♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jan 5, 2010 3:49:50 GMT
There are cases, in my opinion, where the DP for child rapists and rapists, who maimed and mutilated their victim for life, is justified! Mary Vincent after the attack! www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/1997/Feb-21-Fri-1997/photos/vincent.htmlMary Vincent is my poster child in support of the DP for the most horrific mutilating rapes of children!! www.salon.com/march97/news/news970305.html QUOTE: Lawrence Singleton picked up Mary Vincent in his blue van on Sept. 29, 1978, as the teenager was hitchhiking from Berkeley to Los Angeles. She'd come from home in Las Vegas to visit an uncle and was setting out on her own to see California. Singleton told her he had a daughter, Debra, just her age and offered to drive her to Interstate 5, the fastest route south. Instead, he kept driving east, toward Modesto. When Vincent realized something was wrong, she would later testify, she became "scared and mad" and found a pointed surveyor's stick beside the passenger seat. She picked it up and demanded he drive her back to the freeway. "I'm sorry," Singleton said. "I'm just an honest man who made an honest mistake." He turned his van around. Soon he said he had to relieve himself and could not wait to find a gas station. Stopping in desolate Del Puerto Canyon, he got out of the van. Vincent got out, too. As she bent over to tie her tennis shoe, Singleton hit her. He tied her hands, tore open her white blouse and pulled her hair, forcing her mouth onto his penis. "You better suck hard, you b*tch," Vincent remembers he said. He raped her there, then threw her back into the van and drove deeper into the canyon. It was almost dark when he pulled over again and repeatedly raped and sodomized her. "It hurt a lot," she said. She begged him over and over again to set her free. He made her drink alcohol from a plastic jug and she passed out. When she came to, he was cutting the ropes off of her hands and she thought he was letting her go. Then, she looked up and saw an ax coming down as he held out her left arm. "You want to be free?" he said. "You'll be free." He chopped off her left arm below the elbow in three strokes of the ax. Vincent was screaming, fighting to pull away, blood was spurting everywhere. He held her down, grabbed her right arm and chopped it off in two strokes. Then he threw the girl over a railing into a culvert, saying, "OK, now you're free." Mary Vincent walked out of Del Puerto Canyon alive. Two vacationers found her wandering nude, in shock, holding up her arms "so the muscles and blood wouldn't fall out," she said. They wrapped her in towels and drove to an airport to call an ambulance. The first thing Vincent said was, "He raped me." From her hospital bed Vincent was able to describe her attacker so well that a police sketch artist produced a drawing of a man that JoAnne Eversole, a San Pablo, Calif., housewife and bowling aficionado, instantly recognized as her longtime friend and neighbor, Larry Singleton. Vincent also picked his picture out of six others before the grand jury. When he was arrested, Singleton insisted that Vincent was a prostitute, a "$10-a-night whore" he called her. There were two other hitchhikers in the van that night, including another "Larry." If anything happened to Vincent in his van -- and the blood and other physical evidence presented at his 1979 trial was overwhelming -- then the crimes had been committed by "the other Larry" while Singleton was passed out drunk. He insisted that he'd been framed.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2010 8:41:22 GMT
I don't support the death penalty.
But having got that out of the way, do you think that leaving the victim alive was as wrong, as cruel, as murder? After the rape Vincent protected her severed arm until she was found ; she wanted life despite everything.
And there lies the problem, Anna. If the penalty is the same for an assault like this and murder, wouldn't it be easier for the rapist to just kill his victim? Unless he has DNA on record, has a much better chance of escaping undetetected now the main witness is in no position to testify.
As the old saying goes, you might as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jan 5, 2010 15:06:54 GMT
I don't support the death penalty. But having got that out of the way, do you think that leaving the victim alive was as wrong, as cruel, as murder? After the rape Vincent protected her severed arm until she was found ; she wanted life despite everything. And there lies the problem, Anna. If the penalty is the same for an assault like this and murder, wouldn't it be easier for the rapist to just kill his victim? Unless he has DNA on record, has a much better chance of escaping undetetected now the main witness is in no position to testify. As the old saying goes, you might as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb. The monster, who tortured and mutilated Mary Vincent expected her to bleed to death in the desert! She survived against all odds! The predator was later released from prison in California and moved to Florida where he raped a mother of 3 children and that time made sure his victim was really dead afterwards! I hold the anti-DP movement morally responsible for that murder and for all the other murders committed by murderers, who laugh at the threat of early retirement in hotel slam blam. Free meals and no work!!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2010 17:32:37 GMT
Anna, there is no need to shout!
