Live Chat & Podcast at 1:00PM Eastern on Sunday!
There's no such thing as a stupid question, but they're the easiest to answer.
JoinTour
Login
Search
Civilized Debate
Tag Cloud
access acer asus batch bios bsod crash desktop driver drivers error ethernet excel freeze gaming gpu hard drive hardware hdmi internet laptop malware memory modem monitor motherboard netgear network printer problem ram registry router slow software sound trojan ubuntu 11.10 uninstall usb video virus vista wifi windows windows 7 windows 7 32 bit windows 7 64 bit windows xp wireless
Search
Search for:
Tech Support Guy Forums > Community > Controversial Topics > Civilized Debate >
Re-thinking the death penalty from a victim's perspective

 
Thread Tools
Mulderator's Avatar
Distinguished Member with 51,004 posts.
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
26-Oct-2009, 09:58 PM #226
Quote:
Originally Posted by LANMaster View Post
How is your brother holding up, Chris?
As well as one could expect. Problem is there are issues complicating things that I really can't discuss here. Its not something I think has sunk in yet because its not finished. The perversity of a situation like this is that he and some of the other closely affected people will not accept any of this until the trial is over---when they finally get the conviction, it will hit them like a ton of bricks. I think he is still in the shock/denial/anger phase. A loved one's death from a murder I have learned is very different then death by accident or illness. There's an anger there that doesn't exist in the other situations--another dimension that complicates the process. Think of the World Trade Centers--a mass murder--very different situation with a lot more layers of emotional complexity.

Thanks for asking.
__________________
Weapon of Mass Instruction!
Mulderator's Avatar
Distinguished Member with 51,004 posts.
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
26-Oct-2009, 10:07 PM #227
Quote:
Originally Posted by thingamajig View Post
Plea bargaining turns our justice system into a bartering system - for the purpose of expedience. Suggestions that it works, give me the impression of presumed guilt while we claim half-heartedly that suspects are presumed innocent until proven guilty. I would also add that there may be changes required to provide a better way to assess, prevent, and give consequences for law enforcement and prosecutor misconduct when they file trumped up charges. Something I feel to be commonplace since forcing a plea is so compelling.

The oft "guilty until proven innocent" mentality - especially where there are child victims is something of concern to me. I do believe that there are those who can't get a fair trail and their only avenue is to plead to a lesser charge - guilty or not. This works against the integrity of the whole system - harming the cause of victims and the falsely accused equally.
So are you saying there should be no plea bargaining?

Quote:
Originally Posted by thingamajig View Post
The fact that it has become a major part of our justice system is something I believe to work against cases like the Mulders and something that has become a trap. There is a trap here in that plea bargaining has become standard practice (95% of cases?). In order to end your process quickly in our current system, he may have to be offered a lesser sentence like 25-life or a lesser crime like 2nd degree.
Exactly why aboloshing the death penalty would result in murderers getting less than what they should get as a sentence.
Knotbored's Avatar
Senior Member with 2,507 posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Experience: Intermediate
26-Oct-2009, 11:18 PM #228
Washington state has some ruling (perhaps is a national policy) that only a juty and not a judge can assess the death penalty, so an obviously guilty convict can pleade guilty, avoid a trial and give a jury no chance to give out that penalty. My guess is that pleading also gives someone not guilty but might be found guilty by a jury an opertunity to resolve his innocense while serving a life sentence. I am on the fence whether I agree with avoiding this opertunity to fry a murderer. Maybe a judge should be able to refuse that guilty plea and demand a jury trial to satisfy family and friends of victims?
elrodqfudp's Avatar
Computer Specs
Junior Member with 1 posts.
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Jacksonville, Fl.
Experience: Beginner
27-Oct-2009, 12:03 AM #229
In my old age I have learned many things the hard way. One of those things is that rules that are made to fit all usually fit none well.

For many years I was a supporter of the death penalty because it eleminates repeat offenders. Then a new technology was born, DNA. Many people that had been found guilty in the past have been exonerated. My problem then became that the problem with the death penalty is that it is not reversible.

I agree that plea bargaining is used way too much. Not many people know it but one way that lawyers are rated is by their convection ratio.
If a prosecutor plea bargains a case of murder to simple assault, then is the same as a convection. Thus they have a personal interest and gain to use this tactic. One way that this might be reversed is to force our elected officials to use convection as first charged when using this standard.

