|
|
Post by briseis on Sept 1, 2008 6:54:03 GMT -5
I am of course against the death penalty even in cases as sick as this one, but if there is any justice in the world, this NIGHTMARE of a woman should never ever be released; as for 23 hours a day in her cell for the rest of her days? Go for it.
'A US mother who killed her baby daughter by cooking her in a microwave is facing the death penalty.
China Arnold, 28, intentionally put her baby Paris Talley in the microwave and burned her to death after a fight with her boyfriend in 2005, a court in Dayton, Ohio, heard.
A jury found her guilty of aggravated murder and she will face the death penalty when sentenced.
Relatives in the Montgomery County courtroom cried and covered their faces with their hands.
Arnold's daughter was pronounced dead on August 30 2005 at the Children's Medical Centre in Dayton, Ohio.
Her cellmate told the court that Arnold confessed to putting the baby in the microwave and turned it on because she was worried her boyfriend Terrell Talley would leave her if he found out the child was not his.
The baby's DNA was found inside the microwave in the apartment she shared with Talley and her four children.
Jurors will return to the court on Tuesday to decide whether to recommend a death sentence.'
|
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinpie on Sept 1, 2008 9:23:55 GMT -5
Hi briseis,
Crimes against children are those that disturb me the most. When I think about certain cases, one case that has always gotten to me is the Jessica Lunsford case. What was done to that girl was unthinkable. Let's just say- I had no bit of remorse for John Couey when he was sentenced to death. But I was hoping he would have gotten life and been put in with the rest of the prison population. Death row is probably too easy for him. As far as the woman who microwaved her baby- how can anybody be so sick? It takes a rare kind of sick breed to hurt the innocent...
|
|
|
|
Post by wildep on May 29, 2009 10:41:10 GMT -5
What is wrong with you people?? You want these child murderers to continue living on your dollar, in a system that feeds, clothes, and protects them from the only punishment suitable for their crime. The parent that microwaved her baby should be burned at the stake, only because there isn't a microwave big enough to fit an adult in. The sappy notes about every life being sacred is pure fantasy. Every life is not equal. I could care less if killing these people deters somebody else. I don't care if the pope is against it. I don't care if that person finds god and wants to change the world. I would pull the lever, switch, trigger or whatever method is used to deliver the sentence and you wouldn't even have to pay me. These animals don't deserve to live.
|
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on May 29, 2009 20:02:17 GMT -5
Nothing is wrong with us. What is wrong with you that you want to stand with the murderers and be counted amongst their number?
|
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Jun 2, 2009 20:19:19 GMT -5
Making someone pay a penalty equal to their deed is not standing among murderers. On the contrary, someone who coddles a baby/child killer by putting together support groups is standing among them. You are wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by wildep on Jun 4, 2009 14:31:37 GMT -5
No, I'm pretty sure I'm right. And I'm also fairly certain that most Canadians agree with the idea that the woman who microwaved her baby should die.
|
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Jun 11, 2009 10:36:17 GMT -5
We'll put you in charge of raping all rapists. Let's know how that works out for you. Then we'll talk.
|
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinpie on Jun 11, 2009 21:49:48 GMT -5
We'll put you in charge of raping all rapists. Let's know how that works out for you. Then we'll talk. ;D I'm about dying of laughter right now! |
|
sdl
New Arrival
Posts: 0
|
Post by sdl on Jun 17, 2009 9:51:31 GMT -5
What is wrong with you people?? You want these child murderers to continue living on your dollar, in a system that feeds, clothes, and protects them from the only punishment suitable for their crime. The parent that microwaved her baby should be burned at the stake, only because there isn't a microwave big enough to fit an adult in. The sappy notes about every life being sacred is pure fantasy. Every life is not equal. I could care less if killing these people deters somebody else. I don't care if the pope is against it. I don't care if that person finds god and wants to change the world. I would pull the lever, switch, trigger or whatever method is used to deliver the sentence and you wouldn't even have to pay me. These animals don't deserve to live. Dick Cheney called. He wants to hire you. |
|
|
|
Post by wildep on Jun 18, 2009 20:16:17 GMT -5
Dick Cheney? Don't really know where he stands, don't really care. He's got nothing to do with Canada. However, I'll take your word for it that he's a good man. I'd probably take the job. As far as the rapist comment goes, that is pretty funny. I actually laughed out loud. You did come up with a great idea, though: Put all the prisoners who are rapists together in one big cell with a 52" LCD TV on each wall showing nothing but pornography 24 hours a day. That's brilliant! Oh wait, that means someone would be paying a penalty equal to their crime. Can't do that. If you did, there'd be websites popping up saying how that's too cruel. Boo-hoo. I guess all we can do is keep lobbying the government to reinstate the death penalty.
|
|
sdl
New Arrival
Posts: 0
|
Post by sdl on Jul 11, 2009 7:13:21 GMT -5
"sdl-Lifer"... My husband has the best idea for consequences/accountability for particularly heinous crimes committed in the U.S. It's actually a deterrent for RAPE and MURDER, in several countries that have VERY few crimes of this nature…. In the village "square", the murderer or rapist is put on his knees with his hands tied behind his back. A small fire if erected in front of him. His stomach is sliced ...his entrails are thrown in the fire and he watches them burn for almost one minute before he falls in the fire and dies. Now, I ask you... Do you think that it's REALLY necessary for the townspeople to STONE him at the same time? Well, they DO, and I just think the STONING is a little "over-kill", don't you? Would war criminals like Bush*tler and Cheney be eligible? That would be too good for them. |
|
|
|
Post by chiefinspector on Jul 26, 2009 13:52:29 GMT -5
"sdl-Lifer"... My husband has the best idea for consequences/accountability for particularly heinous crimes committed in the U.S. It's actually a deterrent for RAPE and MURDER, in several countries that have VERY few crimes of this nature…. In the village "square", the murderer or rapist is put on his knees with his hands tied behind his back. A small fire if erected in front of him. His stomach is sliced ...his entrails are thrown in the fire and he watches them burn for almost one minute before he falls in the fire and dies. Now, I ask you... Do you think that it's REALLY necessary for the townspeople to STONE him at the same time? Well, they DO, and I just think the STONING is a little "over-kill", don't you? Would war criminals like Bush*tler and Cheney be eligible? That would be too good for them. If Bush or Cheney were convicted of any war crimes of course they SHOULD be eligible, that said since there were no war crimes that will never happen. War crimes is just a political slogan to demonize people of opposing political views. I did not like Clinton, but I would not say he was a "war criminal" for the civilians killed in Kosovo. I don't like the people who were in the FDR administration, but I would not call for a trial of those who planned the mass murder of many thousands in the nuclear bombings in Japan. Wars are never pretty things, innocent people always die, but innocent people die regardless of war. As long as people don't love each other no matter what the other does, there will be war and violence. The lines may blur, but prospective is important. If a people is largely behind their government or a belligerent party then to end the war it must often be brought to that people to make them lose their taste for war. Without bringing the war to mainland Japan there was no chance to end the pacific war in any expedient way. Peace talks would have indefinitely failed to bring the Kosovo atrocities to a stop. one may not like it, but there is a world of difference in innocent deaths caused in an attempt to get a target, by mistake or misfortune and the intentional concentration, methodical killing of millions of people with no intent aside from killing. If the intent was to kill as many innocent Iraqis as possible, I think everyone knows the civilian death toll would be one hundred times what it is now. There is no strategic or military importance in killing innocent people, it will happen, but it isn't the intent as we saw with Hitler. |
|
