This is why we have a death penalty

[Blueskies]

jason it's not you it's what is said to you that bugs some here. me included. i could give a rats ass if someone is gay or not gay... such a non-issue. about as important as me having brown eyes. who cares?

i think some of the dudes here are just so bi-curious. hehehee.

i'm with ya here. it was never funny to me and now it is a huge anannoyance. i like your posts, jason, but i hate some of the shit that follows. has absolutely nothing at all to do with you.

+ 1

[Duncan]

Agreed

----------------
Now playing: LOVELESS - Sex, Drugs, And Rock N Roll Are Dead

[PDiddy75]

I, as a mother myself, would have to say I hope that bastard burns in hell <b>after</b> hes given the DP. I personally think the DP is to easy on an inmate nowadays! What is it? 2 or 3 injections in most states?? Fuck that!! Every state should hold true to the electric chair. Thats torture!! They should sit in that little cell 23 hours a day, no nothing..and wait 10 years to die with a diaper on and wondering what it feels like to have thier eyes pop out thier head! Fuck em...Fuck em...Fuck em!! I dont give a dam....as cruel as it may sound.

[StoneCold]

I, as a mother myself, would have to say I hope that bastard burns in hell <b>after</b> hes given the DP. I personally think the DP is to easy on an inmate nowadays! What is it? 2 or 3 injections in most states?? Fuck that!! Every state should hold true to the electric chair. Thats torture!! They should sit in that little cell 23 hours a day, no nothing..and wait 10 years to die with a diaper on and wondering what it feels like to have thier eyes pop out thier head! Fuck em...Fuck em...Fuck em!! I dont give a dam....as cruel as it may sound.

There's really no punishment we could apply to even out the damage he's done to this woman and her children. At the mininum, he stole her childhood, teenage years, first kiss, first love, virginity, sense of herself as a person. Beyond that he repeatedly physically and sexually abused her, possibly forced her to prostitute (article I linked above) and impregnated her twice (or more).

She'll never be "free" from his clutches having his two daughters to raise.

He's already crazy so I can't see how prison will be punishment unless he's tortured while he's there. The DP should be applied simply to get rid of him and maybe inhibit others from doing as he did.

Also up for punishment should be those who released him in '88. Judge, parole board etc. This woman should receive a gigantic settlement for what she suffered and will continue to suffer the rest of her life.

[PDiddy75]

I, as a mother myself, would have to say I hope that bastard burns in hell <b>after</b> hes given the DP. I personally think the DP is to easy on an inmate nowadays! What is it? 2 or 3 injections in most states?? Fuck that!! Every state should hold true to the electric chair. Thats torture!! They should sit in that little cell 23 hours a day, no nothing..and wait 10 years to die with a diaper on and wondering what it feels like to have thier eyes pop out thier head! Fuck em...Fuck em...Fuck em!! I dont give a dam....as cruel as it may sound.

There's really no punishment we could apply to even out the damage he's done to this woman and her children. At the mininum, he stole her childhood, teenage years, first kiss, first love, virginity, sense of herself as a person. Beyond that he repeatedly physically and sexually abused her, possibly forced her to prostitute (article I linked above) and impregnated her twice (or more).

She'll never be "free" from his clutches having his two daughters to raise.

He's already crazy so I can't see how prison will be punishment unless he's tortured while he's there. The DP should be applied simply to get rid of him and maybe inhibit others from doing as he did.

Also up for punishment should be those who released him in '88. Judge, parole board etc. This woman should receive a gigantic settlement for what she suffered and will continue to suffer the rest of her life.

You are <b>so</b> right in what you stated! I really dont agree with the "parole board" anyhow. I understand that we have to parole inmates due to the fact that our prisons are over crowded and what have you...but most of the time they are not ready to be out in society. If they are in prision...there is a reason! I dont think 10-20 years makes any nutcase "better" or "healed"! Its bullshit!! If your sick in the head, your sick in the fuckin head....na mean?? No GED, or church, or making licence plates for 10 cents a hour makes you a fuckin better person that 3 people can send you outta there!! Dont agree at all. Forget asking for more money for "Cash for Clunkers" damit! Ask for more money to build more prisons and keep our kids and country safe from these kinds of people!! More times then not, they get out and end up right back in there for doing the same crime, if not a worse one...OR...commit another horrible crime just to GO back because its all they know. The whole thing just sickens me...

