Does Wisconsin execute minors?

[Guest Cancer Marney]

This reminds me of a strip from Aaron McGruder's wonderful Boondocks comic. OJ Simpson is going from house to house, searching for "the real murderer" and asking people to try on the glove. Someone answers the bell, sees him, and yells, "MURDERER!" OJ whips around: "Where?!"

[Guest Spaceman Spiff]

Boondocks is an awesome strip.

 

Not as good as C & H, but good nonetheless

[Guest papacita]

I don't really know too many black people who think OJ is innocent. Kinda like how not many white people think OJ is innocent. But, hey, this arguement is slightly pointless. I can't prove that race wasn't the major factor, you can't prove that it is.

Yeah, I really didn't want this to breakdown into an O.J. debate, and a lot of this stuff is just a matter of opinion. For what it's worth though, since 1994, I've only met 2 blacks that believe that O.J. is guilty, one being my friend Jordan, the other being my mom, who changed her opinion about half-way through the trial. Everyone else has said that he was innocent...and in 7th grade, my class even threw a party when the verdict was announced. And to this date, I haven't met ONE white person who's even suggested that O.J. was innocent. Sure, these opinions don't account for every single person, black and white, across the united states, but still, it says something.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Might have something to do with the fact that he wasn't innocent. And the fact that his race wasn't important to white people.

[Guest Samurai_Goat]

Yea, that's a good point. How do we know it's racial prejudice on the white folks part? Maybe the black people felt he was innocent because he was black, not white people saying he's guilty because he's black.

[Guest papacita]

Well, shortly after that verdict was announced, two white guys killed my cousin after an argument about the O.J. trial...

 

Yea, that's a good point. How do we know it's racial prejudice on the white folks part? Maybe the black people felt he was innocent because he was black, not white people saying he's guilty because he's black.

 

I'm black, and I personally believe with all my heart that O.J. didn't commit those murders, if for no other reason than the fact that he's got arthritis and that Ron Goldman, I believe, was a black belt in martial arts (I KNOW that's gonna lead to a debate, but oh well). As I said before, most people are able to give reasonable explanations for their beliefs...that still doesn't mean that race isn't an issue.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Maybe the black people felt he was innocent because he was black, not white people saying he's guilty because he's black.

Exactly. You never see white people defending white criminals on the grounds that it's all a massive conspiracy by THE MAN. Especially not if it's a crime against a black person. No, white people have pretty much learned to keep their mouths shut in that case. Let a black man be accused of a crime against a white person, though, and immediately it's either a frame and a total set-up, or, if insignificant things like facts are actually considered, it's justifiable because of "black rage."

Tell me again how we're the racists.

[Guest Samurai_Goat]

Well, if your cousin was killed over an OJ arguement, than a) I hope the punks got what they deserved, and b) you more than likely made up your mind completely. In that case, I'd like to say that I was pleasently surprised that no one seemed to have a problem with me basically saying that Jesus had homosexual tendencies.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Eh. I think most Christians are inured to that sort of thing after decade upon decade of seeing our holy symbols desecrated in the name of "art." It really doesn't mean much, after all; it's just a symbol, not the thing itself.

Besides, I don't have a problem with homosexuality, so you could equally have said that Jesus had brown eyes. Or blue. Or a slightly chipped upper right canine.

[Guest Samurai_Goat]

Hey, that's not true! Jesus had perfect teeth! It's gotta be here in the bible somewhere...

[Guest Cancer Marney]

BLASPHEMER! THAT CHIPPED CANINE WAS A SIGN OF DIVINE FAVOUR!

[Guest Samurai_Goat]

Hey, doesn't blast femur sound like a terrible medical condition? Thought I'd ask.

 

Yea. Divine Favour. Maybe if your some kind of POTTY HEAD!

[Guest papacita]

You never see white people defending white criminals on the grounds that it's all a massive conspiracy by THE MAN. Especially not if it's a crime against a black person. No, white people have pretty much learned to keep their mouths shut in that case.

 

You're oversimplifying things. First off, you're looking at the situation as if whites and blacks share the same experiences. That's not the case. If you don't believe that, look at things like racial profiling. Look at the amount of police shootings of young minorities around the country. Look at the number of black minorities on death row vs whites convicted of the same crimes, and tell me that minorities aren't justified for feeling alienated by the system. And when the American system has mostly benefited the white middle-upper class, with the exception of the radicals, why would they have to worry about "THE MAN" and things of that such?