You can certainly argue that Mary Vincent's rapist should have been kept locked up until he was no danger. From what you say, that was a case of attempted murder. But the fact that the guy made sure his victim was "really dead" next time perhaps proves my point; many murders are committed to silence a witness, so what would a killer lose if he faces death anyway?
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jan 5, 2010 18:30:22 GMT
Skylark, even though Anna feels passionately on this issue and is a supporter of the death penalty, I think if she came across as just a little excitable that was not down to your post but to the antics of a currently suspended member that have been fraying the nerves of ALL the staff on this board for some time now. On the specific point in question, I support the death penalty for murder but not for any other crimes. Unless the victim is dead I honestly can't justify executing anyone. I'd certainly say that blokes like him are loose cannons and that the danger with serial rapists or paedophiles is that (apart from the damage they do to their victims) they often go on to get bolder and to murder them in future. I agree with you that if the death penalty existed for the type of vicious crime that Mary Vincent had to endure the odds are that her assailant would have made absolutely certain she was dead. There's an old-fashioned saying in English about 'might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb' and I think it's absolutely right that capital punishment should only be reserved for murder. I know my dear friend Anna and I disagree on this issue but then considering my own hubby is an anti I can't be very good at arguing in favour of the death penalty, can I?
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jan 5, 2010 18:32:25 GMT
Actually there was a time in British history when rape WAS a capital crime. As late as 1839 a man called George Cant was wrongly convicte of rape and sentenced to death. Because in those days it wasn't possible to overturn a conviction, he was 'lucky' enough to have his sentence commuted to transportation to Australia.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jan 5, 2010 23:36:21 GMT
Skylark, even though Anna feels passionately on this issue and is a supporter of the death penalty, I think if she came across as just a little excitable that was not down to your post but to the antics of a currently suspended member that have been fraying the nerves of ALL the staff on this board for some time now. On the specific point in question, I support the death penalty for murder but not for any other crimes. Unless the victim is dead I honestly can't justify executing anyone. I'd certainly say that blokes like him are loose cannons and that the danger with serial rapists or paedophiles is that (apart from the damage they do to their victims) they often go on to get bolder and to murder them in future. I agree with you that if the death penalty existed for the type of vicious crime that Mary Vincent had to endure the odds are that her assailant would have made absolutely certain she was dead. There's an old-fashioned saying in English about 'might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb' and I think it's absolutely right that capital punishment should only be reserved for murder. I know my dear friend Anna and I disagree on this issue but then considering my own hubby is an anti I can't be very good at arguing in favour of the death penalty, can I? Dearest Lin! You're quite right about my nerves being on edge, due to that unpentant person! There we agree! I respectfully disagree with you on the deterrent potential of the DP. I think you'd agree with me that if the deterrent for murder or a case like Mary Vincent's martyrdom was reduced to a $50- fine ( a ridiculous deterrent ) those capable of sadistic murder, etc. would more likely strike! The stronger the deterrent the more likely we can spare a future Mary Vincent such a horrible, life shattering experience!
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jan 5, 2010 23:53:04 GMT
Anna, there is no need to shout! You can certainly argue that Mary Vincent's rapist should have been kept locked up until he was no danger. From what you say, that was a case of attempted murder. But the fact that the guy made sure his victim was "really dead" next time perhaps proves my point; many murders are committed to silence a witness, so what would a killer lose if he faces death anyway? sarkett.com/list.htmSorry about shouting! Lin's right about my nerves being on edge.
I'm absolutely convinced that the predator expected Mary Vincent to bleed to death. If a foot is hacked off you will quickly bleed to death. Miss Vincent would have bled to death too, if she didn't somehow find the strength to get back to the street and find help in time.
The Mary Vincent case in my eyes really shouldn't be about the perpetrator, who mutilated her for life, but rather sending an understandable message to any potential predators at large capable of such an evil, horrific crime!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2010 6:31:47 GMT
Anna, I wasn't entirely serious about the shouting; large typeface is sometimes regarded as aggressive, as is the use of capitals. But in truth at my age it helps no end!