[Jana]

I, as a mother myself, would have to say I hope that bastard burns in hell <b>after</b> hes given the DP. I personally think the DP is to easy on an inmate nowadays! What is it? 2 or 3 injections in most states?? Fuck that!! Every state should hold true to the electric chair. Thats torture!! They should sit in that little cell 23 hours a day, no nothing..and wait 10 years to die with a diaper on and wondering what it feels like to have thier eyes pop out thier head! Fuck em...Fuck em...Fuck em!! I dont give a dam....as cruel as it may sound.

There's really no punishment we could apply to even out the damage he's done to this woman and her children. At the mininum, he stole her childhood, teenage years, first kiss, first love, virginity, sense of herself as a person. Beyond that he repeatedly physically and sexually abused her, possibly forced her to prostitute (article I linked above) and impregnated her twice (or more).

She'll never be "free" from his clutches having his two daughters to raise.

He's already crazy so I can't see how prison will be punishment unless he's tortured while he's there. The DP should be applied simply to get rid of him and maybe inhibit others from doing as he did.

Also up for punishment should be those who released him in '88. Judge, parole board etc. This woman should receive a gigantic settlement for what she suffered and will continue to suffer the rest of her life.

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

[Arianddu]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

[PDiddy75]

I, as a mother myself, would have to say I hope that bastard burns in hell <b>after</b> hes given the DP. I personally think the DP is to easy on an inmate nowadays! What is it? 2 or 3 injections in most states?? Fuck that!! Every state should hold true to the electric chair. Thats torture!! They should sit in that little cell 23 hours a day, no nothing..and wait 10 years to die with a diaper on and wondering what it feels like to have thier eyes pop out thier head! Fuck em...Fuck em...Fuck em!! I dont give a dam....as cruel as it may sound.

There's really no punishment we could apply to even out the damage he's done to this woman and her children. At the mininum, he stole her childhood, teenage years, first kiss, first love, virginity, sense of herself as a person. Beyond that he repeatedly physically and sexually abused her, possibly forced her to prostitute (article I linked above) and impregnated her twice (or more).

She'll never be "free" from his clutches having his two daughters to raise.

He's already crazy so I can't see how prison will be punishment unless he's tortured while he's there. The DP should be applied simply to get rid of him and maybe inhibit others from doing as he did.

Also up for punishment should be those who released him in '88. Judge, parole board etc. This woman should receive a gigantic settlement for what she suffered and will continue to suffer the rest of her life.

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Are you serious right now?? Yah, lets just keep him in prision so she can go visit him!!! Get the hell outta here with that shit!! I dont see a problem with me wanting him gone by the DP at all! Im a mother damit...and God forbid, and if something like that EVER happened to my child that I carried for 9 months, gave birth to, and raised for years, loved with all my heart....I would spend every waking hour making sure that fucker didnt see the light of day again. You think he should get life?? FOR WHAT REASON?? There is no guarentee that he will get abused in prision!! This girls life is jacked, for a long time coming. To know he is dead is the closest thing to closure this girl is ever gonna get.
Guess everyone has a right to thier own opinion...

[Ehwmatt]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

Ari, that's way outside the scope of the discussion for this particular situation, this guy doesn't have a "family." And the guy is obviously guilty here, so that's that.

As for Jana's post, very thoughtful insight. I would counter that with the notion that they feel guilty about his arrest because he had, through years of terror and control, asserted 100% dominance over them. Keeping him alive will keep a small part of that dominance alive. Granted, it'd be a while before he's executed, but if and when the time came, his being definitively gone may eventually give time a small chance to heal the wounds he's caused and the psychological damage he's inflicted. That's really their only chance, otherwise they are screwed up (and likely will be anyway) for all their lives

[Jana]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

I don't believe in the death penalty anyway, even though I'm sure if it was something horrific to my family I would want to murder them and could probably in a moment of rage. But I agree with you. that too many have been probably put to death that were innocent. Look at how DNA testing has proven some on death row to not be guilty of the crime they were convicted of or even just in prison for a long time and later proven to be innocent. I was so sure the Ramseys were guilty of murdering their child, one of them, and now I feel I was so wrong b/c I believed the police, but they botched some things in the investigation.

[PDiddy75]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

I can see your point, but in my opinion...for the family....take it as a learning lesson. Dont make the same mistakes he/she did!
I only agree with the DP in cases that are worthy of it. Im not saying someone that robs a 7-11 should get death. Im saying people that are convicted by DNA, which most are nowadays, of murder or crimes against children.

[Jana]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

I can see your point, but in my opinion...for the family....take it as a learning lesson. Dont make the same mistakes he/she did!
I only agree with the DP in cases that are worthy of it. Im not saying someone that robs a 7-11 should get death. Im saying people that are convicted by DNA, which most are nowadays, of murder or crimes against children.