[Guest Samurai_Goat]

Well, I'm not gonna argue to much more over this, but I would like to say that the whole death row arguement is kinda void. The supreme court actually stopped all executions for a while to check and see if there was a disproportionatly large amount of minorities being sent to death row. They concluded that there was not, so they reinstated it. And don't give me that whole "You're white, you don't know what it's like to be alienated." There's more to alienation that just race. And yes, Marney is oversimplifying things, but that's because sometimes, things need to be simplyfied.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

No, actually, Papacita's right. There is a real racial disparity in the number of cases in which the death penalty is sought. I think it's something like 45% black and 28% white.

However, the fact is that there are many factors under consideration when you decide to seek the death penalty or not. I can't see how this could possibly be based on racism - or do you seriously contend, Papacita, that the overwhelming majority of lawyers, judges, and juries are racists?

I think it has more to do with the fact that the poor are less likely to have decent legal representation, and the poorer are also more likely to commit crimes in which the death penalty is sought. The relatively low number of whites on death row (a little over a quarter of the total) has nothing to do with racist attitudes, in my mind. It has much more to do with racial disparities in income.

And changing that disparity is the responsibility of the minorities. Not the system. We do not guarantee an equal starting position on the field, nor do we guarantee equal ability; we guarantee only that the rules are the same for everyone. If minorities want to revel in their now solely self-imposed alienation, they will continue to hurt no one but themselves.

[Guest The Metal Maniac]

To get back to the original topic...

 

Can someone PLEASE tell me how a FOURTEEN YEAR OLD doesn't know that HITTING SOMEONE WITH A SHOVEL UNTIL IT BREAKS might KILL a person?

 

I dunno about you folks, but I learned at a young age that pain is not a good thing, and not the kind of thing one should inflict.

 

This blows my fucking mind. They really need to toss every single one of them in prison. For good. No death penalty; Let them suffer for 50 years or so...

 

Of course, what really burns me is that he apologized because he didn't realize it might KILL the guy. Does that mean if the guy had survived, the kid wouldn't care?

[Guest papacita]

I think it has more to do with the fact that poor people are less likely to have decent legal representation, and poorer people are far more likely to commit crimes in which the death penalty is sought. The relatively low number of whites on death row (a little over a quarter of the total) has nothing to do with racist attitudes, in my mind. It has much more to do with racial disparities in income.

Well, the financial argument would pertain more to the jury than it would the judge, who ultimately makes the decision regarding sentencing. And yes, I do believe that racial prejudice, conscious or unconscious, plays a role in the sentencing. If two men are going being tried for the same offense, with the only difference being that one's white and the other's black, I feel they should be receive the same verdict. But that's just my opinion.

 

As for whether or not I feel that all white people are racist, of course not. I wouldn't associate with whites if I did. But I do feel that most white people has a degree of racial prejudice. The same can be said for blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Native Americans, etc. Everyone is prejudiced to a degree (not just in regards to race), and the only way we're gonna be able to eliminate these prejudices is to discuss them and make sure that we understand them, rather than just sweep them under the rug and act as if they don't exist.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

the financial argument would pertain more to the jury than it would the judge, who ultimately makes the decision regarding sentencing

No, you misunderstood completely. If the accused is poor, he is unlikely to have a competent defense attorney, and he is therefore more likely to have capital charges brought against him successfully. It obviously makes no difference to the judge or to the jury how much the defendent earns. He isn't hiring them. (At least, he isn't supposed to.) The point is that poor people get sentenced to death much more often than rich people, and minorities are poorer than whites. It is still their economic status and their crimes that put them on death row, not the colour of their skin. Why didn't anyone bother even trying to seek the death penalty for OJ Simpson? Because there wasn't a chance in hell it would ever have worked. According to your argument, though, the DA was mistaken. I mean, Simpson's black, right? So everyone should've been perfectly willing to string him up.

 

If two men are going being tried for the same offense, with the only difference being that one's white and the other's black, I feel they should be receive the same verdict. But that's just my opinion.

You don't need to end a perfectly elementary statement with "that's just my opinion." It's obvious it's correct, and you don't get points for saying racism is a bad thing. Well duh. Who the hell ever said it isn't?

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

"You never see white people defending white criminals on the grounds that it's all a massive conspiracy by THE MAN."

 

That's because we don't our white-criminal prize in the mail (since a Chris Rock reference was used earlier)...

[Guest EricMM]

You don't need to end a perfectly elementary statement with "that's just my opinion." It's obvious it's correct, and you don't get points for saying racism is a bad thing. Well duh. Who the hell ever said it isn't?

Clearly by saying that he was implying that there was dissenting opinion. Which is insulting. Papacita is just as racist as everyone else here. Take that how you will, but I'm SURE it's true.

 

Wasn't the original point that OJ got off because he was Famous, not Black? I mean, I don't think the trial got famous because he was black, it was because he took that ride in the bronco!

[Guest papacita]

I mean, Simpson's black, right?

