State Can Make Inmate Sane Enough to Execute

So Mr. Singleton is in effect committing suicide by taking his medication? Isn't that illegal? This is a ridiculous ruling and I'm guessing this will make it to the Supreme Court and will be overturned.

 

I don't have a problem with the idea of capital punishment. I'm sure most people would agree that there are crimes which richly deserve immediate expulsion from the gene pool. It's the actuality of capital punishment and the way the criminal justice system works in this country that is all fouled up.

As for this, I think it's barbaric. "We're going to cure you so we can kill you." Lovely.

But that's okay, because we are a shining beacon for justice and human rights the world over.

 

Saw this in the paper yesterday. My favorite was the quote from the judge saying that the "only" negative effect on the prisoner was that they would put him to death.

That's got to be a relief.

 

Pretty soon this country will execute the insane anyway. This case will probably just be one of the precedents that allows it in the near future. Ah, the slippery slope.

 

Can we haul in Richard Perle on a trumped-up charge? He fits the bill.

 

I agree completely. Anyone who could watch the debacle in IL over the last few years and still support the death penalty as it is currently being applied is a sick person. There is little chance that we haven't executed a fair number of innocent people. Why can't we admit that the death penalty is unfairly applied in a system practically designed to make errors and halt the practice?

There is a good article in a recent Atlantic Monthly that gives some interesting stats on the death penalty. It is not up online yet but it should be up shortly. It is called "The Nation in Numbers: "Mortal Justice: The demography of the death penalty" Check it out.

 

The question should be asked, how did he get put on death row in the first place?

I am not talking about any defense stadegy, but was he crazy when he commited the acts that landed him in jail? If so, the death penalty should not have been an option and some treatment a viable option.

Heck, even John Hinkley has applied for weekend visits to his parents house. He was denied, but his family comes to visit him.

I say, take him off his meds, put him in the general prison population and see how long he lasts.

 

A little sitdown in old sparky and his mental illness will be cured for good

This compassion for deadly ciminals makes me puke. I'll bet you softies are all waiting in line to be prison guards and help these unfortunate souls out. If they kill you, there's no punishment because they're already on life without parole. Oh wait, they can take away their cable TV.

 

Uh, the victim in this case, Mary Lou York, who was brutally stabbed to death by this lunatic, identified him as the suspect before she bled to death. And, yeah, he didn't become "insane" legally until 8 years after her death. So, before we get all teary-eyed over his fate, perhaps he should've thought about it back when he had a clear head and viciously sucked the life out of a truly innocent person.

 

Ian,

I am not talking about just this case but the entire death penalty system. How many other "iron-clad" cases fell apart when people started using DNA tests? Did you follow all of the cases in which the DA and police conspired to get convictions with false evidence and illegal confessions? You know about all of the men freed after extensive research (by students in many cases) revealed they were wronged. How many innocent people have to spend decades in jail or even lose their lives before the pro-death penalty people can admit that revenge shouldn't be taken against a person who could be innocent? If you read that article I mentioned, you'd see that the death penalty is given in a very unjust and biased way. Even if someone is guilty of the crime of murder, shouldn't their sentence be based on the nature of the crime and mitigating factors, not the race of the vicitim or what city the murder occurred in?

I'm saying this as a person with sympathy for the pro-death penalty crowd. I think that some crimes are so serious and without mitigation that the criminal has effectively severed their claims to the right to life guaranteed by our social contract. However, this only applies if the death penalty can be applied fairly and accurately. A mountain of evidence shows that it doesn't even meet those minimal standards. Unless/Until we can devise a better system, I'm supporting changing all death penalty convictions into life sentences. I'd rather let these people live and have a chance of discovering the truth about their convictions than killing them only to find out later that many (or even just some) were innocent.

From the details on this case I've seen it is likely that he killed her. That doesn't change the overall fact that the death penalty system is pathetic. The system is so poorly designed and implemented there is no way you should have enough confidence in the outcome to kill a person. What harm is it to throw him in jail for the rest of his life? Why was he given the death penalty? There are hundreds of these situations. I could point you to many of them but you should already know they exist so what is the point. If you are happy supporting the obviously unjust use of the death penalty, then I guess there is really not much else to talk about.

BTW, you should check out the research on eyewitness testimony. I don't think you'd be so quick to use it to support your support for the death penalty.