I don't really care about the families of the murderer as far as that's a reason why there shouldn't be a death penalty. I'm sure many families are good people, but that's not a reason for me to not give the DP to these murderers. I just have come to the conclusion over the years that I don't in good conscience believe in it b/c of the errors that have and could still occur with putting someone to death. And that's hard to decide for me, because the guy in the midwest that took that young girl graduating from high school last year from the Target parking lot and brutually killed her makes me sick and I would love to see him put to death for such a heinous crime. But it's not for me to decide that. As a juror, I couldn't do it.

These little girls, though, it's a different story for me b/c it's a different scenario and very complicated. Because of the psychological damage they have and will be going through for years and having been so isolated dependent on him, I just feel him being put to death might really make them carry too much guilt the rest of their lives, as they did love him. Though, they're looking for graves, thinking he might have killed people. I hope they find it, and they will realize how evil he is and not rehabilitated.

[PDiddy75]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

I can see your point, but in my opinion...for the family....take it as a learning lesson. Dont make the same mistakes he/she did!
I only agree with the DP in cases that are worthy of it. Im not saying someone that robs a 7-11 should get death. Im saying people that are convicted by DNA, which most are nowadays, of murder or crimes against children.

I don't really care about the families of the murderer as far as that's a reason why there shouldn't be a death penalty. I'm sure many are good people, but that's not a reason for me to not give the DP to these murderers. I just have come to the conclusion over the years that I don't in good conscience believe in it b/c of the errors that have and could still occur with putting someone to death. And that's hard to decide for me, because the guy in the midwest that took that young girl graduating from high school last year from the Target parking lot and brutually killed her makes me sick and I would love to see him put to death for such a heinous crime. But it's not for me to decide that. As a juror, I couldn't do it.

..............................................................................................................................................

I don't really care about the families of the murderer as far as that's a reason why there shouldn't be a death penalty.

:: Dont really understand the statement here. ??

Actually, I dont get the meaning behind the whole reply. You say you dont agree with the DP, but you would love to see him put to death in the Target case. You are either FOR or AGAINST the death penalty??
Or do you think like me, that the DP is fine when DNA convicts a crime thats worthy??

[Ehwmatt]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

I can see your point, but in my opinion...for the family....take it as a learning lesson. Dont make the same mistakes he/she did!
I only agree with the DP in cases that are worthy of it. Im not saying someone that robs a 7-11 should get death. Im saying people that are convicted by DNA, which most are nowadays, of murder or crimes against children.

I don't really care about the families of the murderer as far as that's a reason why there shouldn't be a death penalty. I'm sure many families are good people, but that's not a reason for me to not give the DP to these murderers. I just have come to the conclusion over the years that I don't in good conscience believe in it b/c of the errors that have and could still occur with putting someone to death. And that's hard to decide for me, because the guy in the midwest that took that young girl graduating from high school last year from the Target parking lot and brutually killed her makes me sick and I would love to see him put to death for such a heinous crime. But it's not for me to decide that. As a juror, I couldn't do it.

These little girls, though, it's a different story for me b/c it's a different scenario and very complicated. Because of the psychological damage they have and will be going through for years and having been so isolated dependent on him, I just feel him being put to death might really make them carry too much guilt the rest of their lives, as they did love him. Though, they're looking for graves, thinking he might have killed people. I hope they find it, and they will realize how evil he is and not rehabilitated.

They don't LOVE him, it's a twisted attachment based on the psychological terror and dominance he inflicted on them. His being alive will only preserve that, even if he's behind bars.

[Jana]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

I can see your point, but in my opinion...for the family....take it as a learning lesson. Dont make the same mistakes he/she did!
I only agree with the DP in cases that are worthy of it. Im not saying someone that robs a 7-11 should get death. Im saying people that are convicted by DNA, which most are nowadays, of murder or crimes against children.

I don't really care about the families of the murderer as far as that's a reason why there shouldn't be a death penalty. I'm sure many are good people, but that's not a reason for me to not give the DP to these murderers. I just have come to the conclusion over the years that I don't in good conscience believe in it b/c of the errors that have and could still occur with putting someone to death. And that's hard to decide for me, because the guy in the midwest that took that young girl graduating from high school last year from the Target parking lot and brutually killed her makes me sick and I would love to see him put to death for such a heinous crime. But it's not for me to decide that. As a juror, I couldn't do it.

..............................................................................................................................................

I don't really care about the families of the murderer as far as that's a reason why there shouldn't be a death penalty.

