Can someone please explain this to me? Last night, the state of Georgia executed a woman for conspiring to murder her husband. He "lover", who actually committed the murder, got life imprisonment and is set for parole in 2022. How does this system work??
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34393027
She plans the murder and gets executed, he commits the murder and could walk free after 25 years inside.
Mind. Blown.
Whats weirder is the victims family saying it was something she deserved, but I guess thats part of USAians and their "need" for closure.
Thought crimes, for when you need a few "wins".
Reading the article it is pretty obvious. He got a plea agreement so avoided the death penalty, she didn't.
Wish we had the same conspiracy law over here then attacks by gangs which result in severe injuries mean that someone can be prosecuted unlike the recent Warren Free trial were all the gang were found not guilty of his murder as the prosecution couldnt establish who delivered the fatal blow.
Last edited by hb904460; 30-09-2015 at 04:03 PM.
I can't. At least not with a well-reasoned argument that will make sense to you and convince you this was the right outcome.Originally Posted by Allen
The linked article says "Her former lover, Gregory Owen, who killed Douglas Gissendaner, was given life in prison as part of a plea bargain."
So, punishments don't necessarily "fit the crime" (BTW that's a saying by Cicero, 44BC). Other factors like deals to guarantee a conviction, and plain old human desire for revenge come in to play. Modern justice is a system with clear rules and regulations, and there are always people trying to "game" the system for their own benefit, either as prosecutor or accused.
There appears to be enough political will at the moment to keep the death penalty in America, and think it's worth the risk (perhaps 4% or more) of a few innocents being killed. Who cares? Vote Trump
Slightly off-topic, but I went to see the Magna Carta at the British Library a few months back. I'm fairly ambivalent on Europe, but liked to see the evolution of written laws being passed through the centuries, and across nations. Today the European Council's members are prohibited from using capital punishment. Some members, like Russia, still legally allow it but no longer use it. I'll consider that progress.
Plea Bargains are awful things. Combined with the threat of a death penalty, wow.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
It seems pretty crazy to me too. The deciding factor appears to have been that he was the one that co-operated and went for a plea bargain although I suppose the fact that she actually planned the murder may also have had something to do with it. Either way the state must really have been struggling to make a conviction without a confession to agree to such a deal.
There isn't a lot of information in that article to go on really. You would think the party that actually comitted the crime would be sentenced with murder in the first degree and that the woman would be charged with conspiracy. Whether or not was there was evidence of manipulation or diminished responsibility somehow (although I can't see how) may have made some difference though I suppose. Georgia doesn't classify murder by degree's either which might mean sentencing isn't as straight forward as it might be in other states.
1) It's not an American thing. In this case, it's a Georgia thing, although similar things happen in Texas and Oklahoma.
2) Each state makes their own laws in regards to the legal system, including penalties, and as long as it doesn't violate the federal law, it stands.
The simple answer is, it was within the law. It's what the prosecutors pressed for, and it's what the jury was presented with. It's not a great answer, but it is the answer.
My personal feelings on it, as an American that's been living with the fact for more than 50 years is, in certain cases, I believe in the death penalty. This case? I don't have enough of the facts, although I do know that the State of Georgia doesn't just go willy-nilly executing people on a whim... even though it's only one state to the west of me, I don't recall seeing much about this, and that being recently because of the Papal visit.
Another thing to keep in mind about the carrying out of the death penalty - it's not an automatic thing. China, you're convicted, they take you outside, and poof, you was gone. Kelly Gissendaner was convicted and sentenced in 1998, and went through the entire appeals process. That's a lot of people looking at it, from the local courts, to the state Supreme Court, right up to the US Supreme Court, which had already declined to overturn her conviction earlier, and declined 3 stays of execution on the 29th... so it's not like nobody heard her side of the story. And when it comes to murder in the US, conspiracy equates to committing the act.
Would I have pushed for the death penalty in this case? I don't know enough to say yes or no. I also don't know if the judge did the sentencing, or if it was the jury that did so - it varies depending on state, venue, etc. What's ironic is, the one person (a European) that I would have voted on the death penalty for can potentially be out of jail in less time than it takes to actually carry out an execution in the US once sentenced. A certain mass murderer. We'll leave it at that.
The sad thing is that the US "justice" system thrives on bribes.. sorry plea bargins where you don't get the sentance that fits the crime, but the sentance that your lawyer can get the prosecution to agree to.
There's literally no justice left in the system.
(\___/) (\___/) (\___/) (\___/) (\___/) (\___/) (\___/)
(='.'=) (='.'=) (='.'=) (='.'=) (='.'=) (='.'=) (='.'=)
(")_(") (")_(") (")_(") (")_(") (")_(") (")_(") (")_(")
This is bunny and friends. He is fed up waiting for everyone to help him out, and decided to help himself instead!
The UK released convicted mass murderer Abdelbaset al-Megrahi on compassionate discharge. He got to go home and die, in peace, with his family. It was supposed to take 3 months. It took almost 3 years. Something he denied 270 people. Let's not even pretend to apply the same meaning to the word justice.
Fixed that for you.
It's amazing just how bad this scenario is. Something like 90% of people convicted of a crime don't go to trial. Combine that with private prisons and a focus on punishment rather than rehabilitation and it's no wonder that the US has an incarceration rate four times that of the UK.
I'm fairly certain you fixed that for yourself... but if it helps people sleep better at night, so be it. Kind of ironic in a thread about the American death penalty, n'est-ce pas?
The US has executed at least one innocent man. That, to me, is sufficient reason to be against the death penalty.
I don't think it should be the catch-all punishment like Texas and Oklahoma have turned it into. By the same token, I don't think it should be the responsibility to feed, house, clothe and medicate, oh, let's take Holmes for the most current, convicted, no question the guy was guilty, of the taxpayer. The same applies to Roof in South Carolina. There is no question as to his guilt.
But I also agree that it's a very slippery slope, and there can not be any doubt as to guilt. I went looking around for real information about this case, and there's just not a lot online because of the recent sensationalism of it. But as I said earlier, the simple, if somewhat sad answer still remains - it's within the law, and only the people can make that change.
Not sure if you're aware of it, but in some areas, the Scottish legal system is utterly independent of the rest of the UK. By which I mean, one law operates in Scotland and an entirely different piece of legislation in the rest of the UK. They're two separate jurisdictions, and Scotland guards such perogatives very carefully. The "UK" system has about as much say in such matters as your North Carolina governor does in a state jurisdiction legal matter in Texas. Right or wrong (and wrong, IMHO) al-Magrahi was released by Scottish politicians, not the UK ones.
As for this execution, I haven't seen enough of it to have much of an opinion, but on which of them most deserves execution, assuming either does, I'm inclined to think she did.
Why? What, or who, provided the effective mens rea, the 'state of mind', or will?
She did.
It was, if you like, her decision, her driving the offence. He appears to have been more of a remote control for the weapon. In other words, without her pushing, would he have acted on his own?
Far from being less liable because he did the actual act, it seems to me she was more liable for being the active decision-maker causing it to happen.
On the DP in general, I have no problem with it at all, in the right situations. Whether this was one of them or not is not something I have an opinion on. On whether it's right in principle, I also think I don't have the energy for that argument yet again. If anyone wants to know why I support it in the right circumstances, or what those might be .... 'search' is your friend.We've done that argument extensively in the past. Done it .... to death, as it were.
GuidoLS (02-10-2015)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
