| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
|
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
Isn't he now pleading for amnesty, because his atty's says he's too old
to do time? Like the above statement modified, it's like he's saying "It won't matter if you lock me up, you still won't get your money back..." -L. wrote: wrote: In many ways I thing Gov. Geo needed it himself. He's honestly not a bad guy. He made stupid, terrible choices and it looks like he will pay for them. Greed can turn otherwise lovely people into monsters. That's what I think happened there. -L. |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
On 13 Nov 2006 16:46:26 -0800, "-L." wrote:
wrote: In many ways I thing Gov. Geo needed it himself. He's honestly not a bad guy. He made stupid, terrible choices and it looks like he will pay for them. Greed can turn otherwise lovely people into monsters. That's what I think happened there. Monsters who aren't honestly such bad people? How exactly does _that_ work out? -- L8r, Uncle Clover ************************************************ In my experience, one's degree of wisdom tends to bear an exponentially inverse relationship to one's outpouring of words. Clearly, I've a _long_ way to go... ;-) ************************************************ The true mark of a civilized society is that its citizens know how to hate each other peacefully. ************************************************ |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
Bo Raxo wrote:
wrote: Bo Raxo wrote: I don't think life is a right that can be forfeited. It is inalienable and irrevocable, in my opinion. Thats right! The Hawks lives were inalienable, and irrevocable in my opinion too Okay, ,we agree so far. So if it's wrong to take a human life (except in self defense), then it's wrong whether the life belongs to a couple of retirees or a couple of cold-blooded killers. After all, wrong is wrong. And two wrongs don't make a right. Bo Raxo I used to be for the death penalty, but as I've gotten older I've changed my mind because (in descending order): 1) I don't trust our justice system to deliver the right verdict 100% of the time. 99% of the time is not nearly good enough. (do a search sometime on "The Innocence Project") 2) Being in favor of the death penalty weakens my argument being pro-life. 3) I am a fiscal conservative, and death penalties are much more costly to execute than are LWOP. Since you are invoking a moral argument, I'm gonna quote from the Bible; the New Testament just to make sure you don't think I'm quoting ancient Jewish law that might not be relevant. In Romans chapter 13:4, Paul says, "For he [the ruler] is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment to the wrongdoer." The sword here is a reference to the death penalty, and God grants authority to the government to take the life of a criminal as punishment. (my personal issue is whether the government can always determine correctly who is the criminal.) Machain and Deleon forfeited their own rights to life when they murdered the Hawks. Whether they are punished by death or by LWOP is an important technicality, but that's all it is -- a technicality. The state has no obligation to offer them a chance at redemption. This case is also a good cautionary tale about why the Captain and Mate on a sea vessel should always carry a sidearm. Best regards, Bob |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
"CaptainPike" wrote in message oups.com... Bo, In my opinion, pal, you are one sick *******. It is the same logic you use right here in your argument that probably drove these useless pieces of human garbage to do what they did to those two wonderful people. What makes you feel this way? Is it because you can relate to what Skylar, his despicable whore of a wife, and their cohorts were thinking when they committed such an ugly atrocity to fellow human beings? You are a pathetic loser. Liberalism is a mental disorder, indeed. And you are incredibly logical jumping from Bo not believing that capital punishment is effective, moral or economical to him being a pathetic loser who relates to the perp. In any case, while I understand peoples emotional response to heinous crimes - this guys clearly a bad man. And i'm not sure he has any purpose on this earth at all. However, killing him is going to be a) damned expensive and b) not any kind of deterrent for other violent criminals. I suppose it does eliminate the immediate threat of this guy. It certainly stops his suffering. I'd rather seem him rot in jail. And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers. |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 20:00:41 -0600, zxcvbob wrote:
snip Since you are invoking a moral argument, I'm gonna quote from the Bible; the New Testament just to make sure you don't think I'm quoting ancient Jewish law that might not be relevant. Since when has ancient Jewish law become any less relevant than ancient Christian law? -- L8r, Uncle Clover ************************************************ In my experience, one's degree of wisdom tends to bear an exponentially inverse relationship to one's outpouring of words. Clearly, I've a _long_ way to go... ;-) ************************************************ The true mark of a civilized society is that its citizens know how to hate each other peacefully. ************************************************ |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
Uncle Clover wrote:
On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 20:00:41 -0600, zxcvbob wrote: snip Since you are invoking a moral argument, I'm gonna quote from the Bible; the New Testament just to make sure you don't think I'm quoting ancient Jewish law that might not be relevant. Since when has ancient Jewish law become any less relevant than ancient Christian law? -- L8r, Uncle Clover Good point. It made sense in my head, but doesn't make sense so much when I read it out loud. I probably should have left out that comment starting with the semicolon, then maybe given a reference or two from Leviticus (not necessarily quoted though; to much scripture would come across as being preachy). Thanks for the critique. Bob |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
|
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
Yeah, that'll bring the Hawks back to life, right? And make the
streets safer than if Skylar Deleon spends the rest of his life in prison. There was a man who killed a five year old boy when he was in his late twenties. Spent 20 years in jail and of course everyone thought he had grown, changed... After a couple of months out on parole, he killed a 16 year old girl. The death penalty would have GUARANTEED no further murders from this slime. There is no such thing as 'life' in prison because of weenies like you who care more for the monster that kills than the victim. |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
In article ,
"Beth In Alaska" wrote: And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers. Why not? Let the punishment fit the crime. Rape a rapist with a broom handle until he dies. We should kill killers, preferably the way they killed their victim. In this case I would advocate concrete overshoes for the killer, put him chest deep in the water (at low tide) ;) Also, it would do good to let the victim's family execute the murderer. -- Free men own guns - www.geocities/CapitolHill/5357/ |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
"Nick Hull" wrote in message .. . In article , "Beth In Alaska" wrote: And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers. Why not? Let the punishment fit the crime. Rape a rapist with a broom handle until he dies. We should kill killers, preferably the way they killed their victim. In this case I would advocate concrete overshoes for the killer, put him chest deep in the water (at low tide) ;) But this makes you a killer too. Also, it would do good to let the victim's family execute the murderer. I don't know. While I might WANT to kill someone who hurt my child, I'm not sure thats a HEALTHY thing to do, or even feel. Grief seems so much healthier than violence. |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
In article ,