:: Dont really understand the statement here. ??

Actually, I dont get the meaning behind the whole reply. You say you dont agree with the DP, but you would love to see him put to death in the Target case. You are either FOR or AGAINST the death penalty??
Or do you think like me, that the DP is fine when DNA convicts a crime thats worthy??

I mean emotionally I would, but intellectually I can't believe in it b/c mistakes have been made in putting people to death.

[Jana]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

I can see your point, but in my opinion...for the family....take it as a learning lesson. Dont make the same mistakes he/she did!
I only agree with the DP in cases that are worthy of it. Im not saying someone that robs a 7-11 should get death. Im saying people that are convicted by DNA, which most are nowadays, of murder or crimes against children.

I don't really care about the families of the murderer as far as that's a reason why there shouldn't be a death penalty. I'm sure many families are good people, but that's not a reason for me to not give the DP to these murderers. I just have come to the conclusion over the years that I don't in good conscience believe in it b/c of the errors that have and could still occur with putting someone to death. And that's hard to decide for me, because the guy in the midwest that took that young girl graduating from high school last year from the Target parking lot and brutually killed her makes me sick and I would love to see him put to death for such a heinous crime. But it's not for me to decide that. As a juror, I couldn't do it.

These little girls, though, it's a different story for me b/c it's a different scenario and very complicated. Because of the psychological damage they have and will be going through for years and having been so isolated dependent on him, I just feel him being put to death might really make them carry too much guilt the rest of their lives, as they did love him. Though, they're looking for graves, thinking he might have killed people. I hope they find it, and they will realize how evil he is and not rehabilitated.

They don't LOVE him, it's a twisted attachment based on the psychological terror and dominance he inflicted on them. His being alive will only preserve that, even if he's behind bars.

I see your point. There's no real answer at this point. It will take years to undo the damage of the isolated girls and see how they feel and come out of it. I hope they can have happy lives. They probably can. It's the girl abducted I worry about. Eighteen years is a long time.

[PDiddy75]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

I can see your point, but in my opinion...for the family....take it as a learning lesson. Dont make the same mistakes he/she did!
I only agree with the DP in cases that are worthy of it. Im not saying someone that robs a 7-11 should get death. Im saying people that are convicted by DNA, which most are nowadays, of murder or crimes against children.

I don't really care about the families of the murderer as far as that's a reason why there shouldn't be a death penalty. I'm sure many are good people, but that's not a reason for me to not give the DP to these murderers. I just have come to the conclusion over the years that I don't in good conscience believe in it b/c of the errors that have and could still occur with putting someone to death. And that's hard to decide for me, because the guy in the midwest that took that young girl graduating from high school last year from the Target parking lot and brutually killed her makes me sick and I would love to see him put to death for such a heinous crime. But it's not for me to decide that. As a juror, I couldn't do it.

..............................................................................................................................................

I don't really care about the families of the murderer as far as that's a reason why there shouldn't be a death penalty.

:: Dont really understand the statement here. ??

Actually, I dont get the meaning behind the whole reply. You say you dont agree with the DP, but you would love to see him put to death in the Target case. You are either FOR or AGAINST the death penalty??
Or do you think like me, that the DP is fine when DNA convicts a crime thats worthy??

I mean emotionally I would, but intellectually I can't believe in it b/c mistakes have been made in putting people to death.

I see...
again, I wouldnt want someone to die for someone elses crime either....but today, DNA has come a long way...and when its involved in a crime that convicts the only person possible, for the worthy crime they commited, then yes...whole hearted, fry his ass!!

[Ehwmatt]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

I can see your point, but in my opinion...for the family....take it as a learning lesson. Dont make the same mistakes he/she did!
I only agree with the DP in cases that are worthy of it. Im not saying someone that robs a 7-11 should get death. Im saying people that are convicted by DNA, which most are nowadays, of murder or crimes against children.

I don't really care about the families of the murderer as far as that's a reason why there shouldn't be a death penalty. I'm sure many families are good people, but that's not a reason for me to not give the DP to these murderers. I just have come to the conclusion over the years that I don't in good conscience believe in it b/c of the errors that have and could still occur with putting someone to death. And that's hard to decide for me, because the guy in the midwest that took that young girl graduating from high school last year from the Target parking lot and brutually killed her makes me sick and I would love to see him put to death for such a heinous crime. But it's not for me to decide that. As a juror, I couldn't do it.

These little girls, though, it's a different story for me b/c it's a different scenario and very complicated. Because of the psychological damage they have and will be going through for years and having been so isolated dependent on him, I just feel him being put to death might really make them carry too much guilt the rest of their lives, as they did love him. Though, they're looking for graves, thinking he might have killed people. I hope they find it, and they will realize how evil he is and not rehabilitated.

