home

California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and Wheelchair-Ridden

By Jeralyn, Section Death Penalty
Posted on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 03:38:46 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Update: Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has refused to hold a private clemency meeting for Allen. Last week he refused to hold a public meeting. Things don't look good.

*********
Clarence Ray Allen is the next prisoner set for execution in California -- on January 17.

He is still recuperating from a major heart attack in September that [his lawyers] maintain requires surgery. Diabetes has damaged other organs and left him legally blind and confined to a wheelchair. His lawyers also argue that San Quentin's inadequate medical care, the subject of a federal lawsuit, has contributed to his condition.

Allen has received support from former San Quentin warden Daniel Vasquez, who visited the inmate several weeks ago and told Schwarzenegger in a letter that executing him would be ``shameful.'' Former California Supreme Court Justice Joseph Grodin, who wrote a 1986 ruling upholding Allen's death sentence, also urged the governor to grant clemency, saying the execution would ``violate societal standards of decency.''

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will decide whether to rant Allen clemency. Most see it as a longshot. I'll be debating the case tonight and advocating clemency on ABC radio in Los Angeles at 7pm PT, you can listen online here.

It's an issue that is going to rise again and again as death row's population becomes grayer.

From 1990 to 2000, nine inmates older than 60 were executed in the United States, according to Death Penalty Information Center data. In the past five years, 18 over-60 inmates have been executed, including 77-year-old Mississippi hit man John Nixon Sr. several weeks ago.

< False Confessor Seeks New Trial | DeLay Prosecutors Subpoena Abramoff Documents >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and Wheelchair-Ridden | 50 comments (50 topical)
    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#1)
    by jimcee on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 04:15:57 PM EST
    And his crimes were...

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#2)
    by Patrick on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 04:23:15 PM EST
    What color is he? IF he's white he's eff'd

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 04:24:31 PM EST
    His crimes are not the issue. It's our societal response that's the issue. He's served more than 20 years on death row and will die in prison. He went in alive and will come out dead. That's the equivalent to a death sentence.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#4)
    by Patrick on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 04:32:55 PM EST
    To those who view our response as appropriate, his crimes are the issue. With all due respect.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#5)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 04:40:39 PM EST
    patrick, jimcee, If you really want to know, click the link.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 04:54:15 PM EST
    Clarification request: Is the argument for granting clemency that he will die in prison without execution? Or is it that due to his ill health he's not been able to mount an adequate appeal procedure or campaign for clemency?

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 04:58:57 PM EST
    The argument is that it violates the standards of decency in a civilized society to execute a 76 year old man in his condition.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#8)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 05:00:41 PM EST
    punisher,
    Attorneys for Clarence Ray Allen, 75, filed a clemency request to commute Allen's scheduled January 17, 2006, execution to life in prison without parole. Allen is asking Schwarzenegger for sympathy because of his health problems. Confined to a wheelchair and nearly blind, in September Allen suffered a heart attack. He also has diabetes. Last week Allen submitted an appeal to block his execution on grounds prison officials are not adequately treating his health problems. More...