"Beth In Alaska" wrote: "Nick Hull" wrote in message .. . In article , "Beth In Alaska" wrote: And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers. Why not? Let the punishment fit the crime. Rape a rapist with a broom handle until he dies. We should kill killers, preferably the way they killed their victim. In this case I would advocate concrete overshoes for the killer, put him chest deep in the water (at low tide) ;) But this makes you a killer too. In that case, it is a drowning and the ocean did it :) The felon earned his overshoes by his own actions. Also, it would do good to let the victim's family execute the murderer. I don't know. While I might WANT to kill someone who hurt my child, I'm not sure thats a HEALTHY thing to do, or even feel. Grief seems so much healthier than violence. Terminating a perp is MUCH healthier than grief. Having the victim's family do the deed (if they want to) brings closure to a sad event and future perps will pay attention. OTOH, if you don't want your killer executed, that should be your right. Just mention it in your will and set aside a trust fund to feed, house, cloth and guard your murderer for as long as your money lasts (then he gets a quick termination to save ME $$) ;) -- Free men own guns - www.geocities/CapitolHill/5357/ |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
Nick Hull wrote:
In article , "Beth In Alaska" wrote: And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers. Why not? Let the punishment fit the crime. Rape a rapist with a broom handle until he dies. We should kill killers, preferably the way they killed their victim. In this case I would advocate concrete overshoes for the killer, put him chest deep in the water (at low tide) ;) Also, it would do good to let the victim's family execute the murderer. You aren't advocating justice; you describe revenge as a suitable punishment. Not unlike countries where thieves are punished by getting their hands chopped off. Kind regards, Nancy -- Take a sad song and make it better (lennon/mccartney) Take bad software and make it better (rudins) http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/People/nrudins |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
Nick Hull wrote:
In article , "Beth In Alaska" wrote: "Nick Hull" wrote in message .. . In article , "Beth In Alaska" wrote: And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers. Why not? Let the punishment fit the crime. Rape a rapist with a broom handle until he dies. We should kill killers, preferably the way they killed their victim. In this case I would advocate concrete overshoes for the killer, put him chest deep in the water (at low tide) ;) But this makes you a killer too. In that case, it is a drowning and the ocean did it :) The felon earned his overshoes by his own actions. Also, it would do good to let the victim's family execute the murderer. I don't know. While I might WANT to kill someone who hurt my child, I'm not sure thats a HEALTHY thing to do, or even feel. Grief seems so much healthier than violence. Terminating a perp is MUCH healthier than grief. Having the victim's family do the deed (if they want to) brings closure to a sad event and future perps will pay attention. OTOH, if you don't want your killer executed, that should be your right. Just mention it in your will and set aside a trust fund to feed, house, cloth and guard your murderer for as long as your money lasts (then he gets a quick termination to save ME $$) ;) There is never closure to losing a family member to murder. I've read of cases in which the family of a murder victim did not want capital punishment for the murderer. The family of Ted Bundy's victims are still grieving for their loss. His execution did not bring "closure" to the loss. Kind regards, Nancy -- Take a sad song and make it better (lennon/mccartney) Take bad software and make it better (rudins) http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/People/nrudins |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
In article ,
Nancy Rudins wrote: Nick Hull wrote: In article , "Beth In Alaska" wrote: And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers. Why not? Let the punishment fit the crime. Rape a rapist with a broom handle until he dies. We should kill killers, preferably the way they killed their victim. In this case I would advocate concrete overshoes for the killer, put him chest deep in the water (at low tide) ;) Also, it would do good to let the victim's family execute the murderer. You aren't advocating justice; you describe revenge as a suitable punishment. Not unlike countries where thieves are punished by getting their hands chopped off. It's revenge if you do it on your own. If done under the legal system it's punishmment (or prevention, depending on your view) -- Free men own guns - www.geocities/CapitolHill/5357/ |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
In article ,
Nancy Rudins wrote: Nick Hull wrote: In article , "Beth In Alaska" wrote: "Nick Hull" wrote in message .. . In article , "Beth In Alaska" wrote: And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers. Why not? Let the punishment fit the crime. Rape a rapist with a broom handle until he dies. We should kill killers, preferably the way they killed their victim. In this case I would advocate concrete overshoes for the killer, put him chest deep in the water (at low tide) ;) But this makes you a killer too. In that case, it is a drowning and the ocean did it :) The felon earned his overshoes by his own actions. Also, it would do good to let the victim's family execute the murderer. I don't know. While I might WANT to kill someone who hurt my child, I'm not sure thats a HEALTHY thing to do, or even feel. Grief seems so much healthier than violence. Terminating a perp is MUCH healthier than grief. Having the victim's family do the deed (if they want to) brings closure to a sad event and future perps will pay attention. OTOH, if you don't want your killer executed, that should be your right. Just mention it in your will and set aside a trust fund to feed, house, cloth and guard your murderer for as long as your money lasts (then he gets a quick termination to save ME $$) ;) There is never closure to losing a family member to murder. I've read of cases in which the family of a murder victim did not want capital punishment for the murderer. The family of Ted Bundy's victims are still grieving for their loss. His execution did not bring "closure" to the loss. It's fine with me if the victim and her family don't want capital punishment, as long as I don't have to feed, cloth, shelter and guard the perp, and as long as the perp can NEVER escape. Those who want to protect a perp should pay the price. For me, anyone who murders me should suffer a like fate. When someone dies, wether by natural or violent means, they never come back. It really doesn't matter how people die, only what is done to prevent future occurances. If you cannot get over a person's death you have problems because everyone dies eventually. You might consider it unfair when your husband is murdered, I might consider it unfair if my wife dies in a traffic accident. We both lose, the world goes on. I,m willing to buy safer cars and fewer murderers. -- Free men own guns - www.geocities/CapitolHill/5357/ |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
"comadreja" wrote in message ... In article , Nick Hull wrote: Nancy Rudins wrote: There is never closure to losing a family member to murder. I've read of cases in which the family of a murder victim did not want capital punishment for the murderer. The family of Ted Bundy's victims are still grieving for their loss. His execution did not bring "closure" to the loss. It's fine with me if the victim and her family don't want capital punishment, as long as I don't have to feed, cloth, shelter and guard the perp, and as long as the perp can NEVER escape. You are paying much, much more for appeals to both the State and Federal Court for a Capital Punishment case than paying for the upkeep and cost for someone with LWOP. The appellate reviews, the State paid attorneys for the defendant, State Commission hearings etc. etc. etc. http://janda.org/c10/statisticsnews/NoDeathPenalty.htm -c http://www.deathpenalty.org/index.ph...cost&menu=1%22 Main reason I am against the death penalty. . . $$$$$$$$. Rare that we execute someone relative to the amount on death row and all the extra costs related to both the trial and all the appeals afterward. |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