They don't LOVE him, it's a twisted attachment based on the psychological terror and dominance he inflicted on them. His being alive will only preserve that, even if he's behind bars.

I see your point. There's no real answer at this point. It will take years to undo the damage of the isolated girls and see how the feel and come out of it. I hope they can have happy lives. They probably can. It's the girl abducted I worry about. Eighteen years is a long time.

Yeah, Jaycee almost has no chance. The girls, who knows what they saw. Who's to say he didn't rape and brutalize them too? Who knows... sick fucker.

[PDiddy75]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

I can see your point, but in my opinion...for the family....take it as a learning lesson. Dont make the same mistakes he/she did!
I only agree with the DP in cases that are worthy of it. Im not saying someone that robs a 7-11 should get death. Im saying people that are convicted by DNA, which most are nowadays, of murder or crimes against children.

I don't really care about the families of the murderer as far as that's a reason why there shouldn't be a death penalty. I'm sure many families are good people, but that's not a reason for me to not give the DP to these murderers. I just have come to the conclusion over the years that I don't in good conscience believe in it b/c of the errors that have and could still occur with putting someone to death. And that's hard to decide for me, because the guy in the midwest that took that young girl graduating from high school last year from the Target parking lot and brutually killed her makes me sick and I would love to see him put to death for such a heinous crime. But it's not for me to decide that. As a juror, I couldn't do it.

These little girls, though, it's a different story for me b/c it's a different scenario and very complicated. Because of the psychological damage they have and will be going through for years and having been so isolated dependent on him, I just feel him being put to death might really make them carry too much guilt the rest of their lives, as they did love him. Though, they're looking for graves, thinking he might have killed people. I hope they find it, and they will realize how evil he is and not rehabilitated.

They don't LOVE him, it's a twisted attachment based on the psychological terror and dominance he inflicted on them. His being alive will only preserve that, even if he's behind bars.

Kuddos!!

[Arianddu]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

Ari, that's way outside the scope of the discussion for this particular situation, this guy doesn't have a "family." And the guy is obviously guilty here, so that's that.

Yes, he is - but where do you draw the line? There is no hard line, there is a little bit of black at one end and a little bit of white at the other and a hell of a lot of shades of grey in the middle. Justifying the death penalty where 'there is no doubt' isn't as clear as it seems. A lot of innocent people have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit because a jury was convinced of their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. So what does it take? Witnesses? How many? What if there were no witnesses to the crimes of a multiple murderer? Is evidence enough? How much evidence do you need? What kind of evidence? Do they need to admit to the crime? What if they never do, but everyone is sure that they did it? And what about people who admit to crimes they never did, for all kinds of reasons? The more heinous the crime, the more people need to believe that the perpetrator has been caught and punished, and it's in those cases that the police can convince themselves that they have the right person, to the point of ignoring things, or worse still supressing evidence, that would lead to a jury to dismiss because it would raise doubt. Is it right? Is it wrong? Does it depend on the individual case?

The bottom line is, people are fallible and they are emotional. Convict the wrong person and if you lock them up for life, at least they have a chance to prove their innocence. Kill them and their life is gone forever. You can argue all you want about the deaths of innocent victims, or the loss of their innocence and their lives in cases like the one here, but the bottom line is, I'd rather see a monsterous killer/rapist/pedophile/whatever in gaol for life than have one innocent person executed. That's always going to be the biggest factor for me in why I can't support the death penalty.

[PDiddy75]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

Ari, that's way outside the scope of the discussion for this particular situation, this guy doesn't have a "family." And the guy is obviously guilty here, so that's that.

Yes, he is - but where do you draw the line? There is no hard line, there is a little bit of black at one end and a little bit of white at the other and a hell of a lot of shades of grey in the middle. Justifying the death penalty where 'there is no doubt' isn't as clear as it seems. A lot of innocent people have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit because a jury was convinced of their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. So what does it take? Witnesses? How many? What if there were no witnesses to the crimes of a multiple murderer? Is evidence enough? How much evidence do you need? What kind of evidence? Do they need to admit to the crime? What if they never do, but everyone is sure that they did it? And what about people who admit to crimes they never did, for all kinds of reasons? The more heinous the crime, the more people need to believe that the perpetrator has been caught and punished, and it's in those cases that the police can convince themselves that they have the right person, to the point of ignoring things, or worse still supressing evidence, that would lead to a jury to dismiss because it would raise doubt. Is it right? Is it wrong? Does it depend on the individual case?

