Texas Executes Mexican

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Then cite a fucking source for your assertion!

Lucky did a pretty good job describing the process.

Well, what he did was give his view of it. Are you truly unable to understand that what he did and what you have done does not count as "citation" any more than anyone's lay opinions?

Considering that, not only did the article you cited not address law specific to the US, but that it was Wikipedia, your own citation carries no more credibility than Lucky's or my assertion. Try to find a single source showing that any criminal convictions cannot be appealed. Of course, that doesn't mean the appeal will be successful, but that's true even if the appeal is automatic.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Fine, do you want to send me a self-addressed, stamped envelope and I'll mail you your buck?

No, It's your responsibility to pay. If it costs you a little bit more money to make payment, that's not my problem. I gave you the easy option of donating a buck to the ACLU. If you would rather send payment to me via PayPal, that's fine, but I'm not going to cover the fees; you'll have to. If you would rather mail the payment, that's fine too. I'll PM my address.

Quote

I am not on the hook for anything more than one dollar -- and I dispute even that, because the reply you claimed won the bet was not what I consider to be a qualifying "good faith" reply.

It's quite laughable that you consider a citation from the Constitution to not qualify as a good faith response.

This is why people should always post their money when making bets. There's all too often a poor loser who whines about pay up.

Quote

That's patently absurd. If it were the case, I would have bet you "a dollar, plus all associated costs or fees involved with payment."

It's implied with any wager that the loser is responsible for getting payment to the winner.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Go ahead flame me if you want to, but in Texas there are plenty of people who got life terms who are walking the streets today after as little as 7 years behind bars. And there are a few of those scumbags who have killed again.

How many examples of that (life sentence results in parole after 7 years, then murders again) can you actually come up with?

Sounds like a Texas problem if true, but frankly I sense great hyperbole here. If true, it explains why people fear your state is killing innocents, because if they think 7 years is life (can't count any higher?), there are a lot of problems.

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Quote

Or are you saying you STILL insist that this guy might not have been guilty of the murders?

Apparently this point is not important, only that someone, anyone else on death row might be innocent. Let's let them all go free just in case one might be innocent!

Go ahead flame me if you want to, but in Texas there are plenty of people who got life terms who are walking the streets today after as little as 7 years behind bars. And there are a few of those scumbags who have killed again. Life does not necessarily mean a lifetime!

Me thinks it's called " Life W/O the possibility of parole" and it costs way less than a DR inmate.

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[mnealtx 0]

From DOJ info:

Due to toughening of sentencing laws, criminals ARE spending more of the time sentenced behind bars, roughly 50% longer than before. (From 58% to 87% of sentence, pre/post law changes).

Recidivism still seems problematical, however:

Of the 33,855 offenders returning to prison between 1986 and
1997, 54% returned within 1 year of being released; an
additional 34% returned within 2 years of being released. About
12% returned after 2 to 3 years.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[gemini 0]

In answer to the three above posts:

For at least 20 years Texas prisons have been under federal court supervision and mandated prison rules imposed by the court including one related to prison overcrowding.

As a result, prisoners can be released after serving as little as 1/10th of their sentences.

For example, I was on a jury where an assault with a knife with intent to kill (victim stabbed 7-8 times) resulted in a 45 year sentence. After the trial, the judge who is now a US Congressman told us the defendant would serve 4.5 to 6 years max.

As a result, defendant's receiving life sentences which has been deemed to be 60 - 70 years, can get out in 7 years. Not all do, but some do!

Texas has no provision for life without parole.

Yep, I have been on juries where we wished we had that option.

And you are absolutely correct, it is a Texas problem!

Blue skies,

Jim

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Of the 33,855 offenders returning to prison between 1986 and
1997, 54% returned within 1 year of being released; an
additional 34% returned within 2 years of being released. About
12% returned after 2 to 3 years.

That's a misleading statistic if I ever saw one. It only counts those who return to prison, not those who are released and stay out. It doesn't tell us how bad recidivism is.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[bodypilot1 0]

Quote

"Jose Ernesto Medellin, a Mexican national convicted of the 1993 rape and murder of two Texas girls, was executed Tuesday night in Texas after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to grant a reprieve.

"Medellin was 18 when he and five fellow gang members raped Elizabeth Pena, 16, and Jennifer Ertman, 14, then beat and strangled them. Medellin later boasted to friends about the deed..."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-execute6-2008aug06,0,2738895.story

Adios, asshole.

Execution was too easy. IMO, they should have ass raped him then strangled him to death.

www.WestCoastWingsuits.com
www.PrecisionSkydiving.com

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Of the 33,855 offenders returning to prison between 1986 and
1997, 54% returned within 1 year of being released; an
additional 34% returned within 2 years of being released. About
12% returned after 2 to 3 years.

That's a misleading statistic if I ever saw one. It only counts those who return to prison, not those who are released and stay out. It doesn't tell us how bad recidivism is.

Then dig for it yourself - I don't recall seeing any such numbers in the DOJ report.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[birdlike 0]

Well, yeah, take a look at how the whackos in California were trying to get Susan Atkins, who murdered Sharon Tate as part of the Manson family, and had her death sentence commuted to life in prison, released so she could die in comfort with her family around her. (She's terminally ill.)

They tell us to compromise, to accept "life in prison" instead of executing these monsters like we ought to; and then when we do, they won't even honor their part of the compromise, and suddenly letting the monsters out before they die is back on the table.

Spirits fly on dangerous missions
Imaginations on fire

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

For example, I was on a jury where an assault with a knife with intent to kill (victim stabbed 7-8 times) resulted in a 45 year sentence. After the trial, the judge who is now a US Congressman told us the defendant would serve 4.5 to 6 years max...

What judge/congressman is that? I'm guessing Ted Poe?

[billvon 2,456]

>They tell us to compromise, to accept "life in prison" instead of
>executing these monsters like we ought to . . . .

To me that's not a compromise. They are off the street permanently; that's what's important. (And no, I don't see releasing a paralyzed, one legged terminally ill prisoner as an exception to that.)

[gemini 0]

Yep Ted Poe. Creative sentences was what he was known for locally. Like making shoplifters wear signs and walk in front of a store for days on end....the sign said "I stole from this store."

Blue skies,

Jim

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>They tell us to compromise, to accept "life in prison" instead of
>executing these monsters like we ought to . . . .

To me that's not a compromise. They are off the street permanently; that's what's important. (And no, I don't see releasing a paralyzed, one legged terminally ill prisoner as an exception to that.)

QED - then the punishment is no longer "life in prison".

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 2,456]

>QED - then the punishment is no longer "life in prison".

Like I said, the important criteria to me is that they are off the street and not able to injure or kill anyone else.

[birdlike 0]

Quote

>They tell us to compromise, to accept "life in prison" instead of
>executing these monsters like we ought to . . . .

To me that's not a compromise. They are off the street permanently; that's what's important.

Yeah, except when they ESCAPE and MURDER MORE PEOPLE, like in the example of the "Texas Seven," which was raised in the "Texas executes American" thread.

No living murderer = no escapee murderer.
Execute them and you will never again have to worry about what they might do, in or out of a prison.

That, to me, is worth extra expense, Bill.

Spirits fly on dangerous missions
Imaginations on fire