"Calif Bill" wrote in message nk.net... "comadreja" wrote in message ... In article , Nick Hull wrote: Nancy Rudins wrote: There is never closure to losing a family member to murder. I've read of cases in which the family of a murder victim did not want capital punishment for the murderer. The family of Ted Bundy's victims are still grieving for their loss. His execution did not bring "closure" to the loss. It's fine with me if the victim and her family don't want capital punishment, as long as I don't have to feed, cloth, shelter and guard the perp, and as long as the perp can NEVER escape. You are paying much, much more for appeals to both the State and Federal Court for a Capital Punishment case than paying for the upkeep and cost for someone with LWOP. The appellate reviews, the State paid attorneys for the defendant, State Commission hearings etc. etc. etc. http://janda.org/c10/statisticsnews/NoDeathPenalty.htm -c http://www.deathpenalty.org/index.ph...cost&menu=1%22 Main reason I am against the death penalty. . . $$$$$$$$. Rare that we execute someone relative to the amount on death row and all the extra costs related to both the trial and all the appeals afterward. Which is why I said the appeals process is a farce for somebody like Deleon, or Charles Ng, or Richard Allen Davis, or so many MANY of those convicted of these atrocious crimes. Crimes where *guilt* is not in doubt what so ever. And where we all saw the *fair trial* process. td |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
Nancy Rudins wrote:
Nick Hull wrote: In article , "Beth In Alaska" wrote: And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers. Why not? Let the punishment fit the crime. Rape a rapist with a broom handle until he dies. We should kill killers, preferably the way they killed their victim. In this case I would advocate concrete overshoes for the killer, put him chest deep in the water (at low tide) ;) Also, it would do good to let the victim's family execute the murderer. You aren't advocating justice; you describe revenge as a suitable punishment. Not unlike countries where thieves are punished by getting their hands chopped off. Define justice, Nancy. Cheers, Bama Brian Libertarian |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
Nick Hull wrote:
In article , Nancy Rudins wrote: There is never closure to losing a family member to murder. I've read of cases in which the family of a murder victim did not want capital punishment for the murderer. The family of Ted Bundy's victims are still grieving for their loss. His execution did not bring "closure" to the loss. It's fine with me if the victim and her family don't want capital punishment, as long as I don't have to feed, cloth, shelter and guard the perp, and as long as the perp can NEVER escape. Those who want to protect a perp should pay the price. For me, anyone who murders me should suffer a like fate. When someone dies, wether by natural or violent means, they never come back. It really doesn't matter how people die, only what is done to prevent future occurances. If you cannot get over a person's death you have problems because everyone dies eventually. You might consider it unfair when your husband is murdered, I might consider it unfair if my wife dies in a traffic accident. We both lose, the world goes on. I,m willing to buy safer cars and fewer murderers. I might agree if we were all perfect people, the justice system always made perfect decisions, and decisions were made based solely on justice rather than human emotions of revenge. Since that's not the case, and there's way too much room for mistakes and corruption, we can't make a final decision on someone's life based on the results of an imperfect justice system run by imperfect humans. Kind regards, Nancy -- Take a sad song and make it better (lennon/mccartney) Take bad software and make it better (rudins) http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/People/nrudins |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
Bama Brian wrote:
Nancy Rudins wrote: Nick Hull wrote: In article , "Beth In Alaska" wrote: And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers. Why not? Let the punishment fit the crime. Rape a rapist with a broom handle until he dies. We should kill killers, preferably the way they killed their victim. In this case I would advocate concrete overshoes for the killer, put him chest deep in the water (at low tide) ;) Also, it would do good to let the victim's family execute the murderer. You aren't advocating justice; you describe revenge as a suitable punishment. Not unlike countries where thieves are punished by getting their hands chopped off. Define justice, Nancy. Cheers, Bama Brian Libertarian I'll go by the dictionary definition: Justice \Jus"tice\ (j[u^]s"t[i^]s), n. [F., fr. L. justitia, fr. justus just. See {Just}, a.] [1913 Webster] 1. The quality of being just; conformity to the principles of righteousness and rectitude in all things; strict performance of moral obligations; practical conformity to human or divine law; integrity in the dealings of men with each other; rectitude; equity; uprightness. [1913 Webster] 2. Conformity to truth and reality in expressing opinions and in conduct; fair representation of facts respecting merit or demerit; honesty; fidelity; impartiality; as, the justice of a description or of a judgment; historical justice. [1913 Webster] 3. The rendering to every one his due or right; just treatment; requital of desert; merited reward or punishment; that which is due to one's conduct or motives. [1913 Webster] 4. Agreeableness to right; equity; justness; as, the justice of a claim. [1913 Webster] Kind regards, Nancy -- Take a sad song and make it better (lennon/mccartney) Take bad software and make it better (rudins) http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/People/nrudins |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
In talk.politics.guns Nick Hull wrote:
In article , "Beth In Alaska" wrote: And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers. Why not? Let the punishment fit the crime. Rape a rapist with a broom handle until he dies. We should kill killers, preferably the way they killed their victim. In this case I would advocate concrete overshoes for the killer, put him chest deep in the water (at low tide) ;) Also, it would do good to let the victim's family execute the murderer. What "good" would that be, exactly? Why is revenge "good?" The death penalty isn't punishment, since it's the loss of freedom or privileges which is an integral part. Punishment by definition must have an end, otherwise there's no point. Main Entry: pun·ish·ment 1 : the act of punishing 2 a : suffering, pain, or loss that serves as retribution b : a penalty inflicted on an offender through judicial procedure Suffering and pain END with death, and therefore so does punishment, One must keep the offender alive in order to administer punishment. Otherwise, it's murder for convenience. You say "We should kill killers, preferably the way they killed their victim." Why? -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
"Nick Hull" wrote in message .. . In article , "Beth In Alaska" wrote: And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers. Why not? Let the punishment fit the crime. Rape a rapist with a broom handle until he dies. We should kill killers, preferably the way they killed their victim. In this case I would advocate concrete overshoes for the killer, put him chest deep in the water (at low tide) ;) Also, it would do good to let the victim's family execute the murderer. If you really want to be truthful about this subject, I do think in some instances, allowing the victims' family to 'have at 'em', would probably ease that family far more than years of therapy. Notice, I'm not condoning it, merely stating what I believe to be true. I'd bet Mark Klaas would have *healed* more effectively had he been able to 'have at' Davis. JMO. Same thing with Mark Lunsford, Steve Groene, etc. I could be wrong, but I really do think, especially with the husbands/fathers of victims like these, although they would still grieve forever, I'd *guess* their feelings of helplessness/impotentcy might be abated a bit. td -- Free men own guns - www.geocities/CapitolHill/5357/ |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
