E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSState Senators in Connecticut voted 20-16 on Thursday in favor of repealing the death penalty. WVIT's Liz Dalhem reports.
Updated at 10:00 a.m. ET: With the Connecticut Senate voting early Thursday to repeal the death penalty, the state is poised to become the fifth in five years to end the practice.
Legislative action was delayed last year amid the high-profile prosecution of a death penalty case involving a brutal home invasion that left a mother and her two daughters dead. But after a debate that stretched into the early morning hours Thursday, the Senate voted 20-16 to approve legislation that would replace the death penalty with life without parole.
“Connecticut’s criminal justice system has taken a historic step forward. In a system of justice that is no(t) perfect, we must not employ a penalty that requires perfection. The punishment of life in prison without the possibility of release makes more sense,” Senate President Donald E. Williams, Jr., a Democrat, said in a statement. “These inmates will face conditions that are similar to and in some cases more severe than conditions on death row. It is a punishment and sentence that is certain and final.”
The bill will now head to the House of Representatives, where observers say it is likely to pass. Gov. Daniel Malloy has said he would sign the legislation because it is forward looking, and not retroactive to those already sitting on death row.
Senate leadership held a press conference at the Capitol Wednesday ahead of the vote, with families of murder victims joining them. Senate Republican opponents organized their own news conference, which was attended by the lone survivor of the home invasion case in Cheshire and families of other murder victims.
“For those who say that we should execute those 11 (currently on death row) but none going further, the only way to keep that promise … is to keep our death penalty law,” Republican State Sen. John McKinney said. “I also think we need to talk about the message it sends that some who murder viciously the families in Connecticut should face the death penalty but others should not. Are we … saying that those families and the lives of those victims are somehow less important? For me, that is a wrong and terrible message to send.”
A recent Quinnipiac University poll found that the state's voters are against repealing the death penalty by a margin of 62 percent to 31 percent. A 2011 poll showed that 48 percent of those surveyed preferred the death penalty over life in prison with no chance of parole (43 percent) in first-degree murder cases.
"As we've seen in past Quinnipiac University polls, Connecticut voters still think abolishing the death penalty is a bad idea," said Douglas Schwartz, poll director. "No doubt the gruesome Cheshire murders still affect public opinion regarding convicts on death row."
AP Photo/Jessica Hill
Episcopal Bishops Laura Ahrens, left, and Bishop Ian Douglas rally at the state Capitol with religious leaders who oppose the death penalty in Hartford, Conn., on Tuesday.
'Clear trend'
If the legislation passes the House and is signed by the governor, Connecticut would be the fifth state in five years to repeal the death penalty, joining 16 others that have no capital punishment. California voters will decide in November whether to also do away with it.
“This was a courageous and historic vote, but it was also in line with a growing trend away from the death penalty around the country. Connecticut’s legislature has come to the same conclusion that other legislatures have recently made: the death penalty is too risky, too expensive, and too unfair to continue," Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC), said in a statement.
A bill to repeal Connecticut's death penalty passed in 2009, but then Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell vetoed it. Last year, the bill made it through the joint House and Senate Judiciary Committee. But it died before a full Senate vote after a few senators withdrew their support because a second man charged in the Cheshire home invasion case was about to go on trial, said Ben Jones, executive director of the Connecticut Network to Abolish the Death Penalty.
But it is now possible to have the death penalty debate not amid the “heated nature of a capital trial," so "people are able to think about it more at a systematic level,” said Shari Silberstein, executive director of Equal Justice USA.
Joshua Komisarjevsky and Steven Hayes were convicted in the 2007 Cheshire killings of Jennifer Hawke-Petit and her daughters, Hayley, 17, and Michaela, 11. The girls were tied to their beds and doused in gasoline before the house was set ablaze; they died of smoke inhalation; their mother was strangled.
George Ruhe / AP
Authorities outside the home of Dr. William Petit, a noted specialist in diabetes, in Cheshire, Conn., on Monday July 23, 2007. Intruders broke into his home, held the family hostage and killed his wife and two daughters.
The lone survivor of the invasion, Dr. William A. Petit Jr., along with his sister, Johanna Petit-Chapman, oppose the repeal.
“We believe in the death penalty because we believe it is really the only true just punishment for certain heinous and depraved murders. One thing you never hear the abolitionists talk about is the victims, almost never, the forgotten people. The people who died and can’t be heard to speak for themselves,” Petit said at a press conference. “I think prospective (not retroactive) repeal of the death penalty is false. There’ll be multiple appeals for people already on death row.”
Williams, the Senate president, said before the vote that similar legislation has withstood judicial reviews.
"We're very respectful of those who are in favor of the death penalty," he said. "Yet those folks who have already been convicted and are serving under the prior rules of conviction do not have their sentences altered."
If the legislation becomes law, it would apply to capital offenses committed on or after the effective date of the act. It creates new conditions for those convicted of “murder with special circumstances” -- previously capital crimes -- including being moved to a new cell every 90 days and only having two hours a day out of their cell.
There are 11 inmates on Connecticut's death row. The state has carried out one execution since 1976. Connecticut’s Office of Fiscal Analysis estimated that the state spends $5 million a year on the death penalty system, according to the DPIC.
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
Leave a Comment:
Awesome, just let all those murderers go free. Everything will be fine! Who ever heard of a murderer killing again anyways?
Where do you get the free part from?
They're replacing it with life without parole.
Who suggested letting them go free? Life without parole is not putting killers back on the street.
I know people who were touched by crimes committed by Mad Dog Taborksy and Michael Ross (the last two people Connecticut put to death). Killing those two people did not restore life to murder victims.
I also know people who were patients of Dr. Petit. My heart goes out to him, and I don't feel it is fair to criticize him after the terrible loss he suffered. But, still, executing Joshua Komisarjevsky and Steven Hayes will not bring his wife and daughters back.
It costs ten to a hundred times more to put someone to death than it does to sentence them to life in prison.
Life in prison is real punishment.
The death penalty just provides a painless escape from punishment.
.
Marty... I'm sorry, but Joshua and Steven should receive the same fate that their victims suffered. They will wake up and see the sun tomorrow. Their victims won't. Will it bring the victims back? No.. But at least the SURVIVORS of their crimes won't be forced to support the perpetrators of those crimes for the rest of their lives.
Ruken,
Look up Kenneth McDuff. He was sentenced to death for three murders, commuted to life, and then released due to "overcrowding". He killed six more times, was sentenced to death, and finally executed in 1998.
Do not think that any sentence cannot be reversed.
spike, yes at times sentences can be reversed...so can the death penalty. So what's your point.
Spike,
What state was McDuff? Was that Connecticut?
And you are wrong. You said that no sentence can't be reversed. That is not true for people who are put to death. There is nothing that can be done to bring back the lives of innocent people who have been mistakenly put to death. While you are online looking up Kenneth McDuff, while don't you also look up the "Innocence Project"?
I guess the nitwits there would rather pay to keep them in luxury for the rest of their lives while good people starve.
I would think that as a punishment -- life in prison without parole is worse than death.
I object to being in the same company as North Korea, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran and others of this ilk on this issue. Almost every other civilized country has abolished this punishment. In my state, the last time the death penalty was used they got it wrong. Sooner or later though, someone on this vine will give it the ole' eye for an eye nonsense -- as if we have not evolved passed the Code of Hammurabi. When the state executes an innocent person what is that called? oops?
This exaggeration and hyperbole only serves to make your argument ridiculous.
rofl
so gullable
life in prison means out in 15 years
duuuuuuuuuuuuuh
there is no thing as a life sentence
the murderers killed and took a life
they in turn need to be executed
stop with the pampering of killers
they killed so they should expect to be killed
you have to think about the victims in which no one does
they were put to death by the idiot murderer in turn the murderer needs to be executed
did the victim ask for death NO
but murderers ask every time they kill
so give them their wish execution
i hate to say it but this decision will flip flop on good people
then you really will have to live with yourselves
good luck on that one
hope my love ones arnt part of an irresponcible choice these people make
Look up any of the innocents who have been wrongfully sentenced to the death penalty and killed by the state. Do not think that those wrongful deaths can be reversed. So what are those who are wrongfully killed - collateral damage? Innocents must sometimes die in order that the revenge of the bloodthirsty among us may be satisfied?
The death penalty puts us in the company of such countries as North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia. So what's the deal, Spike? In what other ways should we emulate those fine countries with which we share so many values?
KEITH
Your statements deny truth. Have you not heard of "life without parole"? Don't you realize that life without parole is the alternative to the death penalty? How many guilty people who were sentenced to life without parole have been released?
And frankly, any "victim" who would feel better because the state put someone to death needs to re-evaluate their values.
While I think the death sentence should be used sparingly, only in cases where guilt is not in doubt, I don't think it should be abolished.
Joshua Komisarjevsky and Steven Hayes fall into the catogory of two people who should be executed. In fact, they should be executed very slowly and painfully, just like their victims.
That sounds like another issue altogether.
If he is sentenced to life in prison without parole, he should be the last on the list to ever be released for anything.
Dear Don,
Well, people in both countries breath air, drink water, eat food(although some in NKorea may not), and likely a lot of other thinkgs. Ok born and die - everyone in both countries does that. Just because we have something in common with a "bad" country does not make it wrong.
Putting an innocent to death via the state is bad but some of these people are clearly not innocent.
