Governor denies clemency for ex-gang leader

[Jyqm]

Originally Posted by Brwn_eyes0511

Homer, buddy...they don't even know what a "point" is! Except for maybe the one at the top of their heads...

Where's the last point you made in this thread, Brown Eyes? I'm not sure you've posted anything yet that was any more than a glorified emoticon.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by DavidMn

I'm sorry, but I believe that justice was served in this case. This "person" brutally killed 5? people, and those were 5 people that HE took away their right to live and pursue happiness.

Four.

Originally Posted by DavidMn

God forbid someone brutally kills my mother and father. I would want them dead.

Of course you would. It's a natural human instinct to want revenge. But justice is not about revenge.

Originally Posted by DavidMn

And I RESENT someone trying to impose THEIR moral code on me telling me what I should want done to someone that DIRECTLY involves me, and has nothing whatsoever to do with them. I do respect someone that opposes the death penalty, I just dont agree.

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say. The justice system is all about morality; it's about enforcing the moral standards of society. The term justice directly associates to the principle of moral rightness.

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by dissention

Four.

Oh, well THAT'S not as bad, then.

Geez, the guy goes around acting like a badass killing people, but becomes a total pussy when it's his turn to cross the great beyond. A REAL badass would say "yeah, you'd BETTER take my ass out, bitch." Like mama always said, don't dish it out if you can't take it! And, he got lethal injection, the pussy way to go out. I say that if a guy like that thinks he's such a badass, we should slap some bacon on his lap and fry his punk ass.

Sometimes, you just gotta thin the heard out a bit.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Oh, well THAT'S not as bad, then.

Ah, yes. Leave it to you to infer such a thing. David wrote "5?" as if he wasn't sure of how many people Williams had murdered and I corrected him with the actual number.

[paleshadow]

Originally Posted by amber

Jon Carroll



Monday, December 12, 2005



"Stanley Tookie Williams, the convicted murderer, has done an impressive amount of stuff since his incarceration in 1981. He has written an autobiography plus eight books for children about gangs and gang violence. He has spoken eloquently about the destruction that drugs and gangs can cause. He has rallied an impressive array of people to the cause of his appeal for clemency from his death sentence. He has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize any number of times.

His supporters say he has turned his life around. He has become a force for good. He merits special consideration because he has been so important in motivating children not to choose the life that he did. Those arguments, quite frankly, make me nuts.

I have no opinion about whether Tookie Williams has been rehabilitated. I'm not even sure that "rehabilitation" is a meaningful concept. A lot of people in prison are con artists; it's a useful skill on the street. The way to clemency was undoubtedly clear to a man of Williams' intelligence, and the fact that he chose that path means that either (a) he has had a change of heart or (b) that he hasn't. I dunno. I can't judge from afar, and neither can you.

I think subjective judgments about character are not really relevant in death penalty cases. To believe that they are relevant is to believe that uncharismatic, untalented, surly and/or mentally retarded death row prisoners are not worth saving, while a really cool guy is. Are we saying that it's OK to kill sneaky little weasel-faced people and not OK to kill handsome, intelligent, well-muscled people? It's fine to construct a hierarchy of character if one is, say, choosing a mate or a president. It certainly may be more convenient for advocates if they choose a guy who can speak well for himself and has done many useful things. But that's not the point.

The death penalty is wrong because the state (which is to say: us) should not be involved in killing people, particularly in cold blood. To kill people because they killed people -- it doesn't make any actual sense. A society should be slightly more civilized than its sociopaths. Revenge is an understandable emotion. Greed is an understandable emotion too, but stealing is still not legal. The death penalty does not deter and it does not cure.

Williams may be guilty of extremely unpleasant crimes; I do not have an opinion on his guilt. His lawyers make a strong case for racial bias on the part of the prosecutor and the jury, but lawyers are paid to make strong cases. They are not quarreling about the facts of the case, which suggests that the facts are against them. But I don't care. Even if I were positive that we were executing only guilty people, I'd be against the death penalty.