The bottom line is, people are fallible and they are emotional. Convict the wrong person and if you lock them up for life, at least they have a chance to prove their innocence. Kill them and their life is gone forever. You can argue all you want about the deaths of innocent victims, or the loss of their innocence and their lives in cases like the one here, but the bottom line is, I'd rather see a monsterous killer/rapist/pedophile/whatever in gaol for life than have one innocent person executed. That's always going to be the biggest factor for me in why I can't support the death penalty.

What does it take? Proof of DNA and a jury just having common fuckin sense!!!

[Jana]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

Ari, that's way outside the scope of the discussion for this particular situation, this guy doesn't have a "family." And the guy is obviously guilty here, so that's that.

Yes, he is - but where do you draw the line? There is no hard line, there is a little bit of black at one end and a little bit of white at the other and a hell of a lot of shades of grey in the middle. Justifying the death penalty where 'there is no doubt' isn't as clear as it seems. A lot of innocent people have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit because a jury was convinced of their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. So what does it take? Witnesses? How many? What if there were no witnesses to the crimes of a multiple murderer? Is evidence enough? How much evidence do you need? What kind of evidence? Do they need to admit to the crime? What if they never do, but everyone is sure that they did it? And what about people who admit to crimes they never did, for all kinds of reasons? The more heinous the crime, the more people need to believe that the perpetrator has been caught and punished, and it's in those cases that the police can convince themselves that they have the right person, to the point of ignoring things, or worse still supressing evidence, that would lead to a jury to dismiss because it would raise doubt. Is it right? Is it wrong? Does it depend on the individual case?

The bottom line is, people are fallible and they are emotional. Convict the wrong person and if you lock them up for life, at least they have a chance to prove their innocence. Kill them and their life is gone forever. You can argue all you want about the deaths of innocent victims, or the loss of their innocence and their lives in cases like the one here, but the bottom line is, I'd rather see a monsterous killer/rapist/pedophile/whatever in gaol for [b]life than have one innocent person executed. That's always going to be the biggest factor for me in why I can't support the death penalty[/b].

Your last statement is exactly why I don't believe in the DP. One innocent person dead is too much.

[Ehwmatt]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

Ari, that's way outside the scope of the discussion for this particular situation, this guy doesn't have a "family." And the guy is obviously guilty here, so that's that.

Yes, he is - but where do you draw the line? There is no hard line, there is a little bit of black at one end and a little bit of white at the other and a hell of a lot of shades of grey in the middle. Justifying the death penalty where 'there is no doubt' isn't as clear as it seems. A lot of innocent people have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit because a jury was convinced of their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. So what does it take? Witnesses? How many? What if there were no witnesses to the crimes of a multiple murderer? Is evidence enough? How much evidence do you need? What kind of evidence? Do they need to admit to the crime? What if they never do, but everyone is sure that they did it? And what about people who admit to crimes they never did, for all kinds of reasons? The more heinous the crime, the more people need to believe that the perpetrator has been caught and punished, and it's in those cases that the police can convince themselves that they have the right person, to the point of ignoring things, or worse still supressing evidence, that would lead to a jury to dismiss because it would raise doubt. Is it right? Is it wrong? Does it depend on the individual case?

The bottom line is, people are fallible and they are emotional. Convict the wrong person and if you lock them up for life, at least they have a chance to prove their innocence. Kill them and their life is gone forever. You can argue all you want about the deaths of innocent victims, or the loss of their innocence and their lives in cases like the one here, but the bottom line is, I'd rather see a monsterous killer/rapist/pedophile/whatever in gaol for life than have one innocent person executed. That's always going to be the biggest factor for me in why I can't support the death penalty.

I understand and agree that those concerns are problematic for applying the DP. I don't begrudge you those points and actually agree on all of them besides the eventual conclusion to do away with the DP. But, clearly, none of those concerns apply here to this situation and that's what I was talking about with that line.

[PDiddy75]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

Ari, that's way outside the scope of the discussion for this particular situation, this guy doesn't have a "family." And the guy is obviously guilty here, so that's that.

