die-- is it punishment???

Posted: **Tue Feb 01, 2005 5:00 pm**

If a convicted felon sentenced to death truly does want to die, he would kill himself.

Posted: **Tue Feb 01, 2005 5:35 pm**

There have been convicts on death row who have tried to commit suicide.
They are saved from killing themselves, only to stay on death row so they can be put to death. To me, that makes absolutely no sense. There are convicts on death row who are on "suicide watch". What sense is this?

Posted: **Thu Feb 03, 2005 5:23 pm**

Kat, that seems to be an unanswered question in the Michael Ross case. He indicated he wants to die and spare the families of his victims any more anguish. But the judge whose actions served to stop the execution appears to have doubts that Ross is competent to make this decision.

Posted: **Thu Feb 03, 2005 11:36 pm**

I would think that anyone wishing to die would be deemed incompetent to make that decision.
That includes euthanasia and all suicides.
Not that I necessarily agree, but I can see the state thinking that.

Posted: **Fri Feb 04, 2005 4:08 pm**

why is this reminding me of Aileen Wournos?
didn't that nutzo horse-lady who "adopted her"
brainwash her into wanting to die? and she was
executed

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2005 2:16 pm**

I think Aileen Wournos was a victim, and did not get a fair trial. She claimed she killed in self defense, resisting violent attacks from men while workinh as a prostitute. I believe one journalist discovered at least on of the murders may have been in self defense. She was a sick woman, but she kept claiming she was innocent. She was raped as a young girl, and clearly did not have a happy life. The movie "Monster" was good, has anyone else seen it?

Scott

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2005 4:56 pm**

Aileen is an example of how capital punishment is just the next step in the cycle of abuse some face... Although I in no way sanction what she did-- I can not help but feel compassion for her. I also feel compassion for her victims.

Capital punishment is revenge... Pure and simple. If a member of a family of a victim gunned her down in the courtroom I would be able to understand and empathize with them.

What I can not support is a government killing it's people for the "greater good" of it's other people.

Lizzie Borden Society Forum

Capital Punishment

Capital Punishment