Well then they need to clarify that the death penalty isn't for the "worst of the worst" but rather, a handful of unlucky murderers. The "worst of the worst" get plea deals for lesser sentences on a routine basis.
Agree with OTB, there was no good reason for prosecutors to let this guy plead out.
"The pacifist is as surely a traitor to his country and to humanity as is the most brutal wrongdoer." -Theodore Roosevelt
He wasn't going to get executed so it doesn't even matter.
Oh I know, i was using this as an example to show a handful of things:
1) The death penalty is not in any way, shape or form reserved for the "worst of the worst" but rather an unlucky few
2) The death penalty in Kentucky (and the rest of the USA) is a joke
3) If states aren't going to execute anyone then they should not have a death penalty
4) Pros that continue to support "sentencing phases" and the current death penalty statutes are the reason this keeps happening. Mandatory death sentences are the only way to go.
That being said, prosecutors should be using all resources available to make sure that all murderers receive the maximum sentence possible, whatever that may be.
SCOTUS explicitly rejected mandatory death sentences when capital punishment was reinstated in Gregg. Never mind that all states had rejected a mandatory sentence by 1963 - a trend that had started in the 19th century.
I understand that there are financial and time benefits to be had with plea deals. In fact, there are plenary of capital murder pleas I’ve read about here that did not bother me. However, I believe there are some cases in which a prosecutor is obligated by duty to seek the ultimate punishment all the way to trial. I’m not going to get into where I draw the exact line, but murdering a family of four, including two children, definitely fits. Perhaps the college town jury would have been unusually lenient, but I would expect a prosecutor to try to secure death in a case like this.
"The pacifist is as surely a traitor to his country and to humanity as is the most brutal wrongdoer." -Theodore Roosevelt
Funny, whenever anyone here argues against mandatory death sentences, the only argument they have is "well gregg/furman blah blah blah". Well no crap that's why we can't have mandatory death sentences, but by that logic you should support atkins, Simmons, moore, ring, etc. This is the reason why we have crap like this, and the death penalty is in its last days. If we are afraid of mandatory death sentences why even have it? How do you justify a system that allows people like this to plea to a lesser sentences and say the death penalty is fair? Not just this case specifically, but all the mass murderers who have escaped death recently in Florida, Georgia, Texas, etc.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks