Kelly Gissendaner Executed

[Bojack Horseman]

I partially redact my previous statement:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/richard-glossip-execution-stay_560bd2f3e4b0dd850309dcb5?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

[/]

I partially redact my previous statement:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/richard-glossip-execution-stay_560bd2f3e4b0dd850309dcb5?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

Hopefully 37 days will be enough for the defense to make a new case.

[Taco Truck 🚚]

It's all so arbitrary isn't it? Who gets the death penalty and who doesn't is such a slapdash process that it is pretty much impossible for it to function as a deterrent.

You squeal, you get the deal.  Nothing arbitrary about this case.

Although the death penalty is pretty arbitrary.  Guilty, innocent doesn't matter.  Just put them to death.

[pbrower2a]

The death penalty is imposed so capriciously that it has no value as a deterrent. It is revenge only.

[Lexii, harbinger of chaos and sexual anarchy]

I personally believe the death penalty is wrong, I have no exceptions to that rule.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I partially redact my previous statement:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/richard-glossip-execution-stay_560bd2f3e4b0dd850309dcb5?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

Hopefully 37 days will be enough for the defense to make a new case.

Unfortunately, Oklahoma is so obsessed with the death penalty public officials seldom care about innocence, more interested in putting more and more people to death to appear "tough".

Grisham's "The Innocent Man" covers this better than any other book I can think of.

[Green Line]

Good, the death penalty needs to be used on more cases like this.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Sounds like an appropriate capital case.

I don't remember any death penalty case discussed on this forum where you wouldn't think it was appropriate.

This case is hardly "appropriate", given that the actual killer didn't receive the death penalty. Disproportion in sentencing was a ground for a number of commutations since 1976.

The mastermind, if you will, is always the highest target for District Attorneys.......

That doesn't make it less arbitrary and disproportionate.

Going all out against the person who plots a murder is not arbitrary.  You can argue disproportionate but sadly here we consistently plea bargain things to get the big fish, or simply any conviction.

[/]

I partially redact my previous statement:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/richard-glossip-execution-stay_560bd2f3e4b0dd850309dcb5?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

Hopefully 37 days will be enough for the defense to make a new case.

Unfortunately, Oklahoma is so obsessed with the death penalty public officials seldom care about innocence, more interested in putting more and more people to death to appear "tough".

Grisham's "The Innocent Man" covers this better than any other book I can think of.

To be honest, it's pretty obvious that Fallin approved of the stay to avoid controversy rather than to check the chemicals or whatever.

[Clark Kent]

Doesn't matter who she is or what she did. Nobody has a right to kill anyone who is not an immediate threat. I am anti-death penalty in this case just as I am in all others.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Addressing the disparity in sentencing issue again, I don't see how can we consider her more guilty (and thus the one more deserving death penalty) than an actual triggerman. True, she initiated the whole business, but he made a conscious decision to fire the shot. The justice would dictate both receiving the same sentence (and for the record, I'm deeply opposed to the death penalty). Such arbitrary disparity in sentencing is a common ground for clemency actions, as you can see there.

As of prosecutors making deals, it's really a rotten and abused business. I again heartily recommend "the Innocent Man". Grisham made an amazing work in the field of nonfiction.

[Taco Truck 🚚]

Addressing the disparity in sentencing issue again, I don't see how can we consider her more guilty (and thus the one more deserving death penalty) than an actual triggerman.

You guys don't watch the news?  Prosecutors give people deals to avoid the death penalty all the time.  Killer took the deal.  Where's the confusion?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Addressing the disparity in sentencing issue again, I don't see how can we consider her more guilty (and thus the one more deserving death penalty) than an actual triggerman.

You guys don't watch the news?  Prosecutors give people deals to avoid the death penalty all the time.  Killer took the deal.  Where's the confusion?

Again, doesn't mean it's not arbitrary. Deals system is one of the most abused in American law.

[Taco Truck 🚚]

Addressing the disparity in sentencing issue again, I don't see how can we consider her more guilty (and thus the one more deserving death penalty) than an actual triggerman.

