California Governor Denies Clemency

Hi Tom,

I guess one can argue for the death penalty on any grounds one wishes. Your question is a fair one. If you were on death row, would you rather die or live?

I think the death penalty is the coward's way out--he/she really doesn't pay for his/her crimes. It's funny how we call people who either attempt or commit suicide cowards, yet let criminals off the hook by ending their life when they should stay behind bars, deprived of liberty and the pursuit of happiness the rest of their natural born days.

By the way, I didn't know you are "pretty liberal."

You're a good guy though; you're honest, sincere, and thoughtful.

 

I think I know what you're saying here but there is another side to it. We might be able to access this side of the issue by looking at the case of Timothy McVeigh. He passively allowed himself to be executed. This was a sort of civil suicide. He was executed for his crimes but he might have gained that "life imprisonment" goal had he allowed his attorney to proceed through the entire appeals process. Does this make him a coward? Does it make him a martyr? Does this make him repentent? Does this make him stupid? I really don't know.
Jack

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: California Governor Denies Clemency

The destruction of a human being with forethought is certainly murder.

Are soldiers killing others also committing murder? I'd compare it to the civilian world, where some killing (self-defense, justifiable homicide, etc.) is allowed and not considered murder. If our nation is not threatened, then killing others is not justified. In WWII, our nation was threatened, even before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. If we went to war prior to Pearl Harbor, I would contend that it still didn't rise to the level of murder, for we would be defending ourselves. But what's going on in Iraq is definitely murder, and the blood is on the hands of George Bush. I don't blame the individual soldier, for he/she is following the lawful orders of the officers appointed over him/her. But our state is murdering members of their (the Iraqi) state.

Pacifism to the point of self-defense? Yes. Certainly. Killing to prevent being killed? Of course. Where was the threat to the U.S. from Iraq? Where is the threat to the population from an incarcertated-for-life inmate? Almost nonexistent in both cases, neither of which justifies the state-sanctioned killing.

 

US SUPREME COURT DENIES WILLIAMS' APPEAL

Just heard that the US Supreme Court turned down Williams' appeal. Now there is absolutely no hope he will live.

 

Government is governing. Politics is running for office. They used to be a lot more separate. Look at Nixon. He did some very "leftie" things, despite being a Republican, because they were good for the country. Wage and price freezes (not very effective, but an effort), shutting down Vietnam, going to China, etc. That's ruling. (I'm no fan of Nixon, but he's a good example of someone who ruled instead of ran all the time.)

The death penalty, like abortion and other divisive issues, aren't about politics. They're about governing. But because the two aren't separate anymore, politicians are force to serve their "bases," instead of doing what's right for the country.

 

Re: US SUPREME COURT DENIES WILLIAMS' APPEAL

Fine. He should die, given the current situation, the laws on the books, and the relative merits (or lack thereof) of his case. I would find it hypocritical to save Williams while others die. But I feel none should.

 

Okay, I can accept this. Yes, Nixon was actually more of a liberal president than Clinton.

 

Re: Re: US SUPREME COURT DENIES WILLIAMS' APPEAL

Well, all I can do is quote a slogan from an organization I used to belong to in the '70's, The Fellowship of Reconciliation:

"Why do we kill people to show people that killing people is wrong?"

I still have the button this is on after all these years!

 

Re: Re: Re: US SUPREME COURT DENIES WILLIAMS' APPEAL

And offer my final words on this thread:

Hope O. J. and Robert Blake have a peaceful night's rest!

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: US SUPREME COURT DENIES WILLIAMS' APPEAL

And I hope they don't get a good nights rest for the remainder of their days.
Jack

 

Stanley "Tookie" Williams was pronounced dead a few minutes ago (at this writing), at 12:36 AM PST on Tuesday, 12/13/2005.

The whole of San Quentin was locked-down all day today, as is the practice any time there's an execution.

Williams's attorney reported that as Williams was lead to the final holding cell before he was taken to the death chamber, he was "at peace" with his situation. Williams was lead into the death chamber just after midnight. He was calm, cooperative and put up no resistance whatsoever.

The death chamber at San Quentin is the former gas chamber; therefore it looks more like a large tank or compartment on a submarine with a large door on it which has a wheel crank that had been used to seal the chamber when it was a gas chamber. The death chamber is painted green. The chair in which the condemned sits looks like a converted dentist's chair. The witnesses are in a tan-colored, dimly-lit room, looking through large windows of the chamber walls. Those in the front row are only inches away.

After taking a few minutes to strap Williams into the chair, the IV was inserted into his right arm quickly and easily; but inserting the IV into the left arm took several tries -- and 13 long minutes -- to complete properly. During this time, Williams exhibited unambiguous frustration, some small amount of pain/discomfort, and raised his head many times to look around the room at those working on his left arm IV... at one point saying, loudly, to them, "You haven't found it yet?"

