• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Pardoning Murderers

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
"... Four of the convicted murderers who were pardoned include David Gatlin, Joseph Ozment, Anthony McCray and Charles Hooker. Gatlin was convicted of shooting his estranged wife, Tammy Ellis Gatlin, in 1993 while she held the couple’s infant son in her dying arms. Ozment shot and killed 33-year-old Ricky Montgomery during a store robbery in 1992. McCray shot and killed his wife, Jennifer, in 2001 following an argument the two had in a café. Hooker, a teacher, shot his school principal to death in 1991. ..."

http://joybehar.blogs.cnn.com/video/2012/01/10/mississippi-governor-pardons-convicts

Can a murderer pay his debt to society to such an extent, that he is set free, and is record expunged of his murder?

Is this Republican Governor (former) actually taking a rather practical approach to how the criminal system ought to operate, not how it is?

He really took a big step, and I wonder if there are others who would go to the extent that he has.

Any thoughts?
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Its my understanding they were trustees who worked in the governors mansion.

I wonder if they "saw things" or "heard things" while working there. I wonder if a little silence isn't being purchased.
 

ManInBlack

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
1,551
Location
SW Idaho
I believe all convicted individuals who have committed actual crimes against persons or property should be kept away from society until they no longer pose a threat to the rest of us. Whether this is accomplished through executions or incarcerations matters not to me, but neither probation/parole nor unsupervised "felon" status fit the bill. I will say that from a cost perspective, prompt execution makes the most sense for those who cannot be rehabilitated. In my estimation, 100% of child molesters, rapists, and premeditated murderers cannot be rehabilitated.

EDIT: For the record, I would support a procedural rule that all death penalty convictions be supported by DNA evidence, verified by three independent experts.
 
Last edited:

thebigsd

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
3,535
Location
Quarryville, PA
If murderers were promptly executed (as they SHOULD be) then there'd be no opportunity to pardon any of them, regardless of who's doing it.

While I tend to agree with you in spirit, there have been numerous cases of men being wrongly convicted only to be later cleared by DNA. Even if this happens only .001% of the time, is that a chance that we are willing to take? I am personally torn when it comes to the death penalty. Why I believe it is an appropriate punishment for the crime, I also wonder if men are best qualified to pass such judgement.

In regards to the pardon, I don't really get it in this case. To me it seems extreme to pardon a murderer. His reasoning for pardoning is poor at best. Perhaps Citizen is on the right track. I seem to remember some pardons that back-fired and the pardonee ended up back in jail. Perhaps that will turn out to be the case here.
 
Last edited:

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
While I tend to agree with you in spirit, there have been numerous cases of men being wrongly convicted only to be later cleared by DNA. Even if this happens only .001% of the time, is that a chance that we are willing to take? I am personally torn when it comes to the death penalty. Why I believe it is an appropriate punishment for the crime, I also wonder if men are best qualified to pass such judgement....

+1
We can't trust government to do most anything else right so how can we trust them to justly put people to death? If it was absolutely sure that someone committed murder, their death would be a just punishment but I'd rather let 100 guilty men go free than have one innocent man put to death.
 

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,611
Location
I80, USA
I support the death penalty and not just for murder. But I sony agree that the executions should be immediate. There needs to be time allotted for the convicted to compile evidence for an appeal.

Posted using my HTC Evo
 

nonameisgood

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
1,008
Location
Big D
At least one I them is already in the wind, and is being sought by the state, according to CNN.
 

thebigsd

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
3,535
Location
Quarryville, PA
Last edited:

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
In cases where the individual has been definitively proven to have engaged in an act that mandates the death penalty, they should receive the death penalty. Example: Police raid a home, arrest a suspected serial killer, and find bodies buried in the back yard--execute! Police respond to a call where a man is raping a woman, and there is either observed and DNA evidence that the crime was voilent (all rape is violent but, I hope people get my point here in what I mean by that; that includes female rapists of course)--executed!

Who we should not execute are individuals where there are no DNA evidence, and that much of the convictions depends on the confession of the individual. I would rather see a man free after thirty years in prison of wrongful conviction, than a man found to be wrongfully convicted but, has been executed. I am sure the innocent men being executed would rather have the former as well.
 

Daylen

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
2,223
Location
America
More accurate would be the Governor from the Republican party. Its not much of a Republican, conservative or free market idea for the government to steal private property for the sole purpose of selling to another private party for the benefit of the beneficiary of the property. The Gov got in because the former Governor (democrat) Muskrat was bankrupting the state with welfare checks for deadbeats.
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
More accurate would be the Governor from the Republican party. Its not much of a Republican, conservative or free market idea for the government to steal private property for the sole purpose of selling to another private party for the benefit of the beneficiary of the property. The Gov got in because the former Governor (democrat) Muskrat was bankrupting the state with welfare checks for deadbeats.

Well then, since you put it that way, our economic troubles are the result of Bush W., not President Obama. Thank you for framing it in this way.

Well, it is Republicans who do these things as well. To act is if there are not, or that they are somehow not "true Republicans" is nonsense. Accept responsibility for your politicians Republicans!
 

Daylen

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
2,223
Location
America
Well then, since you put it that way, our economic troubles are the result of Bush W., not President Obama. Thank you for framing it in this way.

Well, it is Republicans who do these things as well. To act is if there are not, or that they are somehow not "true Republicans" is nonsense. Accept responsibility for your politicians Republicans!

Eh? what I meant by state was the State of Mississippi as in the State government.

Picking the greater of two evils because the lesser did a few things I don't like is silly; it just gives the worse candidate a chance to do even more horrible things. And I'll vote for a Democrat when a libertarian is their nominee (or the democrat is more of one than the repub).
 
Top