"We can get some special things for the inmate but the taxpayers don't really give us permission to donate to charity," [Riverbend Maximum Security Institution spokeswoman Dorinda] Carter said.

  Several very important things are revealed therein. First, no interpretation of the facts makes Workman guilty of anything less than felony-murder. He admits to committing the felony of armed robbery and a person died as a proximate cause of his committing the felony.

  However, it appears near certain that the jury convicted him of the premeditated murder of the police officer based on evidence that has been called into question and that the jury would not have recommended death had it not believed the it was an intentional premeditated killing (based on what several of the jurors have stated).

  I won't make this man out to be anything but a guilty criminal whose actions led to the death of another human being but executing him under these circumstances is another example of why I oppose capital punishment. the system is too imperfect and the applications are far too inconsistent.

I have as much problems with Edger's tact as anyone, but lets be fair. Jim, you have made it known what you believe the common Aztec prefered  being ruled by the Spanish Conquistadors over the Aztec Hierarchy. These Aztecs have been dead for centuries.

What the hell, I don't care. If Jim cares to speculate about this and gives his reasoning for this speculation and finally says, I reserve the right to believe what I believe, I'll leave him to his little fantasy.

Same goes for Edger. He doesn't believe in the death penalty. As Jim does, he makes a speculation on what the thoughts of a dead policeman would be, based on the assumption that the policeman was compassionate and not a believer in the death penalty, also (or at least believed in rehabilitation over punishments). Maybe he has some evidence for this as well (such as his daughter?).

Neither has any real connections to dead Policeman's or dead Aztec's thoughts, however. Both of them do have strong opinions and a dislike of those who have viewpoints that differ from their own. Ah well, Edger's views often coincide with my own (I also am against capital punishment) and Jim grows Vegetables (I can't hold a grudge against someone who grows anything).

Edgers remarks were no more speculative than yours.

Either way, Im not going to lose any sleep over it.

  An off the cuff remark that the person dead because of the unquestioned guilt of the defendant (he admits all the elements of felony-murder) probably would have preferred it if Workman did not commit the crime  seems reasonable.

i'm always intrigued by jim's complete lack of a grasp of anything resembling facts; it must be nice to have a mind so uncluttered. clearly, based on just your comments here, regarding the aztecs, you don't know your butt from a hole in the ground.

tell you what jim, go actually study history first, before you make, once again, a total buffoon of yourself in public.

Workman was convicted of the 1981 shooting of Lt. Oliver during a robbery of a Wendy's restaurant.

While Workman has never denied the robbery, evidence brought to light after his initial conviction strongly indicates he did not fire the shot which killed Lt. Oliver.

According to an opinion by Tennessee Supreme Court Justice Drowota, if Workman did not fire the shot which killed Lt. Oliver, than he was not guilty of capital murder."

• Only one witness, Harold Davis, claimed to have actually seen Workman shoot Lt. Oliver.
• But since the initial trial, Davis, who had a history of calling in false tips to police in the hopes of a reward, has confessed that he perjured himself and actually was not present at the crime scene.
• He has passed a polygraph examination verifying this testimony.
• Worse yet, the only expert forensics testimony on the record, that of Dr. Cecil Wecht, concludes that "to a degree of medical certainty" the bullet that killed Ronald Oliver could not have come from Workman's gun, a .45 caliber pistol.

Recantation 1: I was there and I saw that the defendant DID NOT shoot the cop; or

Recantation 2: I wasn't there and i didn't see anything.

 If the recantation is believed:

 #1  is directly exculpatory evidence.