Does Stanley Tookie Williams deserve clemency??

no it's not justice.

But I am convinced that he has been afforded the chance to raise questions about his trial. 25 years of chances to offer some shred in his own defense.

Pardon me, but the definition of racism, in my book, is assuming that peope think or act a certain way because of their skin color. I would stake my life on the decision of twelve black Americans, twelve native Americans, twelve philipino americans. Twelve whatever. I can hardly believe that someone will publicly say that they don't trust a certain race, without even meeting the people involved. I suppose that is one of the "benefits" of internet-anonymity.

No wonder you're convinced he's the victim of racism. I wonder, if you think that whites or blacks, or anyone's behavior is determined primarily by their race. But that's the makings of another thread.

Amazing.

Anyway. I understand that you think he's been mistreated. I disagree, and I'm willing to leave it at that.

But, tell me. Can you imagine a situation were a criminal could be justifiably executed? IS there a place, a time or a crime, where execution is a fitting punishment???

Now You are saying I am a racist. Maybe I am, but the mothers who were black who have trusted me to babysit and care for their children did not think I was, but then I am not the one wanting to kill a black man when its clear he has not received a fair trial. When a cop puts a file on his case in the cell of another prisoner so that prisoner can study it and then come up with a so called jailhouse confession that helped convict him, then its clear that the man did not receive a fair trial. But yet you are screaming for his blood and calling me a racist.

As I said racism is alive and well in this country unfortunately it has not gone away, its just ignored and never talked about. I have as a white person had people who are black be mean to me based on nothing more than my skin color, I figure they themselves had been mistreated by someone of my skin color and felt justified in doing it or had been taught by someone to act that way. I did nothing to them I just ignored it.

I have also seen the same kind of discrimination against people who are black, and they tried to ignore it as well. I have also had black people be extremely kind to me and take time to help me when I needed help the most for no other reason than out of the goodness and kindness of their hearts. People are people we are all a product of our enviroments and experiences. I try and treat everyone as I would want to be treated if that makes me a racist so be it.

This is a true story, it happened a few months back. A few days after Hurricane Katrina hit, hubby went down to Biloxi to see about his sister and her family, hubby saw a black man, somewhere along the way, broke down along the interstate, he obviously had had a flat and was having problems getting the lug bolts off. Hubby got out and walked up behind him and spoke to him, the man did not hear him and hubby yelled out but with the wind and the traffic, he still did not hear hubby so hubby tapped him on the shoulder, when he saw hubby he began yelling, then was screaming don't kill me, he nearly backed out into traffic which scared hubby but fortunately he realized hubby meant him no harm and calmed down. Together they got the bolts off and hubby changed his tire since the man said he had never changed one in his life. He kept asking hubby why he stopped, hubby explained, well you needed help and it was something I could help with. He said, "No I mean why did you stop and help me a black man you don't even know?" He told hubby the minute he saw it was not a black person who had stopped to help him, he was sure he was a dead man. They both had a good laugh over how they both nearly gave one another a heart attack (it scared hubby when he yelled and started backing out into traffic) and he then tried to pay hubby. Hubby said no pay neccessary. He then told hubby, "Its clear you are not from around here, don't stop and help anyone else, especially black people for they are not used to white people stopping to help them and you might get hurt before they realize you mean them no harm."

Was this man a racist or just a realist who realizes racism exists on both sides? You have a real problem with me saying I would not trust a jury made up of predominantly black people not to be prejudiced and at the same time I also say that I can't blame anyone black for feeling the same way about a predominiantly white jury not being prejudiced. Racism exists and denying it will not change anything. Talking about it openly might.

And after hearing testimony from victims of Katrina, I would definitely say racism is alive and well in this country. BTW just in case you are wondering I think this young woman was telling the absolute truth and not exaggerating in any way. Heres an excerpt.

www.democracynow.org.../12/09/1443240

LEAH HODGES: Very true. Very true. Particularly true of [inaudible] and Jefferson Parish. Jefferson Parish is where the Causeway concentration camp was housed, where we experienced the Gestapo-type oppression, as opposed to being rescued. We were three minutes away from the airport. They could have taken us to the airport. Those military vehicles could have taken us to any dry, safe city in America. Instead, they dumped us at a dumping ground, sealed us in there, and they backed up all their authority with military M-16s.

And there were thousands and thousands of people. On the last day we were in there -- and let me tell you something -- they hand-picked the white people to ride out first. Yes, racism was very much involved. They hand-picked the white people to ride out first. Every day, the crowd got darker and darker and darker until finally there were only – there were 95% people of color in that place.



[edit on 10-12-2005 by goose]

Impressive rhetoric.

And now back to the topic of Tookie and capital punishment.

For the third time:

But, tell me. Can you imagine a situation were a criminal could be justifiably executed? IS there a place, a time or a crime, where execution is a fitting punishment???

