Should James Holmes face the Death Penalty if found guilty?

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

Strangely enough, I'm amazed at those that are against the DP, yet loudly claim that "if someone did something like (example) to my (wife/daughter), I'd kill them right there" - or even support or relate to someone that did....(like it's acceptable to kill in a blind rage, but not ok to do it after weighing the evidence in a court of law)

See? Your example, which I think is supposed to make me feel like a hypocrite, is a hypothetical anecdote, strangely based on pure vengeance.

The fact that I would feel exactly the way you describe has no bearing on whether the death penalty is justified or not. I'm paraphrasing, but I think you said that the legal system should be applied in an objective and unemotional manner. I agree. Justice can and should be accomplished by the State (certainly not by the victims' family!) without the death penalty being applied.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

The fact that I would feel exactly the way you describe.

even a blind squirrel like me finds a nut once in a while


(you're not a hypocrit, just human. I just find those positions to be antithetical, I don't see how they are hypocritical, just not self consistent. We can have inconsistent views on items that aren't EXACTLY parallel and not consider it hypocritical, just an observation. Hypocritical implies a character defect, I don't think this falls that far over that line. SC dialogue has people throwing out that accusation way too often, and way too unfairly.)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[GeorgiaDon 362]

Unfortunately, vengeance is often first and foremost in the minds of the surviving family of murder victims. For those people, unfortunately, the death penalty often prolongs or exacerbates their pain, as in their minds "justice" is delayed for decades until the penalty is enforced, and all the while they have to endure appeal after appeal, each one of which re-opens the wounds. I always cringe when I hear family say they won't be happy until the killer is dead, as it seems to me that the murderer has in some way succeeded in bringing people down to his (or more rarely her) level. It also creates the perception that a murderer who is sentenced to life without the possibility of parole has somehow "gotten away with it".

The ability to forgive is powerful medicine against wasting years (maybe the rest of one's life) wallowing in hatred and dreaming of vengeance. To "forgive" does not mean to "forget", and just because someone is "forgiven" doesn't mean they do not have to pay the penalty for their crime. Forgiveness is more for the victims, so that they can begin to heal and stop wasting their life nursing hatred. It seems to me that imposing execution , to be carried out at some ill-defined time years or decades in the future, can only be an obstacle to forgiving and moving past the pain and hatred.

For the State (as the embodiment of our society), if execution is to remain as a possible punishment at all, it should be applied in the same sense that it is sometimes necessary to kill a parasite or tumor. We remove these things because we need to in order to survive, and there is nothing that we can salvage from them that would make the risk of leaving them alive worth taking.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[billvon 2,991]

>There is no excuse to keep this person alive.

Nor is there any excuse to kill him. Once convicted of a crime like this, he forfeits most of his his civil rights, and should never be released back into society. At that point, the decision should be "so what's cheapest?" And right now life in prison is cheapest.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Unfortunately, vengeance is often first and foremost in the minds of the surviving family of murder victims. For those people, unfortunately, the death penalty often prolongs or exacerbates their pain, as in their minds "justice" is delayed for decades until the penalty is enforced, and all the while they have to endure appeal after appeal, each one of which re-opens the wounds.

Is that really more painful than every day the killer sentenced to life is still alive? That lasts longer. And is it vengeance if they're angry that he is alive while their loved ones are not, or does it require the rage and desire to inflict pain on him?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

And is it vengeance if they're angry that he is alive while their loved ones are not, or does it require the rage and desire to inflict pain on him?

IMHO - "vengeance" is an act, not a condition. It's pretty much taking a direct (re)action on someone in a personal manner when it, by that time, should be done by society. Whether they are feeling pain or not, have anger, rage or feel nothing at all, doesn't matter. Only that they acted when it's not their place to act

but that's just my thought - YMMV

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

Quote

Unfortunately, vengeance is often first and foremost in the minds of the surviving family of murder victims. For those people, unfortunately, the death penalty often prolongs or exacerbates their pain, as in their minds "justice" is delayed for decades until the penalty is enforced, and all the while they have to endure appeal after appeal, each one of which re-opens the wounds.

Is that really more painful than every day the killer sentenced to life is still alive? That lasts longer. And is it vengeance if they're angry that he is alive while their loved ones are not, or does it require the rage and desire to inflict pain on him?

It's a tough question indeed. The family of a murder victim is going to have a rough time dealing with the aftermath in either case.

But, what about the family of an innocent man who has been murdered by the State? When an innocent man is murdered by the State, the actual criminal is free to kill again while the State presumes that the case is closed and the original victim's family remains deceived.

[livendive 8]

Quote

He should get all the judicial process he's due.

That said...there's no real question he's the shooter and killed more than a dozen people. The death penalty is appropriate.

Devil's advocate mode: Are you aware of one single witness who can positively ID him as the shooter, given what he was wearing? And do you think there's a chance he is clinically /legally insane?

