As most of the country is now aware, our scandal-plagued, two-faced Governor George Ryan today commuted the death sentences of ALL 167 persons on death row. Moreover, a few of those today and Friday were pardoned altogether, while a few more had their sentences commuted to 40 years and not life imprisonment.

I must preface this by stating that I agree with Ryan's moratorium on the death penalty here in Illinois, and I agree with his decision to pardon the 4 persons whom he pardoned on Friday. These 4, guilty or not, were convicted and sentenced based on evidence and testimony obtained by corrupt cops who tortured the defendants. Hey, if the prosecution is as corrupt as it was in those 4 cases, then it's their fault someone gets off. I have no complaints about that.

What I find truly abhorrent is that Lyin' Ryan told us Illinois residents early last year that he was going to issue blanket commutations. Then he said he wasn't and called for hearings for all death row convicts in front of the Illinois Prisoner Review Board (our parole board).

These hearings were bitterly criticized by everyone--all the major newspapers, the media outlets, even conservative AND liberal columnists. These hearings were an emotional train wreck for all the families of the victims. They had to relive it all.

I personally know a gentleman who serves on this review board. He told me the board was stunned by the governor's actions, and that everyone on the board--Democrats and Republicans--were against the hearings and could not understand why the governor demanded them when he all along had the intention of blanket commutations.

Then, right after Christmas, when asked by several media people, Lyin' Ryan explained he would not grant blanket commutations, saying it wasn't fair to the victims' families, with whom he met in mid-December. It was explained to Ryan that many of the death row inmates freely confessed, or were convicted with a mountain of evidence, or had no doubts about their guilt and the manner in which they were tried, convicted, and sentenced.

Two weeks ago, he told the review board that he was going to look at each case individually. Fair enough. He lied. Today he flip-flopped. Furthermore, he sends letters to all the victims' families and apologizes for his flip-flopping but says he will sleep well at night believing he was right in wiping out death row, never mind the fact that very few remaining death row inmates' cases were being contested.

Hell, one man killed 4 women in California, then came to Illinois and killed another 5 or 6 women. This guy laughed in public, saying he hated women and wanted to kill more. His sentence was commuted.

A man and his girl friend broke into an Addison, Illinois home of a pregnant woman who had an 8-year-old child. The man and woman killed the child, killed the woman, and while she was dying, they cut open her womb, removed her near-term fetus, and tried to pass it off as their own. DNA evidence and their own admissions provided the proof to convict these monsters.

Their sentences were commuted.

A man who killed two young women in the 1950's is now in his late '70's. The sister of these two women is still alive, and she has continually opposed this guy's release. His sentence was commuted to 40 years and he was released.

Just what the hell does Ryan think he's doing?

It is a fact that he is scandal-plagued, and that dozens of people around him have been either convicted or indicted for one crime or another. In fact, recently one of his closest aids just went on trial, and while this guy is on trial, Ryan appoints the guy to a $190,000 a year state job. He also single-handedly destroyed the Republican Party in the Land of Lincoln (though some may thank him for that).

Could Lyin' Ryan be trying to look good on his way out, perhaps trying to deflect federal prosecution? Did he really give a crap about the families and friends of those who were murdered? God knows they're both devastated and furious about his actions today.

One has to think that what he did was despicable when even liberal folks like Eric Zorn or Richard Roeper, as well as incoming governor, Democrat Rod Blagojevich, are blasting him for how he did this whole thing.

As far as I am concerned, Lyin' Ryan is a worthless piece of crap. I know 4 years ago when I voted for Glen Poshard that I made the right choice. Too bad the outcome wasn't what I wanted then, for we're paying for it now.

I don't even see this as a "pro" or "anti" death penalty issue, even though Ryan now says he opposes it. I am not the world's biggest fan of the death penalty. What strikes a lot of people as strange is this: If, in Ryan's mind, there was even a HINT of innocence of a death row inmate (and apparently there was), why didn't he pardon them outright instead of commuting their sentences? After all, someone who may be innocent deserves neither life imprisonment nor death.