What!?

Now, i'm not going to rant about religion and such, but...the Bible does not advocate the death penalty whatsoever. The Bible teaches against revenge, which is basically what the death penalty is.

I'm not stating my opinion on this topic, I just wanted to reply to that statement.

mw080, I don't want to drag this discussion off on a religion angle.

But as a christian who accepts the necessity of capital punishment, I think of Paul's letter to the Romans:




Now that passage doesn't mention capital punishment. It does mention that the authorities don't "bear the sword for nothing." But that could be concievable construed in a number of ways.

The point I take from this is that government DOES have the authority to take the life of evildoers, when it is the only way do guarantee that their crimes are ended, even in prison.

Paul also talks about "wrath and punishment." That also sounds like the deterence and retribution arguements of capital punishment proponents.

Every coin has two sides.

.

[edit on 11-12-2005 by dr_strangecraft]

Sure. But for someone to post that anyone who claims
to be a Christian MUST believe in the death penalty otherwise
they don't understand the bible ... well ... that's plain wrong.

There are PLENTY of places in scripture that supports both
sides of the argument. To claim some Christians don't understand
scripture because we don't like the death penalty .. that's obnoxious.

I agree completely.

The whole "No reasonable person can believe ________" is the bane of this board.

actually god advactes death thru out the bible...the flood, the massacre on the mount of siani, called for the hebrews to destroy other lands, and called for those same soldiers to be killed when they took up the woman of that nation and its gods....................also god dictates in jewish law that if a man murders he to will be murderd by the hand of man....

as for the actual topic at hand...NO WAY that dude should die..but not by gas......he should die the way his victems died......

That was not rhetoric.
In answer to your question yes I do to a limited degree believe in the death penalty. Hitler had he not killed himself would have been a candidate. Saddam is a candidate. There are many political leaders who have murdered their own people and massacred other nations due to their greed and thirst for political power who are also candidates.

As I said over and over Stanley Tookie Williams did not receive a fair trial. One of the main witnesses against him that helped convict him obviously lied, and the police were obviously complicit in this lie. How can a man receive a fair trial under those circumstances ?

Once one is convicteded it is almost impossible to get that conviction overturned. Ask any lawyer, they will tell you it is rare and there have been many cases where there is overwhelming evidence of innocence but only after the conviction and people have languished away in prison and actually been put to death despite new evidence. You keep talking about 26 years like time itself is an issue in his guilt, it is not. Not once one realizes how difficult it is to get a conviction overturned.

I admit I am no big fan of Mr. Williams but the fact remains that he has not received a fair trial.

Rhetoric is not the same as propoganda or BS.

- using language effectively to please or persuade

-study of the technique and rules for using language effectively (especially -in public speaking)
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Rhetoric (from Greek ρητωρ, rhêtôr, "orator") is one of the three original liberal arts or trivium (the other members are dialectic and grammar). While it has meant many different things during its 2500-year history, it is generally described today as the art of persuasion through language. Rhetoric can describe a persuasive way in which one relates a theme or idea in an effort to convince.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric

For my part, I take a certain amount of pride in my own limited rhetorical skills.

Examples where I think capital punishment is justified:

-National leaders who are worse than simply corrupt or incompetent; but who have shown a disregard for the welfare of thier own people, and a willingness to use gory methods to stay in power. Examples you gave, plus people like Ciacescu.

- Heads of criminal syndicates. People (men) like Lucky Luciano or John Gotti or Charles Manson, who continue to order "hits" from solitary confinement. I think this is an excellent example of why "life behind bars" is simply not enough. While there is no evidence of Tookie doing this, it is certainly a possibility, giving his status as a "founding father" of one of two major American crime syndicates.

- Criminals who have shown an ability to escape from jail. Another bit of ammo in the argument that the government simply cannot keep its promise to "lock criminals away forever."

-people who organize crime rings INSIDE jails. This is not mafia, but orgainized smuggling and sex within the prison. If you've ever been in a maximum unit, you know all about the tattoos, the rapes and killings. Guys pulling multiple life stretches just don't care. And there's so many of them that no state can give them a completely solitary existence. Which means they KEEP ON creating and maintaining rackets in the pen. In fact there are a number of serious gangs you can only get into by doing time in max.

I understand that you think this guy didn't get a fair trial. I understand that. I just happen to disagree with you. I think he really did kill those people. There were irregularities, maybe even some wrongdoing on the part of the cops. But that doesn't guarantee his innocence.

And he's enough of a celebrity to get the very best lawyers.

Now, it's true that it is difficult to get a re-trial. Personally, I think it's because most of the guys found guilty ARE in fact guilty.

You know, even if his lawyers couldn't get enough inertia going to overturn a conviction, it IS more common for an appellate court to set aside a verdict and hand down a lesser sentence. In some states, the board just refuses to set an actual execution date. THAT happens all the time.