And life without parole wouldn't have worked as well? These days, a
crime like his would have gotten LWOP - sentences used to be lighter 30 years ago. And even murderers eligible for parole almost never get it granted - not since Willie Horton. No Life without parole would not have worked as well. Yes that one would not be able to hurt anybody but that does not change the fact that these sort of criminals are not afraid of prison. They are not concerned with the concequences of the law because they don't care. The only thing they are afraid of is being killed. If you put this one to death then then the next one that thinks about it, even while lacking the moral constitution to to tell him killing is wrong, may think twice. Do it to every heinous killer then they will start to be a afraid. I would much rather have psychopathic killers terrified to do what they do, which is rape and murder, than have good honest people terrified of doing what it is they do, which is try to good by thier families friends and society. You claim that giving them LWOP is a good thing because they could eventually, maybe do some good for some other inmate. I claim that killing them does good for society. As for the argument that killing is always wrong unless in self defense: 1) How do you define self defense? The law in every state defines it differently. In CA if you kill in self defense you have to prove that what you did was not exsessive. How do you do that? I am a martial artist so if I kill someone coming at me with a knife I could be sentenced to prison because it could be argued that I could have "neutralized the situation" without killing. The problem is that is far more dangerous to myself and others around. If someone else does the same thing that has no training then they are never questioned. Is it right that I have to be tried simply becasue I am better prepared for psychos? I don't think so. 2) People have killed for hundreds of years in this country for many reasons other than self defense such as going to war to protect the very freedoms you are no exercising. To say that killing is always wrong no matter what is way to black and white. The fact is that respect for life and the preservation of life are two different things, a fact that seems to escape you. All things living today will die. I would even go so far as to argue that the Hawks death in itself is not the tragedy but how they were forced to meet that death that is the tradgedy. This, to me, is the true crime. Deleon Should be put to death for that alone. A needle in the arm is far better than the fate he deserves but because our society is trying to be good then we are at least pleasant in the death that is dealt under the government. Taking his life is not that big of a punishment. He will die someday anyways. Making him afraid of meeting a similar fate as his victims is what he gets. Making the sick killers of the world terrified that they will killed in a chair weeping for thier freedom is more than enough justification to me. You say that the system is flawed so we may be executing innocent people yet you seem to have no problem with putting innocent people away for LWOP. People aren't executed after thier first trial they spend decades proving over and over that these people are guilty. Now lets say that the flaws in the system mean that people get sentenced to LWOP or Death. You have no problem with them being in prison for 50 years or however long it takes to slowly die knowing they didn't deserve it, you just have a problem with killing them after 20 or 30 years. Yeah thats so much better not to mention the fact that you never advocated any reform of the system to make sure that people who are guilty go to prison while those that are innocent stay out. You never proposed a better solution to the real problem at hand. The fact is that the system is flawed but it is the best one out there. Comparing the U.S. to other countries doesn't work because the U.S. created the sort of society and freedom that the rest of the world enjoys so much. people complain about this country when they are happy and free, they complain when we "meddle" in the affairs of the world but when a problem comes that they care about then they complain if we dont help. Saying that taking a worldwide vote would mean that we lose is probably the stupidest thing I have ever heard because the rest of the world is able to make thier choices and be free simply because the U.S. is here. I say we should eliminate LWOP and make them all death sentences. It is unpopular with the rest of the world but then again 200 years ago so was democracy. This is without even pointing out the fact that housing these people for the rest of thier lives costs us an s-load of money. I am not saying that killing people for money is okay but the fact is that they are still a massive burden on society even if locked away. The money spent on housing killers could very easily be spent on social programs and increased law enforcement to make sure that innocent people aren't made victims and criminals are caught. Giving LWOP reduces the availible recources. -- Message posted via http://www.boatkb.com |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
Main reason I am against the death penalty. . . $$$$$$$$. Rare that we
execute someone relative to the amount on death row and all the extra costs related to both the trial and all the appeals afterward. Isn't Texas like putting in a speed lane to the chair. I heard that in Texas if there are 3 or more credible witnesses to a crime that qualifies for the death penalty you get one appeal then you move to the front of the line to get on the ride. The only reason it costs so much is because we have to repeat the same process over and over to see if we get different results. Killing them is not what costs so much, it's the pleasing of bleeding hearts with decades of trials that only show the same things over and over again. Here is an idea. Give them a trial, then one appeal. If they don't meet the 3 witnesss clause like in Texas then they get say 10 years in max security prison to see if any new evidence can surface. One more appeal with no admitance of anything the criminal has done in prison to say they are reformed. If you didn't do it you can't be reformed. If found guilty then thats it. Next week their time is up. I think criminals would be more detered if there weren't so many people out there looking out for them. If there weren't thousands of people that care more for the criminals than for the victims. I also think that killing them the way they did thier victims would also be a good deterent because when they look at thier victims they will see thier own fate. Ever time you see a murder trial on T.V. you see the killer looking sad but very little mention of the victims. You hear thier names but that about it. -- Message posted via BoatKB.com http://www.boatkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/boats/200611/1 |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
In article ,
Nancy Rudins wrote: Bama Brian wrote: Nancy Rudins wrote: Nick Hull wrote: In article , "Beth In Alaska" wrote: And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers. Why not? Let the punishment fit the crime. Rape a rapist with a broom handle until he dies. We should kill killers, preferably the way they killed their victim. In this case I would advocate concrete overshoes for the killer, put him chest deep in the water (at low tide) ;) Also, it would do good to let the victim's family execute the murderer. You aren't advocating justice; you describe revenge as a suitable punishment. Not unlike countries where thieves are punished by getting their hands chopped off. Define justice, Nancy. I'll go by the dictionary definition: Justice \Jus"tice\ (j[u^]s"t[i^]s), n. [F., fr. L. justitia, fr. 3. The rendering to every one his due or right; just treatment; requital of desert; merited reward or punishment; that which is due to one's conduct or motives. [1913 Webster] Sounds like an eye for an eye ;) -- Free men own guns - www.geocities/CapitolHill/5357/ |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