Yes, he is - but where do you draw the line? There is no hard line, there is a little bit of black at one end and a little bit of white at the other and a hell of a lot of shades of grey in the middle. Justifying the death penalty where 'there is no doubt' isn't as clear as it seems. A lot of innocent people have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit because a jury was convinced of their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. So what does it take? Witnesses? How many? What if there were no witnesses to the crimes of a multiple murderer? Is evidence enough? How much evidence do you need? What kind of evidence? Do they need to admit to the crime? What if they never do, but everyone is sure that they did it? And what about people who admit to crimes they never did, for all kinds of reasons? The more heinous the crime, the more people need to believe that the perpetrator has been caught and punished, and it's in those cases that the police can convince themselves that they have the right person, to the point of ignoring things, or worse still supressing evidence, that would lead to a jury to dismiss because it would raise doubt. Is it right? Is it wrong? Does it depend on the individual case?

The bottom line is, people are fallible and they are emotional. Convict the wrong person and if you lock them up for life, at least they have a chance to prove their innocence. Kill them and their life is gone forever. You can argue all you want about the deaths of innocent victims, or the loss of their innocence and their lives in cases like the one here, but the bottom line is, I'd rather see a monsterous killer/rapist/pedophile/whatever in gaol for [b]life than have one innocent person executed. That's always going to be the biggest factor for me in why I can't support the death penalty[/b].

Your last statement is exactly why I don't believe in the DP. One innocent person dead is too much.

Your right there. One innocent person dead is wrong in every way imaginable. We have made mistakes in the past, but lets not forget how many cold cases are being solved through DNA now, and how many people are being freed from death row/prison now because of the progress with DNA. I would have a hard time putting someone to death without DNA actually, because of the mistakes made before. But we are in different times now, and more often then not DNA puts the icing on the cake in most criminal trials to where there is no doubt.

[Arianddu]

What does it take? Proof of DNA and a jury just having common fuckin sense!!!

What if the DNA test got screwed up? It happens. What if the police were corrupt and planted DNA evidence because they believe, without proof, and maybe incorrectly, that a person is guilty and they don't want to see him/her walk? It happens. What if DNA is at the scene of a crime, but isn't the DNA of a murderer? It happens.

Like I said - nothing is clear cut and crystal sharp, everything has 'what ifs'. Yes, of course there will always be some cases where there is 100% absolutely no doubt, but the problem is, if you allow the death penalty for those, where do you draw the line that says 'this is what has no doubt, and everything else isn't.' Because if you can execute someone because he kidnapped, locked up and abused someone for 18 years, do you also execute someone who did the same thing for 10 years? How about someone who kidnapped and raped an 11 year old girl and then let her go? Is it the rape, or the kidnap, or the time? And how do you extrapolate to another crime? Or look at it the other way - someone kidnaps and rapes a series of young girls, but is careful and leaves little or no evidence. Eventually this person gets caught, but won't admit to the crime. How much evidence do you need to execute them? Do you need DNA? What if there is no DNA evidence, but, say, four out of six girls positively identify the person? Is that enough to execute them? What if some of the girls were murdered as well as raped, is that enough, even if there is still no DNA evidence? What is enough?

Where do you draw the line? Because the moment you have the death penalty, that's what you have to do, draw a line, and any line we draw as fallible, emotional, empathetic and feeling human beings, is going to be crossed the wrong way; the guilty will not get that punishment you think they deserve, and some innocent people will.

In the end, though, no argument on-line is going to change the opinion of a single person posting here, so I'm going to respectfully agree to disagree, and go play some good music.

Edit - btw, it's why America has a death penalty. We don't, those of us who live in Australia, New Zealand, the UK and Canada. Just saying.

[Jana]

There's a problem with you wanting to get rid of him by the death penalty, the children love him and the girl he abducted still has a bond with him and feels guilty over that. The morning show this morning talked about it, had the stepfather on and some people who talked to the girls, and that the children were upset he was arrested. They will get help, sure, but they would never want him dead, no matter what. That would actually cause more psychological damage to them and maybe even the girl he abducted. Life in prison is the best for this situation, with no chance of parole. He will be abused in prison or have to be isolated, which is hell also.

Thank you for saying that. There are many reasons why I don't support people being given the death penalty; one of them is the family of the convicted. One person commits a crime, and they should pay for it, but that person is going to have family - parents, a partner, children - and those people are innocent. Executing someone punishes their family too. And how many times has someone later been found innocent? Because a person wrongly convicted who is in gaol can be released at least, but someone who has been killed cannot be given back their life. Nothing is black and white; you can say 'only when the person is obviously guilty', but what makes someone obviously guilty?

Ari, that's way outside the scope of the discussion for this particular situation, this guy doesn't have a "family." And the guy is obviously guilty here, so that's that.