You guys don't watch the news?  Prosecutors give people deals to avoid the death penalty all the time.  Killer took the deal.  Where's the confusion?

Again, doesn't mean it's not arbitrary. Deals system is one of the most abused in American law.

The entire US "justice" system stinks.  I was just addressing the wailing going on regarding this narrow topic.  Her fate was in her hands.  He took the deal.  She didn't.  His living or dying has nothing to do with her.

[Taco Truck 🚚]

i have no problem with the death penalty being legal and i think she was a rotten person with no remorse. At the same time, the people closest to her (her children) have forgiven her and they should have respected that wish.

I think the "victim's rights" movement is a racket since the DA/Judge will only listen to the victim if it involves a harsher penalty (though I'd rather get the DP then spend years in solitary).

Let's be honest.  2 out of 3 of her children have reconciled with her.  No one wants to talk about the third child.

[MT Treasurer]

Yes, I do. She was a cold blooded murderer.

Good, the death penalty needs to be used on more cases like this.

[/]

Yes, I do. She was a cold blooded murderer.

Good, the death penalty needs to be used on more cases like this.

Reprimand cold-blooded murder with cold-blooded murder?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Yes, I do. She was a cold blooded murderer.

Good, the death penalty needs to be used on more cases like this.

Reprimand cold-blooded murder with cold-blooded murder?

No.  Rather, we're saying the price of taking a life (in a pre-medidated way) is your life.  Pay up!

[Badger]

Yes, I do. She was a cold blooded murderer.

Good, the death penalty needs to be used on more cases like this.

Reprimand cold-blooded murder with cold-blooded murder?

No.  Rather, we're saying the price of taking a life (in a pre-medidated way) is your life.  Pay up!

Word.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yes, I do. She was a cold blooded murderer.

Good, the death penalty needs to be used on more cases like this.

Reprimand cold-blooded murder with cold-blooded murder?

No.  Rather, we're saying the price of taking a life (in a pre-medidated way) is your life.  Pay up!

Word.

Criminal justice is not a grocery store.

[Badger]

Yes, I do. She was a cold blooded murderer.

Good, the death penalty needs to be used on more cases like this.

Reprimand cold-blooded murder with cold-blooded murder?

No.  Rather, we're saying the price of taking a life (in a pre-medidated way) is your life.  Pay up!

Word.

Criminal justice is not a grocery store.

actions have consequences even outside grocery stores, Tony. or at least they should.

[DemPGH]

The death penalty is imposed so capriciously that it has no value as a deterrent. It is revenge only.

That's pretty much my sentiment, but I'm to the point now where I don't think I can give the death penalty that much credit since there's a percentage of completely innocent people on death row with the state showing no interest in getting it right. In this case everyone knew she wasn't the actual killer. So, it's just the state committing murder as a show of force, really. That's all the credit I'm willing to give the death penalty. The state commits murder as a show of force.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

You can be convicted of murder for telling someone else to commit it? Shouldn't that be a different category of crime?

The US criminal system continues to be an utter disaster.

For me it's not even that. She's clearly guilty not withstanding the categorisation. It's the fact she gets executed and the person who killed doesn't despite being found guilty. It's absurd.

Now that I can agree with, at least in this case where there is a single murder with little chance of repetition. Going back to my deliberately over-the-top Hitler analogy, I'd have no problems with a particular murder avoiding the death penalty, if needed to convict the instigator of multiple murders of a capital crime.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Meanwhile in Oklahoma, the state is preparing to kill Richard Glossip, a man who damn well may be innocent. The police told the guy who killed his boss that they'd take the death penalty off the table if he implicated someone else. So he said his coworker paid him to do it. Glossip was convicted solely on the testimony of that guy, and Mary Fallin refuses to even commute his sentence to life without parole.

I don't care if I get death points for this, but Mary Fallin is a cold-hearted bitch who now has blood on her hands. Whatever happened to "Better that 10 guilty men go free than one innocent man suffer?"

Republicanism? That said, I'd want stronger evidence of innocence to overturn a jury verdict than is present in that case.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Even Tom Coburn has called for Glossip's execution to be stayed.