CAPITAL PUNISHMENT! (Just for Kahl)

[kahljorn]

He's the exception that proves the rule. Proof that no matter what you do, no matter how obvious or clear cut the evidence is, if you know how to manipulate the system, you can make a career out of being on Death Row.

I don't really get how this is relevant but alright. Maybe retarded criminals have a right to a limelight before they are killed. It could be counted as a check on the system. Although, maybe it's morally outrageous to give criminals that type of notoriety. **After reading that he's still alive and on death row, I see how it's relevant.

Just make sure they don't escape. Hmm, while I'm here, does anyone have any examples of murdering nutters escaping and killing MORE people? That's probably a good argument for killing them the first time around.

there's a lot of examples of prisoners killing prison guards, other prisoners etc. inside of jail.

Yet here he is, more than 25 years after the fact, still living on "Death Row" and still claiming he should be given a new trial. Ironically, many of the other principals in the trial - witnesses, lawyers and family members of the victim - are now deceased.

So is he caught up in appeals, or just waiting for his turn to be executed?

So you think they should have killed him sooner -- if they were going to kill him?

Sorry about the tone of my response, but this case really hits home for me in a way that few other death-penalty cases do.

i won't be positive until you answer my questions, but it seems like your frustration has more to do with the way it was handled, or the system, and other periphery issues than the actual killing of people for being convicted of committing fucked up shit.

[Colonel Flagg]

Originally Posted by kahljorn

So is he caught up in appeals, or just waiting for his turn to be executed?

Appeals. Mostly initiated from people who are death penalty opponents, who know nothing about the case. Stupidly, they're arguing his innocence and/or the unfairness of the trial, when it is obvious to anyone who experienced the events as they happened that he shot Officer Faulkner. As for the fairness, neither he nor his brother testified at trial. That tells you all you need to know.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

So you think they should have killed him sooner -- if they were going to kill him?

Yes.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

i won't be positive until you answer my questions, but it seems like your frustration has more to do with the way it was handled, or the system, and other periphery issues than the actual killing of people for being convicted of committing fucked up shit.

You got it, bro'. There's way too much leniency built into the system. If you're going to have capital punishment for crimes, (as a deterrent?) then it makes no sense for people like Mumia to hang around manipulating people (and the system) because it gives the law no teeth.

If we're not going to change the system, then we should outlaw capital punishment. Period.

[Dimnos]

Originally Posted by Colonel Flagg

If you're going to have capital punishment for crimes, (as a deterrent?) then it makes no sense for people like Mumia to hang around manipulating people (and the system) because it gives the law no teeth.

I think the reason we have capital punishment isnt so much as a deterrent. We do it because the people who are supposed to get it deserve no better.