Williams did a lot of talking which none of the witnesses could hear distinctly through the heavy glass separating the witness area from the death chamber. Several times during those 13 minutes, Williams raised his head and shook it in disbelief, almost rolling his eyes at the ceiling in disgust. He looked, fairly unemotionally, mostly at his supporters, who mouthed "We love you" or "God bless you" to him. At one point Williams looked directly at the reporters and other witnesses and maintained a stern -- but not threatening -- stare for about five or six seconds, then looked back at his supporters, never to look back at other witnesses again.

The death warrant was read beginning at 12:21 AM PST; at 12:22 AM PST the person reading it declared that the execution should commence, whereupon the first of the three chemicals were injected into Williams's body through the IVs. Injection of the three chemicals took around five minutes (which took it to approximately 12:27 AM PST); and the remaining nine or so minutes is how long it took for Williams to actually die. He did so staring at the ceiling, with labored and rapid breaths at first, fading slowly to shallow breaths and then no chest movement.

A prison guard standing near his right shoulder kept his hand, in a comforting manner, on Williams's upper right arm, on his bicept; and uttered something that seemed to witnesses like a blessing or a "go in peace" sort of comment as he left the chamber after Williams was declared dead at 12:36 PM PST.

As they exited the witness area, three of Williams supporters broke what had been a prison-requested (and, up to that moment, an observed-by-everyone) silence in the viewing area by raising their black-gloved fists and yelling, in unison, and only once, "The State of California has just killed an innocent man!" Up to that moment, the step-mother of one of Williams's victims had never alterned her stare at Williams, and had never uttered a word, exhibited an emotion, or som much as moved from the moment he entered the death chamber until she stood up to leave the room after he was declared dead. Upon hearing the cry of Williams's three supporters, she became weak-kneed and required support of a family member, and then began to weep.

More than 2,000 people (by witness estimates) gathered outside the prison, some protesting the execution, some in favor thereof, and some merely in silent meditation. Upon learning of Williams's death, the crowd began to disperse without incident. News crews were, of course, everywhere.

MS-NBC's Rita Cosby (formerly of the FOX NEWS CHANNEL) told reporters immediately afterward that Tookie Williams "died as he lived, defiant and belligerant to the end." She added, in an attempt to portray Williams as cowardly at the end, that she thought she read his lips to be saying "no, no, no" just as the chemicals started flowing into his veins. No other witnesses corroborated any of that, except that the FOX NEWS CHANNEL reporter supported her characterization of Williams as being intentionally intimidating and trying to control the room. No other reporters agreed with that characterization, either.

How curious is the take... er... rather... the twist of the facts by those upon whom we rely for objectivity, but who clearly have a position which colors it.

This is a tragedy.

 

You do? Foolish fellow.

Long about 1955 a teacher gave us the story. If you see a byline then you are getting some opinion (slant, spin) of the authors. If you don't see a byline then you are getting the same from people unnamed.

She was much a proponent of the NYT but quite the realist.

 

Thank God they put that murdering bastard to death. May he enjoy his new life in hell.

 

May all his victims Rest in Peace and their families find some comfort in the notion that justice has been served.

 

Actually....

Didn't Manson get death only to have it commuted when the Supreme Court invalidated capital punishment as it was then? I guess I could have looked it up....

 

So it was not applied to him. You are correct and so am I.

Take care.

 

Re: Actually....

Yes, and because California didn't have life-without-parole back then, he gets a parole hearing every 3 years, IIRC. Same with the other "family" members convicted with him.

 

None of the traditional arguments in favor of the death penalty hold any truth to them except the one expressed above: revenge. That's what the death penalty is really all about.

I don't agree with it, and I wouldn't want to be such a person, but I accept it as honest. Any other argument is either hypocritical or unfactual.

 

Re: Re: Actually....

Any bets on whether or not Charlie and Family ever get parole?

My guess, Charlie never will but one of the family might when they are old and gray....

 

I thought some of the women under manson's control where already out?

Oh well,

I have lived through the death penalty on a personal level twice now. The first one was my Boy Scout Leader who hired a man from Soldier of Fortune magazine to kill his wife, and the murder of my friend and his pregnant girl friend.

My scout leader show remorse in the end, admitted what he did was wrong, and might not really have deserved the death penalty. The young man that killed my friend, was a different story. He was defiant to the end, had no problems, with should a pregnant women in the stomach six times, said he would do it all over again. At the time I felt it was justifed for him to be laid to rest.

I don't think the death penalty is perfect in all cases. I think Texas has killed at least two people who could be considered retarted, and I;m not happy with the fact that they killed some women. But that bastard that Killed Charlie, and his Girlfriend and their baby.... well, he deserved it.

In my opinion its hard to judge the death penalty looking at it from the outside without any direct ties to the case. But looking at it from inside, I can see why the families of the victims feel vindicated by the process.