Great post MIB -- although it's tragic that the incidents you recount (which only represent a SMALL portion of the horrific actions by your outgoing Governor) are taking place at the hands of an elected official who clearly believes he is God himself....I know Ryan is still technically in office but there has GOT to be a law preventing an outgoing politician (especially a state Governor) from being able to act in such a reprehensible manner....his unconscionable actions not only affect the lives of hundreds of victims families who have been forced to relive their worst nightmare but, just as importantly, places the public at greater risk when several of these vicious murderers are being RELEASED, many of whom will undoubtedly commit heinous crimes again.

After reading more about this story today (and recovering from my utter disbelief that this was actually taking place), I in no way defend the actions of the corrupt prosecutors who helped gain the convictions but when the evidence is clearly as overhwhelming as it is against so many of these men who committed MULTIPLE cold-blooded murders (why else would they even be on death row ), someone has GOT to stop Ryan -- before it's too late....he's not God Almighty and he is simply trying to go out in a "blaze of glory" by having his name appear in the national headlines -- and in the WORST way humanly possible, I might add....my heart goes out to all the families of the hundreds of victims and I only hope that this scoundrel (and that word is FAR too kind for Ryan) suffers SEVERELY for the remainder of his life (which will hopefully be very brief).

[ January 11, 2003: Message edited by: gamecock ]

gamecock, just as the U.S. Constitution grants complete and absolute pardon authority to the president (for anything federal, of course), so does the Illinois Constitution grant the same absolute pardon authority to its governor.

Unfortunately, there is nothing that can be done.

The only good thing is that this scumbag is out of office come noon Monday. Governor-elect Rod Blagojevich assumes office Monday.

Truthfully, politics in this state is simply disgusting. There is no state in the country more politically corrupt than Illinois, and it ain't just one party, either.

Disgusting. Truly disgusting this all is.

I weep for the families of the murder victims.

Well said MIB....anyone who thinks it is "sheer coincidence" that Ryan chose to announce and implement his "decision" literally hours before he is scheduled to leave office is an outright fool....this has got to be the most dispicable abuse of political power that I have EVER heard! ....it may be the law in Illinois but that sure doesn't make it right -- the State Supreme Court should schedule an emergency meeting (tomorrow if necessary) to act on this matter before any further miscarriage of justice occurs -- assuming it's not too late already....to use the word "disgusting" as you stated doesn't begin to describe the utter contempt that any sane, rational thinking American MUST hold for this man.

My heart also goes out to all the families of the countless victims whose suffering I cannot begin to fathom....and I hope and pray the number of innocent people that will now be murdered SOLELY due to Ryan's ego-trip will be as few as possible (although I'm sorry to say the morgues in Illinois and elsewhere in this country will likely now be fuller "thanks" to your soon-to-be-former Governor, which tragically his exit from office apparently didn't come soon enough).

[ January 11, 2003: Message edited by: gamecock ]

Well, as I said, there's nothing anyone can do, and that includes our State Supreme Court. Just as the U.S. Supreme Court could not have intervened in Clinton's controversial 11th hour pardons, our Supreme Court cannot intervene in Ryan's.

Sad fact: He's the Governor. Our State Constitution grants to him alone absolute authority when it comes to pardons and commutations. There is no recourse available.

How "coincidental" that a wacky Law Professor at the University of Illinois has nominated Ryan for the Nobel Peace Prize because of the governor's actions.

mib, you raised two issues. the first, governor ryan's lying and flip-flopping, you have cause to be angry over.

the second, the fact of the commutations themselves, leaves me troubled. with only a couple exceptions, the death sentences were commuted to life in prison with no chance for parole. such a sentence meets the criminal justice system's goals very well. it punishes the guilty by taking away his (or her) freedom, and it guarantees that the guilty will not repeat the crime, thus safeguarding society.

to demand anything more is to seek revenge, and thankfully, our justice system is not based on "an eye for an eye"; it is not, and shouldn't become, a blood sport.

the fact that these criminals will be locked up and the key thrown away isn't good enough for some, makes me shudder at how callous and blood-thirsty we as a society have become.

thersis, but here is where the problem lies: Governor Ryan says that there are innocent persons on death row, and he does not want to execute an innocent person. So why does he not release them altogether? It makes no sense.

A person is innocent enough to not be executed, but not innocent enough to get out of prison on a life sentence. Either the convict was innocent (send him home then), or he was guilty (leave him on death row).

