Gov. Inslee suspends use of death penalty in WA state

[FastRon 0]

Stumpy

***Like some- Governor Inslee values the lives of the killers over that of the victims and families of same.

That's crap, and I suspect you know it.

I know a number of things. Your opinion is yours.
Q. Has anyone in your immediate or extended family been murdered? Do you understand the pain it can cause, and the desire for closure? Some here do, and I am one of them.

FYI- The death penalty is reserved for particular instances of premeditated first degree murder and felony murder. The appeals and reviews are several, up to and including the U.S. Supreme Court here. It is not casual, and it is not timely nor is it immediate.

As Andy pointed out, what Gov. Inslee did was 'suspend' executions while he served.
I would agree he is likely not competent in criminal law matters to weigh in or review the incredible amount of materials resulting from a trial of a capital crime.
So- the governor made a statement.
Like I said, not everyone willl agree.

[jakee 1,271]

davjohns

I'm going to have to take some time to work through your logic. He's not smart enough to understand individual cases. But when he judges a whole bunch of cases with no knowledge but the verdict, he's a genius.

Interesting argument.

No, you don't get it. He's not judging any cases.

You acknowledged that the system is broken, and that incorrect decisions are made. You said, put simply, "Why doesn't he review the cases and fix the broken decisions?"

Well, as I demonstrated, the answer is pretty obvious.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[davjohns 1]

jakee

***I'm going to have to take some time to work through your logic. He's not smart enough to understand individual cases. But when he judges a whole bunch of cases with no knowledge but the verdict, he's a genius.

Interesting argument.

No, you don't get it. He's not judging any cases.

You acknowledged that the system is broken, and that incorrect decisions are made. You said, put simply, "Why doesn't he review the cases and fix the broken decisions?"

Well, as I demonstrated, the answer is pretty obvious.

By changing the sentence, he has judged that the sentence was wrong. You say he is not judging cases...but he did.

You are correct. I don't get it.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[jakee 1,271]

davjohns

By changing the sentence, he has judged that the sentence was wrong. You say he is not judging cases...but he did.

No he didn't, that's just semantic bollocks.

Quote

You are correct. I don't get it.

No, you don't, and you've also avoided the question: why should the Governor be an effective check in cases where the entire judicial system has failed to recognise a mistake? Does he have the time or the expertise to delve into those cases and mke reliable decisions?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[davjohns 1]

jakee

***By changing the sentence, he has judged that the sentence was wrong. You say he is not judging cases...but he did.

No he didn't, that's just semantic bollocks.

Quote

You are correct. I don't get it.

No, you don't, and you've also avoided the question: why should the Governor be an effective check in cases where the entire judicial system has failed to recognise a mistake? Does he have the time or the expertise to delve into those cases and mke reliable decisions?

I don't think he should. But having assumed that role, I think he should try to do it well.

Does he have the time or expertise? If he does not, why is acting? If he is not capable of doing better, why has he decided to assume authority and change the decisions of the judiciary?

There are no semantics here. He has unilateraly decided to over-rule every case based solely on the outcome.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[Stumpy 256]

Quote

I know a number of things. Your opinion is yours.
Q. Has anyone in your immediate or extended family been murdered? Do you understand the pain it can cause, and the desire for closure? Some here do, and I am one of them.

No - thankfully, and i am genuinely very sorry to hear of your loss.
However, for very good reasons, the feelings of the aggrieved party do not come into play when sentencing.

Quote

FYI- The death penalty is reserved for particular instances of premeditated first degree murder and felony murder. The appeals and reviews are several, up to and including the U.S. Supreme Court here. It is not casual, and it is not timely nor is it immediate.

I am well aware of this. The process also is extremely expensive (more expensive than life imprisonment), and has the potential for inaccuracy.
I'm anti death penalty for these two reasons.
1. It makes no economic sense
2. It is fallible. Not much comfort to someone to be cleared of a crime after they are dead. If we could prove crime beyond any doubt minority report style, then maybe.