How about Charles Manson, John Wayne Gacy or Ted Bundy? (spelling could be wrong, I don't follow these trash people)
When there is no question as to the guilt of some of these vicious killers, I say DEATH!
The death sentence is not appropriate for someone who kills another in a bar brawl, for instance. Nor in cases where there is no overwelming evidence of guilt.
The courts and/or juries should decide who to rehabilitate and who to punish. The punished group should be declared as animals and kept in cages they only leave when they die. Nothing in the cage but straw bedding and they and their cage washed down with a fire hose weekly. Let the criminals who are being rehabilitated man the hoses and see what is in store for them if they offend again. All the saved money not going into lawyers' pockets could be spent on thorough rehabilitation so there is no excuse to offend again. After you prove your life's work is crime, you should be put away for good and treated as you treated your victims, without human dignity.
Your right softdude these prisons are multy million dollar facilities, I say tent cities with outhouses and fence it in accordingly.. The employees should be the only one in a structure..
Abolishing the death penalty is nothing more then window dressing, putting lipstick on a pig. The problem is still there. Getting rid of the death penalty is nothing more than a feel good, pat myself on the back notion that this will put us in line with all the other "civilized" nations of the world. Has getting rid of the death penalty stopped murder in any of "your civilized nations"? Do you think the inmates on death row will suddenly "see the light, get religion" and repent their sins becoming model inmates and maybe some day model citizens? All because you abolish the death penalty?
As far as putting innocents to death, mistakes are made and I am sorry for that but you want to justify abolishing the death penalty using this reason? just like when you put them in prison for life without parole? Because that is where you are going? You want to believe that every person in the world has "value" whether that person is a saint or sinner and they only went "bad" because of _____— (society, the way they were raised, peer pressure, fill in the excuse). There are bad people in the world who commit crimes - all need to be separated from society and yes, some need to die for their crimes.
Will the "innocents" stop pleading their case if they are given life without parole? Don't you realize that every inmate is "innocent", that it was the other guy, that they were framed? Don't believe me? Ask them.
if we could be absolutely positive that the person convicted of murder and sentenced to death was guilty then and only then is the death penalty acceptable to me. absolute guilt is rarely ever the case. the innocence project has proven that not all convicted were guilty and could have been wrongfully executed. that i can't live with.
life without parole...yes that will help the deficit.
Way to go Connecticut politicians! Obviously you know more about what the people want than the people themselves, so let's go show the country how civilized we are! Weeeeeeeeee, I feel much better about myself now.
Truly amazing that they are thinking of abolishing the death penalty just after two guys were convicted of stalking a family, then holding them hostage in their home while taking the mom out to a bank for some money, then going back to their house, tying up the father in the basement and beating him until they thought he was going to die, going back upstairs, tying up and systematically raping the two young daughters and the mother, then covering them in gasoline and setting them all on fire, hopping in their car and attempting to drive off (and through a couple of police cars blocking their exit. So, to clarify, the mother and the daughters died in the fire, the father for some amazing reason was able to get free and got out of the house to get the police.
Fast forward a year or so and there was a very long trial for each of these dirtbags, their lawyers pointing fingers at each other perp, their needing to get off because of their childhood, something must have been wrong with the investigation, can't get a fair trial in CT, etc. and the jury still found them guilty on all charges and approved of the death penalty as punishment.
So the windbags in Hartford decide that no one deserves the death penalty and that these 2 perps are much better off spending 40-50 years behind bars, getting 3 squares a day, some nice clean sheets, cable tv, etc. Yeah, that's much better than an injection. Boy are we civilized......
Michael Gibson-758864
I guess the nitwits there would rather pay to keep them in luxury for the rest of their lives while good people starve.
Luxury? Since when is maximum security prison luxury? And we'll all be starving to keep them there? Can you be a little more dramatic? You might want to check your facts a bit there, Mike. Keeping someone on death row costs way more than keeping them in prison (oh, I'm sorry, I meant "luxury") for the rest of their lives. Besides, killing a dirtbag murderer lets them off easier. Being locked up for life without ever having the chance to get out is far more torture.
I will NEVER understand, or respect, elected officials who pass (or revoke) laws that are not in line with what the people who elected them want.
It should NOT matter one iota what we/you think, unless you live in Connecticut!!! It should matter what the tax paying, legally voting residents of Connecticut want!!
If there is 63%-31% SUPPORT for the death penalty in Connecticut, then WHY THE HELL are their elected ***REPRESENTATIVES*** doing passing laws that do NOT represent the will of the CONSTITUENTS???
Why is the Governor going to sign it??
Citizens of Connecticut should vote out EVERY SINGLE law maker in their state this November who are passing laws that do not reflect their beliefs/desires. PERIOD.
Actually, verno, the death penalty can't be reversed. That's the real problem. A sentence can be reversed if new evidence comes to light. We can't undo an execution.
walks upright said: I would think that as a punishment -- life in prison without parole is worse than death... I object to being in the same company as North Korea, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran and others of this ilk on this issue.
You and me both. Couldn't agree more.
I used to be a proponent of the death penalty but in recent years I've changed my mind.
The death penalty is a failure and doesn't do anything to deter crime - it is just revenge and almost always applied in a discriminatory way. Not to mention it costs a boat load of cash to put someone to death. I can think of much better ways to spend that money. Lock them up and throw away the key...
Good riddance death penalty.
Awesome, just let all those murderers go free.
Reading comprehension fail.
Thank you, Connecticut, for helping this country move toward being part of a civilized world.
Life without parole does what the justice system should do - protect society from future crimes by that party. It also eliminates the revenge factor that is so unevenly applied. And as others have noted, there's no "do-over" when the death penalty is applied in error.
TheOverlord:
YOU WROTE: "The death penalty is a failure and doesn't do anything to deter crime - it is just revenge..."
MY RESPONSE: In our judicial system, the death penalty is neither swift nor certain, and that’s probably why it’s not a significant deterrent to crime. Nevertheless, nobody can deny that all PROVEN murderers who are executed will never murder AGAIN (so there is some intrinsic deterrent value).
Anyway, I think the death penalty could become a celebrated deterrent to crime if it were administered with swiftness and certainty. To find out if my theory is plausible, just seek the opinion of anyone threatened with the “death penalty” (by neighborhood thugs) if they snitch to the police during a crime investigation. The police can get mighty frustrated trying to crack a case when all the witnesses won’t talk for fear of reprisal that the local thugs promise will be swift and certain.
Wow, which part of "forward-looking" did you all NOT READ?
The Governor has said he would NOT sign the bill, if it applied to murderers already on death row.
So, no one is "going free" and no one already convicted, is escaping the death chamber.
All that being said, they should not abolish the death penalty, particularly if the majority of citizens want to see it retained.
Saw that so I had to look it up.............after looking it up not everyone agrees with that.
Edwin H. Sutherland, PhD, late President of the American Sociological Society, and Donald R. Cressey, PhD, late Professor of Sociology at the University of California, Santa Barbara, in the 1974 revised edition of their book titled Criminology, wrote:
Dudley Sharp, Death Penalty Resources Director of Justice For All (JFA), in an Oct. 1, 1997 Justice for All presentation titled "Death Penalty and Sentencing Information," wrote:
I've always detested the protests and the candlelight vigils outside a prison whenever someone is going to be executed. You hardly ever see or hear about such things done for the benefit of the victims.
The only way to prevent the state from wrongly executing innocent people is to eliminate the death penalty.
Steve: If you believe that the victims "benefit" from the death penalty you have a different understanding of benefit than I do.
@Michael Gibson,
Despite the fact that its been known and widely reported for decades that it costs way more to execute someone that it does to give them life in prison, m o r o n s such as yourself continuously make these same type of comments over and over. I guess you really can't undo stupid?
Pray...
For those that feel a life in prison is WORSE than the death penalty, wow.
It's funny to me that the convicted murderers get LIFE without parole. Let's read that again...they get LIFE! The victims get a coffin, 6 feet under and everything is over for them. Done. Yet the murderer gets breath, food, sunlight, music, books, exercise, letters from loved ones, education, medicine when they are sick, dental treatment, clean clothes and on and on and on! They get to LIVE another day, then another, then another. How can all these things be compared to death? Death is much worse, and in my opinion, if you kill someone, that is exactly what you deserve. If you take a life, you should lose yours as well.
The bottom line is that the state should have no right to exterminate its own citizens. Not in a free society.
It's not a determent and there's no way that any SCOTUS if going to deprive due process. You just can't cling to the Constitution when it suit you. All states should make it life without parole. If I had the choice of life in prison without the possibility of parole or death--I'd take death. So--give them hard time with no chance to see outside those walls again in their lifetime.
I am so sick of this argument. The civilized countries have done away with the death penalty, yet not out "eye for an eye" gang. I guess on these arguments you folks rip out the pages of the bible that speak of "Cast the first stone" and turn the other cheek.
Thanks to the right wing members of The SCOTUS, a person can be stripped searched for minor offenses, corporations can buy the candidate that will best serve their interests, you can be held as long as they chose as a "enemy combatant, and you can't fly on a commercial aircraft if you're on "the list",They will reject Health Care Reform on the basis of personal freedoms, yet violate your "rights" at every turn. Those people are not interpreting the Constitution, they're butchering it and Scalia and Thomas should be impeached--immediately. For those 2 weasels, I'd almost make an acceptation and use the death penalty.
@don- the victims are also family members and loved ones who have to live with their loss. They deserve some of the sympathy and compassion that some bestow upon murders in a vigil.
correction: murderers
"It costs ten to a hundred times more to put someone to death than it does to sentence them to life in prison."