    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 05:02:30 PM EST
    I should've followed Quaker's advice. The article says:
    To Allen's lawyers and death penalty opponents, the execution of a feeble old man would amount to cruel and unusual punishment... ``What societal interests are going to be furthered if the execution takes place under this set of circumstances?''
    I guess I'm just confused as to how the execution of a health young person is less cruel than doing it to a feeble old person. And I don't see how societal interests are furthered by any execution. So these arguments don't make much sense to me.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 05:11:55 PM EST
    To elaborate, I'm against the death penalty in pretty much every circumstance that I can think of, because it is cruel and unusual and because it is bad for society. But seeing as how it continues to be practiced, and I'm being both flip and serious here, I'd think that as physically infirm as a person is, he or she is always at least fit enough for death.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 05:43:45 PM EST
    wg, I understand that we're not talking about what should be here, but rather what is. But this case and the recent Tookie Williams case leave me a concern that death row inmates who are not charismatic, like Mr. Williams, or who lack an interesting back story, like Mr. Allen, don't get the same kind of publicity and aggressive campaign for clemency. The effect is that the already tragically unfair process that led to their death row sentence becomes even more arbitrary and unfair.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 05:44:20 PM EST
    Surely the citizens of California will sleep better at night, secure in the knowledge that they're safe from this old man. And if the example set by his execution dissuades just one blind old man with a heart condition from entering a life of crime, it'll all be worth it.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 05:45:48 PM EST
    Agreed Molly. He's a menace.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#15)
    by jimcee on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 06:14:09 PM EST
    Quaker, Sorry if the sarcasism was missed. It never really is as effective in print as it is in speech. TL, My father never killed anyone but died at 76 years old, cruel or unusual? Et Al, If he didn't want to die at the hands of the state he shouldn't have killed at the hands of a private individual (himself) in a Capital Punishment state. Whether you agree with the death penalty or not he made that choice and now after much postponement he will be subjected to his punishment, which is more than can be said of his victims. If you don't like the death penalty lobby to change it, but it doesn't change the choices made by those who are punished that way. What I find interesting is that there are what 600 or so folks on death row in California and the anti-death penalty people always choose the worst. First Tookie Williams, a first rate scum and now some fellow who makes Williams look good. Blind, crippled or not it is his time to answer to the state, like it or not.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 06:23:53 PM EST
    This dude makes Tookie look good.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 06:25:44 PM EST
    jimcee: My father never killed anyone but died at 76 years old, cruel or unusual? Depends on the circumstances. jimcee: ...the anti-death penalty people always choose the worst. I don't know how you came up with that.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 06:59:11 PM EST
    Stan: I am one who believes that by taking a human life you forfeit your own. I bet that some military vets who have taken human lives would disagree.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 07:02:31 PM EST
    Here's a link to a description of the crimes: [deleted, not in html format] Mr. Allen caused four people to lose their lives. Each murder was a cold-blooded calculation. More shockingly, Allen ran a security service as a cover for his illicit activities. I am one who believes that by taking a human life you forfeit your own. The original crimes happened over 25 years ago. Mr. Allen has gotten 25+ years of breathing his victims did not.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#20)
    by jimcee on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 07:05:02 PM EST
    Charles, I am not demanding a scalp, I am just pointing out the fact that if you don't want to be executed for murder then you had better kill in a non-death penalty state, if you choose to kill. Punisher, Actually my father died from cancer. Mr. Allen will die a more quick and pleasent death than my dad did, I'm sure. Funny how that works.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 07:14:05 PM EST
    jimcee, cancer can indeed be cruel, but I don't know of any way to compare the value two men or the suffering of two deaths.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#22)
    by Patrick on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 07:25:28 PM EST
    From the article:
    He has been convicted of ordering four murders in his lifetime and is on death row for a spree of violence in the Central Valley in the 1970s and early 1980s that still sends shudders through law enforcement and his victims' families.
    From Charlie:
    I don't care what the guy did. A life sentence will suffice.
    So I say, a person who can order people killed can do it from jail too.
    Patrick: Yeah, white people really got it rough in this world.
    Apparently the point was a bit too subtle for you so I'll spell it out. Since the Gov'ner didn't commute the sentence of a black man (Tookie) there'll be hell to pay if he does it for a white man. Many will not look at the difference in the cases. They will only see the color and they will get a voice.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#23)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 07:33:48 PM EST
    Clarence Ray Allen is going to die in prison whether the death sentence is commuted to life or not. The purpose of his sentence ostensibly was to remove any future danger to society, to anyone, from him. He is an old, sick man, and he is near the end of his life any way you look at it. He is not, and probably cannot physically be, a threat to anyone. To anyone here who supports executing him, and is against the governor extending him clemency... Answer me two questions please: What's in it for you? How will you benefit by his execution.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#24)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 08:22:14 PM EST
    The older I get, the more and more abhorrent the death penalty becomes. Not because I don't have the same rage everyone else does toward a violent criminal, but simply because I believe we must always strive to be better. And state-sanctioned murder can in no way be defined as the human race striving to be better.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#25)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 08:33:50 PM EST
    Happy (late) birthday to your wife, Charlie. Hope you two had a good evening.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 08:41:09 PM EST
    Charlie, we are on the same side of this and many issues. I think you are wrong, though, to minimize jimcee's loss.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 09:10:54 PM EST
    BMB suggests that Allen continues to be dangerous to Californians because: Clarence Ray Allen ordered murders from prison... On one occasion, carried out 25 years ago. Maybe that's an imminent danger in the Bush playbook, but not to any reasonable person.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#28)
    by scarshapedstar on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 10:05:00 PM EST
    To those who view our response as appropriate, his crimes are the issue. With all due respect.
    Hmm. I thought it was all about "closure". Retribution rears its ugly head. Good thing we know which party loves Jesus, eh?

