Tsarnaev death sentence overturned

chia wrote:

"Which would make our legal system no better than the bombers"

Justice and closure matters. It isn't justice for the family of victims for people like you to spare his life. Let the victims of the family decide his fate.

In my mind this is one of the most clear cut rationalizations for the death sentence. If it can’t be meted out in this case, why do we even have it? I’m very thankful I’m not a family member of the victims because I would be immeasurably angry with this judge.

Good job evading the question there guy.

From an ESPN article:

https://www.espn.com/olympics/trackandfield/story/_/id/29572538/boston-marathon-bomber-dzhokhar-tsarnaev-death-sentence-overturned-appeal

'A federal appeals court Friday threw out Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's death sentence in the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, saying the judge who oversaw the case did not adequately screen jurors for potential biases.'

What potential bias would a juror have? I don't understand how this enters the discussion. I don't understand the appeal at all.

The America I knew in the 1990's executed those repsonsible for federal crimes like Mcveigh.

Bill Clinton, who may or may not be a pedophile (I don't know but it is unfortunate to see the things about him and his connection to Epstein as I did today on Twitter) said appropriately 'Justice will be swift and it will be severe' when the hunt for Mcveigh was on.

Amercia used to put these guys away quickly in the past.

post nups wrote:

chia wrote:

"Which would make our legal system no better than the bombers"

Justice and closure matters. It isn't justice for the family of victims for people like you to spare his life. Let the victims of the family decide his fate.

I'm not asking for his life to be spared. I think having due process, even for despicable people, is important.

As much as the decision angers me, I hope a more fair sentencing will also see this man put in the chair.

Greg wrote:

From an ESPN article:

https://www.espn.com/olympics/trackandfield/story/_/id/29572538/boston-marathon-bomber-dzhokhar-tsarnaev-death-sentence-overturned-appeal

'A federal appeals court Friday threw out Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's death sentence in the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, saying the judge who oversaw the case did not adequately screen jurors for potential biases.'

What potential bias would a juror have? I don't understand how this enters the discussion. I don't understand the appeal at all.

The America I knew in the 1990's executed those repsonsible for federal crimes like Mcveigh.

Bill Clinton, who may or may not be a pedophile (I don't know but it is unfortunate to see the things about him and his connection to Epstein as I did today on Twitter) said appropriately 'Justice will be swift and it will be severe' when the hunt for Mcveigh was on.

Amercia used to put these guys away quickly in the past.

It’s not necessarily just bias. If prosecutors seek the death penalty then the jury members must be willing to consider all punishments under the law. If a jury member is opposed to the death penalty and will not vote for it then such juror is not able to consider the full range of punishment. It means that a juror has already made up their mind about what punishment is or is not permissible. On the flip side, I think we’d all agree that a juror who says “I will only seek the maximum sentence” is not equally unfit, correct? The purpose is to make sure a jury recommends/sentences (depending on jurisdiction) a punishment based on the evidence before them regarding that particular crime.

We literally had jurors who would say “I will not convict a black person” or “I will not convict for domestic violence because that’s a matter to be handled within the home.” Even had a juror hold out on a guy with hundreds of pounds of a controlled substance because he appeared Hispanic and the juror was worried the person would get deported if convicted. I once had a jury vote to convict for armed robbery with a firearm within 5 minutes but there was one holdout who basically didn’t believe DNA evidence was real...got a mistrial on it as a result. Conversely, I certainly wouldn’t want a juror who would assume the person is guilty based on skin color either. That’s equally unfair and improper.

So yeah, making sure jurors will weigh the evidence and make their decision based on the evidence before them and the entire range of punishment is pretty important. This isn’t a political debate, all people who believe in a fair system should want that.

Typo: meant that a juror who would only seek the maximum sentence would indeed be equally unfit.

Nah bro, Corrupt cops, DAs, and judges have been implicated in enough evidence rigging, jury tampering, and other corruption for me to always be open minded about. As long as there are humans involved in the justice process we can't just kill people who always have a sliver of chance of being innocent. You can always free someone who has a life sentence when you screw up, you can't bring someone back to life.

bladerunner wrote:

What simplistic drivel. First, let's examine what he and his brother did. They maimed dozens of people who had to under go excruciating pain and suffering. Many lost limbs, had multiple surgeries, and are experiencing unthinkable mental anguish to this day.

So if we execute this man, who ruined dozens of lives, that makes us monsters? No. Society that does not take retribution on people who commit heinous acts are making light of the victim's plight. "We know what he did was wrong but we will allow him 3 meals a day and take care of his needs, but we won't allow him back into society". That isn't justice for the victims. It's a slap in the face.

He's never ever getting out. I doubt an execution in this case would ever be carried out anyway.

The idea that the US govt was not involved in this bombing is crazy.

Yet all the evidence of their involvement was buried and so the real perpetrators walk free

YMMV wrote:

checking in wrote:

the death penalty should not exist. life sentences should not exist. every life may have a chance at redemption. maybe it's circular to say i can think of no scenario in which two wrongs generally make a right, because the conservative killers will come back and say, here's scenario: death penalty for murder.

but that needs some support. usually the support is "justice" or "closure" or "deterrence" - - but i'm not sure any of those hold water, at least as the death penalty is currently administered. maybe it would be a closer case if we killed murderers quickly and more publicly?

It is incredible how leftists are quick to invoke the possibility of redemption for cold-blooded convicted killers, but offer no possibility of redemption to the entire white race for the "crime" of being born and therefore complicit in historical racism.

hard work wrote:

YMMV wrote:

It is incredible how leftists are quick to invoke the possibility of redemption for cold-blooded convicted killers, but offer no possibility of redemption to the entire white race for the "crime" of being born and therefore complicit in historical racism.

Whataboutery, strawman, trolling, whatever you want to call it, this is pure, unadulterated nonsense. I don't hear any redemption here, and I don't see any link with slavery. I think you're too deep into your echo chamber and you're seeing your fears everywhere.

The government with the authority to kill is a dangerous government.

YMMV wrote:

It is incredible how leftists are quick to invoke the possibility of redemption for cold-blooded convicted killers, but offer no possibility of redemption to the entire white race for the "crime" of being born and therefore complicit in historical racism.

The sad part is that you actually believe this.

Justice is not analogous to Revenge.

The death penalty is an abomination.

sbeefyk2 wrote:

This is another example of why the US justice system needs to be scrapped and started all over again. Innocent people spend 20+ years in prison before being discovered they were completely innocent and then someone who bombed a large event and then went on an hours long shootout with the police gets his sentence overturned by a technicality. This guy should have been shot and killed on site by the arresting officers.

This country is stupid.

The result of a high profile case vs one no one cares about. If OJ wasn't OJ he would be serving a life sentence right now and no one would know.

I'm sure Donald has asked his advisors what it would take to have him drawn and quartered in front of a newly erected Robert E. Lee monument.

Death penalty needs to go. We are better than that. (I recognize that some of you aren't)

The only acceptable use of lethal force is self defense.

Vancomycin wrote:

The only acceptable use of lethal force is self defense.

self defense of basic human principles.

Evil is not tolerated.

You do evil things, you should be prepared to pay with your life.

I gave what I thought was a pretty humane alternative in a previous post. But that likely will not happen. It's a lifetime with 23 hours in a cell per day or a needle for this guy.

Because of the choices he was making. Sure he was under the influence of his brother. But you still have a moral compass.