|
Post by freerob on Jun 23, 2005 11:40:02 GMT -5
am i the only one here that thinks KIDS shouldn't be tried as adults?
|
|
|
Post by mikebook on Jun 23, 2005 11:47:05 GMT -5
But when kids do adult crime, what can we do...The juvenile court system is designed around low level offenses, not armed robbery, rape, and murder...
|
|
|
Post by freerob on Jun 23, 2005 11:58:44 GMT -5
But when kids do adult crime, what can we do...The juvenile court system is designed around low level offenses, not armed robbery, rape, and murder... Well Mike your point is extremely valid, but my points are that, in FL anyway, a child charged and convicted as an adult, of 1st degree murder, there is a MANDATORY LWOP sentence. Regardless of how his Councel presented the case. Surely that's unfair? Each case is DIFFERENT. Agreed a life is lost, and NO-ONE can say otherwise. However, a CHILD killed a CHILD. NOT ADULTS here. I must admit, I am more than close to this case. However I have read the full police report (SO many mistakes the Police made), the autopsy report and the full Medical Examiner's report. I KNOW this case very well. There are major legal problems on the prosecutor's side here, that will be addressed at the retrial. After reading all the detailed papers, I personally think Josh didn't even DO IT. There could be a cover-up here. Tina Church is investigating. (thank you Tina xxx) Many like to make posts about cases yet have never READ the 'details' of them. I'm sure Mike, you, as a Librarian could get access to all regarding Josh. It was a Kangeroo court, and all the more made like pantomime because it was aired on Court TV, LIVE. The Prosecution, or should I say Harry Shorstein was interested in his own political career! No? He said it on CAMERA! He stated that Josh should have been charged with manslaughter but he had so much political heat on him, he just couldn't do it. JUSTICE, the ole AMerican WAY... HUH???
|
|
|
Post by mikebook on Jun 23, 2005 12:03:01 GMT -5
I will take a look at it later today...
|
|
|
Post by freerob on Jun 23, 2005 12:05:13 GMT -5
I will take a look at it later today... ok Mike, cheers.
|
|
|
Post by injector on Jun 23, 2005 12:21:27 GMT -5
I'm very glad these juveniles have been spared. Some on the pro boards even think it ok to murder CHILDREN with LI. I'll quote a post (I won't reveal who wrote it). "This is a tough question for me. I have previously said that 10 should be the youngest age where one can receive the DP. However, a recent case involving a 7 year old who beat his baby sister to death has made me question my belief. In any case, I think that executions of those under 13 should be as soft as possible. I would allow them to receive their injections in the pediatric unit of a hospital as opposed to being strapped to a gurney, and I would allow the executee's family to be by his side throughout the whole procedure. Either way you cut it, executing children under 10 is a tough call." It was I who wrote that. I also wrote this in a later response: "I don't have kids. Maybe I went a bit too far in my post. It is tough to put an exact age limit on executions though. Your right though Elvis, executing 7 year olds might not be the best thing to do". I think that it is a tough ethical call about what age it is appropriate to execute someone.
|
|
|
Post by freerob on Jun 23, 2005 12:41:13 GMT -5
I'm very glad these juveniles have been spared. Some on the pro boards even think it ok to murder CHILDREN with LI. I'll quote a post (I won't reveal who wrote it). "This is a tough question for me. I have previously said that 10 should be the youngest age where one can receive the DP. However, a recent case involving a 7 year old who beat his baby sister to death has made me question my belief. In any case, I think that executions of those under 13 should be as soft as possible. I would allow them to receive their injections in the pediatric unit of a hospital as opposed to being strapped to a gurney, and I would allow the executee's family to be by his side throughout the whole procedure. Either way you cut it, executing children under 10 is a tough call." It was I who wrote that. I also wrote this in a later response: "I don't have kids. Maybe I went a bit too far in my post. It is tough to put an exact age limit on executions though. Your right though Elvis, executing 7 year olds might not be the best thing to do". I think that it is a tough ethical call about what age it is appropriate to execute someone. Well, I admire your honestly Injector. I did not want to cause more crap by revealing your name. Only you have the right to say this. But I was rather upset with your point of view. When we are CHILDREN, how can we possibly be accountable? Oh yes, depending where you live of course! I was not the 'easiest' child. Okay, I did not MURDER anyone, however had I at say, 13 or 14 years old, with the mental capacity at that age, do I deserve to DIE in prison at say 75 because of a freak incident at 13 or 14? Or do I deserve to perish with my parents/family around me at just 13 or 14 years old? I think the USA needs a huge revamp of their Laws. Here (okay MUCH smaller before u say) we have THE LAW. Not individual laws per State like the USA. Okay you have federal laws, but that simply ISN'T enough. Too many are taking advantage of this position for political gain. It's totally corrupt, and yet these CHILDREN are rotting in jail because of adult men/women's political ego's. I say, scrub ALL State Laws, and have ALL laws governed by your President and the country of the USA.! God, Bushy wouldn't be in long!!!! ;D
|
|
Mo-DAWG
Settlin' In
Yes... this is the real Mo-DAWG ..