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 10:07:52 PM EST
    Charlie: He's pure scum on every level. You're exaggerating.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 10:25:58 PM EST
    Dadler, "state sanctioned murder." Do you object to: 1. Fielding an Army? 2. Arming police officers with deadly arms? 3. Arming security guards? 4. Using deadly force to protect yourself? If you answered Yes to all 4, then I'll concede your point on executions. (Also, you might be French). However, any no's and, by my estimation, you agree with SOME "state sanctioned murder." Very respectfully, Jimbo

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#31)
    by cpinva on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 10:34:34 PM EST
    jimcee, as usual, sets up a false dichotomy: his father died at 76, from cancer, so it's only fair that mr. allen be executed. the two events are mutually exclusive, but it's the best that jim, as usual, can offer. my brother died of cancer at age 29. so what? again, two mutually exclusive events. BMG, i'd say the fact that mr. allen was able to order murders from prison is an idictment of the CA penal system's ineptitude. another blind man leading jim's deaf and dumb act. is mr. allen guilty of committing heinous acts? absolutely. is he being punished for said heinous acts? absolutely. actually, dying a slow, painful death strikes me as more punishment than can be had from a needle in the arm. but hey, that's just me. will society be materially improved by mr. allen's officially sanctioned murder? beats me, but i kind of doubt it, since it's been without his company for the past 25 years. will i be materially better off with him executed? not that i'm aware of, unless there's a previously unknown life insurance policy, naming me as the beneficiary. the truth is, it will diminish me, because i will have been forced into becoming an indirect participant in mr. allen's murder. i mourn for the victims of mr. allen, and their families. that said, killing him will neither resurrect them from the grave, nor disuade any one else from committing similar acts. on the other hand, macabre though this may sound, his execution might actually result in a movement to abolish the death penalty, at least in CA. perhaps people will be so disgusted by the execution of a guy who can't even have a bowel movement without help, they'll rise up en mass, and demand an end to it. there's always hope.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 10:42:49 PM EST
    Edger asked: > What's in it for you ? The knowledge that at least one cold-blooded killer is finally paying a price for stealing innocent people's lives. Kind of easy. Some of us have a large empathy for the victims of criminal violence, greater than our empathy for the perpetrators of criminal violence. --

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 03:11:53 AM EST
    TL:
    He's served more than 20 years on death row and will die in prison. He went in alive and will come out dead. That's the equivalent to a death sentence.
    I wonder why you even push for Tookie or this guy to get their setences commuted. It is obvious that you don't even agree with LWOP.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 06:24:03 AM EST
    Charlie, They are all examples of state sanctioned killing. BTW, the French used to have big brass ones and lost them. Go see the Battle of Algiers. Man, them Froggies with the blow torches make Lyndie Englund look like an amateur. Also, you gotta love any country that would blow up a Green Peace ship that threatened to interrupt a nuke test. If the French ever recover their manhood, I'll take it back. Otherwise it stands. Jimbo

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#35)
    by Slado on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 01:30:47 PM EST
    What if they found a Nazi criminal hiding in an Argentinian old folks home? He'd probably be 90+ years old. But if he was guilty for the murder of thousands of people would he not be worthy of a the same death sentance his buddies got 60 years ago in one of the most celebrated internatinaly acclaimed examples of proper jurispudance? What exactly is the statute of limitations for applying the death penalty? How sick, how old do you have to be to grant clemency? It seems odd for someone who never supports the death penalty to use an argument of "It's been to long" or "He's too sick" or "He's a changed man" as an excuse to not apply it. That infers that it is properly applied at other times. That if you're 25 and of good health and are unsympathetic for your crimes then go ahead, fry away. He's guilty. He was convicted uder the law of the land. He should pay for his crimes. I'm against the death penalty just like I'm against abortion but they are the law of the land. So be it. If I don't like the law I try and change it. I don't say murderers who are old or write children's books deserve any more rights then the ones who are simply guilty of murder in the 1st degree.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#36)
    by roy on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 01:38:26 PM EST
    Slado,
    It seems odd for someone who never supports the death penalty to use an argument of "It's been to long" or "He's too sick" or "He's a changed man" as an excuse to not apply it. That infers that it is properly applied at other times.
    It implies that it's more appropriate at those other times. Not that it's necessarily appropriate enough to be acceptable. At the risk of putting words in TL's mouth, I think the message is that executing blind crippled old men is extra horrible, whereas executing virile young men is just horrible. Neither acceptable.
    I'm against the death penalty just like I'm against abortion but they are the law of the land.
    A governor's broad discression in granting clemency is also the law of the land. Why focus on the killing people part of the law, and ignore the not killing them part?