Saying he values the killers over the victims is a stretch in anyones books however.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

There are no semantics here. He has unilateraly decided to over-rule every case based solely on the outcome.

Your second sentence is pure semantics, Sir.

[davjohns 1]

Sometimes, I really wish you would turn on your PM feature.



This is actual semantics:

There was a prison break and I saw a midget climb up the fence. As he jumped down he sneered at me and I thought: "Well that was a little condescending..."

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[Channman 2]

The next dude up for the happy juice in Texas is Edgar Tamayo...well I think its been delayed for 30 days but in the end Edgar will pay for his crime which is fitting.

Washington state can have its little boy governor, but in Texas we elect Big Boys and Girls, not little cry babies that many here seem willing to support.

[normiss 635]

Care to guess how many innocents your awesome state has murdered under the law???

[davjohns 1]

I am not trying to argue a tiny little point...but I am. Sorry. It's a little issue of mine.

Innocent? Or 'not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt'? Or 'well and truly did not commit the crime for which they were convicted'?

I am sure history has lots of examples of people being convicted and executed despite the case not being proven beyond a reasonable doubt, even though they did it.

I am sure some people have been convicted and executed even though they really did not commit the crime for which they were convicted.

Innocent is a whole other world.

I've defended people who were not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I've defended a couple who actually did not commit the crime they were accused of. I've never defended an innocent person.

Your point is perfectly valid. I don't mean to say otherwise. Mistakes are made. I just bristle at the use of that word. People use it incorrectly an awful lot.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[Southern_Man 0]

davjohns

I am sure some people have been convicted and executed even though they really did not commit the crime for which they were convicted.

Innocent is a whole other world.

I've defended people who were not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I've defended a couple who actually did not commit the crime they were accused of. I've never defended an innocent person.

Your point is perfectly valid. I don't mean to say otherwise. Mistakes are made. I just bristle at the use of that word. People use it incorrectly an awful lot.

Are you saying it is OK to kill people who aren't guilty of the crime which they were convicted of, simply because they were not innocent of other charges? Or may have been criminal lowlifes in general? Because that is what this reads like. I find that a horrifying statement from a member of the bar.

Are you familiar with the work of the innocence project?

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[davjohns 1]

Southern_Man

***

I am sure some people have been convicted and executed even though they really did not commit the crime for which they were convicted.

Innocent is a whole other world.

I've defended people who were not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I've defended a couple who actually did not commit the crime they were accused of. I've never defended an innocent person.

Your point is perfectly valid. I don't mean to say otherwise. Mistakes are made. I just bristle at the use of that word. People use it incorrectly an awful lot.

Are you saying it is OK to kill people who aren't guilty of the crime which they were convicted of, simply because they were not innocent of other charges? Or may have been criminal lowlifes in general? Because that is what this reads like. I find that a horrifying statement from a member of the bar.

Are you familiar with the work of the innocence project?

I don't think I said anything remotely like that. I wasn't even debating the whole death penalty issue at that point. I'm just pointing out there is a difference between 'not guilty' and 'innocent'. People use the two interchangeably when they are vastly different things. If you read all of my post, I think you find I said just that at the end.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[SkyDekker 1,150]

normiss

Care to guess how many innocents your awesome state has murdered under the law???

Big Boys and Girls don't care about that. It is all about total body count.

[SkyDekker 1,150]

Quote

People use the two interchangeably when they are vastly different things. If you read all of my post, I think you find I said just that at the end

Yet, the popular saying is, innocent until proven guilty.

Yet, none of us are innocent.

[wmw999 2,166]

Actually, that's what it sounded like to me as well. No one who's been alive for long enough to make decisions is innocent of everything, so "innocent of the crime accused of" is the bar that we use.