So, while you are convinced he's gotten the shaft, I am unconvinced. As a matter of fact, I am confident that he is guilty.

.

So let me get this straight anytime one makes a good argument that you do not want to agree with it you say its rhetoric, never mind whether it is the truth or not.
Let me ask you, has there ever been a case where someone was being executed, that you did not agree with and saw the need for clemancy?

Read below what even one of the judges who has heard this case wrote. He should be ashamed of himself for not giving this man a new trial.



sfgate.com.../c/a/2005/12/07/MNG60G468I1.DTL

The prosecution's case was based on circumstantial evidence and the testimony of witnesses "whose credibility was highly suspect,'' U.S. District Judge Stephen Wilson wrote in 1998. He noted that there were no eyewitnesses to the shotgun murders of three people at a Los Angeles motel and that the only testifying eyewitness to the killing of a convenience store clerk was "an accomplice who had a strong motive to lie.''

i really believe his execution will start another race war here in america. the war has started in australia. this will be exciting to watch!!

Anybody who think's Tookie Williams or any other Criminal should be murdered, are wannabe murdere's themselves, all the blood thirsty sentiments on this board is making my skin crawl, to have a state murdering Humans in your name is bewildering logic,
How many of you would like to flick the switch?
why dont you get some popcorn and order the event on pay for view,

BAN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

i wish they would put these executions On Demand. i'd pay 10.99 a month to tune into the executions. i don't need these people staying in prison all their lives taking my tax money.

Absolutely not!!! No clemency for this killer , i dont care if he became a God fearing man in jail (most of them do). A little too late.

Off with his head I dont gloat over the taking of another human beings life, but its well deserved here.

Justice is not murder, Iamian. There is no murder in executing a murderer, and to think so is weakness. Animals prey upon weakness.

He should be kept alive to write children's books, to teach our children, I hear. That is worse than weakness. What sort of parent would determine that a murdering gang-banger is more qualified to instill morals and values than themselves?

The fact that this is even discussed is even more evidence that the society is nearing moral bankruptcy; when right and wrong are indistinguishable in the minds of so many, and that the already morally bankrupt entertainment elite can make people rethink logic and common sense.

Who has the right too kill anybody? niether tookie williams nor you,
you talk of morality, talk to the entertainment elite, and the freaks who buy such things, listen to the words that cross your lips, KILL, and EXECUTE.

How does your God judge an Hangman?

The government has the sword, and not for no reason.

My God doesn't hide His words to those who search.

The creature killed a family of four. The death penalty was no secret.

the words that pass my lips are as clear as the weakness I smell oozing from elsewhere. Murderous predators smell the weakness, too, and they love it. Oh, they respect you as much as a cat respects the moth it toys with, but they love the weakness.

Edited because of the usual typos this poster commits in every post.

Edited to correct typos in the above sentence.

[edit on 12-12-2005 by Thomas Crowne]

[edit on 12-12-2005 by Thomas Crowne]

goose, I mean positive things by the word "rhetoric." Here is some rhetoric that also reflects the truth:


It is wrong for a person (you, me, or Tookie) to kill, except in immediate self-defense. No one person has that right. Only the State can have such a right.

The state has rights which the people as individuals lack. The doctrine of immanent domain is another example.

As far as "circumstantial" evidence at Tookie's trial goes, that's fine if it meets the criterion of acceptable evidence under California Law. I strongly suspect that if it was unacceptable, the conviction would have been set aside.

I'm not aware of a SINGLE case where a person was executed and later proved to be innocent. I haven't researched the issue, because it frankly doesn't interest me much. It's your assertion, not mine. I don't doubt that it has happened; I just think it is the lesser evil, compared to all the killers inhabiting our jails and neighborhoods.

Cicero, in his book On Rhetoric, talked about the question of whether it is worse for some innocents to be punished along with the guilty, or for a few of the guilty to go unpunished.

For my part, I think it is worse for the guilty to go unpunished. This state of affairs only encourages more heinous crime, and allows the guilty to have more chances at perpetrating it.

To be honest, our society (all human society) is like a pendulum swinging between two opposite poles: too much punishment, and too little.

When America rebelled against the British Crown, it was because the Crown instituted too much punishment. That is why we have a bill of rights, which specifically prohibits cruel and unusualy punishment.

In the 50's and 60's many states began outlawing capital punisment, because the public felt it was not appropriate. But beginning in the 1990's, the states began re-instituting it. Why, because the general feeling has become that there is not enough punishment to keep our society civil and safe.

There. I think that's a fine piece of rhetoric, worthy of a debating match.

.

let me guess you dont live in australia or in us do you???
yes i too fear this will spark a race war on some level .......i live 20 mins out of DC ... i still remember the last "race riots " we had......this could get quite ugly..........but i still think he should fry..........