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#37)
    by Edger on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 01:59:56 PM EST
    Edger asked: > What's in it for you ? The knowledge that at least one cold-blooded killer is finally paying a price for stealing innocent people's lives. Kind of easy.
    Yes, it sure is... He is going to die in prison. Either way. Whether he's executed or not. He is going to die in prison. Guess what? You even get to save the cost of the execution! You get a two for one deal here... By just leaving him to die naturally. But of course I'm forgetting the best part aren't I? You know... The "let's see an old man beg for his last few months" part... The blood lust part... The retribution part.... The old eye for an "I" part... whichever part "does it" for you... Yesssir... Kind of easy, huh? Somebody hand me one of those airsick bags, will you?

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#38)
    by jimcee on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 08:54:26 PM EST
    I'll yawn as I point out that my example was rather absurd (I think there is a latin term for that but but I'm not that smart) but it doesn't change the fact that this fellow was a rather nasty piece of work and did his deeds under a certain legal system and some of them apparently while incarcerated. Whether or not you support the death penalty he was convicted of his deeds under the effective judicial system at the time and he should be subjected to it after myriad proceedings. Overall I really don't feel sorry for him or feel that society will be hurt by his execution. If anything it might save society a few bucks to keep this fellow alive if he is so sickly. As I have said earlier, if you don't like the death penalty lobby to change the law. If you don't want someone that has been convicted under those laws, stand back and use thier executions as an example the law has run amok. I don't celebrate anyone's death.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:41:42 PM EST
    Does the fact that this person committed a heinous crime mean absolutely nothing to you? He should be punished regardless of what his health conditions are ex post facto. To put it simply, if you can’t handle the punishment, then don’t commit the crime. Why should anyone feel compassion for him? Oh yeah, I forgot, the lives of guilty, prisoners mean more to you than the lives of innocent, unborn fetuses. You’re such hypocrites.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#40)
    by Dadler on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 12:00:43 AM EST
    Penn_StateR, We should feel compassion for the same reason Jesus taught forgiveness for everyone. And I doubt very seriously Jesus would say "Oh, but I mean forgiveness in heaven after you guys kill him." Seems to me he actually STOPPED an execution in the Bible. Would he stop an abortion in progress? Excellent question, if I do say so myself. And the answer IS...

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 09:47:27 AM EST
    Once again the left (bleeding hearts) are all over the execution of a convicted murderer..... Where is all your compassion for the victims of this scum? He did the crime...he's guilty. To Allen's lawyers and death penalty opponents, the execution of a feeble old man would amount to cruel and unusual punishment. Sounds to me it would be more cruel to try & keep him alive? And Allen's case is likely to foreshadow an increasingly common occurrence for California, where more and more graying murderers on the nation's largest death row could be executed decades after their crimes. The only reason he's still alive (and very sick now) is that (thanks to all the libs in this counrty) it takes 25 years to carry out a sentence! To bad his victims didn't have an extra 25 minutes! I'm sure they all would loved that? ``What societal interests are going to be furthered if the execution takes place under this set of circumstances?'' The punishment will actually be carried out as it should be! And again...the circumstances wouldn't be what they are if it didn't take 25 years ! ``There is something horribly wrong with that picture.'' Yes there is...! I'll agree on that note! But the other side to Allen's story is not so sympathetic. He has been convicted of ordering four murders in his lifetime and is on death row for a spree of violence in the Central Valley in the 1970s and early 1980s that still sends shudders through law enforcement and his victims' families. To prosecutors and death penalty supporters, Allen has had the benefit of 23 years of appeals in the courts and, regardless of his age and medical condition, must now pay the price for his crimes. Yes indeed! ``I have no sympathy for him,'' said Tricia Pendergrass, whose brother, Bryon Schletewitz, was one of Allen's murder victims. ``He was allowed to grow old. He chose his life.'' Amen sister!

