Family pre-trial input on death penalty cases

  • Thread starter Thread starter prayerrider
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes I personally don’t like it for family members to have (name removed by moderator)ut on the sentencing. They are probably the most emotionally involved, and I don’t feel like their pleas for mercy, or toughness, or whatever should sway the judge.
 
Loud-living-dogma said:
Yes I personally don’t like it for family members to have (name removed by moderator)ut on the sentencing. They are probably the most emotionally involved, and I don’t feel like their pleas for mercy, or toughness, or whatever should sway the judge.
Click to expand...
With that logic, the accused shouldn’t be able to provide (name removed by moderator)ut either. They’re also very “emotionally involved” in the sentence.
 
Aquinas11 said:
40.png
Loud-living-dogma:
Yes I personally don’t like it for family members to have (name removed by moderator)ut on the sentencing. They are probably the most emotionally involved, and I don’t feel like their pleas for mercy, or toughness, or whatever should sway the judge.
Click to expand...
With that logic, the accused shouldn’t be able to provide (name removed by moderator)ut either. They’re also very “emotionally involved” in the sentence.
Click to expand...
Too much emotionalism!! 🤣
 
Last edited:
It was interesting to me that prosecutors consulted families before announcing that the death penalty would be sought, rather than waiting until the trial’s penalty phase.
 
Last edited:
In many cases the decision to seek the death penalty has to be made prior to the start of the trial.
 
I think things like Victim Impact Statements are totally appropriate. So much of what passes for “justice “ today occurs behind closed doors as plea deals are negotiated, and the perpetrator in the absence of a trial is never confronted by the reality of how his crimes have affected his victims.
 
There is also the need for different type of lawyers and specific questioning of the jury pool.
 
But killing the responsible parties will not bring their loved ones back, nor will it end the pain.
 
Yes bc of the PR if you don’t & then announce not seeking death penalty and family goes to media saying “they never even bothered to ask us”, especially since these cases are already usually in media. Prosecutors are politicians so won’t risk that PR
 
Imprisioning doesn’t bring loved ones back either so clearly that’s not the criteria.

Death penalty does protect public from future killing by same person, including inmates in prison. Aquinas compared it to severing an infected limb to prevent contamination of body
 
Yes of course but I’m talking about those convicted of Capital Offenses , people of extreme risk of reoffending. If imprisoned they can kill inmates or be released prematurely and re-kill. Can’t do that w Death Penalty
 
Do you think the victim’s opinion should carry weight? That seems weird to me. If man 1 wants criminal 1 to hang for stealing his horse and man 2 wants criminal 2 to get run out of town for stealing his. Does it really make sense for criminal 1 to get a worse punishment?

Where’s the justice in that?
 
Aquinas11 said:
Yes of course but I’m talking about those convicted of Capital Offenses , people of extreme risk of reoffending. If imprisoned they can kill inmates or be released prematurely and re-kill. Can’t do that w Death Penalty
Click to expand...
As we’ll learn when the governor of California pardons a good chunk of the 700+ death row inmates whose executions he has stopped.
 
He will be able to count on their votes, since no doubt he’ll restore that right to them pronto.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top