Just my $.02

I find it interesting that no one on the board has yet stated what I feel - commuting death sentences is the right thing to do. In this instance, there may be a number of reasons to dislike Gov. Ryan's process for doing so, and for believing that he is only acting to shore up his "legacy" and silence critics. I don't live in Illinois and can't speak to Mr. Ryan's character. Nonetheless I fully support his actions - the death penalty is a barbaric anachronism that should not be practiced by civilized societies.

I realize that many of the people whose sentences have been commuted have committed horrible crimes. And I completely understand the victims' families' thirst for vengence. These families rightly want to see the killers receive the ultimate penalty. However, our judicial system should not be based on vigilante feelings. We must, as a society, stand up for something more than mere vengence. We are the only modern Western power to continue using the death penalty, and I simply don't see any justification for it.

To me life in prison and the death penalty result in nearly the same effect to the killer - life is basically over. The difference is the death penalty robs the killer's family of their presence, and no matter how horrible the killer, there is invariably someone who still loves that person. Making the killer's family suffer is cruel and unnecessary.

The other difference is with life in prison, there is a chance, however slight, that the killer may actually reform and do something positive for society. I admit it's a long shot, but I am thinking most specifically of the "Scared Straight" program of the 70's. In that program it was the "lifers" who worked with delinquent youth to set them on the right path. These men were willing to give of themselves, without personal gain, in the hopes of preventing kids from ruining their lives. I don't know how successful the program was, but it was a clear sign that even those on death row can have the desire to create a positive effect on others. I don't like seeing us, as a society, give up on fellow humans, no matter how horribly they may have acted.

I also think that, in some ways, life in prison is worse than the death penalty. With life in prison, the killer does continue to have access to the wider world, and will see and hear about friends and family members going on with their lives - lives that the killer has no hope of living. At some point the killer is going to realize how much he/she lost in committing their crime, and that realization will haunt them for the rest of their sentence. Is that not a horrible enough punishment? - years, if not decades, of knowing that you have trashed your life, are stuck in prison, and there is nothing you can do about it.

Don't get me wrong, I certainly have seen and heard of cases where I believed the killer deserved to die for their crime (e.g., the guy who hired a hit man to kill his ex-wife, crippled son, and his nurse, just to gain access to the kid's malpractice settlement money), but I don't think my feelings, or anyone else's, should be the basis for our criminal justice system.

Ryan's an ass, I'm glad he's gone, and at this point, he shouldn't be lauded for doing his job right for a change. (There should be a lot more ink spilled for those that have been fighting for years to bring the failed system to light.)

But that's the point that shouldn't get lost in the politics. What he did was the right thing to do, the moral thing to do.

Society has created society; society can use it's laws to remove you from society. Society didn't create life; it has no right to end it.

[quote] Governor Ryan says that there are innocent persons on death row, and he does not want to execute an innocent person. So why does he not release them altogether? It makes no sense.

---

The short answer to this question would have to do with the uncertainty in determining guilt/innocence & the irreversibility of execution.

I haven't researched the facts pertaining to Governor Ryan's term in office & have seen only passing reference to the scandals, so I am in no position to comment on that. But I respect him for this action, because from all appearances, he is acting on a personal conviction that evolved through his experience while he was in office. It was not based on poll numbers or approval ratings--he had nothing to gain (but at this late hour little to lose) politically by doing this.

My opposition to capital punishment in not so much based on its ineffectiveness as a deterrent, or on its cruelty, though these are both valid arguments. The most serious problem with its seeming arbitrariness, with the fact that the likelihood of a death sentence appears to depend so much on class & race, & also that so many people of death row were subsequently exonerated. It is a safe bet that at least some of the persons executed since executions were resumed in the U.S. were innocent.

In a society in which all people are ostensibly equal, no human, whatever the authority vested in him/her by society, should have the right to pronounce another human as unfit to live. To me it seems fundamental that in a free society, the state should not have the power of life or death over its citizens. Punishments, prisons & the rule of law are absolutely necessary to any civil society, both as deterrence and to protect society from dangerous individuals, & to satisfy our sense of justice. But not capital punishment.