I think the death penalty should certainly be on the table, but none of us know yet whether it's appropriate.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[GeorgiaDon 362]

Quote

Quote

Unfortunately, vengeance is often first and foremost in the minds of the surviving family of murder victims. For those people, unfortunately, the death penalty often prolongs or exacerbates their pain, as in their minds "justice" is delayed for decades until the penalty is enforced, and all the while they have to endure appeal after appeal, each one of which re-opens the wounds.

Is that really more painful than every day the killer sentenced to life is still alive? That lasts longer. And is it vengeance if they're angry that he is alive while their loved ones are not, or does it require the rage and desire to inflict pain on him?

Being angry is not vengeance. Being angry under such circumstances is only human, but it is not helpful to anyone to be so angry that every day, possibly for the rest of their lives, is consumed with hatred and the desire for revenge. IMO, surrendering to a level of anger that will ensure that I would not be able to experience any iota of happiness or joy for most or all of the remainder of my life is conceding way to much power to the killer, and is not at all what my wife or children would want for me (should they happen to be murdered). It certainly isn't what I would want for my wife and kids were I to be murdered. My point was simply that a social convention that holds up execution as the only truly just punishment for murder, then drags the process out for decades (necessary for all the checks and balances to ensure guilt), makes it especially hard for people to get control of their anger. I've lived in Canada, Europe, and the US, and the US is the only place where I've seen people so consumed by the need to see the criminal dead that it takes over their whole life.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

He should get all the judicial process he's due.

That said...there's no real question he's the shooter and killed more than a dozen people. The death penalty is appropriate.

Devil's advocate mode: Are you aware of one single witness who can positively ID him as the shooter, given what he was wearing? And do you think there's a chance he is clinically /legally insane?

I think the death penalty should certainly be on the table, but none of us know yet whether it's appropriate.

Blues,
Dave

Not trying to be a smart ass here but,

So you really thing the actual "Joker" planned to frame this guy? Bought the weapons in the guy's name, booby trapped his house, committed the crime, spray painted the guy's hair orange, then switched clothes with him and stuck gun in his hands and car and got away?

Come on... This is unquestionably THE guy. In his talks so far he's essentially admitted to committing the crime.

As for what is "clinically" and legally insane, those are actually two different things.

The legal definition is more or less, "did he know pulling the trigger would kill people and killing people is wrong."

Again, come on... Yes, he absolutely knew what he was doing. He's not going to get off by reason of insanity.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

My point was simply that a social convention that holds up execution as the only truly just punishment for murder, then drags the process out for decades (necessary for all the checks and balances to ensure guilt), makes it especially hard for people to get control of their anger.

it's not society's responsibility to make the victims 'feel better'. It's society's responsibility to make sure the criminal doesn't repeat his criminal action.

the defect, then, is with the victims' inability to find their own closure, not society doing it for them - mixing that up is why this topic is littered with emotional arguments rather than rational. yes their loss is understandable, sad, difficult - but moot to the topic

as an aside, I don't agree that this society "holds up execution as the only truly just punishment" - we also have incarceration, and many other forms of punishment.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I've lived in Canada, Europe, and the US, and the US is the only place where I've seen people so consumed by the need to see the criminal dead that it takes over their whole life.

So of those other counties would release the killer to society by the time we get around to the execution. OTOH, like the cost argument, this begs the question about process improvement in the DP appeals process, not argues for life.

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

Quote

He should get all the judicial process he's due.

That said...there's no real question he's the shooter and killed more than a dozen people. The death penalty is appropriate.

Devil's advocate mode: Are you aware of one single witness who can positively ID him as the shooter, given what he was wearing? And do you think there's a chance he is clinically /legally insane?

I think the death penalty should certainly be on the table, but none of us know yet whether it's appropriate.

Blues,
Dave

Not trying to be a smart ass here but,

So you really thing the actual "Joker" planned to frame this guy? Bought the weapons in the guy's name, booby trapped his house, committed the crime, spray painted the guy's hair orange, then switched clothes with him and stuck gun in his hands and car and got away?

Come on... This is unquestionably THE guy. In his talks so far he's essentially admitted to committing the crime.

As for what is "clinically" and legally insane, those are actually two different things.

The legal definition is more or less, "did he know pulling the trigger would kill people and killing people is wrong."

Again, come on... Yes, he absolutely knew what he was doing. He's not going to get off by reason of insanity.

Of course I don't think the Joker framed this guy. I think there's a huge mountain of circumstantial evidence, so much so that his guilt is almost assured. Is it theoretically possible that there were two participants, one inside shooting and this one outside to take the blame? Sure, but it's spectacularly unlikely.

I'm also quite aware of the differing definitions of insanity, and I'm pretty sure this guy was aware that what he was doing was wrong. That said, his behavior in court today certainly looked like that of someone who will be testing the waters of an insanity defense. Assuming he's found legally competent, it still stands to reason that clinical insanity could be an appropriate consideration in death penalty decision-making.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Devil's advocate mode: Are you aware of one single witness who can positively ID him as the shooter, given what he was wearing? And do you think there's a chance he is clinically /legally insane?