-- Not true for everyone.
Life in prison is real punishment.
-- It is a punishment....And the death penalty is also a punishment.
The death penalty just provides a painless escape from punishment.
-- That's ridiculous. Most criminals will often cop a plea for life imprisonment to avoid the death penalty. Most criminals sentenced to death fight their sentence.
steve
What makes you believe those people who attend a death penalty vigil do not have sympathy for the victims? They do. However, when they are protesting the death penalty they have a job to do - trying to stop the backward, medieval practice of the government killing people.
You don't show sympathy for anyone by killing other people.
@don- well, maybe some people are more evolved than me. I don't believe that execution is a deterrent or some kind of eye for an eye satisfaction. I see executing violent murderers and rapists as justice. Rather than attributing executions to the government, I think it should be attributed to a society, and different communities and societies should be able to determine how to handle the violent people in their midst.
Can you be absolutely certain that the person you're executing is guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt? Because wrongful convictions and executions happen all the time and there's no making up for it once you stick the needle in their arms. Frankly I don't know how someone could live with themselves if they later found out the person they sentenced to death was really innocent.
steve
I think you are right. You are not as "evolved" as some. The first step toward becoming "more evolved" is to recognize that you have a ways to go. You are justifying murder in the name of justice. That is the way they do things in North Korea. I hate for our American community to handle "justice" they way they do in Yemen.
Well, Don, I was being sarcastic but now you are being kind of obnoxious and holier than thou. If it makes people of your ilk feel superior to consider executions in the US murder or on the same plane as dictatorships, you not only fail to understand the meaning of the word "murder" but you dismiss our legal system of appeals and trial by jury as parity with despotic regimes. The pacifist is always the first to be eliminated when the wild animals of our species are allowed to have their way.
In England many of our forefathers were hanging kids for stealing a loaf of bread. That has obviously been halted but what is wrong with killing a man who rapes, tortures and kills an innocent woman for his own deprived satisfaction? It is certainly not a cruel and unusual punishment. How about putting them in stocks, on the Court House steps, for life. Would that be better? It would be a great deterrent.
BTW a couple of hours in the stocks would deter illegal parking.
If life without parole means that, when they get sick, they die, then I am all for it.
No free education. No free health care. Get sick, die.
Otherwise, forget it.
They are not worth the care and money.
The best argument I've seen against the death penalty is that not a single millionaire has ever been executed in the entire history of the US. The police knows it, the judges know it and the politicians know it.
I think it's about time people know about it and stop the death penalty charade.
I don't understand how state sanctioned murder is better than regular murder. Someone earlier said the murderers should suffer the same fate as the victims. Putting a man down like a dog with an injection will never equate to a random, gruesome murder. We'll never be able to even the score with a sociopathic murderer, so why are we still in favor of this uncivilized practice?
People are so in lust of revenge. It's disgusting. It's the human quality that fuels many murders to begin with. Sure, revenge is popular, but it doesn't mean it's right. I love when lawmakers do what's right instead of what's fair. That's the entire reason for the court system.
Can you imagine where we would be if this nation were allowed to ignore constitutionality and do what's popular instead?
What is a fair punishment for this "brutal home invasion that left a mother and her two daughters dead. " I think our prison system is too soft and not tough enough to be called punishment. The death penalty, the way it is, is not effective. So what is a just punishment? I think we need different levels of punishment for example, murder equals solitary confinement until you die. In short, our justice system is too worried about the criminals and to me that does not lead to a just punishment. Another thing that needs to change is letting people out who violently rape/attack another person. Again, put them in solitary until death. If people fear the punishment then crime will drop.
Actually, it is only expensive because of the ability to 'appeal.'
Why is the death penalty not effective? Takes too long for one thing. You're more likely to die in prison from illness or from old age than from execution if you were on death row.
And another question comes to mind: our prisons are overcrowded as it is. Where shall we build more prisons? In your backyard?
Very well said. Knowingly pushing through a bill that defies the will of your constituents is shameful. The only way to ensure our elected officials are accountable to us is to show them on election day. If the citizens don't then they get what they deserve.
A very novel idea in theory but in practice, we all know prisons are little more than taxpayer subsidized daycare centers. Hard time should be just that - hard time. But convicted murderers don't even get THAT anymore. You can thank the "let's save and rehabilitate everyone" libbies for that. Which is another reason why I'm FOR the death penalty.
U are placing blame incorrectly. U are certainly right ...had he been executed, no more killing would've occurred. But had the legal system not failed, he would've rotted in jail and still had no chance of getting out. His sentence wasn't reversed. It was commuted. He should never had it commuted. Secondly, they system should never release the most violent criminals simply because of overcrowding. That should be for non violent offenders if any.
Also there are 2 sides to every coin. You have argued one side but have u considered that over 100 people have been exonerated after getting the death sentence and 39 more have been executed and found innocent after the fact. That's a lot of mistakes when you're dealing with people's lives.
We have a system that can keep violent people locked away and kept there if followed and not circumvented.
Very well said. Knowingly pushing through a bill that defies the will of your constituents is shameful. The only way to ensure our elected officials are accountable to us is to show them on election day. If the citizens don't then they get what they deserve.
----------------------------
That's a trite saying played over and over again. Well what about after they are elected and only tell u what u want to hear during the election. That is what happens often. So you're suggestion doesn't hold much water many times.
I am so baffled by people who think lawmakers are elected to do the will of the people who elected them. Sure, unless what the people want is illegal and unconstitutional. Then we have the courts to defend the democracy. Sorry, folks. Your lawmaker has to follow the law first.
If the people involve with putting a wrongly convicted person to death are then executed too, then I would have no problem with the death penalty.
Bring those murders to Texas, we will execute them for you.
Generally I side with the left, but not on this issue. I'm glad my state still has the death penalty. Life is the ultimate possession. And taking it away is the most powerful act anybody can do to another person. It is my view that if you willingly take a life (i.e. 1st degree murder) then you need to be taken care of.
Tell me again, we didn't kill innocent people. Hah!
Someone above is confusing revenge for justice.
The two can overlap, but are not always the same thing.
To me, justice would be swiftly executing the two men mentioned in the article that murdered the women and children and lit the fire.
To me, a child rapist should be physically castrated.
That would be justice.
Locking up people for possessing marijuana? That's a waste of time and money and it's not justice. (And I've never even smoked a J!)
So, people, don't confuse the two.
Protecting society from vicious criminals is not merely about deterrence. People must also be protected from known criminals who must be prevented from committing additional heinous crimes.
The only sure way to accomplish this is capital punishment.
To all those that think the death penalty is barbaric, ineffective, expensive, or life in prison is worse think about some facts first.
It's ineffective? Show me the numbers. Back when we could hang people at high-noon or line up the firing squad what were the violent and brutal crime rates? Not very high. Today it remains fairly ineffective based on the fact that we tend to not follow through with it or the criminal is allowed to drag it out forever. It's expensive? Yet again this is because we allow the criminal to drag it out. The death part is NOT expensive but you know what is? 20 or 30 appeals we allow them over a period of 30, 40, 50 years before finally taking them out. Seems there's a flaw in your logic on which part is expensive and it's the same part that makes life in prison expensive also. Appeals, appeals, and more appeals. So how is death more expensive when at least at some point we get to stop allowing them cable, food, clothes, and other nice comforts.
Life in prison is worse? Hahahahahaha.. *breath* hahahahaha!! Says the person who has never faced certain death. If you're religious then you're saying living is worse than being expedited to hell? Curious, since I've always thought hell was supposed to be the worst thing ever. Created by god himself. Then again, that implies with absolute certainty that you know there's is something after death and it's not just an eternity of nothingness. Is the death penalty barbaric? Dam* right it is. A barbaric punishment reserved for the worst things on our planet.
Human rights? Give me a break. Consider this: a couple men brutally rape, torture, attempt to strangle with a cord, fail, beat and rape an 18 year old girl some more, then set her on fire while she's alive and leave her for dead - but she doesn't die until later in the hospital. You consider those things HUMAN?? You really think they're going to torture themselves every day over what they did while they're in prison?
I really want to see this bleeding heart when something like that happens to your family. I hope nothing ever does for your sake. It's about time you put a maxi pad over that bleeding heart you have for criminals and maybe go clean up the bloody mess from their victims.
Sounds nice but not true there have been 2 millionaires executed Louis Buchalter (labor racketeer), Juan Garza (drugs).
First off, the death penalty is not, and never was, a deterrent to homicide. Back in the late 60's, and throughout much of the 1970's, during the period when many states maintained a "moratorium" on the death penalty, the murder rates were always higher in the states that kept it active.
Secondly, it costs more to prosecute, and execute someone for a "capital" crime, than it does to incarcerate them for the remainder of their lives. (Sounds stupid, but it's true!)
Thirdly, let's look at some the countries who maintained the death penalty, (and some who still do to this day); Nazi Germany, The U.S.S.R. and its eastern bloc allies during the cold war, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Iran, Pakistan, Cuba, China, North Korea.
Not exactly models for our "civilized" society, eh?
And finally, there is always the off chance that the wrong person/people will get prosecuted for a particular offense, and be executed when in fact they were innocent of any wrongdoing.
Just recently, a group of three teenagers from West Memphis Arkansas were freed from jail after spending 18 years there for a crime they very likely did not commit. One of them was on death row. It would have been a shame if he'd been executed for something he didn't do.
