Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

News

Flip

Original poster

US death penalty

25 replies

turquey · 15/12/2004 19:07

I haven't been paying much attention to
this case but knew the basic details, knew he'd been found guilty on seeing endless screeching tabloid headlines. Yesterday I was in the supermarket and saw the headline he'd got the death penalty.
I've always thought (from the comfortable vantage point of living in a country that does not have it) that I am slightly in favour of the death penalty in certain specific circumstances - but seeing that headline unexpectedly, knowing that I now live in the country where this is acceptable (even though it is not in this state) absolutely gave me chills. It's really made me re-evaluate.
I don't want to start an argument, and I'm not America-bashing, but I'm quite shocked at how strange it feels. There've been a lot of experiences since I moved to the US from England just over a year ago that have disproved my initial theory that living here won't feel all that different, but this was a doozy.

OP posts:

EbenyZebraScrooge · 15/12/2004 19:34

Where do you live, Turquey?
I come from an American very anti-death penalty family, but when I read about a crime like this, can't say I have much sympathy for the guy.

Colinsawmommykissingsantaclaus · 15/12/2004 19:52

Yes, he was sentenced to death, but that doesn't necessarily mean he will be put to death. California has 641 inmates on death row, and have executed only 10 since 1978, while in that time 38 have died of natural causes. (No, I don't keep stats like that in my head, just read an article about it)

That being said, this case has really been sad for me, as Laci Peterson disappeared just days after I found out I was pregnant. Not a whole lot makes me cry, really, but that did.

Original poster

turquey · 15/12/2004 19:57

I'm in New Jersey. I don't have any sympathy for him - I'm just trying to explain, very inarticulately, that I'm really surprised how strongly against the death penalty I feel now I am here, where it is a possibility, whereas in England I was slightly more ambivalent. It was a real knee jerk reaction of horror - even though the crime was horrible.
It's been a really interesting experience for me living out here, and I'm learning as much about myself as I am about America. (Sorry that sounds incredibly poncey, but it's true!)

OP posts:

Original poster

turquey · 15/12/2004 20:03

I can totally understand that Colinsmommy.

OP posts:

fostermum · 15/12/2004 20:10

i could live with the death penalty for proven cases of murder with intent or child abuse(sexual)i could live with life meaning life,but these days i feel there is very little justis in the world what ever country your in.as has been said this man may have the death sentence but wether it is carried out will be anpther matter

Caligulights · 15/12/2004 20:23

I never want the State to have the right to take a Citizen's life, for whatever crime. The State commits much greater crimes against its Citzens than any one individual could ever commit (unless he's got access to weapons of mass destruction) and we don't have the right to take its life! The one stumbling block for me would always be that the criminal justice system makes mistakes and a mistake cannot be rectified if the victim is dead.

snowdonim · 15/12/2004 20:23

I was visiting my ds1 in LA when the guilty verdict was handed down in this case. The trial was certainly headline news. Ds's FIL is a judge in Ca but left the State court system because he's opposed to the death penalty.

Looking at those figures, it does seem as if Ca is reluctant to use the ultimate sanction, which makes me wonder why they bother have it.

morningpaper · 15/12/2004 20:27

I'd imagine it must be odd to find yourself in a country which has just legally decided that someone must be killed. It seems so wrong. (It's especially odd when America has such a strong pro-life front when it comes to abortion.)

I was reading an article about this last night. Here are some random facts:

There are currently 3,653 inmates on death row.
There are around 70 death-row executions a year in the US.
There are no rich men on death row: 90% of death-row inmates are unable to afford an attourney.
since 1973, 6,000 people have been put on death row. More than 60 have been released in the wake of evidence pointing to innocence. That is a 1-percent error rate.
Since 1990, 18 people have been executed in the United States for crimes committed when they were 17 or younger. Two-thirds of all such child executions across the world are carried out by the US (the practice is generally regarded as legally and morally wrong).
There are currently 83 minors on death row.
Over 50% of men on death row are black or hispanic.

You can find the final statements of all recent death-row inmates from Texas here . Sobering reading.

EbenyZebraScrooge · 15/12/2004 20:27

My dad is also a judge in California... he reckons that his opposition to the death penalty (and he absolutely abhors it) has definitely hindered his career.

Killing people to show people that killing people is wrong... is obviously faulty logic. Personally I am a lot more upset about other things in the world, though.

EbenyZebraScrooge · 15/12/2004 20:29

"Pro-life" as long as it's innocent souls. Not where the guilty are concerned. Then retribution is required (or so the mindset goes).

Caligulights · 15/12/2004 20:33

Unless the guilty are very rich of course.

KateandtheElves · 15/12/2004 23:27

I don't like the death penalty at all, and I wish I were living in a country that didn't have it. I don't think it acts as a detterent, it certainly doesn't save the taxpayers money, and it can't be right for the state to be able to take someone's life.

On the other hand, when I read about individual cases like these I don't lose much sleep or any tears for Scott Peterson. I won't be sad when (if) he is executed. Does that make me a hypocrite? I don't know.

Uwila · 16/12/2004 09:37

I've got no sympathy for a man who plans and executes the murders of his wife and unborn child. The world is a better place without monsters like Scott Peterson.

Come and get me now.... I know you will all be horrified with my view.

JJ · 16/12/2004 09:52

I am vehemently anti-death penalty for all the normal reasons, iykwim. In the US it's a state thing - just looked it up and 38 states have it and 12 don't. Also, a few years ago, the former IL governor put a moratorium on executions that I believe is still in effect. (The governor has the right to grant clemency.)

KateandtheElves · 16/12/2004 12:17

Uwila, I agree with you. I have absolutley no sympathy for Peterson and I think the world will be a better place with out him. Not a horrific view at all.

On the other hand, I don't believe that the government should be allowed to kill him. Do you understand the distinction I'm making?

Gobbledigoose · 16/12/2004 12:27

Agree with you Uwila.

Amanda3266 · 16/12/2004 12:29

I am not into the death penalty at all. As far as I can see NOBODY has the right to take life. Whether that's the nutter on the street or the justice authority. Lock him up for life - the world will still be without him. No sympathy for him but still don't agree with the death penalty.

aloha · 16/12/2004 12:41

I'm against it full stop too. It doesn't mean you think murderers are nice people at all. You can think they are horrible and should be punished and kept away from others but still oppose the death penalty.

lisalisa · 16/12/2004 12:44

Message withdrawn

paolosgirl · 16/12/2004 12:57

If people like him die in any way, then I'm afraid I don't lose a wink of sleep, full stop. He has no right to life with quality - to laugh, to smile, to to love ever again as far as I'm concerned. However, there is always the possibilty of another innocent person dying (don't forget the victims are ALWAYS innocent), and for that reason I believe life should be life in cases like this, with no privileges, attempts to rehabilitate etc. IMO the victims do not have any of these, so why should the perpetrator? The victim should always be considered before them.

lisalisa · 16/12/2004 13:03

Message withdrawn

Uwila · 16/12/2004 14:04

I still think it's okay to kill him. His own wife and child... he doesn't derve the oxygen it takes to keep him alive. ALthough, I do agree with point of the possibility of a mistake. Perhaps death should be the sentence when the jury is 100% certain, and not just beyond a reasonable doubt.

You may be interested to know that there is "life without parole" sentence in the state of Texas. So, if you never want the guilty to walk the streets, you have to go for the death penalty.

Uwila · 16/12/2004 14:05

Grrr... sorry. Meant to say there is NO life without parole sentence in Texas. So the choice for prosecutors is life with parole or the death penalty.

tammylove · 17/12/2004 18:35

Im very much a believer in an eye for an eye.
I think its mental torture to be on deathrow, waiting to die.

If judges decide thats a fair punishment, who am i to argue?

TheHollyAndTheTwiglett · 17/12/2004 19:05

I'm against the death penalty even for such a heinous crime

what partly scares me is the jury saying they came to that decision (for death penalty) because he showed 'no emotion'

... I know Americans believe they wear their hearts on their sleeves, and I also know I suffer from English reserve, but really does a sentence depend on how well someone can demonstrate remorse .. I find that quite scary in a judicial system (and reminds me of the Louise Woodwarde case)

Flip