From what I've read the evidence is shotty at best. The only witnesses were ones facing murder, rape and mutilation cases of their own, who testified to save themselves... not motivation for lying is it? . Not to mention the racist prosecutor and the fact there were no black men on the jury... Does that mean he's innocent.. of course not. But there was plenty of room for error and misjudgment.
Oh so you're saying that he and some of his little friends formed an after school group to hang out and play chutes and ladders and stuff and it turned into something else.
Gentlemen, what we are seeing is the death of personal responsibility. Nothing is anyones fault (except George W. Bush) and therefore no one can or should be punished (except George W. Bush). Oh, and yo-yo-, thanks for the red rep. I will cherish it warmly with all of the love that it deserves. But, you forgot to send me your address...
Definitely not. That would be punishment -- and punishment is wrong. You see, people have reasons that they do bad things. We just need to understand these reasons and care about them. We don't need to punish anyone, that would be barbaric. Well, anyone except George Bush.
Nobody said he shouldn't be held responsible for crimes he committed. I'm sure being locked up in prison (include 8 years in solitary) for over 50% of your life (26 years) isn't a punishment at all . The issue is wether you should execute a person that has changed himself and made a positive difference in thousands of lives. I'm sure awards from the president and nominations for nobel peace prize are meaningless and he's just a piece of trash that should be killed
People must be held accountable for their actions. I think it's great that he has turned a new leaf but think about the crimes he has done.
There's no question in my mind about whether the man should be freed or not. Clearly he was caught and punished for the crimes he committed and should never be set free. There may be some case for arguing the guy got a bit of a crappy deal on the homicide convictions with the apparantly dodgy dealings / racism / whatever. But that's just what he got nailed with. No doubt he got away with many, many more crimes, so in my mind that kinda evens things up punishment-wise. I do believe that anyone who can actively discourage people from getting embroiled in gangs and the misery they can bring to generations of people in a neighbourhood should be allowed to continue with that work. Life in prison is surely a fitting punishment and a suitable message to send out. We don't have the death penalty in the UK but I'm not against it. I just think that in this one case, someone who is acting as both a deterrent and a voice against gang culture should not be extinguished from this life. That seems to be the most pragmatic and commonsense approach.
the death penalty is backwards and medieval, and since there is many instances of bad convictions I don't see how any thinking person can possibly support it and also no christian person should support it unless of course they are full of crap and don't really beleive in their religion If I recall correctly the crips where not intially created as a criminal gang, but they became one when the crack took over inner cities.
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to ferret77 again.... Too right - An eye for an eye come on... Are we animals?
Okay Arnie, say you have an 8 year old daughter. Someone goes to your daughters school, kidnaps your daughter, rapes her repeatedly and murders her brutally. Then he taunts the police by leaving pieces of her dismembered bodies in various locations. He states publically at his trial if given the chance he will do it again. Would you want this person to live or to die?
I'd rather he was arse raped in jail every day for the rest of his life. I think that's a nastier punishment - don't you?