You can't teach people that its wrong to kill other people, by killing people. It just doesn't work. The mentality of "you brutalize me, so we brutalize you back" only gives credence to the notion that its alright to hurt other human beings, so long as there is "justification." I
.....and "justification" is always in the eye of the beholder.
As a resident of Connecticut, while I am glad the death penalty has been repealed, I still have some reservations. I used to be a proponent of the death penalty however, there have been many recent cases that have cast much doubt on the guilt of the prisoner.
Further, it has become pretty obvious that the death penalty is not a deterrent for criminals - if they are so sick that they are determined to kill, they will do so. In my mind, life in prison without parole is a daily reminder that the prisoner will never enjoy life on the outside, and that they will be spending the rest of their miserable existence behind bars.
To those with bloodlust (i.e. you better hope nothing happens to your families! They raped! Murdered!) - What if it turns out that the suspect wasn't the one who did the murdering and/or raping, who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and it turns out to be a case of mistaken identity? Sorry but, we have prisons for a reason. Call me a bleeding heart but wrongly executing one innocent individual is one executed innocent too many.
You want blood? Go slit your wrists and you'll see all the blood you want.
JoeNY,
"So the windbags in Hartford decide that no one deserves the death penalty and that these 2 perps are much better off spending 40-50 years behind bars, getting 3 squares a day, some nice clean sheets, cable tv, etc. Yeah, that's much better than an injection. Boy are we civilized......"
LMAO ... I see reading isn't your forte ... the repeal isn't retroactive, but moving forward. Meaning, the two criminals in the Petit case aren't eligible for a reversal on of death penalty. If you had read the article, not only would you know this simple fact, but you would also know that it isn't retroactive for anyone currently sitting on death row ... all 11 of them.
This is a big problem with this country - entirely too many people don't pay attention, don't get all the facts before opening their mouths and ultimately end up looking like an uninformed fool ... Kudos, sport.
The FEAR is that as long as a murderer is alive, some moron governor can pardon him. See Mississippi. Or some judge will change their mind, etc.
Reality is, however, that it takes a long time to get through to dying, and there's a reason for that. If it isn't obvious to anyone, our court system is highly flawed in convictions. While it may not be the majority, it is true that there have been innocent people on death row, and proven in Texas that innocent people have been killed on death row. A rogue governor has plenty of time to pardon all the murderers he wants, anyway. And a rogue justice system has the same.
Therefore, only the innocents who don't get a break end up paying the ultimate price. Murderes get killed, yep, but no murderers life is worth killing an innocent for.
When the justice system is 100% perfect, I'll be all for the death penatly. But 'best we can do' is simply not good enough. And Texas should get a clue.
So again, "politicians" do as they choose and NOT the wishes of the people they purport to represent.
It is past time for the people to vote these self absorbed "professional politicians" out of office on a National, State and Local level.
Then the bias media says this "The upcoming Connecticut vote is in line with a clear trend away from the use of capital punishment across the country" When most voters are for capital punishment. How do they get clear trend across the country? It seems like only the politians are against it.
Funny how politicians are ready to end the death penalty against the public's wishes but when it comes to legalizing marijuana, they vote against the public's wishes. Which is more dangerous? a vicious killer or cannabis?
A more cost-effective way to carry out an execution...
Give me a tub of water & a $25 toaster from Target. Hell, they might even DONATE it if a product placement deal could be made.
Totally agree NorthernLights dude.
If you offered free money do you think the voters would pass it 90-10% or even higher? Sure they would, but there is no such thing as free money. Similarly, there is no such thing as a "just" (as in justice) death penalty and the leaders realize this fact. Not everything popular is right.
What do you suppose the vote would be to return black people to slavery in southern states like Alabama or South Carolina? I suspect that vote would be 70-30% for slavery but I think we all know the majority is not always right - or Constitutional.
Sometimes mob-rule just doesn't work and that's why we have a representative democracy and not a direct one. Often the mob just acts like a mob....
Were they stupid when they gave minorities and women the right to vote, despite public opinion? Clown.
Most states are terminating capital punishment based on money, not opposition to the death penalty.
If you live in a state where multiple appeals drag on for 20+ years before an execution is made, it becomes a tax burden.
Execution costs more.
No, Life Without Parole costs more.
Well, which is it? I don't see how an execution can cost more. Can someone provide some facts/figures?
It sounds to me like 62 percent of the population of that state should rise up and vote out everyone who end up voting for this law.
When people support capital punishment, it's only because they don't realize how much it costs, as opposed to life imprisonment. When you tell taxpayers where their money is going and how it can better be spent, they will come around. It seems that most Americans give a damn about money and little else, although vengeance is also a powerful motivator. I find it ironic that the right-wing so-called Christians are the most stoked about killing people. And why not, their supporters don't seem to recognize their hypocrisy.
@Frank
People v. Scott Peterson, Death Penalty Trial
$3.2 Million Total
People v. Rex Allen Krebs Death Penalty Trial
$2.8 Million Total
People v. Cary Stayner, Death Penalty Trial
$2.368 Million Total
People v. Robert Wigley, Non-Death Penalty Trial
$454,000 Total
Life imprisonment costs about $40,000 total per felon in some text book I read in college as of 2010. You are free to look it up. The reason executions are so expensive is because of the pre-trail. These trials tend to be dragged out long because no one wants to execute anyone without proper evidence and that can take a long time. The only one who pays money is the tax payer.
Besides death is not that horrid of a punishment. If I know that death is what I am going to get for killing someone, that would not stop me from killing. However, imagine going to prison, worrying about prison rape and sleeping with one eye open for the rest of your life. That is a greater detterent for me. I don't want to be raped.
The best argument I've seen against the death penalty is that not a single millionaire has ever been executed in the entire history of the US. The police knows it, the judges know it and the politicians know it.
I think it's about time people know about it and stop the death penalty charade.
What does one's economic status have to do with it? Pro death penalty supporter am I! No repeat offenders!
Phenom, that $40,000 is on the low end of the scale, and it is per year. Most violent criminals in the U.S. are 18 to 24-year-old males. That's a potential 60+ years in prison, when the most violent, multiple-victim murderers are sentenced to life without parole. The citizenry is also disenchanted with the judicial and law enforcement system, as well as with the poorest and most dysfunctional segment of society producing such males at a fast, irresponsible clip. The U.S. has 2 million men in prison, with the same number that have pled down their crimes or have devoted their sorry lives to the merry go round of predation on the public/apprehension/prison/release/predation on the public/apprehension/prison/release ... Then, there are the high number that law enforcement will admit are just never apprehended. Take off your rose colored glasses.
Across the country in states with the DP, juries are profoundly reluctant to reach that decision and generally only in the most heinous crimes against utterly helpless, innocent victims. Judges bend over backward not to apply DP sentences, not only because of the gravitas, but because it ALWAYS entails umpteen lawyers appealing minutia of the trial till kingdom come, costing taxpayers, rewarding lawyers of murdering monsters, and endlessly punishing the already forever broken anguished family of the victim. By the way, given the high number of repeat offender men who rape and murder women and little girls daily ... repealing the DP is insane. With more women than men in college and getting good jobs, buying homes, and generally supporting society - fewer and fewer women are inclined to continue throwing their hard earned taxes down the garbage disposal of the law enforcement/prison industry that doesn't protect females and views the scum of society like temporary housing guests, instead of vermin that ought pay for purposeful, wanton and cruel murder of productive but vulnerable citizens who were simply going about their daily lives. The answer is to improve DNA testing, make it mandatory and widespread, and retain the DP for those barbaric animals who voluntarily relinquish their right to live - and often again walk - among us by their sadistic victimization of those who cross their path. Science already has IDed the genetic marker shared among the majority of violent male criminals; either we handle them on the back end, after they harm us all, or we begin testing in utero on the front end, preventing them in the first place. If such men believe life is cheap, well, it isn't, but I've no issue with returning the favor.
I'm disenchanted with the judicial system. I don't believe their accuracy at chosing the guilty party is 100%.
Tell me again, we haven't killed innocent people with our justice system. Hah!
To the politicians in Conn. who think the trend across the country is to abolish the death penalty: The serial killers, psychos & whacko baby-killers thank you. The familes of future victims are now double victims since no real punishment will be doled out for the depraved acts some are capable of committing. As an added bonus- the taxpayers of your state will get to take care of housing, feeding & cable bills for these killers. Congratulations- the blood is on your hands.
The death penalty requires perfection in an imperfect world--that says it all. Not to mention of course that it is more expensive than imprisoning someone for life.
truesaid,
Oh, please. Stop being so damned dramatic. It is well documented that the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime. Further, it is well documented that innocent people have been executed based on false testimony, incorrect identification by eye witnesses and screw ups in forensic laboratories.
Killing one innocent individual in order to feed your blood lust is one too many.
@vfeinstein-
So, hypothetically, if someone close to you were murdered in some heinous way and the court gave you the option to grant them life in prison or the death penalty what would you choose? You'd be so absorbed about innocent people being put to death in the past and how this serves as no deterrant that you'd opt for them to have 3 square meals a day for life- your tax dollars at work. It isn't about killing or serving some sick blood lust as it is about the desire to see justice served by having the option to fit the punishment with the crime. If you want to take such a powder puff approach to justice then best of luck!