There is, so far as I know, no evidence that capital punishment acts as a deterrent to murder. Various studies have been done comparing murder rates of countries before and after the removal/introduction of the penalty; the same has been done with US states.
I haven't looked at the research for many years, but unless things have changed recently, the statistics don't back the idea that the fear of hanging concentrates the mind, at least at the time the crime is committed. Indeed, criminologists were saying that the risk of being caught or detected is the main deterrent.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jan 6, 2010 12:24:10 GMT
Anna, I wasn't entirely serious about the shouting; large typeface is sometimes regarded as aggressive, as is the use of capitals. But in truth at my age it helps no end! There is, so far as I know, no evidence that capital punishment acts as a deterrent to murder. Various studies have been done comparing murder rates of countries before and after the removal/introduction of the penalty; the same has been done with US states. I haven't looked at the research for many years, but unless things have changed recently, the statistics don't back the idea that the fear of hanging concentrates the mind, at least at the time the crime is committed. Indeed, criminologists were saying that the risk of being caught or detected is the main deterrent. Yes, that's my understanding of the evidence too. The DP is not a deterrent. One of the reasons I oppose it (in the UK anyway) is because a huge minority of the population are morally opposed to it. When you have a jury of 15 people (or 12 as they have in lesser jurisdictions) there is every chance that a majority of that panel will be morally opposed to the death penalty in any circumstances. Therefore, in capital murder cases, there is every chance that the jury will return a 'not guilty' or 'not proven' verdict regardless of the evidence, because of their strong moral opposition to the dp. Thus guilty men (and women) walk free.
|
|
|
Post by motorist on Jan 6, 2010 13:27:48 GMT
Therefore, in capital murder cases, there is every chance that the jury will return a 'not guilty' or 'not proven' verdict regardless of the evidence, because of their strong moral opposition to the dp. Thus guilty men (and women) walk free. Given that these jurors show willing to pervert the cause of justice for their own convictions, and risk other innocent victims, I would suggest that this would make them unsuitable for Jury duty, where the ONLY task that the jurors should be focussing on is whether or not the defendant is guilty
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2010 14:34:27 GMT
Years ago, when I studied criminology, I remember reading that convictions are harder to secure in death penalty cases. The reason suggested was that jurors are more likely to find "reasonable doubt" if they think that a giulty verdict will result in execution; they don't want to live with their conscience. Unfortunately Mr Google didn't find me anything to back this up, but - here's - a site you may find interesting. Yes, it is a pressure group, but the evidence they cite does tie in with what I know of the subject.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jan 6, 2010 14:39:36 GMT
Therefore, in capital murder cases, there is every chance that the jury will return a 'not guilty' or 'not proven' verdict regardless of the evidence, because of their strong moral opposition to the dp. Thus guilty men (and women) walk free. Given that these jurors show willing to pervert the cause of justice for their own convictions, and risk other innocent victims, I would suggest that this would make them unsuitable for Jury duty, where the ONLY task that the jurors should be focussing on is whether or not the defendant is guilty In the UK we don't pre-vet jurors. It is a random selection procedure. So whether or not people are 'suitable' for jury duty or not is pretty much irrelevant.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jan 6, 2010 18:07:38 GMT
Anna, I wasn't entirely serious about the shouting; large typeface is sometimes regarded as aggressive, as is the use of capitals. But in truth at my age it helps no end! There is, so far as I know, no evidence that capital punishment acts as a deterrent to murder. Various studies have been done comparing murder rates of countries before and after the removal/introduction of the penalty; the same has been done with US states. I haven't looked at the research for many years, but unless things have changed recently, the statistics don't back the idea that the fear of hanging concentrates the mind, at least at the time the crime is committed. Indeed, criminologists were saying that the risk of being caught or detected is the main deterrent. Dearest SkyLark! I'll put up an extra thread later to debate the deterrent effect of the DP. I think you have to agree that the DP is a greater deterrent than say a $50- fine. The anti DP people don't seem to deny that. What they attempt to say is that the DP is not a greater deterrent than a life sentence in prison with no parole.
True! People like you and me would never commit a capital murder, even if we were offered a reward. Deterrents are for us forum members not relevant, but they are neccesary for those with no higher principles.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2010 18:15:09 GMT
Anna, have a read of that link I posted: they aren't saying that at all.
