Christa Pike -where does she stand legally?

[mids2019]

Just this really. Christ a is obviously being giving life saving treatment at hospital but where does she now stand legally. I suppose she probably has irreversible brain damage so will this not allow a second execution to take place? Is this a cruel and unusual punishment?

[Note from MNHQ - edited your title, OP]

I thought you were saying I wasn't very bright because I supported the death penalty and didn't care if someone was innocent.

Whereas I was saying that we know she was guilty in this case, but there are clearly people who are wrongly convicted and imagine one of them being put through this torture. 30 years on death row and then a botched execution probably leading the brain damage. Not that I support it for her either but it would be even worse if you were locked up wrongly.

i’ve just been digging a bit.

apparently the inmate she tried to kill was protecting someone else, she is described as saving that persons life.

her childhood as well was severely traumatic, rape, abuse- none of which was brought up at trial in mitigation.

i find it interesting that neither of the two men who committed the crime with her got the death penalty, or even life with no parole.

One was under 18, and is still in prison. The other wasn't a man, was the lookout and got probation.

The link above debunks that.

https://law.justia.com/cases/tennessee/court-of-criminal-appeals/2013/m2012-01640-cca-r3-pc.html

She went with a "defence of another" defence but the court didn't buy it.

Jones was attacked by one inmate and then Pike joined in, plus:

Defendant: They know I... I.... I've gave them all fair warning that I would kill if I ever got near her.
Lisa: Yeah.
Defendant: So, it was a big choker, but I tried!
Lisa: (laughs) Really?
Defendant: I mean, seriously! And you know... I know the difference now between like, pre-meditated [sic] murder and what happened with Colleen.
Lisa: Yeah.
Defendant: Because I definitely pre-meditated [sic] this...

The one convicted as an accessory after the fact is a women. She made a deal with the prosecutors and testified as a witness.

Her codependent on the murder charge was 17 and thus ineligible for the death penalty. Had he been 18 he would almost certainly have received the same sentence.

Christa Pike was offered a deal - if she had pled guilty she would have been given life without parole. She refused it.

yeah, 10 months' difference between the male who was cheating on Christa Pike with Colleen Slemmer, and Christa. One gets the death penalty, one doesn't.

The poor mother of Colleen still doesn't have the piece of skull back that appallingly, Christa took. The State still has it and is refusing to return it until Christa is dead.

Her background made her what she was, but she was a dreadful human being then. All this could have been avoided if someone had stepped in and stopped the mistreatment.

The State keeping the piece of skull is just repulsive at this stage.

@InterIgnis the lawyer was fresh out of school and gave Pike very poor advice indeed apparently.

The whole thing is a catalogue of disastrous handling from the very start to right now.

Yes, that’s how age limits work. By the same principle, she was eligible to vote and join the military. He could do neither.

There was no cheating. It’s entirely possible that Tadaryl Shipp was interested in Colleen and used that to play on Pike’s insecurities, but Colleen Slemmer did not encourage or return his interest.

They had also previously expressed a desire to perform a human sacrifice, and they did carve a pentagram into her chest whilst she was still alive.

The letter she wrote to Tadaryl immediately after receiving her sentence:

“Ya see what I get for tryin’ to be nice to the hoe? I went ahead and bashed her brains out so she’d die quickly instead of letting her bleed to death and suffer more, and they fucking fry me?!”

the lawyer was fresh out of school and gave Pike very poor advice indeed apparently.

That a common feature in US system the poor are more likely to get poor less experienced legal advice and more likely to get the death sentence.

Data shows that roughly 95% of people on death row in the United States come from disadvantaged economic backgrounds.

It's just not a big issue for most of their voting population - they do not care.

When polled they know being poor means more likely to get death sentence but for most voters their views on justice, retribution, and the severity of the crime outweighs their concerns over how the system treats low-income individuals.

It’s not “the US”. It’s up to individual states. Not all States have the Death Penalty anyway!

I’m sure I read it was a “Dr Fowler” - who was also involved in the botched execution of Tony Carruthers earlier in the year.

True, but on a federal level it is the US. The federal government has the death penalty. Trump ended Biden's moratorium on executions and has approved the execution of more people than all of the previous Presidents combined.

He could supply individual states with lethal injection drugs if he wanted to, or if he had any concern about the state system as it stands. The fact that he doesn't shows he doesn't care whether it is humane or not, as long as it's successful in killing people.

The US has always been a backwards country in terms of justice and social welfare, but under Trump it is sliding decades further backwards.

You’d think he’d have had a practise run if he knew he was likely to need to do this. Jeez. 🙄

And someone posted upthread about this. Pike was intervening in fights trying to stop them, and the inmate said she (Pike) basically saved a prisoner’s life when attacked by a third inmate, like a self defence type situation.

@twistytwin Medics can provide peripheral services doing things like inserting IV’s or central lines, and obviously pronouncing death but they can’t actually be involved in the actual killing process. I think there’s something to be said for the opinion expressed by a medical professional who admitted to providing these services - that at least he knew that this part of the procedure was done properly and that hopefully it would benefit the condemned inmate. The problems start when prisons look to recruit retired staff whose skills are rusty and who are often doing it for the money.

Someone up thread has posted a link to the actual trial record emphatically debunking that.

https://law.justia.com/cases/tennessee/court-of-criminal-appeals/2013/m2012-01640-cca-r3-pc.html
She went with a "defence of another" defence but the court didn't buy it.
Jones was attacked by one inmate and then Pike joined in, plus:
Defendant: They know I... I.... I've gave them all fair warning that I would kill if I ever got near her.
Lisa: Yeah.
Defendant: So, it was a big choker, but I tried!
Lisa: (laughs) Really?
Defendant: I mean, seriously! And you know... I know the difference now between like, pre-meditated [sic] murder and what happened with Colleen.
Lisa: Yeah.
Defendant: Because I definitely pre-meditated [sic] this...

Exactly. It’s ethical “washing” isn’t it.

That's an interesting quote you keep choosing to highlight whilst ignoring quotes from Jones herself.

"On the night that she was choked by the Petitioner, Jones said that she had been placed in a recreational cage with the Petitioner and Cornett because a fire had been set. She said Cornett was “talking trash” to her, and when she approached her, Cornett took a swing at her and missed. At that point, Jones decided she was going to “beat[Cornett]in[to] a coma.” During the fight, the Petitioner pulled her off of Cornett with a bootlace and saved Cornett from serious injury.

Keen students of the death penalty will recall that one of Pierrepoints (many) reasons to declaim it was the fact that s slightly guilty poor woman (especially the wrong sort) would be far more likely to hang than a very guilty rich white one.

Even keener students of rhetoric will notice the use of the rather absurd notion of "slightly" and "very" guilty.

And prize winning students will spot this is the very same batshit logic that death penalty proponents have when they suggest we need the death penalty for the "very guilty".

Herein endeth the sermon for today.

About her actions and words then, no one, no one at all, is saying they aren't appalling.

What I'm trying to say is that if you take a toddler with some degree of FAS and other natal brain disadvantages, to the slaughterhouse, let her see animals she loves being killed and disemboweled in front of her, rape her, beat her, threaten to kill her pets (after she's seen other animals killed), beat her some more, give her zero stability, rape her some more, beat her some more ...... let her watch her only decent human being die of cancer .... rape and beat her some more, let everyone who does this walk around around her without punishment, are we really surprised that she turns out to think that beating and killing is normal?.

She never really had a chance. Literally, if you know anything about ACES and formation of the brain, her brain was changed and affected from before birth to adulthood.

The only way to stop more Christas, for absolutely every single person's benefit, is early intervention. Instead the US doesn't care and the UK has cut Social Service aid to well below any effective level.

As you your quote says Jones was attacked by Cornet and Pike joined in.

Pike came prepared with a garrot.

That is not self defence, or defence of a another. What Jones later said she was "thinking" makes no difference at all. Nor can you start a fight and then legally argue self defence. So there are two cast iron reasons why this wasn't self defence. (Defence of another.)

Most of all, we know for 100% sure the court did not think this was a "defence of another" case because it convicted!

Pike came prepared with a garrot.

To make a stew ?

To be fair. Her victim didnt get a chance to reach womanhood.

I’m sure Christa was referred to as a girl back when she was sentenced.

?

Oh, please yourselves.