If I were a mean person...

 

Anyway, I understood your point perfectly. The reason I say it pertains more to the jury than the judge because with public defenders, 9 times out of 10, the judges already know these guys. I had a teacher last semester who was a former Defense Attorney, and she often talked about how judges, prosecutors and the appointed attorneys would go out for coffee after trials and play golf together. With this in mind, an inadequate would weigh more heavily on the minds of the jury than it would the judge.

 

You don't need to end a perfectly elementary statement with "that's just my opinion." It's obvious it's correct, and you don't get points for saying racism is a bad thing. Well duh. Who the hell ever said it isn't?

If this thread has established one thing, it's that your idea of racism and mine are two completely different things. Keep your points.

[Guest papacita]

Which is insulting. Papacita is just as racist as everyone else here. Take that how you will, but I'm SURE it's true.

racism-a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

And I'm racist how...?

 

Wasn't the original point that OJ got off because he was Famous, not Black? I mean, I don't think the trial got famous because he was black, it was because he took that ride in the bronco!

And no, that wasn't the original point.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

an inadequate would weigh more heavily on the minds of the jury than it would the judge

Since the jury has to convict before the judge can sentence, the inadequacy of defense lawyers for the poor is still the major issue at hand. Not racism.

 

your idea of racism and mine are two completely different things

Oh? Let's have your definition, then.

[Guest papacita]

Since the jury has to convict before the judge can sentence, the inadequacy of defense lawyers for the poor is still the major issue at hand. Not racism.

Juries don't hand out sentences. Judges do. When there is a disparity between blacks and whites under the same circumstances at the SENTENCING stage, then I feel that it's not far-fetched to conclude that there is a degree of racial prejudice coming into play.

[Guest EricMM]

Ok, fine, if going by your grand definition,

 

racism-a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

 

Then you are not actually racist, then you are prejudiced against white people.

 

Because you said that white people would rather see a black person go to jail than a white person.

 

Please. There's nothing special about being white. There's NOTHING special about being black. There's NOTHING!!! special about being a minority, majority, or some sort of perfect equality. None of those make you any "better" in my eyes.

 

I wouldn't chose a white man over a black man, because they all have the same chance of being crazy psychos. We're all human.

 

To imply that anyone deserves anything because they're white, black, latino, asian, native american, or a blue person from Kentucky, is either racist or prejudiced. P-E-R-I-O-D.

[Guest papacita]

To imply that anyone deserves anything because they're white, black, latino, asian, native american, or a blue person from Kentucky, is either racist or prejudiced. P-E-R-I-O-D.

All that I said was that blacks and whites should be judged equally in a court of law. Is that so wrong?

[Guest EricMM]

Of course it's not, and I never said it was.

 

Stop adding little passive aggressive lines at the ends of your posts

[Guest Cancer Marney]

When there is a disparity between blacks and whites under the same circumstances at the SENTENCING stage, then I feel that it's not far-fetched to conclude that there is a degree of racial prejudice coming into play.

You're not only prejudiced, you're ignorant. Prosecutors have to decide to seek the death penalty and juries must convict and recommend a sentence before the judge ever makes the decision to sentence someone to death. The judge's role in the application of the death penalty is relatively minor, especially in light of the fact that there's an economic disparity long before it ever gets that far. The death penalty is sought far more often for poor defendants than it is for rich defendants.

Yes, the legal system needs reform. But it will come from people who are educated and informed, not people who can't even make a solid case. Your arguments are predicated on false premises.

[Guest papacita]

When there is a disparity between blacks and whites under the same circumstances at the SENTENCING stage, then I feel that it's not far-fetched to conclude that there is a degree of racial prejudice coming into play.

You're not only prejudiced, you're ignorant. Prosecutors have to decide to seek the death penalty and juries must convict and recommend a sentence before the judge ever makes the decision to sentence someone to death. The judge's role in the application of the death penalty is relatively minor, especially in light of the fact that there's an economic disparity long before it ever gets that far. The death penalty is sought far more often for poor defendants than it is for rich defendants.

Yes, the legal system needs reform. But it will come from people who are educated and informed, not people who can't even make a solid case. Your arguments are predicated on false premises.

Marney, in cases where a fixed sentence isn't imposed, isn't the final sentence made with the judge's discretion?

 

Edit: And yes, I know full well that the sentencing standards are set before hand by the state.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Sentencing was always at the judge's discretion until Ring v Arizona, but now juries essentially have to recommend the death penalty in order for anyone to be executed. Previously, of course, judges did have the discretion to overrule sentence recommendations but few did it. It was seen as judicial activism and heavily criticised in every circuit, and most such cases tended to be appealled and the defendant resentenced.