While people who were on death row in Illinois were convicted of murders, the list of crimes qualifying for the death penalty in the U.S. goes beyond that. Espionage & treason are already on the list; & who knows what might make the list tomorrow? Of all the executions that have occurred in the U.S. & Great Britain, how many would withstand scrutiny by the moral standards of today? In South Carolina we have executed several people who were juveniles at the time of their crime. In the 1940s we once executed a 14-year-old (needless to say that he was black). Because the standards that we apply in determining what crimes deserve execution have evolved, & continue to change, & vary from country to country & region to region, justice is best served by ceasing executions altogether. Whatever the judgment we pass on another person, it is still an opinion, not god's truth. A judge & jury act through civil, not divine, authority.

In issuing blanket clemency George Ryan was not "playing god"; rather, he was acting on his newfound belief that none among us can rightly assume this role. I applaud his action.

[ January 13, 2003: Message edited by: Billy ]

[quote]Originally posted by MCMikeNamara:

Society has created society; society can use it's laws to remove you from society.

---

Society did not create society. That makes no sense.

It is a group of people coming together, making laws, that created this society here in Illinois. Both the Illinois and U.S. Constitution specifically permit execution.

[quote]Society didn't create life; it has no right to end it.

---

Be careful with saying this, because pro-life people might want to use this in the abortion argument.

I am of the opinion that no one has the right to take another life except in very specific, limited circumstances (self-defense, etc.). "No one" is different from "society" having this same right. The State of Illinois, by mandate of its citizens, permits the taking of a life provided numerous conditions are met, those being, of course, that the person to be executed had to have committed a certain crime, be tried, convicted, etc. Such a person has forfeited his right to remain in this society, at least according to the laws of Illinois.

I would have had no problems with Lyin' Ryan looking at each of the 167 cases individually, and deciding whether to commute a case that might have raised the slightest amount of doubt. But for him to flip-flop more than once on that, then decide to issue an across-the-board commutation, well, THAT is immoral, not the death penalty itself, as some here like to think.

There was no reason for Ryan to commute the sentences of so many obviously guilty people--people who did not even petition for commutations--just so he could look good on his way out the door (and before the Feds indict his sorry ass).

I fear Lyin' Ryan did this primarily to look good in the eyes of all those political groups like the anti-death penalty and Hollywood ones. (Yes, there was a group of 100+ Hollywood folks who signed a letter to Ryan, asking him to commute everyone's sentences.)

The families and friends of the victims now have to live the rest of their lives knowing that the one(s) who murdered their loved one are getting a pass for nothing but political reasons.

Thank God as of today we have a new governor--and a rather good-looking one at that.

[ January 13, 2003: Message edited by: MIB ]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MIB:

Society did not create society. That makes no sense.


Sorry -- I didn't realize me being so glib would be taken so literally. What you say is exactly what I meant. The people have come together, they have formed society, they have decided 'thou shalt not kill' and put laws in place in order to enforce that commandment, and as you say of those who break this law:


Such a person has forfeited his right to remain in this society, at least according to the laws of Illinois.


Sure thing -- couldn't agree more. Put these folks in jail -- remove them from the society. But that's different than removing them from life -- a right that no society has anymore than an individual does.

Except in self-defense, it's immoral to kill people if you don't need to do so. Period. Society, as we've set it up, does not need death row to protect itself or its individuals. That's what makes it immoral.

(Ryan's stated motives -- even if you take them at face value, which I don't -- still don't address the morality of killing people. Even if we had a system in place to determine the absolute guilt or innocence of an accused murderer, it would still be immoral for society to kill them.)

All that being said, our difference of opinion here comes from a different concept of moral issues -- something probably best not debated online -- and certainly something that will change easily. I'm no preacher and not trying to be. So now that I've clarified what I meant, I'll agree to differ if you will

[ January 13, 2003: Message edited by: MCMikeNamara ]

Just as an aside, I don't think a Democrat could dare do what George Ryan did, even though most opponents of the death penalty presumably tend to vote Democratic. Any Democrat who did this would be tied to the whipping post to be flogged by Bill Clinton personally.

I understand the emotions of the families of the victims but not the logic.

If an innocent person is executed then that would seem to largely remove the motivation to find the real killer?

[ May 08, 2004, 06:54 PM: Message edited by: sportinlife ]

Living in IL, I've never had much use for Ryan. He used his previous office as a platform to run for guv on state time, and "licenses for bribes" is the tip of the iceberg.

