Death Sentence Overturned For Asshole Who Killed Dave's Mom

[wally]

http://laist.com/2012/07/16/death_sente ... rdered.php

that's gotta suck.

[Hype]

I don't think it sucks all that much... it's a procedural thing (I guess it sucks that they fucked it up)... Dave and his family will continue to cope as best as they can whether the guy stays on death row or dies of cancer or whatever.

[Juana]

Wow that is fucking appalling but who knows maybe its better off he stays in prison the rest of his life knowing he will never know freedom again. Now there is no end in sight for him where as before he might have had a date.

[Hokahey]

I don't think it sucks all that much...

Sucks if they were of the type that anticipated his execution bringing closure.

[Hype]

I don't think it sucks all that much...

Sucks if they were of the type that anticipated his execution bringing closure.

Maybe, though the law really doesn't hand out sentences based on whether or not it will bring the victims closure (good thing too).

[Matz]

why doesn't the state just kill them the day after they get the death sentence? that's what I don't get, instead of this keeping them alive for 20 years, kill some but not others thing. Doesn't make much sense.

[Hype]

why doesn't the state just kill them the day after they get the death sentence? that's what I don't get, instead of this keeping them alive for 20 years, kill some but not others thing. Doesn't make much sense.

There's a lengthy appeals process that exists for good reason (to allow for the possibility of wrongful conviction). There are also A LOT of people in jail in the US, so any appeal is going to take a long time to get into the courts in the first place.

And yes, innocent people have been murdered by the State in the US.

[Juana]

why doesn't the state just kill them the day after they get the death sentence? that's what I don't get, instead of this keeping them alive for 20 years, kill some but not others thing. Doesn't make much sense.

There's a lengthy appeals process that exists for good reason (to allow for the possibility of wrongful conviction). There are also A LOT of people in jail in the US, so any appeal is going to take a long time to get into the courts in the first place.

And yes, innocent people have been murdered by the State in the US.

As well as in other countries.

[Hype]

why doesn't the state just kill them the day after they get the death sentence? that's what I don't get, instead of this keeping them alive for 20 years, kill some but not others thing. Doesn't make much sense.

There's a lengthy appeals process that exists for good reason (to allow for the possibility of wrongful conviction). There are also A LOT of people in jail in the US, so any appeal is going to take a long time to get into the courts in the first place.

And yes, innocent people have been murdered by the State in the US.

As well as in other countries.

Yep. I've probably mentioned this before, but there are several famous cases in Canadian law of men wrongfully convicted of murder, and the wrongful convictions only discovered decades later. Luckily, we don't have the death penalty, so they weren't killed. Only their lives were destroyed (how ironic)...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overturned ... _in_Canada

[Romeo]

nothing like pouring salt in a wound. Your safe in the assumtion that Justice was served and this animal will die in prison....
BUT I always thought the death penalty was overturned in CA back when Manson was on trial

So how could he of been sentenced to the death penalty??

what pisses me off is:

The state's high court ruled that John Riccardi, now 76, was denied a fair trial because the trial judge erroneously excused a prospective juror during jury selection, explains City News Service

Really?? Dave was denied his Mother because of this asshole

[JOEinPHX]

I'll bet Dave rarely even thinks about this guy.

It's been like 40 years.

The fact that he was captured probably brought a hell of alot of closure, and I doubt he gives a shit what happens to the dude one way or another at this point.

[creep]

I'll bet Dave rarely even thinks about this guy.

It's been like 40 years.

The fact that he was captured probably brought a hell of alot of closure, and I doubt he gives a shit what happens to the dude one way or another at this point.

except he is doing a documentary on it. i guess he has more to add to it now.

[JOEinPHX]

We don't even know what the documentary is about though.

I doubt we're going to see Dave crying for 90 minutes about the loss of his mother. I think we're going to see a sick look into the mind of the man who did it.

Look at the way interviews with the Manson situation are handled. They don't talk to the victims' family and say "hey, tell us what you were feeling 50 years ago and how you feel today", they go straight to Manson and ask him some questions to see what fucked answers come out of his mouth.

Dave is too dark of an individual to make it about his own sadness or his own grieving process. It's going to be about the mind of the killer.

Or at least that's what I think it would be about. I could definitely be wrong.

[creep]

We don't even know what the documentary is about though.

I doubt we're going to see Dave crying for 90 minutes about the loss of his mother. I think we're going to see a sick look into the mind of the man who did it.

Look at the way interviews with the Manson situation are handled. They don't talk to the victims' family and say "hey, tell us what you were feeling 50 years ago and how you feel today", they go straight to Manson and ask him some questions to see what fucked answers come out of his mouth.

Dave is too dark of an individual to make it about his own sadness or his own grieving process. It's going to be about the mind of the killer.

Or at least that's what I think it would be about. I could definitely be wrong.

i was just making the point that he obviously still thinks about it. i thought i remember him talking about going to interview him.

[Romeo]

We don't even know what the documentary is about though.

I doubt we're going to see Dave crying for 90 minutes about the loss of his mother. I think we're going to see a sick look into the mind of the man who did it.

Look at the way interviews with the Manson situation are handled. They don't talk to the victims' family and say "hey, tell us what you were feeling 50 years ago and how you feel today", they go straight to Manson and ask him some questions to see what fucked answers come out of his mouth.

Dave is too dark of an individual to make it about his own sadness or his own grieving process. It's going to be about the mind of the killer.

Or at least that's what I think it would be about. I could definitely be wrong.

Every year that Manson would come up to the parole board Sharon Tate's sister would attend. All 15 of them.

And every time they ask Debra about the obvious denial of parole and she would state she was elated.

