Wednesday December 11, 2013
Jump to content
As you read this a jury in Everett, Washington is deliberating on whether or not to impose the death penalty on a Washington prison inmate who strangled a corrections officer.
Defense lawyer Karen Halverson asked jurors not to be swayed "by the voices of vengeance or retribution."
The 54-year-old convicted rapist is already serving life in prison without parole.
What is there to "deliberate?"
I completely agree. Why are tax dollars being wasted for a jury to deliberate, as well as to support this waste of oxygen? I read somewhere, that in the U.S. our prisoners are better taken care of than our elderly. Think about it....
Free room and board, medical care, library, tv, don't have to work.
You are both obviously right.
And if the man is not executed what is to stop the next criminal from attacking some other corrections officer. In all fairness to those who work in a place where I would not be caught dead, that has to be the law.
In truth, I have always believed, and will always believe, that the only appropriate penalty for deliberate murder, where the facts are clear cut and not just from forensics, is death. A life for a life. Somehow that seems like fundamental justice.
Another bit of fundamental justice is that when some prosecutor knowingly and deliberately withholds exculpatory evidence in a capital punishment case he should be charged with attempted murder. If I could write the laws, that would be one of the first I would write.
Posting comments requires a free account