On the other hand, he's done more for GLBT legal equality (or tried to, against much resistance from the legislature) than any of his predecessors, and he hasn't been shy about it.

That said, I'm with CPT_Doom all the way, on the death penalty in general and commuting sentences to life. The system is not infallible, especially when it's run by the kind of scamsters who usually win Illinois elections. Wrongly convicted inmates can be freed, but wrongly convicted corpses can't be resurrected.

More to the point, "unscrupulous prosecutors" were one of the fatal flaws in the system that Ryan cited ... and I can't think of two more unscrupulous prosecutors than the two who have screamed the loudest about Ryan's decision: Dick Devine and Joe Birkett. If those two said the North Pole was cold, I wouldn't believe it without checking first.

Ryan also had an excellent point about the executions-as-family-therapy BS. What the victims' families need is help getting through life. Hello! Killing even the guilty just to give someone's next of kin "closure" is the cruelest hoax of all. And sentencing decisions are not a referendum on the value of the victim's life, so let's quit pretending they are.

Pardon the rant, but I'm tired of most of what I hear on this subject. If "lying" were the issue, neither Slick Willie nor his predecessor would have made it through his first term.

[quote]Originally posted by thersis:
the fact that these criminals will be locked up and the key thrown away isn't good enough for some, makes me shudder at how callous and blood-thirsty we as a society have become.

---

Not as callous & bloodthirsty as some of these murderers -one of these guys on Illinois death row was there because he killed several people including a pregnant woman and ripped the baby out(according to the NY Times) - That sucker deserves the death penalty ( IMHO)

[quote]Originally posted by copman:
Not as callous & bloodthirsty as some of these murderers -one of these guys on Illinois death row was there because he killed several people including a pregnant woman and ripped the baby out(according to the NY Times) - That sucker deserves the death penalty ( IMHO)[/QB]

---

Thank you, copman, for being the voice of reaason....I am appalled at the "logic" uttered by several Outsporters on this thread in their attempt to show compassion and "equal rights" for cold-blooded, vicious murderers under the rationale that perhaps one-tenth of one percent of those on death row MAY somehow be innocent....I certainly am NOT wishing that ANY family have to endure the unconscionable pain and suffering (and those words don't begin to describe the unbelievable magnitude of grief that all those families had to endure) of having a loved one brutally tortured and murdered -- I have to wonder if many of these outspoken "anti-death penalty" advocates would feel the same way if God forbid someone they dearly love was viciously tortured and murdered and there was absolutely no doubt as who the perpetrator was --under those circumstances I tend to think their views would be vastly different to say the least.

My heart still goes out to all the families of those tragically killed by these animals (none of whom deserve ONE SECOND of compassion or fairness as a result of their VOLUNTARY actions) and I continue to hold out hope that Ryan's ego-driven decisions will somehow be overturned, as the national media has been justifiably advocating for the past 48 hours.

I heard Blagojevich on WBEZ this afternoon; he sounded Kennedyesque. Has he always had this accent and intonation? It was uncanny--and he's even got a JFK-type haircut, though updated for 2003....

One of my relatives was assassinated by white supremacists in Arkansas in the 1970s. Even given this scenario, I would not want them to receive the death penalty; they should have been placed in jail for the rest of their lives, though I do not believe the crime was ever solved (or even thoroughly investigated).

Ryan's commutations of the four men who were abused by the police and court system was admirable. His blanket commutation was a disgusting political ploy to distract attention from the scandal-plagued mess he left in Springfield, Illinois. No one will be able to overturn it, however, because the Constitution of Illinois, superseded only by the U.S. Constitution, gives the governor the right to make such a unilateral and outrageous action.

[quote]Originally posted by gamecock:
one-tenth of one percent of those on death row MAY somehow be innocent....

---

Hope you are never part of that "one-tenth of one percent".

no one has deigned answer my original question: what, save satisfying a blood thirst is gained by executing these people? face it, you don't want justice, you want REVENGE.

[quote]Originally posted by thersis:
no one has deigned answer my original question: what, save satisfying a blood thirst is gained by executing these people? face it, you don't want justice, you want REVENGE.