In article ,
"tiny dancer" wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message nk.net... "comadreja" wrote in message ... In article , Nick Hull wrote: Nancy Rudins wrote: There is never closure to losing a family member to murder. I've read of cases in which the family of a murder victim did not want capital punishment for the murderer. The family of Ted Bundy's victims are still grieving for their loss. His execution did not bring "closure" to the loss. It's fine with me if the victim and her family don't want capital punishment, as long as I don't have to feed, cloth, shelter and guard the perp, and as long as the perp can NEVER escape. You are paying much, much more for appeals to both the State and Federal Court for a Capital Punishment case than paying for the upkeep and cost for someone with LWOP. The appellate reviews, the State paid attorneys for the defendant, State Commission hearings etc. etc. etc. http://janda.org/c10/statisticsnews/NoDeathPenalty.htm -c http://www.deathpenalty.org/index.ph...cost&menu=1%22 Main reason I am against the death penalty. . . $$$$$$$$. Rare that we execute someone relative to the amount on death row and all the extra costs related to both the trial and all the appeals afterward. Which is why I said the appeals process is a farce for somebody like Deleon, or Charles Ng, or Richard Allen Davis, or so many MANY of those convicted of these atrocious crimes. Crimes where *guilt* is not in doubt what so ever. And where we all saw the *fair trial* process. There is no reason why the death penalty should be expensive, except for the lawyers who profit. If a person is sentenced to death, just take him out of the courthouse and waste him. I would prefer selling his organs and giving the money to the victim's family. Certainly the system is not perfect and some innocent people will be killed, but nothing in this world is perfect. Should we outlaw marriage because half of them fail? The answer to bad verdicts is not endless appeals but to improve the system to reduce bad verdicts. A court should be a level playing field; if the same govt pays the judge, jurors and prosecutor can you expect acquital if you lack a $million lawyer? Separation of powers is the answer, our founding fathers knew it but failed to implement it. See my web page for details. -- Free men own guns - www.geocities/CapitolHill/5357/ |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
"Phoenix" wrote in message ... In article , says... In article , "tiny dancer" wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message nk.net... "comadreja" wrote in message ... In article , Nick Hull wrote: Nancy Rudins wrote: There is never closure to losing a family member to murder. I've read of cases in which the family of a murder victim did not want capital punishment for the murderer. The family of Ted Bundy's victims are still grieving for their loss. His execution did not bring "closure" to the loss. It's fine with me if the victim and her family don't want capital punishment, as long as I don't have to feed, cloth, shelter and guard the perp, and as long as the perp can NEVER escape. You are paying much, much more for appeals to both the State and Federal Court for a Capital Punishment case than paying for the upkeep and cost for someone with LWOP. The appellate reviews, the State paid attorneys for the defendant, State Commission hearings etc. etc. etc. http://janda.org/c10/statisticsnews/NoDeathPenalty.htm -c http://www.deathpenalty.org/index.ph...cost&menu=1%22 Main reason I am against the death penalty. . . $$$$$$$$. Rare that we execute someone relative to the amount on death row and all the extra costs related to both the trial and all the appeals afterward. Which is why I said the appeals process is a farce for somebody like Deleon, or Charles Ng, or Richard Allen Davis, or so many MANY of those convicted of these atrocious crimes. Crimes where *guilt* is not in doubt what so ever. And where we all saw the *fair trial* process. There is no reason why the death penalty should be expensive, except for the lawyers who profit. If a person is sentenced to death, just take him out of the courthouse and waste him. I would prefer selling his organs and giving the money to the victim's family. Move to China, where the particular fitness and need for a prisoner's body parts often makes for a speedy execution. Certainly the system is not perfect and some innocent people will be killed, but nothing in this world is perfect. Should we outlaw marriage because half of them fail? Does marriage involve killing? Are the effects as irreversible as death? The answer to bad verdicts is not endless appeals but to improve the system to reduce bad verdicts. A court should be a level playing field; if the same govt pays the judge, jurors and prosecutor can you expect acquital if you lack a $million lawyer? Separation of powers is the answer, our founding fathers knew it but failed to implement it. See my web page for details. I don't know WTF you're trying to say here. The disproportionate number of white perps, who get lighter sentences for the same crimes, on death row, immediately makes the DP highly suspect. It's pure circus for the masses, that's all. Our ominous and powerful state shouldn't be allowed to kill people. It's amazing that the same people who want less state controls will hand over this power to their ultimate in corruption. How can you trust them to kill the right person? What, is the State suddenly virtuous when it allows an execution? No matter how much a person deserves death (and there are many who do), I'm not willing to give any government the power to make that decision. Yep, and in the USA the government doesn't have that power. Only the jury decides if they receive a death sentence or not. |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
In article ,
says... "Phoenix" wrote in message ... In article , says... In article , "tiny dancer" wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message nk.net... "comadreja" wrote in message ... In article , Nick Hull wrote: Nancy Rudins wrote: There is never closure to losing a family member to murder. I've read of cases in which the family of a murder victim did not want capital punishment for the murderer. The family of Ted Bundy's victims are still grieving for their loss. His execution did not bring "closure" to the loss. It's fine with me if the victim and her family don't want capital punishment, as long as I don't have to feed, cloth, shelter and guard the perp, and as long as the perp can NEVER escape. You are paying much, much more for appeals to both the State and Federal Court for a Capital Punishment case than paying for the upkeep and cost for someone with LWOP. The appellate reviews, the State paid attorneys for the defendant, State Commission hearings etc. etc. etc. http://janda.org/c10/statisticsnews/NoDeathPenalty.htm -c http://www.deathpenalty.org/index.ph...cost&menu=1%22 Main reason I am against the death penalty. . . $$$$$$$$. Rare that we execute someone relative to the amount on death row and all the extra costs related to both the trial and all the appeals afterward. Which is why I said the appeals process is a farce for somebody like Deleon, or Charles Ng, or Richard Allen Davis, or so many MANY of those convicted of these atrocious crimes. Crimes where *guilt* is not in doubt what so ever. And where we all saw the *fair trial* process. There is no reason why the death penalty should be expensive, except for the lawyers who profit. If a person is sentenced to death, just take him out of the courthouse and waste him. I would prefer selling his organs and giving the money to the victim's family. Move to China, where the particular fitness and need for a prisoner's body parts often makes for a speedy execution. Certainly the system is not perfect and some innocent people will be killed, but nothing in this world is perfect. Should we outlaw marriage because half of them fail? Does marriage involve killing? Are the effects as irreversible as death? The answer to