The guns have serial numbers that clearly show him to be the buyer. They have him wearing the same outfit. I believe they captured him with the guns. The apartment provides more evidence.

This is one of the most open and shut cases ever, in terms of is he the shooter. The only trial issue I see will be of sanity. We clearly have a person who was capable of meticulous planning and with no regard for others' lives. Is being a psychopath a valid defence?

[quade 4]

Quote

I've lived in Canada, Europe, and the US, and the US is the only place where I've seen people so consumed by the need to see the criminal dead that it takes over their whole life.

Well, you haven't been paying much attention to the rest of the world or the history of it.

The Death Penalty is pretty common in quite a few places in the world and for much less serious crimes than MASS MURDER.

For instance, in Saudi Arabia, you can be put to death for essentially having performed a magic trick or drawing a cartoon.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I think there's a huge mountain of circumstantial evidence,

circumstantial would imply they found the guns, but not the shooter. This isn't correct.

[billvon 2,991]

>Being angry under such circumstances is only human . . .

Agreed.

> it is not helpful to anyone to be so angry that every day, possibly for the rest of
>their lives, is consumed with hatred and the desire for revenge.

Also agreed. I would hope that such people (no matter who they hate) get the sort of help they need so they can live happier lives.

>My point was simply that a social convention that holds up execution as the only truly
>just punishment for murder, then drags the process out for decades (necessary for all
>the checks and balances to ensure guilt), makes it especially hard for people to get
>control of their anger.

Yep. Many people are also angered by our just treatment of criminals (i.e. we don't torture them or maim them etc.) But again, that's a problem with the person, not a problem with the system.

[quade 4]

Quote

That said, his behavior in court today certainly looked like that of someone who will be testing the waters of an insanity defense.

I know the media (all forms) are making hay of this today, but how about this as an explanation; maybe he hasn't gotten a lot of sleep since the crime?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>There is no excuse to keep this person alive.

Nor is there any excuse to kill him. Once convicted of a crime like this, he forfeits most of his his civil rights, and should never be released back into society. At that point, the decision should be "so what's cheapest?" And right now life in prison is cheapest.

I'm against the death penalty but considering this guy would likely be murdered while in prison, he would have to be kept in solitary confinement for the rest of his life. Would that be considered cruel and inhumane punishment?

Is the cost of protecting him while in prison for perhaps 50 or more years still less expensive than the death penalty?

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

As for what is "clinically" and legally insane, those are actually two different things.

The legal definition is more or less, "did he know pulling the trigger would kill people and killing people is wrong."

FWIW, I don't think practitioners use the term clinically insane or even insane in referring to their patients. I believe the term insane is now strictly a legal term and "clinically insane" is in the dustbin of history.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[DaVinci 0]

While I have no qualms about the death penalty in open and shut cases (and this pretty much seems to be an example).

I would be MUCH more interested in using him as a lab rat and finding out what made him decide to commit this act. Unfortunately, our society will not let us really examine him. We seem to only be interested in punishment.

This is an excellent opportunity to find out why he did this and maybe learn some things to try and avoid this in the future.

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

I think there's a huge mountain of circumstantial evidence,

circumstantial would imply they found the guns, but not the shooter. This isn't correct.

If you find me near the scene of a murder, in possession of a gun that ballistics show was used to shoot the deceased person, you can reasonably infer that I was likely the shooter. It's not guaranteed, as someone else may have used my gun, but it's certainly a reasonably conclusion. That inference is what makes it circumstantial. If my fingerprints are found on shell casings, that's corroborating evidence. Same if witnesses claim the shooter was wearing a blue jacket, and I've got one in the trunk of my car. With enough evidence, the story becomes pretty clear to any reasonable person, and that's obviously true in this case.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Bolas 5]

Quote

We've put too many people to death who have subsequently been exonerated of the crime for which they were convicted. I think it unwise to support the death penalty on a case by case basis, and I can't make a general evaluation of its merits without taking into consideration those who have been wrongfully executed.

Key words here being "crime for which they were convicted." It'd be interesting to see of those that were sentenced to death, what their criminal and trial histories were...

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Key words here being "crime for which they were convicted." It'd be interesting to see of those that were sentenced to death, what their criminal and trial histories were...

The only relevant crime is the one for which they were convicted.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

>There is no excuse to keep this person alive.

Nor is there any excuse to kill him. Once convicted of a crime like this, he forfeits most of his his civil rights, and should never be released back into society. At that point, the decision should be "so what's cheapest?" And right now life in prison is cheapest.

The system is broken, it shouldn't take so long in cut and dry cases like this. He should be prosecuted next week and given 90 days for his appeals. I'll pull the trigger on him. I would have no problem living with myself afterward.