Imprisonment for Life? A Viable Option?

[Alexius]

For starters, this is somewhat related to the Capital Punishment thread. This deals with the second [or in some cases, the first] most severe punishment accepted in most of the world–that of life imprisonment.

There are more people in the United States serving life sentences than in any other country. Many are serving one or more life-terms for any number of crimes including drug trafficking, homicide, rape and kidnapping. In most cases, these are life sentences without the possibility of parole. On the Federal level, LWOP is the only kind of life sentence (aside from say, 50 or so years).

Anyway, in what case(s) (if any) do you consider the sentence of life without parole (LWOP) a viable and just punishment?

I may have a few more questions for thought, but I’ll wait to see where this goes first…

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[O.S.Luke]

Anyway, in what case(s) (if any) do you consider the sentence of life without parole (LWOP) a viable and just punishment?

I do. So does the Catholic Church, according to the Catecheism.

 

[LilyM]

I’d say the ONLY circumstances where capital punishment COULD rightly be imposed are where there is

a) an incredibly serious crime, with very high likelihood of repetition and little or no chance of rehabilitation (as determined by psych reports and other expert evidence)
b) a full and unequivocal confession of the crime from the prisoner, corroborated independently by multiple pieces of unimpeachable physical evidence.
c) no doubts whatsoever as to the mental fitness, IQ level etc of the prisoner

All of the above evidence to be doublechecked (ie two separate and independent sets of expert reports, two separate investigations of the physical evidence).

In view of the well-discussed cases of wrongly executed prisoners, and the seriousness of bungling capital cases, I’d even be neurotic enough to suggest that there should in effect be two trials if this were possible.

Perhaps come up with a scenario where two separate juries could be impanelled, but kept separate from each other at all times, and deliberating separately. Only if BOTH juries agree on guilt, proceed to sentencing.

d) no execution of anyone under the age of 18 - ever.

 

[Alexius]

I’d say the ONLY circumstances where capital punishment COULD rightly be imposed are where there is

a) an incredibly serious crime, with very high likelihood of repetition and little or no chance of rehabilitation (as determined by psych reports and other expert evidence)
b) a full and unequivocal confession of the crime from the prisoner, corroborated independently by multiple pieces of unimpeachable physical evidence.
c) no doubts whatsoever as to the mental fitness, IQ level etc of the prisoner

All of the above evidence to be doublechecked (ie two separate and independent sets of expert reports, two separate investigations of the physical evidence).

In view of the well-discussed cases of wrongly executed prisoners, and the seriousness of bungling capital cases, I’d even be neurotic enough to suggest that there should in effect be two trials if this were possible.

Perhaps come up with a scenario where two separate juries could be impanelled, but kept separate from each other at all times, and deliberating separately. Only if BOTH juries agree on guilt, proceed to sentencing.

d) no execution of anyone under the age of 18 - ever.

I was actually asking about life imprisonment, not the death penalty, but I appreciate the feedback. Perhaps life in prison would satisfy your fears of executing an innocent person?

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[LilyM]

I was actually asking about life imprisonment, not the death penalty, but I appreciate the feedback. Perhaps life in prison would satisfy your fears of executing an innocent person?

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

I think the two are very much linked - most people would see LWOP as pretty much being an alternative to capital punishment, perhaps where one or more of the factors I’ve mentioned are lacking.

As you may’ve guessed, I come from a country (Australia) where the last execution of a prisoner (and an extremely controversial one it was) happened in 1965, and where there are no longer any capital crimes on the books. But I’m not so hardcore anti-death penalty as to think it could never possibly have a place.

 

[Alexius]

I think the two are very much linked - most people would see LWOP as pretty much being an alternative to capital punishment, perhaps where one or more of the factors I’ve mentioned are lacking.

As you may’ve guessed, I come from a country (Australia) where the last execution of a prisoner (and an extremely controversial one it was) happened in 1965, and where there are no longer any capital crimes on the books. But I’m not so hardcore anti-death penalty as to think it could never possibly have a place.

I agree.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

I will offer a local case from a few years back. The defendant, in his early 40’s, has been convicted of a particularly heinous murder. He has been convicted of over 20 felonies since age 17, half of them violent crimes, half while he was in prison. He has seriously injured other prisoner in three of these. Throughout the trial he was actively trying to find someone to kill the witnesses against him.

Shall we put him in prison for life without parole so he will only injure/kill other prisoners and guards in the future?

 

[ralphinal]

If it takes 30 years from sentencing to execution, for anyone over 30, it is more or less life without parol…

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

For starters, this is somewhat related to the Capital Punishment thread. This deals with the second [or in some cases, the first] most severe punishment accepted in most of the world–that of life imprisonment.

There are more people in the United States serving life sentences than in any other country. Many are serving one or more life-terms for any number of crimes including drug trafficking, homicide, rape and kidnapping. In most cases, these are life sentences without the possibility of parole. On the Federal level, LWOP is the only kind of life sentence (aside from say, 50 or so years).

Anyway, in what case(s) (if any) do you consider the sentence of life without parole (LWOP) a viable and just punishment?

I may have a few more questions for thought, but I’ll wait to see where this goes first…

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

“Life” should mean life.​

What it should not mean:

• 10 years with the prospect of serving only 2/3 of the sentence
• A sentence of 30 years with more added when the criminal fails to die on time: a sentence of 30 years should be served for 30 years, not 29, not 31, but 30
• Remission of sentence for good behaviour.