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#42)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 10:09:40 AM EST
    BB: Once again the left (bleeding hearts)... You start your pretty long comment with namecalling. You disrespect yourself by doing so, and it decreases the force of your arguement. I disagree with you on the matter of capital punishment but I would have more respect for your perspective if you would argue more respectfully. One more point. You say: Where is all your compassion for the victims of this scum? You seem to believe that one can feel compassion for only one person at a time. I'd suggest to you that compassion is not so limited a resource.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 10:29:07 AM EST
    Oh okay, Dadler, I see where you're coming from. I suppose there isn't any compassion left over for the innocent victims of this man...? Hmm...that's scary. While Jesus preached about forgiveness, he also beleived in justice. It seems that keeping him alive is more of a punishment than giving him a quick and easy death. Fine. Have it your way.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#44)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 10:48:11 AM EST
    punisher... You start your pretty long comment with namecalling Ok...how should I refer to those "on the left"? Actually the term "bleeding heart liberal" is well established and not necessarily a negative one. I'm assuming you have no issues with the term 'wingnut'? That is one of the 'nicer' terms that refer to those leaning to the 'right' around here and is thrown around quite often with no objections from you that I ever saw?

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#45)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 11:00:47 AM EST
    BB, yes, "those on the left," as you offer, does sound more emotionally neutral and leaves you sounding less hysterical and more rational. You seem to be pointing toward an interesting point, too. That is, that tone and context determine insult and invective as much as, or more than, the actual words that are used. So if you want to have an important discussion about an emotionally laden subject, like an execution, for example, it helps to decrease the volume a bit. That is, if you want to have a useful discussion. If you want to rant, then you should turn up the volume, toss out names, whatever. Also, regarding your suggestion that it is only liberals who are against the death penalty, many conservative catholics, here and abroad, are strongly against it. Regarding your point that I haven't spoken out against the term wingnut. I assume that the people to whom that word is directed are grown ups and able to defend themselves adequately.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#46)
    by Dadler on Fri Jan 06, 2006 at 11:09:57 AM EST
    Penn_StateR, I don't think you'll get much of an argument about Jesus believing in justice. But what definition of "justice" we're talking about is an entirely different matter. Let you who is without sin cast the first stone. My moral opposition aside, far too many innocent people have been released from death row for me to trust the system on a purely operational level. Can't imagine how many innocent people we've REALLY executed. Logic tells me it'sa much higher number than we could stomach. FYI, when I was fifteen, I came into the kitchen one morning to to go to school and my mom was crying her eyes out. The night before, it turned out, one of the foster kids we'd sponsored from abroad had been stabbed to death in his apartment. I hadn't been terribly close to him, but he'd lived with us for awhile before moving out. It was the first funeral I went to where I completely lost it. The kid was nineteen. His murder was never solved, or I should say the guy who did it was never charged. We didn't even get the satisfacton of knowing the killer was at least in prison. So I do have plenty of compassion for the victims, and I have plenty of experience with that rage, too. And I am against the death penalty. It's a large world. Peace, my fellow free American.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#47)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jan 07, 2006 at 12:29:35 PM EST
    Oookay. Perhaps, I have a different interpretation of scripture. That's irrelevant, because that wasn't my entire argument anyway. Please, I know better than using the old "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth argument". I would be against the death penalty if the penal institutions did what they're meant to do. This would mean that they would actually punish their prisoners instead of giving them privileges. What has being a good, law abiding citizen, who will eventually give something back to society by going to college gotten me? Let's see, tons and tons of debt. Maybe I should commit a crime and go to jail. Then, I'll finally have cable, free health care, and eat something better than ramen noodles every night. Hell, some of them have more money in their prison account than I do in my checking and all of which is partially funded by me. If that's your idea just punishment...then, there's something seriously wrong with you. Don't get me wrong, I'm obviously not saying everyone who commits a crime should be executed. And, yes, I do support rehabilitation programs, but ONLY if that person can be released back into society to make a positive contribution. Otherwise, they should be properly punished. Yes, I do realize that innocent people have been executed, but so have the guilty. I agree there is no excuse what-so-ever for an innocent person to be executed. Since you haven't given me any stats on that, I think it's safe for me to point out that it doesn't happen very often. By utilizing the technology that we have today, we have probably decreased the frequency of wrongful convictions to less than 1% of the prisoners on death row. What about the other 99%? While on death row, prisoners have years to appeal their conviction. And while all maintain they're innocent, few appeals are granted. The reason for that, they're where they belong.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#48)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 09, 2006 at 04:54:19 PM EST
    Wowww. Well, thank you for your unsolicited hostility. Hmm…I suppose the only thing you knew how to do was copy paste my comment, because it appears you only skimmed it. I see you have such impeccable reading comprehension. My intent was not to try to make you feel sorry for me. I know I’m not the only one who works hard. I was simply trying to site the fact that you care more about those who don’t take responsibility for their actions….and screw everyone else. That’s the problem with our society. Who cares about those whose rights were infringed upon? Apparently, that list would consist of just me, myself, and I. All I was saying is that it’s a shame that you don’t fight so hard for the rights of others [those not incarcerated]. I guess I should to go to jail for a crime I committed and insist I’m innocent. Then, you'd advocate for me in a heartbeat. I hope you never take off those rose-colored sunglasses, because you may be shocked. Just for the record, your patronizing was also not appreciated. Don’t talk to me like I’m stupid. Just because I’m only 20-years-old, doesn’t mean you shouldn’t show a little bit of decency and respect. I know I’m young, but that doesn’t mean I’m stupid. So, I suggest you save that talk for when warranted. Your ad hominem attacks only tell me that you're just starved for attention. Oh well, I’m sure that when I get out of college; I’ll get a better job than you’ll ever have. You're right about one thing, you're interpretation of scripture is irrelevant. Umm..I’m pretty sure I said scripture wasn’t my argument, but I guess you missed that when you hastily skimmed my post. I am interpretation of scripture?? Huh? I’m thinkin’ that’s a grammatical rule a fifth grader knows. Let's watch who we call “dumb”, eh? By the way, I wouldn't necessarily call myself a conservative per say. I'm an independent thinker.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#49)
    by Dadler on Mon Jan 09, 2006 at 05:22:56 PM EST
    Penn_StateR, Charlie is Charlie, but I think for unsolicited hostility you started out posting here on that note: Oh yeah, I forgot, the lives of guilty, prisoners mean more to you than the lives of innocent, unborn fetuses. You’re such hypocrites. I've learned, if nothing else, that debating the oppostion accomplishes a lot more if we acknowledge that many of our pardigms and preconceived notions of each other are largely useless. So, take Charlie for what he's worth, but don't forget to look in the mirror when you can. Peace.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#50)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 09, 2006 at 09:40:22 PM EST
    Again, you misunderstood what I said in my first post. I wasn’t being hostile at all…I was just using my first amendment right by voicing my opinion, pardon me. Why even have a site like this if you’re going not be open to other people opinions [i.e. twist my words or put words in my mouth]? What’s the point? Then, everyone will have the same opinion…gets a bit stale after awhile. I’m sorry, but I’m no uneducated, gun-toting-backwoods-hick-girl, or whatever the current stereotype about people with conservative ideals is, I’m a scholar. Hopefully, I kept this short and concise enough so that it won’t lose its meaning if skimmed. If not, any attempts of future posts would be futile. Besides, I have much better things to do.