They are producing evidence that countries with the death penalty tend to have higher homicide rates than those results, and suggest reasons. They repeat what I say earlier; that criminals are focused more on avoiding getting caught than on what might happen when they are.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jan 6, 2010 18:28:41 GMT
Anna, have a read of that link I posted: they aren't saying that at all. They are producing evidence that countries with the death penalty tend to have higher homicide rates than those results, and suggest reasons. They repeat what I say earlier; that criminals are focused more on avoiding getting caught than on what might happen when they are. Dearest SkyLark! First off deterrence is not prevention. Secondly all of these so-called studies, claiming the DP does not deter murder make the same identical and dishonest mistake of siting homicide cases that are not DP eligible by any means to support their claim. The DP only applies to the worst of the heinous capital murders. Only 1 out of a roughly 100 homicide cases in the US is DP eligible. It is therefore illogical to expect the non-DP eligible 99% of homicide cases to support the claim that the DP doesn't deter murder.
I put up a thread where we can debate the broader aspects of justifying or questioning the validity and usefulness of the DP.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jan 6, 2010 18:51:40 GMT
Anna, have a read of that link I posted: they aren't saying that at all. They are producing evidence that countries with the death penalty tend to have higher homicide rates than those results, and suggest reasons. They repeat what I say earlier; that criminals are focused more on avoiding getting caught than on what might happen when they are. Dearest SkyLark! First off deterrence is not prevention. Secondly all of these so-called studies, claiming the DP does not deter murder make the same identical and dishonest mistake of siting homicide cases that are not DP eligible by any means to support their claim. The DP only applies to the worst of the heinous capital murders. Only 1 out of a roughly 100 homicide cases in the US is DP eligible. It is therefore illogical to expect the non-DP eligible 99% of homicide cases to support the claim that the DP doesn't deter murder.
I put up a thread where we can debate the broader aspects of justifying or questioning the validity and usefulness of the DP.That doesn't make sense to me. The DP surely applies to whatever crimes the government of the day in the jurisdiction decides it does. For instance, in China the DP applies to drug smuggling. The existence of the DP seems to me to be a core moral/ethical issue. But once it does exist, inevitably the criminals who are eligible for it will change over time. Goodness, in Scotland a coupla hundred years ago we put a young man to death via the DP for daring to doubt that the bible was the literal word of God.
|
|
|
Post by motorist on Jan 6, 2010 19:03:54 GMT
Given that these jurors show willing to pervert the cause of justice for their own convictions, and risk other innocent victims, I would suggest that this would make them unsuitable for Jury duty, where the ONLY task that the jurors should be focussing on is whether or not the defendant is guilty In the UK we don't pre-vet jurors. It is a random selection procedure. So whether or not people are 'suitable' for jury duty or not is pretty much irrelevant. I am aware of that, I Was suggesting that maybe we should do. If a juror cannot perform his duty because of some personal conviction (right or otherwise), they should not be selected. In the case of DP trials, they don't happen often enough that it would be a hugely big problem
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jan 6, 2010 19:20:42 GMT
[quote author=anna board=death thread=1035 post=14391 time=1262802521 First off deterrence is not prevention...[/quote] If it isn't, what is it?
If someone is 'deterred' from committing a crime but commits it anyway, in what sense have they been deterred?
Or do you mean that some people may be deterred from committing a crime by fear of the DP, but not all?
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jan 6, 2010 21:04:17 GMT
[quote author=anna board=death thread=1035 post=14391 time=1262802521 First off deterrence is not prevention...If it isn't, what is it? If someone is 'deterred' from committing a crime but commits it anyway, in what sense have they been deterred? Or do you mean that some people may be deterred from committing a crime by fear of the DP, but not all?[/quote] Hi Jean, An example of deterrence would be doubling the price of admission to a movie. This wouldn't prevent people from buying a ticket, but certainly would reduce the number of ticket buyers!www.thefreedictionary.com/deterrence QUOTE: 1. deterrence - a negative motivational influence disincentive 2. deterrence - a communication that makes you afraid to try something determent, intimidation discouragement - the expression of opposition and disapproval 3. deterrence - the act or process of discouraging actions or preventing occurrences by instilling fear or doubt or anxiety
|
|