---

I would possibly go for getting rid of the death penalty if there was a guaranteed life in prison NO chance of parole- but when Charles Manson the famous murderer in California from 1969- comes up for a review of parole every few yrs then something is wrong. And actually I do want justice AND for the victims I will admit I feel they deserve revenge. YES I'll admit it. That offender will be punished and will never murder again. BUT I believe that open dialogue is good on this subject and if the death penalty is changed it shouldn't be by one man in a governors seat just as he is leaving office.

I know next to nothing about George Ryan, but I admire him for this. You can say he did it for the publicity and the glory, but if you look at the first few posters here, and the reaction of others around the country - it's a very negative reaction, and he had to know that would be the result. I believe he was following his conscience.

No matter what these "monsters" did to deserve it, the fact is that the death penalty does NOT deter crime. The vast majorities of those on death row are minorities, and poor. Over the past few years, dozens and dozens of people sitting on death row have been found to be innocent, and more will be exonerated as DNA evidence is used and these cases are further examined.

And most importantly, in my opinion, is that the death penalty contributes to the devaluation of human life in this country. When the government kills people - for whatever reason - and even says that it's okay if a "small percentage" of those killed are innocent, it's hardly sending the message that human life is sacred.

From the "Best Commentary on a Serious Issue from a Cheesy Primetime Soap Opera" category...

Sydney (Melrose Place): "Killing is wrong. That's why we have the death penalty."

Originally Posted by gamecock:
[quote] I have to wonder if many of these outspoken "anti-death penalty" advocates would feel the same way if God forbid someone they dearly love was viciously tortured and murdered and there was absolutely no doubt as who the perpetrator was --under those circumstances I tend to think their views would be vastly different to say the least.

My heart still goes out to all the families of those tragically killed by these animals (none of whom deserve ONE SECOND of compassion or fairness as a result of their VOLUNTARY actions) and I continue to hold out hope that Ryan's ego-driven decisions will somehow be overturned, as the national media has been justifiably advocating for the past 48 hours.

---

Originally Posted by conor500
[quote] And most importantly, in my opinion, is that the death penalty contributes to the devaluation of human life in this country. When the government kills people - for whatever reason - and even says that it's okay if a "small percentage" of those killed are innocent, it's hardly sending the message that human life is sacred.

---

To answer your question gamecock - if a member of my family were viciously murdered, I would undoubtably want the bastard who committed the crime dead - in fact, when my cousin's ex-husband merely tried to kill her, my entire family wanted him dead. That is a normal, emotional reaction to this type of vicious crime, but I do not want a justice system based on emotion.

conor500 makes an important point, but I think the issue goes beyond the "sacredness" of human life. It's about whether these killers are human beings at all. gamecock states that the killers deserve absolutely no human compassion - they are mere "animals."

Yet who gets to decided when a crime is "vicious enough" to warrant the death penalty? Who decides which lives are so valuable, and which types of killing are so heinous that we should no longer consider the killer human? Remember, the Far Rightest of the Far Right fringe in this country believe that the crime of homosexuality is so heinous that all gays should be executed.

I think we are all too ready in this country to separate ourselves from these types of horrible killers - to make them some sort of "other" that must be stopped. The reality is every one of those killers was once a child, and I am not so much in the "nature" camp (in the "nature vs. nuture" debate) to simply accept these children were doomed to be horrible monsters later in life. As far as I am concerned, every criminal in jail, every killer sentenced to death is a failure of our society. Whether it is a failure of parents, of extended family members, of the community, the schools, the justice system, or simply our apathy about those who are "different" than us - it is still a failure of our civilization.

Every one of us is capable of a tremendous amount of agression and violence, when provoked. What makes us different from those in jail is what actually provokes us enough to kill, and our ability to have enough compassion for other people that we value them enough not to kill.

I in no way argue these people should not be held accountable for their crimes, I simply think life in prison w/out parole is the answer (FYI copman - Manson is eligible for parole because CA did not have a life in prison w/out parole option in 1970 or 1971, when he was convicted. When the Supreme Court overturned the death penalty later in that decade, all death penalty prisoners automatically got the next worst sentence available - they would have to try Manson again to get a stiffer sentence, and that would violate double jeopardy).