    Re: California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and W (none / 0) (#51)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 10, 2006 at 12:44:24 PM EST
    Penn_StateR Calling us all a bunch of murderer-loving, unborn baby-hating hypocrites is certainly a tad hostile, no? And that's what you said, no twisting here. Claiming free speech as a defense, when no one censored you but only disagreed, is just a tad on the weak side rhetorically. To put it nicely. And come on, stop being defensive. We had a dialogue, we debated and didn't agree, I didn't call you names, or call you conservative, hick, any of it. Or are you just considering us all a big lumped together "liberal" mass? You made no comment on how many innocenct have been released (do an easy google search), what that logically indicates about how many innocents were possibly executed; you didn't seem at all stopped by the fact that I've BEEN in the victim's extended family in a murder, I've felt that rage and I'm STILL anti-DP. You made broad brush claims like Yes, I do realize that innocent people have been executed, but so have the guilty. I agree there is no excuse what-so-ever for an innocent person to be executed. If you really believe there is NO excuse whatsoever, then you cannot support the DP at all, since logic tells you a dead person's chances of gaining his freedom are nil. Take a look at the Frances Newton case. She's dead now. And read through TL/Jeralyn's death penalty posts, links, there's a wealth of info to easily be found. Peace.

    California's Next Executionee: 76, Blind and Wheelchair-Ridden | 50 comments (50 topical)