bad verdicts is not endless appeals but to improve the system to reduce bad verdicts. A court should be a level playing field; if the same govt pays the judge, jurors and prosecutor can you expect acquital if you lack a $million lawyer? Separation of powers is the answer, our founding fathers knew it but failed to implement it. See my web page for details. I don't know WTF you're trying to say here. The disproportionate number of white perps, who get lighter sentences for the same crimes, on death row, immediately makes the DP highly suspect. It's pure circus for the masses, that's all. Our ominous and powerful state shouldn't be allowed to kill people. It's amazing that the same people who want less state controls will hand over this power to their ultimate in corruption. How can you trust them to kill the right person? What, is the State suddenly virtuous when it allows an execution? No matter how much a person deserves death (and there are many who do), I'm not willing to give any government the power to make that decision. Yep, and in the USA the government doesn't have that power. Only the jury decides if they receive a death sentence or not. Uh, no, the state and federal governments are consulted on appeal and every death row inmate files for a stay of execution or a reprieve from multiple sources who are NOT juries. The State decides if the DP is on the table at trial. The State decides which attorney indigent perps will get to represent them. The officers of the State (not juries) review appeals. The Government sure as **** has power over the DP. And they use it shamelessly to prove what a great old job they are doing for you and me. bel |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
In article ,
Phoenix wrote: No matter how much a person deserves death (and there are many who do), I'm not willing to give any government the power to make that decision. Yep, and in the USA the government doesn't have that power. Only the jury decides if they receive a death sentence or not. Uh, no, the state and federal governments are consulted on appeal and every death row inmate files for a stay of execution or a reprieve from multiple sources who are NOT juries. But FIRST a jury must deliver the death verdict. IIRC there is no judge that can initiate a death penalty, he can only read the jury verdict. -- Free men own guns - www.geocities/CapitolHill/5357/ |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
"Phoenix" wrote in message ... In article , says... "Phoenix" wrote in message ... In article , says... In article , "tiny dancer" wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message nk.net... "comadreja" wrote in message ... In article , Nick Hull wrote: Nancy Rudins wrote: There is never closure to losing a family member to murder. I've read of cases in which the family of a murder victim did not want capital punishment for the murderer. The family of Ted Bundy's victims are still grieving for their loss. His execution did not bring "closure" to the loss. It's fine with me if the victim and her family don't want capital punishment, as long as I don't have to feed, cloth, shelter and guard the perp, and as long as the perp can NEVER escape. You are paying much, much more for appeals to both the State and Federal Court for a Capital Punishment case than paying for the upkeep and cost for someone with LWOP. The appellate reviews, the State paid attorneys for the defendant, State Commission hearings etc. etc. etc. http://janda.org/c10/statisticsnews/NoDeathPenalty.htm -c http://www.deathpenalty.org/index.ph...cost&menu=1%22 Main reason I am against the death penalty. . . $$$$$$$$. Rare that we execute someone relative to the amount on death row and all the extra costs related to both the trial and all the appeals afterward. Which is why I said the appeals process is a farce for somebody like Deleon, or Charles Ng, or Richard Allen Davis, or so many MANY of those convicted of these atrocious crimes. Crimes where *guilt* is not in doubt what so ever. And where we all saw the *fair trial* process. There is no reason why the death penalty should be expensive, except for the lawyers who profit. If a person is sentenced to death, just take him out of the courthouse and waste him. I would prefer selling his organs and giving the money to the victim's family. Move to China, where the particular fitness and need for a prisoner's body parts often makes for a speedy execution. Certainly the system is not perfect and some innocent people will be killed, but nothing in this world is perfect. Should we outlaw marriage because half of them fail? Does marriage involve killing? Are the effects as irreversible as death? The answer to bad verdicts is not endless appeals but to improve the system to reduce bad verdicts. A court should be a level playing field; if the same govt pays the judge, jurors and prosecutor can you expect acquital if you lack a $million lawyer? Separation of powers is the answer, our founding fathers knew it but failed to implement it. See my web page for details. I don't know WTF you're trying to say here. The disproportionate number of white perps, who get lighter sentences for the same crimes, on death row, immediately makes the DP highly suspect. It's pure circus for the masses, that's all. Our ominous and powerful state shouldn't be allowed to kill people. It's amazing that the same people who want less state controls will hand over this power to their ultimate in corruption. How can you trust them to kill the right person? What, is the State suddenly virtuous when it allows an execution? No matter how much a person deserves death (and there are many who do), I'm not willing to give any government the power to make that decision. Yep, and in the USA the government doesn't have that power. Only the jury decides if they receive a death sentence or not. Uh, no, the state and federal governments are consulted on appeal and every death row inmate files for a stay of execution or a reprieve from multiple sources who are NOT juries. Yep, they remove, delay, or negate a death penality they do NOT impose it. The State decides if the DP is on the table at trial. True. However it is the decision of the jury that imposes it and none other. The State decides which attorney indigent perps will get to represent them. Unless the defendant cares to obtain his own attorney, then they can have anyone that will take their case. The officers of the State (not juries) review appeals. Yep, and all they can do is overturn the DP, they can not impose it. The Government sure as **** has power over the DP. And they use it shamelessly to prove what a great old job they are doing for you and me. And in the end the jury and the jury alone decides if the DP shall be imposed. As such the government does NOT have that power. The jury does, and only the jury. |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
So if a 50 yr old man raped your 12 year old kid for a few weeks would
you tell the judge to spare that person so they can one day be a great person in our community? Bo Raxo wrote: tiny dancer wrote: wrote in message oups.com... http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...wed-storylevel Los Angeles Times November 9, 2006 Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom An alleged accomplice in the disappearance of a yachting couple out of O.C. says there were some frantic minutes, then a callous drowning. By Christine Hanley, Times Staff Writer Thomas and Jackie Hawks fought their alleged captors to the bitter end and in a moment of tenderness managed to hold hands before an anchor dragged them to the bottom of the sea. Family and friends of the couple were brought to tears Wednesday when a prosecution witness gave an excruciating, minute-by-minute account of events aboard their 55-foot yacht, Well Deserved, during the Santa Ana murder trial of Jennifer L. Deleon. Deleon, 25, a Long Beach mother of two, is accused of helping her husband, Skylar, and three other men in a plot to murder the Hawkses, steal their yacht and plunder their savings. If convicted, she could get life in prison without parole. Skylar Deleon, the alleged mastermind, goes on trial in January. Jennifer Deleon was not on board when the Hawkses were presumably killed - their bodies haven't been found. But prosecutors say she used her 9-month-old child to gain the couple's trust and later helped destroy evidence by cleaning the boat. They reject her defense that she didn't know what her husband was up to until after the alleged murders, then followed his lead only because she was afraid of him. On Wednesday, Alonso Machain, who was on the boat with the couple the day they disappeared, provided the first eyewitness account of the alleged crimes, acknowledging that he was hoping for leniency in exchange for his testimony. Machain, who is rail-thin and looks much younger than his 23 years, testified that he met Skylar Deleon at Seal Beach City Jail, when he was working as a jailer and Deleon was in a work furlough program for committing home burglary. Machain said Deleon, during his jail stay, convinced him that he was rich, earning more than $2 million a month and traveling the world. Machain said he grew to respect and admire Deleon, and the two became good friends. In October 2004, Machain said, Skylar Deleon asked him whether he'd like to make a "few million dollars." At the time, Machain was unemployed. When Machain asked how he could make that much money legally, Deleon responded that "it isn't illegal unless you get caught," Machain said. He said Deleon told him he was routinely solicited to carry out murders, which he did "on the side." Deleon told him the Hawkses "were bad" and it would "make the world a better place if they were taken out," Machain said. After the couple were killed, he allegedly told Machain, they would get to keep their boat and anything else they owned. Machain said Deleon accompanied him to the Lakewood Mall, where they bought two stun guns, and Machain went alone to another store to buy two pairs of handcuffs. On a test-sail with the Hawkses on Nov. 6, 2004, Machain was to have overpowered Jackie Hawks while Deleon subdued her husband. But Machain said Deleon abandoned the plan once they were all on the boat, for unknown reasons. It was during that outing that Machain said Deleon first learned that Thomas Hawks was a retired probation officer "very physically fit for his age." Back at the docks, Machain said, Deleon called his wife and told her she had to come down to the boat to meet the Hawkses and make them "feel more at ease." Within the next week he also decided that a third person would be needed to help overcome Thomas Hawks. On the morning of Nov. 15, Machain said, he and Deleon met up with that person - whose name, he later learned, was John Fitzgerald Kennedy - before returning to the pier. Once they were headed out to sea, he said, Jackie Hawks called someone to report that she and her husband were with the buyers. Machain said he was standing in the kitchen of the main cabin when Deleon and Kennedy overpowered Thomas Hawks in a lower area of the boat near a bedroom. The commotion caused Jackie Hawks to try to move past Machain, he said, and she screamed, "What's going on?" With Jackie Hawks cornered in the kitchen, Machain said, he pulled out his stun gun. "I knew I had to act. I had to overpower Mrs. Hawks. I struggled with her. She was fighting me." Eventually he got her handcuffed, he said, and took her down to the bedroom, where her husband was already handcuffed on the bed. That's when she asked Deleon, "How could you do this to us? You brought your wife and kids here. We trusted you." Machain helped Deleon cover the couple's eyes and mouths with duct tape as Jackie Hawks cried, saying she didn't want to die and that she wanted to see her new grandchild. The Hawkses were then taken up to the main cabin one at a time to sign and fingerprint title transfer documents. Jackie Hawks was told that if she cooperated she would be released. "She was shaking uncontrollably," Machain recalled. When it was her husband's turn, Deleon told him that if he tried anything funny he would be struck with a Magnum flashlight. Thomas Hawks responded that he wouldn't try anything, according to Machain. The couple were brought back to the bedroom while Deleon and Kennedy prepared the anchor on the aft deck, Machain said. Left to "baby-sit" them, he watched as Thomas Hawks tried to console his wife. She was still crying and asking, in a muffled voice through the tape, why their captors were doing this to them. "I could see Mr. Hawks trying to reach over and hold her hand and comfort her," Machain said. On the deck, the couple were tied together standing, her back to her husband's chest with their hands still cuffed behind them. Realizing what was happening, Thomas Hawks kicked Deleon as he tried to fasten the couple to the anchor, sending him back into a deck chair, Machain said. Kennedy responded with a "hard swing" to the husband's right temple. "It was a pretty hard blow" that left him staggering and making "slurring noises," Machain said. He would have fallen to his knees but "Mrs. Hawks was holding him up," all the time "screaming, yelling, asking, 'What's going on?' " he recalled. Deleon lifted the anchor and threw it overboard as Kennedy pushed the couple overboard, Machain said. Deleon then turned the yacht around and the men collected cash, jewelry and other valuables, Machain said. Kennedy cracked open a beer, grabbed a fishing rod and fished all the way back to the harbor, he said. Thanks for the update on this one. Another one of those cases where the death penalty should be *streamlined*. Once they are found guilty and sentenced to die, give 'em one appeal and then stick the needle in 'em. Just *my* opinion, of course. Yeah, that'll bring the Hawks back to life, right? And make the streets safer than if Skylar Deleon spends the rest of his life in prison. And there is no chance whatsoever that a 25 year old could grow and change over the next two or three decades, doing good by working with fellow inmates or convincing young people to not make the mistakes he did. Like *some* other inmates who committed heinous crimes in their youth have managed to do. Nope, you say we might as well throw that life away as garbage. Must be great to be able to see in to the future and know with such certainty whether a person will ever be able to change and ever be able to do any good for his fellow man. I don't know where one finds such certainty about human nature and the future, but somehow I think it comes from a place to which I wouldn't want to go. Bo Raxo |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
Nick Hull wrote:
In article , Nancy Rudins wrote: Bama Brian wrote: Nancy Rudins wrote: Nick Hull wrote: In article , "Beth In Alaska" wrote: And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers. Why not? Let the punishment fit the crime. Rape a rapist with a broom handle until he dies. We should kill killers, preferably the way they killed their victim. In this case I would advocate concrete overshoes for the killer, put him chest deep in the water (at low tide) ;) Also, it would do good to let the victim's family execute the murderer. You aren't advocating justice; you describe revenge as a suitable punishment. Not unlike countries where thieves are punished by getting their hands chopped off. Define justice, Nancy. I'll go by the dictionary definition: Justice \Jus"tice\ (j[u^]s"t[i^]s), n. [F., fr. L. justitia, fr. 3. The rendering to every one his due or right; just treatment; requital of desert; merited reward or punishment; that which is due to one's conduct or motives. [1913 Webster] Sounds like an eye for an eye ;) That's not how I interpreted it. Kind regards, Nancy -- Take a sad song and make it better (lennon/mccartney) Take bad software and make it better (rudins) http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/People/nrudins |
Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
