Some crimes deserve execution as long as we are extremely certain we have the right person
But the world is moving away from execution
The Israeli American who slaughtered the Indian Canadian. (Sorry can’t remember names) Taiwan may have given him the death penalty in days past but nowadays Taiwan refrains from capital punishment
The problem is, we were certainly certain about the people wrongfully executed before. And we still get it wrong.
Wrongful imprisonment remains a problem and people who choose not to settle and take a plea bargain have the book thrown at them.
Beyond reasonable doubt.
Victor Nealon was imprisoned for 7 years more because he continued to profess his innocence. In a system where you need to show ‘remorse’ to get out of prison earlier.
But pleading guilty? Well, now we’re certain!
By legal definition every guilty verdict is “extremely certain” , so what can we say about those who were wrongly executed?
I’m not
Talking legaleeze I’m talking irrefutable evidence
But the USA does it right a lot of times in that they keep people on death row for decades to allow for appeals
I’m not against life imprisonment
Instead of the death penalty but probably no release for at least 30 years
The problem then becomes once released the person is not equipped to live well in society so the govt has to then provide a pension
Which I think is reasonable
I feel if I was a judge I would lean towards life imprisonments
I think doing life is vary hard
I’m claustrophobic so if I were to be locked up I would go insane
In the case of this woman, she confessed once her story fell apart. That to me would meet the standard to proceed. She never denied doing it and neither did her lawyers.
If you have watched Twelve Angry Men, stories fall apart for innocent people too.
So if you admit you get killed, if you deny it but found guilty you get jail?
Do you see any issue when it comes to pleas?
Not denying it usually gets a lesser sentence
Here it was cut and dry.
They tracked her chats on the computer.
When authorities went to speak to Montgomery they found her in the living room holding the baby and watching television with the AMBER alert flashing on the screen.
I’d say that with a confession is pretty specific.
Plea fairness is the subject of another thread. This case was very clear who did it. That’s why I feel only in specific cases where there is no doubt.
Was it?
Montgomery’s legal team says she suffered “sexual torture” for years, including gang rapes, as a child, permanently scarring her emotionally and exacerbating mental-health issues that ran in her family.
At trial, prosecutors accused Montgomery of faking mental illness, noting her killing of Stinnett was premeditated and included meticulous planning, including online research on how to perform a C-section.
Henry balked at that idea, citing brain scans that supported the diagnosis of mental illness. She said the issue at the core of legal arguments was not whether she knew the killing was wrong in 2004 but whether she fully grasped why she was to be executed.
According to her lawyers, Montgomery suffered from depression, borderline personality disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder. At around the time of the killing, they say she had a rare condition called pseudocyesis in which a woman’s false belief she is pregnant triggers hormonal and physical changes as if she were actually pregnant.
Montgomery also experienced delusions and hallucinations, believing God spoke with her through connect-the-dot puzzles, defense experts said.
Details of the crime at times left jurors in tears during her trial.
Prosecutors told the jury Montgomery drove about 170 miles (274 kilometers) from her Melvern, Kansas, farmhouse to the northwest Missouri town of Skidmore under the guise of adopting a rat terrier puppy from Stinnett. She strangled Stinnett, performed a crude cesarean and fled with the baby.
Prosecutors said Stinnett regained consciousness and tried to defend herself as Montgomery cut the baby girl from her womb. Later that day, Montgomery called her husband from Topeka, Kansas, telling him she had delivered the baby earlier in the day at a birthing center.
Montgomery was arrested the next day after showing off the premature infant, Victoria Jo, who is now 16 years old and hasn’t spoken publicly about the tragedy.
Prosecutors said the motive was that Montgomery’s ex-husband knew she had undergone a tubal ligation that made her sterile and planned to reveal she was lying about being pregnant in an effort to get custody of two of their four children. Needing a baby before a fast-approaching court date, Montgomery turned her focus on Stinnett, whom she had met at dog shows.
Certainly seems like people were rushing to get a conviction. These don’t seem to be the actions of a sane person. Maybe she is criminally responsible. Maybe she isn’t. Can anyone check now?
I’m surprised she didn’t cop the insanity plea
She’s obviously insane
Crazy people don’t get put to death in the USA
Her lawyers did. Prosecutors accused her of faking it. I didn’t know prosecutors made such good psychiatrists. I guess if I need therapy, then I’ll turn to the local prosecutor.
This was despite medical evidence showing that she may have been mentally not there.
I do believe she definitely was insane by virtue of the crime
But surely there is a legal definition of this boundary between clear and not-clear? What makes you comfortable with this execution, but feel someone else doesn’t deserve it? Based on the examples above given for the justification of the “Way beyond reasonable doubt” category, most people who get caught here seem to have mental health issues, e.g. knifing random people on the subway- what was the purpose of killing this woman, was it to prevent others like her, or was it just to appease the victim’s family?
Undeniably a horrible crime. Also undeniably she did it.
But this was a very, very broken human being that was horribly abused.
She was born brain damaged, step father started raping her at 11, threatened to kill her younger sister if she resisted, her mom walked in on the step father raping her and didn’t stop it, was beaten, bashed the dog’s head in as punishment to her, and was pimped out by her mom starting in her early teens. Was pushed in to a marriage with an abusive step brother. Required drugs to maintain contact with reality. What does it say about us when we execute the most broken amongst us?
They do when they’re poor with lousy lawyers.
Her life was taken before it even started.
Even if someone admits to a crime, there should be a thorough investigation.
I seem to remember when Lennon was murdered, Chapman admitted he did it and it was case closed. No investigation into the people who were there, the doorman, the driver of the limo etc…
Money talks in life and in death on earth
I don’t think she should have been executed. She was insane.