I only wish that I knew a way to get this implemented.
Drabdr's Avatar
Computer Specs
Community Moderator with 6,566 posts.
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Arlington, TX
Experience: Computers fear me
27-Oct-2009, 10:39 AM #230
Quote:
Originally Posted by elrodqfudp View Post
In my old age I have learned many things the hard way. One of those things is that rules that are made to fit all usually fit none well.

For many years I was a supporter of the death penalty because it eleminates repeat offenders. Then a new technology was born, DNA. Many people that had been found guilty in the past have been exonerated. My problem then became that the problem with the death penalty is that it is not reversible.

I agree that plea bargaining is used way too much. Not many people know it but one way that lawyers are rated is by their convection ratio.
If a prosecutor plea bargains a case of murder to simple assault, then is the same as a convection. Thus they have a personal interest and gain to use this tactic. One way that this might be reversed is to force our elected officials to use convection as first charged when using this standard.

I only wish that I knew a way to get this implemented.
Hey there! A big Texas howdy welcome to you here! We sure are glad you dropped by to visit. This is a really good first post. I hope to see more from you.
Drabdr's Avatar
Computer Specs
Community Moderator with 6,566 posts.
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Arlington, TX
Experience: Computers fear me
27-Oct-2009, 10:46 AM #231
Quote:
Originally Posted by elrodqfudp View Post
In my old age I have learned many things the hard way. One of those things is that rules that are made to fit all usually fit none well.
Man, you got that right. You ought to jump in on the Zero Tolerance Thread about the public school systems.


Quote:
Originally Posted by elrodqfudp View Post
For many years I was a supporter of the death penalty because it eleminates repeat offenders. Then a new technology was born, DNA. Many people that had been found guilty in the past have been exonerated. My problem then became that the problem with the death penalty is that it is not reversible.
Again, much wisdom in your post. My angle is that I became a supporter of the Death Penalty because of DNA testing. It gave us much stronger ability to determine that we are not putting an innocent person to death. Now... don't get me wrong. I am pretty confident that we have put innocent people to death. I know in the early days (1860-1950) especially in the South, people were put to death, um, excuse me, murdered, simply due to their skin color. But I would like to think to an extent we have surpassed that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elrodqfudp View Post
I agree that plea bargaining is used way too much. Not many people know it but one way that lawyers are rated is by their conviction ratio.
If a prosecutor plea bargains a case of murder to simple assault, then is the same as a conviction. Thus they have a personal interest and gain to use this tactic. One way that this might be reversed is to force our elected officials to use conviction as first charged when using this standard.

I only wish that I knew a way to get this implemented.
Good points.

BTW... I changed some words in your quote from convection to conviction. I think that's what you meant.
__________________
“The one thing that unites all human beings, regardless of age, gender, religion, economic status or ethnic background, is that, deep down inside, we ALL believe that we are above-average drivers.”
— Dave Barry
LANMaster's Avatar
Distinguished Member with 55,833 posts.
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central USA
Experience: Need no stinking badges
27-Oct-2009, 11:13 AM #232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulderator View Post
As well as one could expect. Problem is there are issues complicating things that I really can't discuss here. Its not something I think has sunk in yet because its not finished. The perversity of a situation like this is that he and some of the other closely affected people will not accept any of this until the trial is over---when they finally get the conviction, it will hit them like a ton of bricks. I think he is still in the shock/denial/anger phase. A loved one's death from a murder I have learned is very different then death by accident or illness. There's an anger there that doesn't exist in the other situations--another dimension that complicates the process. Think of the World Trade Centers--a mass murder--very different situation with a lot more layers of emotional complexity.

Thanks for asking.
Yes. It is similar (but different) when dealing with a suicide of someone close who is perfectly healthy. It is a robbery and a violation, not an accident, but a deliberate theft. It hurts a lot more than some act of God or even a neglegent person who did not intend to kill a loved one. When the killing is deliberate, it brings a whole different level of anger, frustration, and a deep NEED for vengeance.
There is no excusing such a deliberate act.
The crime is not only a crime against the victim, but to all who are close to the victim.