 

[LilyM]

I will offer a local case from a few years back. The defendant, in his early 40’s, has been convicted of a particularly heinous murder. He has been convicted of over 20 felonies since age 17, half of them violent crimes, half while he was in prison. He has seriously injured other prisoner in three of these. Throughout the trial he was actively trying to find someone to kill the witnesses against him.

Shall we put him in prison for life without parole so he will only injure/kill other prisoners and guards in the future?

Was anyone suggesting that we should? This’d be a case where there is a heinous crime with next to zero chance of rehabilitation. Somehow I doubt he’s disputed his guilt, hence the attempted killing of witnesses.

 

[notself]

In the case of someone who kills in prison, they can be sentenced to solitary confinement. No need to kill.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Was anyone suggesting that we should? This’d be a case where there is a heinous crime with next to zero chance of rehabilitation. Somehow I doubt he’s disputed his guilt, hence the attempted killing of witnesses.

One of the crucial pieces of evidence was his letter to each of the witnesses warning them to keep their mouths shut because without them noone could prove what happened.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

If it takes 30 years from sentencing to execution, for anyone over 30, it is more or less life without parol…

Your numbers are about right. Thomas Vincent Edward died in the prison medical facility last week. His appeal of his death sentence was still pending in U.S.District Court. His first trial was in 1983.

Please pray for him, for Vanessa Iberri his victim, her family and for Kelly Cartier who he also shot [she survived].

 

[maize]

life in prison.

solitary confinement.
no tv.
no letters.
no visitation.
no books.
nothing to take your mind off why you are there.

basically living dead.

 

[notself]

life in prison.

solitary confinement.
no tv.
no letters.
no visitation.
no books.
nothing to take your mind off why you are there.

basically living dead.

What is the source for your information?

 

[LilyM]

One of the crucial pieces of evidence was his letter to each of the witnesses warning them to keep their mouths shut because without them noone could prove what happened.

Well, those threats and letters in themselves are close enough to an admission on his part. Presumably there’s physical evidence that he could be convicted on as well.

 

[maize]

What is the source for your information?

my head? thats what life should be like.

 

[dianaiad]

I will offer a local case from a few years back. The defendant, in his early 40’s, has been convicted of a particularly heinous murder. He has been convicted of over 20 felonies since age 17, half of them violent crimes, half while he was in prison. He has seriously injured other prisoner in three of these. Throughout the trial he was actively trying to find someone to kill the witnesses against him.

Shall we put him in prison for life without parole so he will only injure/kill other prisoners and guards in the future?

I have always been a proponent of capital punishment. Not because I think it’s all that much of a punishment–but rather because it gets guys like the above person out of our hair. Personally, if we are going for PUNISHMENT, life in little concrete cage for 23 hours a day is far more appropriate–and far harder on him.

Now it seems that it’s actually cheaper to keep him in that wee cage than to put him out of our misery. So…ok…lock him up. Works for me.

He doesn’t get visitors. He doesn’t get privileges. He doesn’t get anything but air, baloney sandwiches, clean clothes and toilet paper. (shrug)

And if, in the rare instances that it turns out that he didn’t actually DO anything, and was unjustly convicted, when he gets out the state hands him several million bucks, a tax free house and free everything he wants for the rest of his life. We’re all still ahead of the game.

 

[sisyphean]

I suppose that I seam like a left winger on this, despite having been extremely conservative my entire life. So here goes nothing…

I cannot, morally, justify putting anyone to death. Neither I nor anyone else has the authority to kill anyone who does not pose a direct threat to me, my family, or someone else. When a person is in prison, no matter the reason, they can be effectively controlled to prevent any further harm being inflicted. I suppose it comes down to this: if I could not go before God and say that I had a right to do what I did then I wont do it (wow, that was rambling). I also cannot ask anyone else to do it, since acceptance and/or support makes you implicitly responsible. Take the abortion debate; if you support abortion as a choice, are you not supporting death? The same concept applies here. No person has a right to take another person’s life.

As far as the imprisonment goes. I would place the person (I think it is safe to assume the severest of punishments for the severest of crimes here) in a solitary confinement cell for the rest of their life. BUT, that person must be allowed certain things: Decent food (not great, but decent), books (relatively inexpensive and non-consumable), a certain amount of exercise time (in one of those solitary confinement exercise cells you see in movies). This is because I, we, are bound to CHARITY (caritas) and this requires that we show mercy and love to all.

Our God is a just God and we are made in his image. This requires that we MUST pass judgment on some but must ensure that it is within what we have been given (and we cannot condemn people, lest we first be condemned). It is very true that we must remove these people from society, but we have not the right to remove their life from them (that is the sole domain of God). We are also obligated to show mercy to sinners and evildoers. As difficult as it is we must, and I emphasize MUST, be possessed of both qualities: Aequitas (justice) wholly dependent on Veritas (truth) and Clementia (mercy) wholly dependent upon Caritas (charitable love).

At least thats one mans opinion.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

I was actually asking about life imprisonment, not the death penalty, but I appreciate the feedback. Perhaps life in prison would satisfy your fears of executing an innocent person?

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

The problem with life imprisonment is that it leaves brutal killers alive to kill again.

Hundreds of murders have been committed by those previously convicted of murder, and about half of these murders occur in prison.

Executing murderers saves innocent lives.