Posts: 47
|
Post by Mo-DAWG on Jun 23, 2005 12:54:11 GMT -5
It is truly lamentable that the Supreme Court bullied TX to compromise true justice. the S.C did not bully TX to compromise true justice, the just stopped killing children.....u guys will still have what u call justice...they will get locked up for at least 40 years...what else ya want? go on killings kids? well yes...obviosly, since ya wanted to kill a 7 year old on Pro-site.....hallelujah Mo-DAWG
|
|
|
Post by freerob on Jun 23, 2005 12:57:17 GMT -5
It is truly lamentable that the Supreme Court bullied TX to compromise true justice. the S.C did not bully TX to compromise true justice, the just stopped killing children.....u guys will still have what u call justice...they will get locked up for at least 40 years...what else ya want? go on killings kids? well yes...obviosly, since ya wanted to kill a 7 year old on Pro-site.....hallelujah Mo-DAWG EXACTLY Mo, they WANT BLOOD.
|
|
|
Post by injector on Jun 23, 2005 13:01:35 GMT -5
It is truly lamentable that the Supreme Court bullied TX to compromise true justice. the S.C did not bully TX to compromise true justice, the just stopped killing children.....u guys will still have what u call justice...they will get locked up for at least 40 years...what else ya want? go on killings kids? well yes...obviosly, since ya wanted to kill a 7 year old on Pro-site.....hallelujah Mo-DAWG The problem is that the young brute continues to breathe. If a kid can beat a baby to death at 7, I dread what he can do at 17. Does the name Lionel Tate ring a bell?
|
|
Mo-DAWG
Settlin' In
Yes... this is the real Mo-DAWG ..
Posts: 47
|
Post by Mo-DAWG on Jun 23, 2005 13:02:01 GMT -5
the S.C did not bully TX to compromise true justice, the just stopped killing children.....u guys will still have what u call justice...they will get locked up for at least 40 years...what else ya want? go on killings kids? well yes...obviosly, since ya wanted to kill a 7 year old on Pro-site.....hallelujah Mo-DAWG EXACTLY Mo, they WANT BLOOD. yes exactly....you should have read that on Pro-site...they agreed to execute a 7 year old child and had fun discussing that...now seriously who is the REAL pervert monsters? they would probably even murder a 3 year old just to jack off on its death.... Mo-DAWG
|
|
|
Post by injector on Jun 23, 2005 13:05:44 GMT -5
EXACTLY Mo, they WANT BLOOD. yes exactly....you should have read that on Pro-site...they agreed to execute a 7 year old child and had fun discussing that...now seriously who is the REAL pervert monsters? they would probably even murder a 3 year old just to jack off on its death.... Mo-DAWG No we wouldn't. The idea that pros get sexual excitement from executions is as false as the idea that antis get sexual pleasure from writing letters to murderers.
|
|
|
Post by freerob on Jun 23, 2005 13:10:02 GMT -5
I'm very glad these juveniles have been spared. Some on the pro boards even think it ok to murder CHILDREN with LI. I'll quote a post (I won't reveal who wrote it). "This is a tough question for me. I have previously said that 10 should be the youngest age where one can receive the DP. However, a recent case involving a 7 year old who beat his baby sister to death has made me question my belief. In any case, I think that executions of those under 13 should be as soft as possible. I would allow them to receive their injections in the pediatric unit of a hospital as opposed to being strapped to a gurney, and I would allow the executee's family to be by his side throughout the whole procedure. Either way you cut it, executing children under 10 is a tough call." It was I who wrote that. I also wrote this in a later response: "I don't have kids. Maybe I went a bit too far in my post. It is tough to put an exact age limit on executions though. Your right though Elvis, executing 7 year olds might not be the best thing to do". I think that it is a tough ethical call about what age it is appropriate to execute someone. Just inerested... You have written 1,302 posts (so far) on 'THAT' other forum. Why the need to post here? to gain an understanding of Anti's? According to your 1,302 posts you couldn't care LESS about US! after 1,302 posts, I think you MIGHT have made your mind up! You or your banned friend Guurney are acting as my personal Secretary there (and if u r not, feel free too!)! Glad I haven't gotta pay! ;D
|
|
Mo-DAWG
Settlin' In
Yes... this is the real Mo-DAWG ..
Posts: 47
|
Post by Mo-DAWG on Jun 23, 2005 13:10:44 GMT -5
the S.C did not bully TX to compromise true justice, the just stopped killing children.....u guys will still have what u call justice...they will get locked up for at least 40 years...what else ya want? go on killings kids? well yes...obviosly, since ya wanted to kill a 7 year old on Pro-site.....hallelujah Mo-DAWG The problem is that the young brute continues to breathe. If a kid can beat a baby to death at 7, I dread what he can do at 17. Does the name Lionel Tate ring a bell? a kid who does that obviosly has serious issues it cant deal with since its a kid...and it needs help and maybe conseling instead of a bunch of perverts going on a child-killing spree.....what a child does at the age of 7 doesnt say nothing about his behavior at the age of 17 when u raise it correctly and get him help.....and yes the name Lionel Tate does ring a bell...this kid should have had help and counseling early enough......but this country doesnt like to heal it just prefers to kill and if its a child thats ok..termination feels better than giving a kid help when it seriously needs it ..right? some people i really lose respect for since the would even kill children...those people disqualify themselves when they show how much more the love to kill than to give a child a chance... No f*cken repect for ANY child killers!!!!! Mo-DAWG
|
|
|
Post by freerob on Jun 23, 2005 13:11:54 GMT -5
the S.C did not bully TX to compromise true justice, the just stopped killing children.....u guys will still have what u call justice...they will get locked up for at least 40 years...what else ya want? go on killings kids? well yes...obviosly, since ya wanted to kill a 7 year old on Pro-site.....hallelujah Mo-DAWG The problem is that the young brute continues to breathe. If a kid can beat a baby to death at 7, I dread what he can do at 17. Does the name Lionel Tate ring a bell? YEAH..... FREED AFTER 3 YEARS!!!
|
|