wrote: So if a 50 yr old man raped your 12 year old kid for a few weeks would you tell the judge to spare that person so they can one day be a great person in our community? No. First, rape doesn't get the death penalty except in Lousisiana. Second, I would tell the judge to spare that person because killing is wrong. Now you tell me: if your brother or sister or son or daughter was arrested for a crime they didn't commit, convicted, and sentenced to death, would you still support the death penalty? Innocent people are released from death row every year. Or how fiscal choices: it is more expensive to follow the judicial process for the death penalty than it is to lock 'em up for life. Will you volunteer to chip in an extra thousand dollars a year in taxes to make up the difference? Will you tell the kids they can't have music classes or after school sports, that a poor pregnant woman doesn't get prenatal checkups, so that we can impose the death penalty instead of life in prison? Those are real choices, unlike the one you pose. Bo Raxo wrote: tiny dancer wrote: wrote in message oups.com... http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...wed-storylevel Los Angeles Times November 9, 2006 Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom An alleged accomplice in the disappearance of a yachting couple out of O.C. says there were some frantic minutes, then a callous drowning. By Christine Hanley, Times Staff Writer Thomas and Jackie Hawks fought their alleged captors to the bitter end and in a moment of tenderness managed to hold hands before an anchor dragged them to the bottom of the sea. Family and friends of the couple were brought to tears Wednesday when a prosecution witness gave an excruciating, minute-by-minute account of events aboard their 55-foot yacht, Well Deserved, during the Santa Ana murder trial of Jennifer L. Deleon. Deleon, 25, a Long Beach mother of two, is accused of helping her husband, Skylar, and three other men in a plot to murder the Hawkses, steal their yacht and plunder their savings. If convicted, she could get life in prison without parole. Skylar Deleon, the alleged mastermind, goes on trial in January. Jennifer Deleon was not on board when the Hawkses were presumably killed - their bodies haven't been found. But prosecutors say she used her 9-month-old child to gain the couple's trust and later helped destroy evidence by cleaning the boat. They reject her defense that she didn't know what her husband was up to until after the alleged murders, then followed his lead only because she was afraid of him. On Wednesday, Alonso Machain, who was on the boat with the couple the day they disappeared, provided the first eyewitness account of the alleged crimes, acknowledging that he was hoping for leniency in exchange for his testimony. Machain, who is rail-thin and looks much younger than his 23 years, testified that he met Skylar Deleon at Seal Beach City Jail, when he was working as a jailer and Deleon was in a work furlough program for committing home burglary. Machain said Deleon, during his jail stay, convinced him that he was rich, earning more than $2 million a month and traveling the world. Machain said he grew to respect and admire Deleon, and the two became good friends. In October 2004, Machain said, Skylar Deleon asked him whether he'd like to make a "few million dollars." At the time, Machain was unemployed. When Machain asked how he could make that much money legally, Deleon responded that "it isn't illegal unless you get caught," Machain said. He said Deleon told him he was routinely solicited to carry out murders, which he did "on the side." Deleon told him the Hawkses "were bad" and it would "make the world a better place if they were taken out," Machain said. After the couple were killed, he allegedly told Machain, they would get to keep their boat and anything else they owned. Machain said Deleon accompanied him to the Lakewood Mall, where they bought two stun guns, and Machain went alone to another store to buy two pairs of handcuffs. On a test-sail with the Hawkses on Nov. 6, 2004, Machain was to have overpowered Jackie Hawks while Deleon subdued her husband. But Machain said Deleon abandoned the plan once they were all on the boat, for unknown reasons. It was during that outing that Machain said Deleon first learned that Thomas Hawks was a retired probation officer "very physically fit for his age." Back at the docks, Machain said, Deleon called his wife and told her she had to come down to the boat to meet the Hawkses and make them "feel more at ease." Within the next week he also decided that a third person would be needed to help overcome Thomas Hawks. On the morning of Nov. 15, Machain said, he and Deleon met up with that person - whose name, he later learned, was John Fitzgerald Kennedy - before returning to the pier. Once they were headed out to sea, he said, Jackie Hawks called someone to report that she and her husband were with the buyers. Machain said he was standing in the kitchen of the main cabin when Deleon and Kennedy overpowered Thomas Hawks in a lower area of the boat near a bedroom. The commotion caused Jackie Hawks to try to move past Machain, he said, and she screamed, "What's going on?" With Jackie Hawks cornered in the kitchen, Machain said, he pulled out his stun gun. "I knew I had to act. I had to overpower Mrs. Hawks. I struggled with her. She was fighting me." Eventually he got her handcuffed, he said, and took her down to the bedroom, where her husband was already handcuffed on the bed. That's when she asked Deleon, "How could you do this to us? You brought your wife and kids here. We trusted you." Machain helped Deleon cover the couple's eyes and mouths with duct tape as Jackie Hawks cried, saying she didn't want to die and that she wanted to see her new grandchild. The Hawkses were then taken up to the main cabin one at a time to sign and fingerprint title transfer documents. Jackie Hawks was told that if she cooperated she would be released. "She was shaking uncontrollably," Machain recalled. When it was her husband's turn, Deleon told him that if he tried anything funny he would be struck with a Magnum flashlight. Thomas Hawks responded that he wouldn't try anything, according to Machain. The couple were brought back to the bedroom while Deleon and Kennedy prepared the anchor on the aft deck, Machain said. Left to "baby-sit" them, he watched as Thomas Hawks tried to console his wife. She was still crying and asking, in a muffled voice through the tape, why their captors were doing this to them. "I could see Mr. Hawks trying to reach over and hold her hand and comfort her," Machain said. On the deck, the couple were tied together standing, her back to her husband's chest with their hands still cuffed behind them. Realizing what was happening, Thomas Hawks kicked Deleon as he tried to fasten the couple to the anchor, sending him back into a deck chair, Machain said. Kennedy responded with a "hard swing" to the husband's right temple. "It was a pretty hard blow" that left him staggering and making "slurring noises," Machain said. He would have fallen to his knees but "Mrs. Hawks was holding him up," all the time "screaming, yelling, asking, 'What's going on?' " he recalled. Deleon lifted the anchor and threw it overboard as Kennedy pushed the couple overboard, Machain said. Deleon then turned the yacht around and the men collected cash, jewelry and other valuables, Machain said. Kennedy cracked open a beer, grabbed a fishing rod and fished all the way back to the harbor, he said. Thanks for the update on this one. Another one of those cases where the death penalty should be *streamlined*. Once they are found guilty and sentenced to die, give 'em one appeal and then stick the needle in 'em. Just *my* opinion, of course. Yeah, that'll bring the Hawks back to life, right? And make the streets safer than if Skylar Deleon spends the rest of his life in prison. And there is no chance whatsoever that a 25 year old could grow and change over the next two or three decades, doing good by working with fellow inmates or convincing young people to not make the mistakes he did. Like *some* other inmates who committed heinous crimes in their youth have managed to do. Nope, you say we might as well throw that life away as garbage. Must be great to be able to see in to the future and know with such certainty whether a person will ever be able to change and ever be able to do any good for his fellow man. I don't know where one finds such certainty about human nature and the future, but somehow I think it comes from a place to which I wouldn't want to go. Bo Raxo |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:33 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com