[quote]Originally posted by CPT_Doom:
Originally Posted by gamecock:

To answer your question gamecock - if a member of my family were viciously murdered, I would undoubtably want the bastard who committed the crime dead - in fact, when my cousin's ex-husband merely tried to kill her, my entire family wanted him dead. That is a normal, emotional reaction to this type of vicious crime, but I do not want a justice system based on emotion.


I in no way argue these people should not be held accountable for their crimes, I simply think life in prison w/out parole is the answer

---

But is there no emotion involved in a call for life without parole? Is it completely rational to assume that a person should be permanently removed from society - that they are completely beyond rehabilitation and should never, ever be given a chance to be free? I would argue that life with parole is the more rational, less emotional sentence, since it would allow law enforcement officials to periodically and rationally review each convicted murderer's personal growth, atonement, regret, etc., and make a rational decision about whether the convict should remain in prison. I'm not supporting parole for murderers, mind you. I'm just saying that if you want a legal system completely free of emotion (which I don't think is possible), you would really have to allow for a rational analysis of the imposed sentence at some point in time.

William, I do believe that there are crimes that are so heinous as to warrant the removal of the individual from society - jail should be both punitive and rehabilitative, but that rehabilitation does not have to mean automatic release at some point. To pay your debt to society may mean being behind bars for the remainder of your life. I do think people have the power to be rehabilitated, and have a postitive effect on others, even from jail.

But going on your idea - perhaps life with the possibility of clemency is the better option - that is, I agree we don't want the Charles Manson's of the world coming up for parole every 3 years, because that is hard on the family members of the victim who must continue to "justify" the continued incarceration.

Rather than set up an expensive system of automatic parole hearings - allowing some clemency for very old or very sick convicts (as happens now, even with "life w/out parole" convicts) who are no longer a danger may be the best option.

[quote]Originally posted by CPT_Doom:
But going on your idea - perhaps life with the possibility of clemency is the better option - that is, I agree we don't want the Charles Manson's of the world coming up for parole every 3 years, because that is hard on the family members of the victim who must continue to "justify" the continued incarceration.

---

In opposition to the death penalty, you said that we shouldn't have a judicial system based on emotion. I would argue your concern for the victim's families is, in fact, an emotion.
I wouldn't think you would find that appropriate (especially since you've stated that when a person commits murder, it is at least in part a failure of society, and since the victims' families are part of society, they really must shoulder some blame for the crime).

I hope I made clear from the start that I don't support parole for murderers - it just seems to me to be more rational and thus the logical extension of your "no emotion" argument.

[quote]Originally posted by William1865:
I would argue that life with parole is the more rational, less emotional sentence, since it would allow law enforcement officials to periodically and rationally review each convicted murderer's personal growth, atonement, regret, etc., and make a rational decision about whether the convict should remain in prison.

---

Another reason for allowing parole is to provide convicts an incentive to behave themselves while they are in prison. Someone who knows he's in prison for life with no chance for parole has no reason not to rape or murder his fellow inmates, attack and kill prison guards, etc. Most wardens and other law enforcement types will argue this point.

Does the Death Penalty deter? Well, for one thing, the one executed has no opportunity to kill again, and unlike the murderer who is sentenced to life in prison w/o parole, the executed person cannot escape from prison nor be let out via a political pardon, which is what Ryan did over the weekend.

Here's a rather morbid reality, I believe: The only way to make sure the Death Penalty truly frightens people into not committing murder is if it is applied rather frequently, to the point where someone believes "I ain't gonna kill in that state! I'll get fried in a heart beat!"

But to "ramp up" the death penalty turns us into an assembly line of killing. This is both disgusting and macabre, to say the least.

Then we have those sentenced to life in prison without parole. What incentive is there for such a person to not kill again, specifically in prison, for example? This has been alluded to above, and it is a valid point.

You're in prison for life, you get pissed at a prison guard, you kill him. Well, I guess we'll have to sentence you to life in prison w/o parole--again. It makes the prison guard's life both expendable and worthless.

How about this as an idea: If the Death Penalty were to be abolished, why not life in prison w/o parole, but at hard labor? Make such persons do hard labor 6 or 7 days a week!

Obviously William, emotion cannot be completely taken out of the question of justice - if someone kills more people, we find that more horrible. If someone kills innocent children, we find that more horrible than a "hit" on another drug dealer - all of these judgements come out of both emotion, and a valuing of certain lives (innocent children) above other lives (drug dealers).