The death penalty is not a deterrent. The numbers prove that out time and time again. The US murder rate per capita - 4.8 per 100,000. Canada, no death penalty, 1.62. Germany 0.84. Japan 0.83, UK 1.23, Israel 2.1, Italy 0.87, France 1.09, and the list goes on. Of "major" states, only Mexico and Russia don't have the death penalty and are higher than we are.
That's why family members have no say in the sentencing.
Removing the death penalty protects the accused, which is how our law system is supposed to work. It's nice to say, "think of the victim's families", but you know what's even nicer to say?
"We've never executed someone innocent of the crime they were convicted of"
I'd rather spend the money on keeping real murders in prison forever than to accidentally kill someone who didn't do anything wrong.
truesaid,
I have 2 issues with your comments. First, based on everything I've read, the appeals process for death row inmates is more expensive than lifetime imprisonment. Second (and much more importantly), you assume everyone that is sentenced to die is guilty of the crime they are convicted of. I don't think that is a valid assumption. Personally, I'd rather lock someone away in prison for life than risk executing an innocent person.
You are so obsessed with your powder-puff approach to justice that you'd rather play it safe and not send anyone to the gas chamber (even if deserved) because, oh well, it won't be a deterrant anyway. Oh so sending them to life in prison is a deterrant? Some people like the ideas of getting 3 squares a day and not having to worry about working a job again and they are less than remorseful for their crimes.
Sorry, but I want to answer the hard questions and point blank say that the death penalty needs to be a choice as long as guilt is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt and the criteria of the case fits the death penalty. vfeinstein ignorantly accused me of having a blood lust- no, I do not relish people being killed. But in some cases (e.g. Oklahoma City bombing) I do think that justice must be severe and set an example. And if your statistics don't show that the death penalty is a deterrant then that means that many are not capable of learning from the examples of society very well. Fine, make your bed & you can sleep in it.
Ron- unfortunately the appeals process is so expensive but that's the flaw in our justice system that needs to be corrected. And, I want to emphasize- no death penalty for anyone unless it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt they committed the crime. I'm not an advocate for the death penalty but simply believe it should be used under certain rare circumstances.
I am disappointed in the lack of forethought in the attempt to repeal the death penalty in CT. They specifically delayed the vote when they thought the convicts from the home invasion case deserved to die. What? Do they think a horrific murder with the death of children and indisputable evidence will never come about again in CT? That's a bit overconfident if you ask me. Once they do this and another similar case comes along in the future, they are just going to try and change it back. And even then they still can't apply the law retroactively! Why don't they instead amend it to only apply in certain situations, like murder cases that are won based on more than circumstantial evidence or cases that are especially heinous? Save us all some time and frustration for the next group of legislators.
You want to talk about a waste of tax payers money? Let's stop the flip-flopping legislative practices of our state and federal politicians. Laws are written, passed and then 4-8 years later repealed. We are paying the salaries of a bunch of guys who only care about undoing whatever the last controlling party passed in previous years. Nothing ever gets accomplished when you can't see past your own nose (or past your 2nd term in office).
Typical democrat. I think he should be sentenced to life in prision, you know leading by example. It's like common sense is under attack these days.
The state should not be a murderer. However, each cell could be equiped with a hook in ceiling and a rope with a noose, so that the guilty might handle the matter themselves.
If the "lawmakers" don't have the cajones to do the job, I volunteer.
Those convicted with irrefutable evidence, should be executed. Those convicted with circumstantial evidence should receive life in prison, with NO possibility of parole.
Will you pay for the increased financial costs of execution then?
All the automatic appeals death row inmates get cost more than incarcerating them for life.
Ruken.... it's the appeals that cost. I'll provide my own transportation, and housing. Hell, I'll even provide the ammunition to accomplish the task.
Enough coddling of the scum of the earth. Put them down like the mad animals they are.
xdm9mm, yes it is the appeals that costs, and that would not end even if you would do the killings.
Ruken: A bullet cost .30 cents would not cost that much if the libs got out of the way.
The state is not a "murderer". Murder is the taking of innocent human life. These convicted killers are not innocent. Taking their lives is justice, not murder. IMHO, capital punishment should be expanded to rapists and other violent offenders as well. I'm tired of hearing about "reforming" them. They do not reform. The purpose of the criminal justice system is not to reform, it is to punish. But regardless, the rate of reform for those given capital punishment is 100%. I've never heard of a single case where an executed criminal became a repeat offender.
Ruken, the solution is to end the automatic appeals. End all appeals. The very moment the head juror says "we find the defendant guilty", he should be escorted out of the courthouse, to a public gallows, and hanged. Immediately. No cost of appeals. No cost of feeding, clothing, guarding, medical care, etc. Just the cost of a rope and 10 minutes of an executioner's time.
The costs of keeping someone on death row are misleading, when compared to the cost of a life sentence. The cost of a death row inmate include appeals, while the cost of keeping someone in prison for life doesn't include appeals, which can be just as expensive.
XD---
"Those convicted with irrefutable evidence, should be executed. Those convicted with circumstantial evidence should receive life in prison, with NO possibility of parole."
What? Don't you think that every person on death row (or any crime for that matter) should be convicted with "irrefutable evidence"? Don't you think that has been the notion in TX and FL? And despite this the innocent are convicted and put to death anyway. Google Texas InnocenceProject for some sense of the near misses in that state. See also Illinois.
That's actually my point. And you can't do away with the appeals, because innocent people can and have been sentenced to death in the past.
My point being, should new evidence ever arise in the future that puts someone's guilt into doubt (see DNA evidence) you can at least release someone who served 20 years of a life sentence, but you can't bring someone back to life that was falsely executed.
walks-upright...
yes, mistakes have been made. However, when there is as I said, irrefutable evidence, DNA, video (some of these sick bastards actually DO film themselves committing the crime.), survivors of the crime, yes I'm a proponent of the death penalty.
When it is circumstantial and there is no "hard" evidence, then no, I don't agree with the death penalty. Circumstantial is the "eye witness" that saw the individual, the video of a "car matching" the suspects in the area and such.
In the case of Joshua and Steven, the evidence against them was irrefutable. They should die. Painfully.
How about if we execute the appeal lawyers if they lose? That would get rid of friviouls appeals. I'll bet 99% of the public would back it too. Trouble is, 100% of those in legislatures are lawyers so they would never pass it.
Deuteronomy 17:6 At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.
Ed...lay off the Tabasco, it's having an effect on your brain. This is a secular nation...sky daddy's laws don't apply here.
Yeah, real smart. What happens when we discover that a witness lied or made a mistake or the DNA lab was incompetent? Oops??
Problems with eyewitness testimony, especially across racial lines, are well-known and documented. DNA labs can and do make mistakes.
So one significant problem with the term "irrefutable evidence" is that the definition of it varies depending on the prosecutor. Allowing a death penalty in a case with this "irrefutable evidence" may be incorrect in borderline cases where the evidence is actually refutable. You also have cases where this irrefutable evidence turned out to pretty crappy. Take eye witness testimony in rape cases for example. Most jurors and the legal system considered the eye witness testimony irrefutable, many people still do. It's been shown numerous times that eye witness testimony is extremely poor in stressful situations. So, with these changing definitions for evidence, allowing the death penalty always has the chance to be wrong. Currently this chance of being wrong is far to high to be acceptable. Even in the best case scenario where you clean up the evidence collection, remove investigator biases, DNA evidence etc. you still have a chance of being wrong. There is no going back after the action is concluded nor will you ever have a perfect incorruptible justice system, so such a final punishment is a very bad idea.
The best argument I've seen against the death penalty is that not a single millionaire has ever been executed in the entire history of the US. The police knows it, the judges know it and the politicians know it.
I think it's about time people know about it and stop the death penalty charade.
The best argument I've seen is that factual evidence is not an excuse for a retrial. Tell me again that we haven't killed innocent people. Hah!
Sorry Olias - you're wrong.
Louis Buchalter, head of Murder, Inc. in the 20's. Executed 1944. Estimated to have spent over a quarter million dollars on his defense alone. Guess the organization name gave his guilt away.
Juan Garza, drug cartel kingpin. Executed 2001. Exact worth unknown, estimated in the tens of millions.
Just sayin'....
Why don't those grinning clergy concern themselves with the rights of the innocent than scum bags who deserve to die???
They're either hoping and praying for some converts or at least someone to help fill the offering plates as they go around.
They're grinning because they are pedophiles who also escape justice.
Those grinnen clergy probably just had some not so grinnen alter boy. And they be happy. Hypocrits
Abolish it, just when its needed the most ??
The best argument I've seen against the death penalty is that not a single millionaire has ever been executed in the entire history of the US. The police knows it, the judges know it and the politicians know it.
I think it's about time people know about it and stop the death penalty charade.
jonnygmen,
They're happy because unlike Evangelical Christians, they're actually consistently pro-life. They actually read the commandment that said "Do not kill" and didn't make up a bunch of exceptions to that commandment like Evangelicals. Evangelicals are a very bloodthirsty group, they love war (as long as they don't have to lift a finger) they love executions and they detest anyone who tries to deny their lust for death and destruction. Evangelicals are a lesser evolved form of life. They are incredibly weak minded, and thus, are violent or violent vicariously through the violence of others. Those who support the death penalty are not capable of higher thought. Wouldn't it be more severe of a punishment for a person to live a life of pain and hardship in prison than to never feel anything again? One person earlier insinuated that life in prison was luxurious! Seriously? It's not exactly paradise in, to quote "Office Space" federal "rape you in the ass" prison.
Suggestion for you Virginia Demoflop, gather up all your liberal friends, donate to a fund to pay the upkeep of these offenders so the rest of us don't have to pay. When the money runs out you will be begging for them to get the needle.
well ,then when you have more and worse crimes you can pay to keep them longer or let them out early for "good behavior"....shame on your lawmakers?? for even considering it..
I think some crimes deserve death. I really do. Slow painful death.
That stated, 1) solid evidence has shown that there is effectively no change in offense patters when a crime is punishable by death versus life w/o parole, and 2) it costs a crap more in legal fees to execute someone than it does to imprison them for life.
Until something changes about this reality, I will continue to be agains the death penalty (even though I'd love just one minute with a baseball bat and these scum bags; however, I love due process more).
EngEsq, you should be lobbying your congressmen to end the appeals process, instead of ending capital punishment. Just put them to death immediately, as soon as they are convicted, no appeals. They didn't give their victims any appeals.
I hope we have not reduced the issue of the death penalty to a cost/benefit analysis. That would seem to be wrong on so many levels.
walks-upright, I fail to see anything wrong with a cost-benefit analysis.
Juries NEVER make mistakes? Prosecutors NEVER engage in malfeasance? What a perfect world you must live in.
The best argument I've seen against the death penalty is that not a single millionaire has ever been executed in the entire history of the US. The police knows it, the judges know it and the politicians know it.
I think it's about time people know about it and stop the death penalty charade.
The court system isn't supposed to give a @!$%# about the victims or their families. It's designed to protect the accused so that mistakes are made as little as possible.
I feel sorry for the victims, prison guards, and anyone with a half a brain living in Connecticut.
Awesome. Now I can kill, rape, steal and do whatever I want in my home state knowing that if I get caught, I'll be guaranteed a bed and three meals a day.
Yep, and a good buddy to sleep with you. Sounds like fun, huh??
Well considering im gay that sounds fine.
There is no guarantee of a peck on the cheek after this session of "making love". Never mind the group of disease carrying fools that are having their way with you. If they think you like it, they'll beat you until you don't. I've been in prison, I know. Enjoy . . .
Plus Healthcare!
Prison life isn't like a porn video, Wolf.
People always want to associate going to jail with "bubba" in your cell. But what if the criminal committing the crimes IS Bubba?
I know, it is really hard for liberals to comprehend that one.
Thats the issue... Why be afraid to break the law anymore. You can kill someone, MANY people, rape a couple 12 year old girls, then beat your own mom and dad to death with your bare hands and get three meals a day for life. The punishment MUST fit the crime or there is no fear of the consequences. We need MORE death penalties... no one cares if they break the law anymore. They can just do what they want then be taken care of for life.
The best argument I've seen against the death penalty is that not a single millionaire has ever been executed in the entire history of the US. The police knows it, the judges know it and the politicians know it.
I think it's about time people know about it and stop the death penalty charade.
You can definetly tell on this site who is for the death penalty(republicans) and who is against(democrats).Democrats would rather waste money putting someone in prison for a lifetime rather than ending their life the way justice should have been served.
I would have to agree with the above posts. Anyone can break the law, and say that "the worst they could do to me is put me into prison for the rest of my life, with a roof over my head and food to eat. How can that possibly be bad"?
You need to vote these democrats out of office.
Be Accountable: Unfortunately, the death penalty does not deter crime. Study after study has shown this. The death penalty currently stands in CT and that did not keep the Cheshire home invasions from happening.
Criminals, being criminals, don't sit back and think it all out and then say, gee, I was going to go kill a family today, but I really don't want to get slapped with a death sentence, so I guess I just go play a round of golf instead. It would be nice if the world worked that way, but it doesn't.
You know, I also see people make the comments about getting raped in prison, but what are the statistics on that sort of thing actually occurring?
I don't care if it deters murder or not. If you murder (As in first degree murder.) someone else you need to be put out of society's misery. You need to be gone, dead, expunged, never to return, cremated and then buried in concrete. There needs to be zero chance you will ever be in a position to do it again. No chance of parole, early release, accidental release or escape.
Another small step toward joining the rest of the civilized world. But the pound-of-fleshers can take heart: they'll always have Texas.
"The pound-of-fleshers can take heart"
If that was a Merchant of Venice pun, I salute you, sir.
Civilized world? Allowing convicted murderers to live is not civilized, it is quite the opposite. It devalues the lives they took. It demonstrates that the state does not value human life, when it will not compel equal payment by those who take it. Connecticut is on the verge of becoming uncivilized.
I'm in full agreement with you,
Nothing I can think of shows less respect for the destroyed life in progress of the victim than the passionate concerns that are voiced about the life of the murderer.
The best argument I've seen against the death penalty is that not a single millionaire has ever been executed in the entire history of the US. The police knows it, the judges know it and the politicians know it.
I think it's about time people know about it and stop the death penalty charade.
Actually that statement might be true if you don't include crime bosses. Ever hear of Louis "Lepke" Buchalter? He was a millionaire and a crime boss and was executed.
It shows that they value the lives of innocents falsely convicted over the lives of the real murderers and the feelings of the victim's families, which is how it should be.
What's the real difference between life without parole and the death penalty?
Olias, GIVE IT UP! Cutting and pasting doesn't make your point.
Bad idea. While I am not crazy about Capital punishment, there are crimes and situation where the potential of a death sentence does work. Cousin murdered on a Conneccut Interstate 12 years ago. Shooter gave up the man that hired him, he in turn gave up his girlfriend who's idea it was, who had escaped to Englan, then Ireland (due to no capital punishment extradition)...who then was convicted but had no reason to give up the 2-3 additional co-conspirators...punishment was, in order, 45 years (shooter reneged on a couple provision and got the max allowed), the go between got 35 yrs, a life time sentence he was already in his 60's...the original plotter got life with no parole. The people do not want it banned...so why do the politicians go down thier own road over and over?
Because our leaders should actually LEAD and do the right thing, not the popular thing. In a republic, we elect our leaders to use their judgement. If the people's wishes were paramount, half of the south would still have jim crow laws.
Barry-NJ cries over pedophiles who kill their victims if they get the death penalty.
I suppose everyone has their own reasons for voting but I don't vote to elect "leaders" in Congress or Legislatures. I vote for representatives.
Life without parole is not the same as letting murderers go free. The government should not punish killers by killing them. Jesus would not kill a person locked in a cell. Neither should we.
Jesus isn't around to pull the trigger.
This has nothing to do with WWJD.
It has everything to do with not accidentally killing someone who didn't commit a crime and there being no real difference between life w/o parole and the death penalty.
Um... One is alive and the other is dead. That's a pretty huge difference.
When most people think of capital punishment, they think of it as a form revenge. No one is going to have that sentence unless they kill. The problem is taking another life never fixes anything. In fact the process to get there only complicates and burdens victims as well as tax payers (hence only 1 execution in 25 years). Housing inmates on life sentences costs a tiny fraction of what it does to execute. If all states abolished the archaic death penalty laws, it would save tax payers many billions of dollars per year. I would much rather put the money to good use for something like education rather than pay for some killer's endless appeal process. Also the process is beyond time consuming. Why drag out the process on victims friends and families clog up courts? Also there is never an excuse to kill, never.
I'm glad I don't still live in CT. The problem with the death penalty is that it takes to long to carry it out. I am for a trial within one week of the crime, and then hang them in the town square (after stoning them for 12 hours).
If we had strong deterrents, crime would go away. Send the non death penalty crimes to Sheriff Joe. He'll teach them why it is not good to commit crime and return to his jail.
Taxpayer,
So you want the trial to take place within a week of the crime. Man, you don't give the prosecution much time to gather evidence and make a case. Under your system, many more guilty people will go free because they won't be convicted in court!
OK, I agree. A week is too quick. Give them a month to do trial. Bring in the 10 eye witnesses who say him rape and kill the little 10 year old boy. Let them testify.
Bring in the Psychologists to testify that the killer had a tough childhood (his parents spanked him once and his welfare check was 2 days late once and his drug dealer made him pay cash or food stamps). Then, immediately following the trial, take him to the town square and hang him (after stoning, of course).
Taxpayer,
A month still does not give the prosecution adequate time to make a case. And, what if ten witnesses aren't available. Taborsky was convicted of murder and sent to death with the testimony of only one witness.
C'mon, please, let's use a little logic in this discussion here.
@ bankrupt: While I can't say I'm much in favor of stoning, one of my major complaints that you allude to in your remark is the lack of "Swiftness" in the legal system. When my wife was about 6 months pregnant a young mother a few towns over was murdered. Within days the guy was caught(pretty solid evidence too). He didn't go to trial until my son learned to walk and was nearly out of diapers!
The death penalty itself may not be a deterrent but when it takes 20 months to prosecute an open and shut case the public looses interest and deterrent of swift sure justice is lost no matter what the crime.
The CT home invasion case perpetrated July 2007 convicted Oct 2010.
Statistics do not support your assertion about strong deterrents and crime. The European Union outlawed the death penalty decades ago and they have a lower homicide rate than the United States.
A speedy trial is in the 6th Amendment to the US Constitution.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy
and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the
crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously
ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory
process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of
Counsel for his defence.
ok, Marty, I will continue to give in to you. Take 6 weeks for the trial. Then, immediately to the town square for the stoning and hanging. This will get rid of the "cost" comparison between Life and Death sentences.
As far as "deterent" is considered, once we hang him we know he won't do it again.