But of course we're not sure, and that's the other point. Eyewitnesses are not infallible; law enforcement people will tell you that eyewitness evidence is the most unreliable evidence there is. Juries can be stupid or misguided or both. The state may have an excellent advocate, and the defense lawyers could be drunks one step short of disbarment. Are we really prepared to kill people because their lawyers were drunks?

And I repeat what I said about rehabilitation. Most criminals are drug addicts or alcoholics; it comes with the territory. Drug addicts and alcoholics are among the best con artists in the world. They have had long practice in saying things that people want to hear. They can read a room, because often the room is what's standing between them and their drug of choice. If a jailhouse witness can get time off for testifying in a certain case, of course he will. He might coincidentally be telling the truth, but I wouldn't lend him money on the basis of what he said -- and I sure wouldn't kill another man on his word.

And, sadly, most of the people who testify against criminals are themselves criminals. It's a flawed system. We now know, because of advances in DNA evidence, that innocent men have been executed. I have no idea whether those executions weigh heavily on the prosecutors and police officers who built the case, but they weigh on other people. The governor of Illinois suspended all executions because of the possibility of killing an innocent man. It seems like a good idea for all the states.

At this writing, the fate of Stanley Williams is unknown. Whatever happens to him, it's time to look forward to the next case and all the cases that follow, and bear witness."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...sn=001&sc=1000

When I read your post about all the good things he has done since he has been incarcerated, it reminded me of the story "A Good Man is Hard to Find" by Flannery O'Connor. There is a quote at the end of the story by the misfit after he has killed the grandmother. He says of her, "She would of been a good woman if it had been somebody there to shoot her every minute of her life". Wouldn't we all?

[Richard B]

Originally Posted by David

Like if the meat were used to feed people or something.

Soylent Green.

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by dissention

Ah, yes. Leave it to you to infer such a thing.

Point being that if you kill MORE than three, you should fry like chicken at KFC, eggs at Waffle House, and Freedom Fries at the Congressional cafeteria.

[amber]

Originally Posted by paleshadow

When I read your post about all the good things he has done since he has been incarcerated, it reminded me of the story "A Good Man is Hard to Find" by Flannery O'Connor. There is a quote at the end of the story by the misfit after he has killed the grandmother. He says of her, "She would of been a good woman if it had been somebody there to shoot her every minute of her life". Wouldn't we all?

That's not what that article is about.
That is a good quote from the story, though.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Sometimes, you just gotta thin the heard out a bit.

It's "herd".

[Richard B]

Originally Posted by The Tower

That is an untrue myth. The Crips were founded in the late 60’s. Williams joined in 1971. While Williams liked to claim and brag that he was a co-founder of the gang, it was not true.

Cribs/Crips established itself first in 1969, but wasn't until 1972 were they truly became established. Tookie was 13 when he joined. If it were true thatTookie just claims to have founded the Crips, wow he's even weirder than I thought. Who in their right mind would want that noriety? Here's a good history of gangs:
Crips and Blood

Originally Posted by The Tower

Are we, as human beings, sophisticated enough to actually understand and correct these kind of behavioral problems? Do we understand the brain well enough to actually be able to do change or hinder murderers and other violent criminals? No. At least not now or in the near future.
And killing people is the solution to this dilemma?

Not at all. Go ahead and nurture young people and teach. Frankly, I think there are people who are simply predisposed to violent behavior that we don't understand well enough to actually resolve. Everyone knows killing is wrong, we're told this at a very early age unless you live in a cave...but then why do people still do it? Why is there still such disregard for human life? Look at the case of the Mendez brothers. Born with a silver spoon in their mouths...but I guess they wanted diamonds instead and murdered their parents in cold blood. They knew better. So again, why?

Then there is this other awful thing called War. We justify the killings now, don't we? Not a great message to send out to society. Double standard in the worst way. No to killing...unless...blah, blah, blah.