Which brings me to anopther question;

Have they decided on a motive, Chris? Why did the guy do this?
Apologies if you already answered that, but I think it speaks to the crime in a way that either softens the blow, or makes it even more repugnant.
__________________
i'm a stranger here
Bastiat's Avatar
Distinguished Member with 5,158 posts.
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
27-Oct-2009, 01:41 PM #233
Quote:
Originally Posted by elrodqfudp View Post
I agree that plea bargaining is used way too much.
I hate to bring reality to the discussion but if you reduced or eliminated plea bargains then more criminals will go free because of the violation of their right to a speedy trial. Without plea bargains the system would shutdown rapidly.
LANMaster's Avatar
Distinguished Member with 55,833 posts.
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central USA
Experience: Need no stinking badges
27-Oct-2009, 01:43 PM #234
.... not to mention all those who take the plea to testify against a worse offender.
buffoon's Avatar
Community Moderator with 14,072 posts.
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Spain
Experience: comfortably numb
27-Oct-2009, 06:26 PM #235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bastiat View Post
I hate to bring reality to the discussion but if you reduced or eliminated plea bargains then more criminals will go free because of the violation of their right to a speedy trial.
Right, I understood that from previous posts. What I don't know is what it is that prevents speedy trials respectively their starting. Too many criminals or not enough courts etc.?
Quote:
Without plea bargains the system would shutdown rapidly.
Does that mean the system is due for reform (re-inforcement)? In other words why is this a problem in the US and doesn't seem to be elsewhere?
__________________
Human affairs are not so happily arranged that the best things please the most men. Therefore it is often the sign of a bad cause when it is applauded by the mob. ----Seneca----
Bastiat's Avatar
Distinguished Member with 5,158 posts.
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
27-Oct-2009, 07:01 PM #236
Quote:
Originally Posted by buffoon View Post
Right, I understood that from previous posts. What I don't know is what it is that prevents speedy trials respectively their starting. Too many criminals or not enough courts etc.?
Both.

Quote:
Does that mean the system is due for reform (re-inforcement)? In other words why is this a problem in the US and doesn't seem to be elsewhere?
?........Not unless you intend on rewriting the US Constitution. As to the second question, our distrust of government power has guaranteed certain rights that are not conducive to the rapid administration of justice.
Guyzer's Avatar
Computer Specs
Distinguished Member with 11,089 posts.
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Fraser Valley Area of B.C.
Experience: Coupla times
27-Oct-2009, 09:15 PM #237
Quote:
Originally Posted by buffoon View Post
In other words why is this a problem in the US and doesn't seem to be elsewhere?
It isn't exclusive to just the USA. It's just as much of a problem in Canada.
wacor's Avatar
wacor has a Photo Album
Distinguished Member with 27,401 posts.
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: You will never know
Experience: Depends on the definition
27-Oct-2009, 09:19 PM #238
But is not the definition of a speedy trial subjective?

I don't recall there being anything that stipulates what that really is.

Unless you mean a defendant could declare he is prepared to go to trial at arraignment. Seems like most of the time there are delays much longer than needed and don't hear much complaining on either side in general.
__________________
Conservatives in Exile Club
http://forums.techguy.org/group.php?groupid=34
if you want an invite just ask
Bastiat's Avatar
Distinguished Member with 5,158 posts.
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
27-Oct-2009, 09:26 PM #239
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacor View Post
But is not the definition of a speedy trial subjective?

I don't recall there being anything that stipulates what that really is.

Unless you mean a defendant could declare he is prepared to go to trial at arraignment. Seems like most of the time there are delays much longer than needed and don't hear much complaining on either side in general.
No, it's not subjective, it however isn't subject to a mathematical formula either. I would also note that many, if not all, state constitutions have a requirement for a speed trial as well and usually it's more strict than the federal requirement under the Constitution (but not always).
__________________
What is the speed of dark?
wacor's Avatar
wacor has a Photo Album
Distinguished Member with 27,401 posts.
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: You will never know
Experience: Depends on the definition
27-Oct-2009, 09:52 PM #240
If there is no mathematical formula then how can you not say it is anything but subjective?

For example some murders go to trial in just a few months while others after a year or two.

Explain please
 

THIS THREAD HAS EXPIRED.
Are you having the same problem? We have volunteers ready to answer your question, but first you'll have to join for free. Need help getting started? Check out our Welcome Guide.

Search Tech Support Guy

Find the solution to your
computer problem!




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
WELCOME TO TECH SUPPORT GUY! Are you looking for the solution to your computer problem? Join our site today to ask your question -- for free! Our site is run completely by volunteers who want to help you solve your computer problems. See our Welcome Guide to get started.
Thread Tools



Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter TechGuy.tv TechGuy.tv Mobile TSG Mobile
You Are Using:
Server ID
Advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service.
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:47 AM.
Copyright © 1996 - 2011 TechGuy, Inc. All rights reserved.

Powered by Cermak Technologies, Inc.