I like the wild west where they hung the cattle thieves without a trial. However, I'm willing to give the murderers a trial within six weeks.
And when your legislators raise your taxes to expand an overloaded court system in order to be able to provide swift trials, you'll probably scream bloody murder.
Eric I hope you don't think I was necessarily saying I support the death penalty. What I was saying is that the time from arrest to conviction (excluding plea bargains) is so long the effect of punishment is nullified in the eyes of the public because it disapears for so long and when I say the public I am also talking about those that are part of the criminal element of the public as well.
I grew up in a city housing project and a pretty tough one at that a guy would get arrested for a minor felony and be back on the streets within days awaiting trial which could take months. To many (kids) it seemed like there was no punishment at all.
Barry, yes, raise my taxes and put them quickly to death. It isn't fair to murderers to make them suffer for years while they await the appeals.
Of course, I don't live in high tax NJ.
The solution to the long delays and poor overburdened judges is to pass laws (like says in Constitution) that require quick trial with no delays for convenience of lawyers and judges.
@Bankrupt Oh yeah it would cost some money
Three reforms I would like to see
More judges, Prosecutors, better paid public defenders (maybe we can some of better quality)
Pay jurors a prevailing wage like $12.00 an hour.
Direct and severe penalties for shoddy police work and suppression of exculpatory evidence.
Ending of the Death Penalty........ Hmmmm Will they change their ever loving minds when they find out how much more the public will have to pay to put the guilty into the prisons........ We will see......
Actually, life in prison is a LOT cheaper than execution.
Marty... it's more expensive only because every dirt bag lawyer crawls out from under the barrel to appeal, then appeal, then appeal and appeal again. They have even made appeals for people ASKING to be executed.
WHAT???????? Were you educated at Wal Mart????
XDM,
Why do you think Michael Ross's sentence was appealed even when he wanted to be executed? Because the law REQUIRES the appeal process to be exhausted. The death penalty is final. The state wants to be as sure as it can that the wrong person isn't put to death.
Marty, While I agree that there should be a trial, and an appeal MIGHT be necessary. The continual appeal and denial, appeal and denial, is ludicrous. The appeals process must be limited. Appeals should not occur if an 'i' wasn't dotted or a 't' crossed or some lawyer thinks he found another obscure point of Old English Common law that might have a bearing on a case 200 or 300 years later.
I WILL say, as I did in my initial post, that execution should only be possible in those cases where there is clear evidence of the perpetrators guilt. NOT in those situations where the conviction is based on circumstantial evidence.
The appeals process needs to be reformed. Defense lawyers need to be required to present all of their motions in one appeal for motions based on the original trial. More appeals should only be allowed in the case of new evidence or new information not available at the time of the first appeal. Lawyers should not be able to game the system by feeding their motions to the court one motion at the time in an attempt to drag out the day of execution. Lawyer's licenses should be on the line for frivolous appeals or for those that sit on a case for years only to file a motion 2 weeks before the scheduled execution date time after time.
WIMPS............
Just goes to show that 62% of the respondents to the Quinnipac poll have a barbaric streak! Actually, life without is called "the big bitch" by prisoners, much worse in many peoples minds. Even at $30K+ a year to house a prisoner, it is actually cheaper to house than execute.
What we need to ask ourselves, as a country, why we are the only remaining country in the Western world that still has a death penalty. Mandatory sentences have proven to be a good deterrent, and besides, capital murderers are, in fact, the most easily rehabilitated. Before the right wing zealots got involved in the '80's, the average time served for murder in the U.S. was roughly 16 years. This was comparable to European sentences. The recidivism rate was tiny. Do you really like spending your tax dollars to keep someone locked up who could be released, be a productive member of society, and, at the very least, ccontribute to the tax base.
It's only cheaper to house than execute because we take too long to execute.
Then those are the laws to change. Until then, it is cheaper to keep them in jail for life.
Travis.... maybe you should read this....
Kenneth Allen McDuff is one of the most hated and reviled names in Texas criminal history.
Often called "the Poster Boy of Capital Punishment," he is the only
man in US history to be sentenced to death, released from death row and then
sentenced to death again and executed for a different crime.
McDuff was born in 1946 in Rosebud, a small town in central Texas. Early on he
displayed antisocial behavior and was often in trouble at school. He was a
confirmed bully, always trying to intimidate weaker students, but he was also a
coward and would back off if a victim showed no fear and fought back. His
teachers's efforts to discipline McDuff were hampered by his mother Addie, a
bossy and domineering woman who steadfastly refused to believe that her son
could ever do anything bad. Addie's distorted view of her son would persist
until the very end.
McDuff dropped out of high school early on and went to work with his father
John Allen (J.a) pouring concrete. When he wasn't working he was out drinking,
fighting, womanizing and racing around in a succession of cars, all of which he
eventually wrecked. He was also into burglary, and in 1965 he was sent to
prison on 14 separate counts of it. He was releasd after less than a year and
had clearly not learned the lesson.
McDuff had no real friends, being almost universally disliked and feared by
people in Rosebud, but he had a few hangers-on, mostly young men who were
impressed by his grandiose stories and who were not especially intelligent. One
of these was an 18-year-old named Roy Dale Green. On August 6, 1966, McDuff and
Green were driving amilessly around central Texas, as was their habit. In the
Fort Worth suburb of Everman, they spotted a car parked at a baseball diamond.
Green claimed later that he thought that he and McDuff were only going to
harass and scare the people in the car, but McDuff obviously had other ideas.
In the car was Robert Brand, 17; his girlfriend, Edna Louise Sullivan, 16; and
Brand's cousin, Marcus Dunnam, 15. They were taking a break after giving Louise
lessons on parallel parking.
McDuff and Green approached the car, ordered all three out and abducted them,
locking the boys and the girl in the trunks of both cars. Green drove one car
and McDuff the other, taking their captives to a secluded area where McDuff
shot the boys point-blank in the head while they knelt in the trunk begging for
their lives. Afterward, Louise Sullivan was raped several times by both men,
and also with the broken handle of a broomstick. After that, she was made to
kneel with her head on the ground while Green restrained her and McDuff slowly
strangled her by pressing the broomstick across her throat. The next day, Green
heard about the crime on the radio and broke down and confessed, and he and
McDuff were arrested. Green received a lesser sentence in exchange for
testifying against his partner. McDuff insisted on taking the stand and did not
impress the jury at all. He was sentenced to die for the murder of Robert
Brand.
The death sentence was overturned when the US Supreme Court abolished capital
punishment in 1972, and at about the same time, the case of Ruiz vs. Texas was
calling attention to poor conditions and overcrowding in Texas prisons. Because
of the reforms resulting from this case, hardly any prisoner was serving out
his full sentence. McDuff was convicted of bribery, a felony, while in prison
after he offered a parole board member $10000 for an early release. But even
this did not stop him from winning parole in October of 1989. Three days later,
the body of Sarafia Parker was found. While McDuff was never officially
connected to her death, she is believed to be his victim.
While on parole McDuff made no attempt to even pretend he had been reformed. He
was convicted of making terroristic threats after trying to pick a fight with a
group of black teenagers, and also for DUI and public drunkenness. He became
addicted to crack cocaine and spent most of his time hanging out with people on
the very fringes of society. Even though he was enrolled at Texas State Technical
Institute where he was studying to be a machinist, he spent most of his time
getting high and drunk, picking up prostitutes and regaling his hangers-on with
embellished accounts of his exploits. He talked obsessively about obtaining
guns with which to rob and kill crack dealers, but his entourage just brushed
off the bragging as beer talk. It wasn't.
In October of 1991, McDuff's car ran a roadblock in Waco. Police and other
witnesses observed a woman in the passenger seat, her hands behind her, apparently
trying to kick out the windshield. For unknown reasons, the car was not stopped
and the woman, later identified as a 37-year-old prostitute named Brenda
Thompson, was never seen alive again. Just a few days later, another
prostitute, 22-year-old Reginia "Gina" Moore, vanished without a
trace. On December 29, 1991, McDuff and a life-long alcoholic named Alva Hank
Worley were driving around Austin Texas looking for drugs. Worley would later
testify that McDuff several times pointed out attractive women and implied that
he would like to "take them." Eventually they spotted Colleen Reed, a
28-year-old accountant, washing her black Mazda at a car wash. McDuff grabbed
her and forced her into their car. Witnesses heard her screams and called
police but it was too late. Reed was driven out of town and raped by both men.
Worley said later that eventually she tried to resist McDuff, possibly by
biting him, and that McDuff struck her so hard Worley thought he heard bones
breaking and Reed appeared to be unconscious or dead. Worley was dropped off
soon after this and McDuff disposed of the body.
McDuff had briefly held a job at a Quik-Pak market near the TSTI campus in
Waco, and was paired with a more senior employee named Aaron Northrup.
Northrup's 22-year-old wife Melissa also worked at the store, and McDuff
evidently took a liking to her. He told several friends that he wanted to rob
the store and "take" the girl who worked the night shift there.
Again, nobody took him seriously. On March 1, 1992, Aaron Northrup became
concerned when Melissa failed to return home from her shift at the Quik-Pak,
and a police investigation was launched. McDuff's car was found near the store,
and Northrup's car was located in a wooded area in Dallas County. Eyewitness
accounts placed McDuff in the area of the abduction and also at the site of
where Colleen Reed was kidnapped.