Yes, he is - but where do you draw the line? There is no hard line, there is a little bit of black at one end and a little bit of white at the other and a hell of a lot of shades of grey in the middle. Justifying the death penalty where 'there is no doubt' isn't as clear as it seems. A lot of innocent people have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit because a jury was convinced of their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. So what does it take? Witnesses? How many? What if there were no witnesses to the crimes of a multiple murderer? Is evidence enough? How much evidence do you need? What kind of evidence? Do they need to admit to the crime? What if they never do, but everyone is sure that they did it? And what about people who admit to crimes they never did, for all kinds of reasons? The more heinous the crime, the more people need to believe that the perpetrator has been caught and punished, and it's in those cases that the police can convince themselves that they have the right person, to the point of ignoring things, or worse still supressing evidence, that would lead to a jury to dismiss because it would raise doubt. Is it right? Is it wrong? Does it depend on the individual case?

The bottom line is, people are fallible and they are emotional. Convict the wrong person and if you lock them up for life, at least they have a chance to prove their innocence. Kill them and their life is gone forever. You can argue all you want about the deaths of innocent victims, or the loss of their innocence and their lives in cases like the one here, but the bottom line is, I'd rather see a monsterous killer/rapist/pedophile/whatever in gaol for life than have one innocent person executed. That's always going to be the biggest factor for me in why I can't support the death penalty.

What does it take? Proof of DNA and a jury just having common fuckin sense!!!

You don't always have DNA in every single case. A lot of cases also hinge on eyewitnesses, a lot of other evidence. Let's see common sense: DNA and a Jury - OJ Simpson - free. hahahhahhaha. The other side of the coin. Murderers that go free. That's a topic for another day, I guess.

[BobbyinTN]

I also think if you're a Christian and FOR the death penalty, it's hypocritical.

This is something that I've grappled with for a while. While I'm not going to present my political view on this, I morally feel abortion is an abominable action and anyone that excuses it as a 'choice' needs to have their vagina sealed shut with molten hot lava.

Thinking out loud here...the conundrum is how to denounce abortion while remaining supportive of the death penalty!?!? Yes, there's a level of hypocrisy to it. How can someone be supportive of protecting life at one end, but disinterested in protecting it at the other.

However, what a person engages in, between the moment their life began and the moment they took another's is what changes this issue, at least for me.

Every life has a right to a beginning. Not every life has a right to a full end, if that life chooses to take another in cold-blood. So to that end, it's NOT hypocritical. A person makes a sentient decision to take another life in cold blood, he/she should be prepared to face death him/herself.

Big difference: abortion ends an innoncent life and the death penalty ends a guilty one - usually a scumbag.

But if you're a Christian, that's for God to decide who is guilty and who isn't. It's not man's job.

[StoneCold]

In case the other thread disappears, I'll repost the link info here as well:

Donations for Jaycee Dugard can be sent -- checks only -- to

Jaycee Dugard Trust Fund
c/o Viewtech Financial Services
P.O. Box 596
Atwood, CA 92811

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=8451296

How to Donate to the Jaycee Dugard Trust Fund
By MIKE VON FREMD, KATE SNOW, SARAH NETTER & RONNA WALDMAN

Aug. 31, 2009—


Donations for Jaycee Dugard can be sent -- checks only -- to Jaycee Dugard Trust Fund, c/o Viewtech Financial Services, P.O. Box 596, Atwood, Calif. 92811.

[Voyager]

These little girls, though, it's a different story for me b/c it's a different scenario and very complicated. Because of the psychological damage they have and will be going through for years and having been so isolated dependent on him, I just feel him being put to death might really make them carry too much guilt the rest of their lives, as they did love him. Though, they're looking for graves, thinking he might have killed people. I hope they find it, and they will realize how evil he is and not rehabilitated.

I agree with you. If they find out that he is a mass murderer, the girls would miss him less and it may be easier for them to detach. But there is not doubt that all three of these girls will go through tremendous separation anxiety, even though it was separation from a rapist.

[Voyager]

In case the other thread disappears, I'll repost the link info here as well:

Donations for Jaycee Dugard can be sent -- checks only -- to

Jaycee Dugard Trust Fund
c/o Viewtech Financial Services
P.O. Box 596
Atwood, CA 92811

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=8451296

How to Donate to the Jaycee Dugard Trust Fund
By MIKE VON FREMD, KATE SNOW, SARAH NETTER & RONNA WALDMAN

Aug. 31, 2009—


Donations for Jaycee Dugard can be sent -- checks only -- to Jaycee Dugard Trust Fund, c/o Viewtech Financial Services, P.O. Box 596, Atwood, Calif. 92811.

Thanks for that SC. I was wondering if there was a place to donate. I hope this poor lady and her daughters get millions.