Unless you have had a family member a victim of murder you do not know the grieving process. Unless you know of someone who is in prison because they took the life of a loved one you do not know how or if the victims family thinks about them. OR lives in the comfort knowing they are locked away forever & can't harm you or anyone else again.


So you have no idea how Dave feels.

[Hype]

There's a difference between taking victim (and family) feelings into account at a parole hearing, and producing verdicts on the basis of those feelings. The latter isn't justice, it's something else (vindictiveness, chivalry, whatever), even if it is understandable. The problem is that the justice system is in place not just to "punish evildoers", but to make sure that the system which tries to maintain order also maintains fairness, as much as possible. So while it's not fair to Dave's family, in the sense that it *may* go against their wishes, it's not fair to any of us (Dave's family included) to render the justice system inept because sometimes people feel differently than the courts can legally act.

[Romeo]

you are allowed "victims" statements at sentencing and parole hearings in which your thoughts can impact the sentencing or denial of parole.

The rest is left in the hands of the court.

He received his due process and a jury of his peers. BUT to take it to the HIGH court because a prospective juror, not a person sworn in on the panel, was excused during the selection process...is bullshit

[Hype]

you are allowed "victims" statements at sentencing and parole hearings in which your thoughts can impact the sentencing or denial of parole.

The rest is left in the hands of the court.

He received his due process and a jury of his peers. BUT to take it to the HIGH court because a prospective juror, not a person sworn in on the panel, was excused during the selection process...is bullshit

It may seem like bullshit, but there may be a good reason for that rule to exist.

The thing about victim impact statements is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_impact_statement

As far as sentencing goes, the purpose of it is, in the case of a living victim, to help possibly determine the extent of the crime, and so it should be taken into account. But in cases where the family are giving statements... it's a bit trickier, as that article nicely shows:

In some jurisdictions there are very different rules on how victim impact statements from family members may be regarded. This is because it is seen as unprincipled that different punishments for death are given according to the how much the victim is missed, or conversely that someone's death is relatively less harmful if they have no family. In the circumstance of death, some jurisdictions have described victim impact statements from family members as 'irrelevant' to sentence but not 'unimportant' to the process: they are valued for restorative purposes but cannot differentiate punishment for causing death.

[Matz]

why doesn't the state just kill them the day after they get the death sentence? that's what I don't get, instead of this keeping them alive for 20 years, kill some but not others thing. Doesn't make much sense.

There's a lengthy appeals process that exists for good reason (to allow for the possibility of wrongful conviction). There are also A LOT of people in jail in the US, so any appeal is going to take a long time to get into the courts in the first place.

And yes, innocent people have been murdered by the State in the US.

ah right, the appeal I'm a fuckin moron. But then when all that is said and done why not get it over with, 5-6 years down the line or whatever.

[Hype]

why doesn't the state just kill them the day after they get the death sentence? that's what I don't get, instead of this keeping them alive for 20 years, kill some but not others thing. Doesn't make much sense.

There's a lengthy appeals process that exists for good reason (to allow for the possibility of wrongful conviction). There are also A LOT of people in jail in the US, so any appeal is going to take a long time to get into the courts in the first place.

And yes, innocent people have been murdered by the State in the US.

ah right, the appeal I'm a fuckin moron. But then when all that is said and done why not get it over with, 5-6 years down the line or whatever.

According to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U ... ow_inmates

There were approximately 3,254 people on death row as of May 7, 2011

But keep in mind, too, that according to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... ation_rate

The incarceration rate in the United States of America is the highest in the world. As of 2009, the incarceration rate was 743 per 100,000 of national population (0.743%).

...

Imprisonment of America's 2.3 million prisoners, costing $24,000 yearly, and $5.1 billion in new prison construction, consumes $60 billion in budget expenditures.

So I guess the amount of bureaucratic red tape involved is enormous... dealing with appeals not just from the 3,000+ guys on death row, but millions of others? It's a crazy system.

[JOEinPHX]

Unless you have had a family member a victim of murder you do not know the grieving process.


So you have no idea how Dave feels.

When I was 4 my father died in a horrific accident that was the result of others negligence.

I am now 31 and I rarely even think about it.

Do i understand completely? No, because everyone's experiences are different. But being young and losing a parent in a gruesome way... I UNDERSTAND THAT.

I can't see inside Dave's head, but from my own person experience... You move on with your life. He probably thinks about it far less than you would assume.

[Hype]

4 and 15 are pretty different though, I'd think. At 4, your memories are much more faded, and you have far less of them... Your brain had less time forming connections to that person and their behaviours, etc. Either way it's tragic, but still, I don't see what the justice system correcting a mistake has to do with it.

[JOEinPHX]

The guy definitely should have gotten the chair a long time ago.

At some point can't they not even execute them due to their advanced age?

[Juana]

My father passed away in '85 and I still remember it and I was 4 at the time. But it only crosses my mind a lot when I accomplish something or when it's close to the date he died but he was not murdered he was killed in a crash. So everyone is different but I doubt its actively on Dave's mind 24/7, in fact this probably brought it back if someone has made him aware. Either way the guy is going to die behind bars and unless he commits suicide he doesn't know when that will be which to me is more of a punishment then having a set date.

[Kajicat]

Dude should die for the murder he committed. But then again, that's the easy way out and he doesn't deserve that. Jail for the rest of his life would allow him to suffer like he should. But...then taxpayer money goes to keeping dude alive, and that's not cool. He'll be playing baseball in the courtyard, reading books, watching TV, eating...all on our dime.

Tough decision. Hell, saying HE should die just because he killed someone else doesn't seem right. Then we're just killing people too. It's fucked up philosophical shit if you think about it too much.

I'd like to say let's just keep a simple rule of if you kill someone else, you yourself will be killed...but that in itself seems immoral. But people who hurt/kill others need to be eliminated from society. But is death the answer? I hope not.



Anyways...