A month later, a fisherman found Melissa Northrup's body in a gravel pit near
where her car had been recovered. She had been bound hand and foot and probably
strangled. She was two months pregnant. At about the same time, a worker on his
lunch break found a badly decomposed body in the woods near the TSTI property.
She was a prostitute named Valencia Kay Joshua, who'd last been seen in
February on the campus, looking for McDuff's dorm room.
By now, McDuff was out of Texas. He never revealed how he was able to get a new
car and fake ID, but he was then in Kansas City, Missouri, working as a garbage
collector. Texas Rangers and US Marshals began hunting him in earnest after
Melissa Northrup's body was found, and on May 1, 1992, he was profiled on
"Americ's Most Wanted." Just a day later, a co-worker contacted
police to say he knew where the fugitive was. The garbage truck was pulled over
during its regular run and McDuff thus became AMW's 208th successful capture.
McDuff stood trial first in the Northrup case. He was disruptive and obnoxious
in court, tried to act as his own lawyer, and could never give a satisfactory
account of his whereabouts on the night the young woman was killed. He was
sentenced to die for her murder, and then stood trial for the Reed murder, even
though her body had not been found. McDuff was even more disruptive during this
trial than he had been before, probably because the judge was black and McDuff
was a classic bigot. He was convicted of Reed's killing on the basis of strong
circumstantial evidence eyewitness accounts, Worley's testimony and five of
Reed's hairs found in his car. He received a second death sentence.
After McDuff's arrest, Texas launched a massive overhaul of its prison system
to try and ensure that nobody like him ever won early parole again. The
tightened parole rules, prison-building projects and improved monitoring of
parolees are collectively known in Texas as McDuff Laws. Only in the fall of
1998, as his date with the executioner drew closer, did McDuff reveal the
location of Reginia Moore and Brenda Thompson. When his directions failed to
produce Reed's remains, he was taken out of prison under tight security and even
tighter secrecy and driven to the location where he'd said he had left Reed. He
provided a more detailed set of directions and Reed's remains were quickly
found.
McDuff's time ran out finally on November 17, 1998. Just after six P.M he was
put to death by lethal injection in the Huntsville prison. Justice had been
served, 32 years too late.
Travis who cares if we compare to the European sentences and no most will not be a productive member of society or contribute to the tax base.
Texas, not Connecticut. Not relevant to this discussion!
Marty.... why? Did McDuff not commit a crime and the punishment of execution, which was forestalled by the courts? Was McDuff not released and able to commit more crime?
You know as well as I do that ANY prisoner can be released at any time, either by the President or Governor commuting the sentence, a pardon, or even a clerical error letting a "lifer" out in error.
If there is irrefutable evidence sufficient to generate a Death Sentence, then that sentence should be carried out within 30 to 60 days of conviction.
XDM,
We are talking about a Connecticut law and about people who committed crimes in Connecticut (Hayes, Komasarjevsky, Ross, Taborsky). What happens in Texas doesn't affect Connecticut law. The cultures of Connecticut and Texas are completely different.
Wow that's grasping at straws Marty.
@ XDm - Here's a website you might be interested in.
http://www.wesleylowe.com/repoff.html
It's called a short list of murdered convicted of murdering again. It's actually a fairly long list.
Good grief, this is not even a close decision. Who are the elected Senator's supposed to represent, the felons or the state voters? A recent Quinnipiac University poll found that the state's voters are against repealing the death penalty by a margin of 62-31 percent.
As the recent horrific home invasion crime illustrates, some career criminals cannot be rehabilitated and are capable of horrible offenses no matter where they are.
I woncer if those polled were told that the alternative would be an automatic life without the possibility of parole? I have respect for Quinnipiac's polls, but we need to understand the context of the question before drawing an conclusions.
And as the recent horrific home invasion crime illustrates, having a death penalty doesn't keep sicko criminals from killing a family in cold blood.
Might just be time to get the hell out of this state. The politicians do what they want anyway. If the poll states that most of the people here are in favor of the death penalty, then why do they not listen. I understand the money portion of it but come on, these people that do these heinous crimes deserve what they get. I like what one of you stated, the victims are no longer here but the murderers still get to wake up everyday and see the sun shine. This state is so ass backward. Imagine what the crime rate will be now. They only get life in jail, no big deal for them. At least if there is a chance for the death penalty, maybe some of these crimes won't occur. Maybe just wishful thinking. And why has there not been an execution in this state since 1976? What is wrong with that picture?
And go where, Angela? Massachusetts? Not too many states have capital punishment anymore. And since you mention that nobody has been executed in CT since 1976, why the sudden uproar about getting rid of the death penalty? If Connecticut doesn't execute anybody anyway, then why not do away with it? Seems kind of pointless to have a punishment that's never used. I wonder how many people are on death row in your state appealing their sentences because they can?
This state is so ass backward. Imagine what the crime rate will be now. They only get life in jail, no big deal for them. At least if there is a chance for the death penalty, maybe some of these crimes won't occur.
There's a lot of contradiction within that statement... I don't know where to begin.
All I am saying is that if a criminal sees that there is no death penalty, they may be more willing to do a heinous crime. I was speaking as if it were the criminal stating that. If there is a death penalty still standing then maybe some of these crimes would be prevented. I am not from Connecticut but have lived here for the past 8 years and some of the things that go on in this state I am totally against. As I read in the article there are only 16 other states that oppose the death penalty. I agree that an eye for an eye is all. Just my personal opinion.
I guess I should have said not too many states execute people anymore. But what I find kind of silly is your statement that "If there is a death penalty still standing then maybe some of these crimes would be prevented" when you also say that "there not been an execution in this state since 1976." People who are about to commit a murder don't sit down and say to themselves, "Hmm. I better think twice about this because after all, I am in Connecticut. Maybe I should take a drive over to Boston and rape and kill someone there, instead, because if I get caught I won't be sent to Death Row." Do you really believe that criminals think that way about the law?
Well, I'll tell you. I am totally for the death penalty, for many reasons, most of which have already been discussed. if we must move away from the death penalty, I'd like to see the replacement punishment be..... Life, with absolutely NO chance for parole, but, LIFE in solitary confinement... a small, dark room, a solid steel door with no windows... just the criminal and his/her thoughts... nothing else... for as long as you live.... slide in the meals three times a day.... THAT is something I could live with as an alternative.
The death penalty is necessary and appropriate, kill and be killed, what could be more just?
The U.S. millitary kills innocent men, women, and children on a regular basis. Do we in turn also deserve to be killed? "Kill and be killed"...your words.
The U.S. millitary kills innocent men, women, and children on a regular basis
are you 100% certain about that, that they are all innocent?
please save your anti-American military bias for a related story, thanks.
Thank God that was never part of our laws. Some people are killed accidentally, some who kill are mentally ill. There's manslaughter, and plain murder. I am too suspicious of the character of the men who arrest and convict. Some get where they are by election or political appointment. Sometimes good people simply get the facts upside down and the wrong person goes to jail. A society can put a man away for life for murder and he'll never be on the streets again. Vengeance is an old visceral Biblical response - punishment is a different matter. To cage a man for life is ample punishment. Too many innocent men have been freed from prison lately because of DNA tests to believe the system is perfect enough for the death penalty.
@ eric-
Did I say that they were ALL innocent? Did I? Quit trying to add your own inflection on to my comment. I said that The U.S. military kills innocent men, women, and children. This is a fact. If you disagree...you are deluded. Learn.
I think that getting rid of the death penalty is a bad idea. my uncle was shot in the head by his best friend then tied to the back of his own truck and drug down the road. the killer put makeup on his face to try to hide the worse of the injuries. he got life without parole. it's not right, he deserved to die.
Another state where killing is OK and will be paid for by the taxpayers.
Where does it say killing is OK? As it stands now, with the death penalty, your statement is true.
Excellent. About time we stopped behaving like the murderers.
As long as just ONE person is executed for a crime he or she did not commit, then we are ALL murderers.
Then are we not all murders when a murdered makes it out of prison to kill again?
Stop paying for all their appeals. The price of housing them would go down. One appeal and then kill them the same way they killed, gun, knife whatever.
I agree, you kill somone you die. No life prison terms. Use the money on health care for the needy, not a killer.
CT loves to waste money! I am sooooooooooooooo glad I left that "Illegal/Criminal loving state!
I really hope they don't do away with it so that Joshua Komisarjevsky and Steven Hayes do get the death penalty.... they are more deserving of it than most cases that have had the penalty served.
It wouldn't apply to them.. The governor said he would only sign it if it's not retroactive to those already on death row.. That's a good thing.. I agree with you.. These 2 are the most deserving of the death penalty!!!!
Putting them to death is letting them off too easy.
Life behind bars without possibility of parole is more appropriate.
leaving them behind bars for what.. free meals, free excersize, tv, at the taxpayers expense?? Putting violent criminals to death is appropriate but it would be better is if the states would let the families of the murdered victims shoot them firing squad style.. That would be satisfaction!!
There are a number of cases of people who were executed and then later proven innocent by modern DNA testing. Once they're dead, there's no way to give them back their life. It's time to end barbarism in our country. When you're more conservative than the Catholic Pope you need to let go of your radical beliefs.
democrats always do what the voters who put them in do not want done. its called hypocrisy the democratic motto! the death penalty comes down to one thing. they guy who was killed has gotten a true life senatnce 6 feet down, while the killer gets life in prison and at some date when that will be called cruel and unusual will walk the streets again alive while the dead are still 6 feet down alone! that is where the unfairness begins