However we cannot base a sentence solely on emotion, and the death penalty serves no purpose but vengence. It does not make society better off, it does not make the victim or the victim's family better off, and it does not make the killer better off - everyone loses.

As for the issue of the victim's families "guilt" in the crime - obviously neither the victim's family, nor any other part of society, is DIRECTLY responsible for the murder (and yes, compassion for the victim's family is an emotion). My point was that killers are not some alien life form, they are part of society, and we must own them, embrace them and try to understand them, if only to prevent future crime.

There was a great moment in "The Laramie Project," from a Muslim feminist, that people kept saying "Laramie is not the type of town to let crimes like this happen." The young woman argued that clearly Laramie was the type of town where crimes such as Matthew Shepard's murder do happen - because it happened there! She went on to say "we have to own this crime." I think that is true for America at large.

We, especially politicians, are so quick to talk about "criminals" like they were created in a vacuum. It takes an awful lot to produce a killer - very few people ever "snap" and just kill out of the blue - there are warning signs. In addition, these killers are someone's child, someone's sibling, someone's friend, often someone's parent. These killers almost always have some humanity in them, no matter how small or hidden. When we ignore that humanity, we make lesser people of ourselves, and condemn ourselves to the endless cycle of violence with which we live.

[quote]Originally posted by conor500:
I know next to nothing about George Ryan, but I admire him for this. You can say he did it for the publicity and the glory, but if you look at the first few posters here, and the reaction of others around the country - it's a very negative reaction, and he had to know that would be the result. I believe he was following his conscience.

---

Be thankful you're not an Illinoisan and do not know him as we do. To say he is tainted with scandal is an understatement. There is so much corruption and scandal surrounding Ryan that there isn't enough bandwidth in this forum to describe it all; and it ain't some typical or common occasional bribe we're talking about. For one thing, 6 children died horrible deaths because of George Ryan's corruption when he was recent IL. Secretary of State. Ask Mr. and Mrs. Willis, the parents of these 6 kids, who lost them all because of Ryan's corruption.

He is truly a disgusting piece of trash, and I hope the Feds indict his sorry ass soon.

Originally posted by MIB
[quote] Does the Death Penalty deter? Well, for one thing, the one executed has no opportunity to kill again, and unlike the murderer who is sentenced to life in prison w/o parole, the executed person cannot escape from prison nor be let out via a political pardon, which is what Ryan did over the weekend.

---

Incidentally, the only research I ever saw (this was during my senior Psychology Seminar on Violence and the Human Animal) on the death penalty's "deterrence" showed absolutely no effect of the death penalty on murder rates. Even in England, back in the days of frequent public executions, the murder statistics would show a slight drop just after executions, with a resulting increase in murders afterwards - so the overall rate was unchanged.

[quote]Originally posted by MIB:
There is so much corruption and scandal surrounding Ryan that there isn't enough bandwidth in this forum to describe it all; and it ain't some typical or common occasional bribe we're talking about. For one thing, 6 children died horrible deaths because of George Ryan's corruption when he was recent IL. Secretary of State. Ask Mr. and Mrs. Willis, the parents of these 6 kids, who lost them all because of Ryan's corruption.

---

That's the "licenses for bribes" scandal, in which state workers (for a patronage-heavy agency) were found to have taken bribes to approve license applicants (mainly for commercial licenses, i.e. truck drivers), with the proceeds going into Ryan's campaign fund. Many aides were indicted, but like Uncle Ronnie in Iran-contra, Ryan maintained deniability (enough not to need Bonzo's amnesia alibi).

Here's the "not in our stars, dear Brutus" twist ... like Watergate, this scandal broke during the campaign. Yes, before the election. The voters elected the bastard anyway (although I didn't vote that year, so I can't complain). Talk about getting the government we deserve.

Besides, corruption in public office (state and local) is epidemic in Illinois and has been for years. It hasn't been that long since a statewide elected official was found to have a gazillion bucks that he stole from the state in shoeboxes in his house.

The one bright side is that the new guv, Blagojevich, appears to be a genuine reformer (he's the main reason I voted this year). If so, he has his work cut out for him.