And to me it's horrific to execute someone when there is a potential for doubt. Texas has almost certainly executed people who were not guilty of the crime they were executed for, and even more certainly let people languish and/or die in prison for crimes they were documentably not guilty of. And I'm sure Texas isn't the only state -- only a really big and populous one.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[jakee 1,271]

Quote

But having assumed that role, I think he should try to do it well.

He should attempt to do it well by taking on an impossible task instead of an achievable one?

Quote

Does he have the time or expertise?

You brought it up. Does he?

Quote

If he does not, why is acting? If he is not capable of doing better, why has he decided to assume authority and change the decisions of the judiciary?

It's pretty simple. Taking action to remove the consequences of bad decisions is different from taking action to find and remove bad decisions. If you can't admit that to yourself your argument won't have much credibility.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rickjump1 0]

"So? What is it you're not getting with life imprisonment?"

A. The chance to escape and kill again.
B. The chance to "turn your life around" after you find Jesus and are set free (it happened thanks to Gov. Mike Huckabee).
C. In the year 2064, the local chapter of Catholic Nuns against life imprisonment start a national petition to free you. With the help of the Hollywood Screen Actors Guild, a movie is made depicting your pathetic criminal behavior since age 2. Sympathy from the White House overwhelms the Gov. of WA. who has since become another pothead. He relents and signs a pardon for your release. Upon release, you rape and kill another little girl. Times have changed.....your arresting officer drives you across the Texas State Line where your goose is cooked. God Bless Texas.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[normiss 635]

In Florida, life is LIFE.

I think a number of states need to fix this issue.

[rickjump1 0]

normiss

In Florida, life is LIFE.

I think a number of states need to fix this issue.

In Florida nothing is "certain" except DEATH and taxes.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[jakee 1,271]

davjohns

This is actual semantics:

There was a prison break and I saw a midget climb up the fence. As he jumped down he sneered at me and I thought: "Well that was a little condescending..."

That's just punning.

And you know what Dr Johnson said about that

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[FastRon 0]

***Living in the Seattle area, I fully support the moratorium Jay Inslee instituted for this state regarding the death penalty. Look at it from our point of view...after they agreed to let the Green River Killer escape death simply by revealing the location of the bodies, the whole death penalty thing in Washington was screwed anyway.

Fourteenth Amendment stuff. Equal treatment under the law. It's in the Constitution, and if you let off a guy who viciously murdered over 40 women, and sentence another guy to death for shooting someone in a robbery at a Seven-Eleven...then how is that equal treatment?

I am not sure extending the 14th to criminal sentencing is appropriate. States rights are the reason it was written. As the States display such a variety in rule of law, the U.S. Supreme Court has not ruled to remove the death penalty under that argument.
No argument- The plea agreement in the Green River Killer case is an abomination- It ought to be in a textbook on what not to do as a prosecutor- but one politically foolish person should probably not dictate protocols or even case law for the rest of the country.

Actually Robert, you have it correct. What Inslee has said is that there will be no executions while he is governor. Various County prosecutors around the state have said it will cause essentially no impact upon cases at hand or to be tried- as the law is not being changed, and the penalties for ciminal behavior are codified by the legislature.

Having sat through my share of trials for a host of crimes- "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" around here is so near certainty, the distinction is another angel on the pinhead.
As pointed out below there certainly IS a difference between not guilty and innocent... i.e.- O.J. maybe?

The reality of the matter to me is that there are people out there who are truly evil- by every definition of the word- I have met more than my share. Some are in prison, many are not... FYI- These individuals don't have a "better nature"- for whatever reason they have a behavioral "disease". For sure they don't have a set of values about self and others that most members of society would find unbelievable. They are not going to "get better", and they are not insane under the law.
There are only two ways fo prtect the rest of us from them- life without, and the death penalty. The life without is also argued as too harsh. (See the "Three Strikes" debates-)

What is insane is the parole board meets every few years and has to decide if Charlie Manson is eligible for parole.

[davjohns 1]

Yes, it is a pun. I just thought it was punny.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[normiss 635]

As well as a life without parole sentence.