Originally Posted by The Tower

So you want to spend money on keeping this murderer locked up for the rest of his life, in a decent facility and fed three times a day?
I’d rather have my tax dollars imprison criminals than have them contribute to the killing of one innocent person. No one is omniscient. I certainly don’t trust the justice system to be absolutely certain of everyone’s guilt. While prison sentences can be ended, death cannot.

True. I don't trust the justice system either, it's really flawed. OJ won't agree, but that's another story. The prison system in the US is overloaded. Their freedom to walk streets is gone but everything else continues. They study, write, draw, watch TV, listen to music, socialize with inmates and visitors (if they have any). Not such a bad punishment, especially if you're a murderer with nothing else in your life.

Originally Posted by The Tower

Frankly, Tookie is afraid to die. If I were in his shoes, I'd rather die than waste away my life in a prison cell. And you know what...anyone can write a book.
And your point is?

He was afraid to die. It's over now. He went peacefully, unlike his victims. But that's okay.

Originally Posted by The Tower

I also was unfortunate enough to see the crime scene photographs from his truly brutal killings. Not pleasant.
Unfortunately, a large portion of life is not pleasant. Nothing justifies killing.

Except war? Like you said life is not pleasant...it involves killing.

Originally Posted by The Tower

Killing him changes nothing. The victims are still dead, they will not come back, the memory of them dying will not be erased. The only thing the execution did was show the weakness of American society.

Keeping him alive changes nothing either.


Our country has a lot of work and reform to do. Reading all these posts and thoughts has been deeply interesting. I hope we evolve righteously with time and rise above this mess. I hope to see some significant changes in my lifetime.

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

It's "herd".

Whatever. Sometimes it needs to be thinned out. (I've NEVER claimed to be a good speller.)

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Originally Posted by Lux

Browneye, you have no point, you're someone back at the beginning of last century thinking they really have a point about why women should not be allowed to vote. You don't realise that you sound like a slimey 12 year old trying to have a conversation with adults. We're having to argue why women are people too and you're laughing at the concept because your mind doesn't grant you the facilities to understand that of course this is true.

Calling nurse Ratched....

one has escaped!

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Originally Posted by Lux

**** you're good, I feel so stupid. You're right after all, the death penalty is humane and brings civilised order to society.

Lux, seriously I am done discussing this. Obviously we are going to disagree on this, and I don't think either of us are the type who can easily be persuaded to change our opinions.

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by tommer

"death" is unfair. simple. fairness is not the feeling or state to describe the ending of human lives. it is good that there are people, and it is not good and not fair that they die. people are better off being alive, that is their fair state of being.

The fallacy of this is that it neglects the obvious. Not only is death fair, it is inevitable. We ALL die eventually.

My personal feeling is that one does not have the right under normal circumstances to randomly take a life. Sometimes, people commit crimes that are so heinous that they warrant death. Not to bring a sense of closure or completion to the victims they leave behind, but because there are evil people in this world, and not having them in this world only serves to benefit mankind. If a person gets to the point where they lose all sense of humanity, well, then they cease to be human, and forfeit all of the rights and benefits that come with it, at least as far as I'm concerned.

While I personally have no moral objections to the death penalty, I do think that it hasn't been, nor will ever be, applied fairly. I DO believe that racial minorities, the poor, and the mentally ill are FAR more apt to be imprisoned and/or sentenced to death than a middle-to-upper class white individual. And, since we're about equality here, I think it's safe to say that men are disproportionately put to death.

That having been said, there are times when there is no doubt that people should die. Dahmer comes to mind the quickest. He wasn't assigned death, but only lasted a year or so in the pokey before he was brutally murdered in prison. Are you people telling me that he would not have been better off with lethal injection, instead of the fatal ass beating he got? Where's YOUR humanity?

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Originally Posted by GateandGarden

Go f*ck yourself.

So, Hil.

Is that the only time you post now...to take up for Lux?!?

Come on now...you used to have your own opinions.

Lux is a big girl. I may not agree with anything she says but she is one clever girl and needs NO ONE to take up for her.