By SharonH

April 16, 2007 1:18 PM | Link to this

Well thank goodness they killed the death penalty bill. The judicial system was set up the way it was for a reason and it would have been ridiculous to change just satisfy that teacher’s(the one who campaigned for it) lust for vengeance (not justice). There are always elements in this state who are bound and determine to always make this state look the most backward.

By Son of Tator Tot

April 16, 2007 2:05 PM | Link to this

you mean “get aholt” of it, don’t ye?

By Chris B

April 16, 2007 5:19 PM | Link to this

This is very sad that criminals get more rights than victims, especially when the victims are 2 year old children and 22 year old mothers just trying to have a day at the park. This bill was not about vengeance but about justice. Unfortunately, there are twisted people that feel more for the murderers than the innocent victims. This is sickening. We will keep trying.

By Craig

April 16, 2007 5:37 PM | Link to this

Chris,

Perhaps these people feel that more death to punish death is not the way to go. There are some people who take life a little more seriously than you think. When faced with that decision there are those who seriously consider life as a whole when making that decision. Justice is making sure that when the state kills someone, a jury of one’s peers is in complete agreement on the death penalty. If a unanimous verdict is fine for other matters why not for the death penalty (something far more crucial)?

By MrLiberty

April 16, 2007 9:23 PM | Link to this

I have seen first hand how the general stupidity that infects the human species can wrongly convict a person of murder. Hundreds of cases all over the country have been resolved with the convicted going free because of DNA or other corroborating evidence. In many of those cases there has been a blatant element of prosecutorial misconduct.

The crime of murder is prosecuted by the state, the judge is paid by the state, the jury is paid by the state, and in many cases the defense attorney is paid by the state. Seem’s a bit one-sided don’t you think?

So long as we have to put up with this horribly failed system of injustice, the least we can do is require a unanimous vote for the death penalty.

If you think that this system of injustice won’t ever impact you, just remember the students from Duke. At least in the former Soviet Union everyone wasn’t deluded into believing there was a system of “justice.”

By RL

April 17, 2007 9:33 AM | Link to this

Thank God they killed the death penalty bill.

Did anyone else think it was strange when in the same week the GA house of reps. voted to make it easier to give the death penalty and then voted to pay over $1 million to a man wrongly convicted of rape more than 20 years ago? Does anyone else see the unbelievable contradiction?

By Chris B

April 17, 2007 2:27 PM | Link to this

Many people are mistaking wrongful conviction and DNA mistakes with this bill regarding the death penalty. This is not about wrongful convictions. The murderer of Jordan and Whitney Land was found guilty unanimously within ten minutes or so of deliberation. This is about proper application of punishment. Jordan and Whitney Land had the right to live and were innocent citizens; their murderer didn’t give them a choice. Their murderer had a choice to commit murder or not. One poster wrote administering the death penalty is not taking life seriously. Not administering the death penalty to someone that can murder a two year old child and her mother is not taking life seriously. Innocent life should mean much more than the life of a cold hearted killer.

By RL

April 17, 2007 2:45 PM | Link to this

Chris, this is NOT about any specific case and about NOT making the death penalty EASIER to give. Mistakes ARE made and we (well I) would like to at least keep the current system… if we make it easier to give the death penalty there is a higher likeliehood of executing an innocent person… shouldn’t we all want to prevent that?

By Chris B

April 17, 2007 3:55 PM | Link to this

Absolutely, I understand this is not about one case. However, this particular case highlights the GROSS miscarriage of justice from the victim’s standpoint. I also happen to have learned that one of the two jurors that held out allegedly sited some very biased remarks. There can be one or two confused or even dishonest jurors that prevent the proper carriage of justice for victims just as there can be wrongful DNA evidence. In fact, even more of a chance for the juror errors than with DNA errors these days. The case I cited had no dependencies on DNA evidence by the way. I would argue that now, even the wrong DNA card cannot be used because technology and science have greatly improved since these past cases being made so public. Who sides with the victim’s and their families these days? Do we, the people of this state want to send the message to innocent victim’s families that a murderer’s life is more valuable than their family members lives were? Everyone wants to talk rubbish about theories in defense of murderers, it is time victims have a voice against politically biased agendas. The majority vote for death works in Florida and thank God worked for Carlie Brucia’s case and Jessica Lundsford’s case but the backwardness that was referenced in a previous post to me is actually here in this state due to elements supporting murderers rather than victims, and due to crooked defense attorneys out to make money and a name for themselves even if it is at the expense of a murdered mother and child’s justice and their surviving family members. Victims deserve a voice! Conspiracy theories are getting old.

By sheila howell

April 17, 2007 7:00 PM | Link to this

I am the mother of a 22 year old young beautiful mother (WHITNEY) and the grandmother of a precious 2 year old grandaughter (JORDAN) THAT WERE MURDERED BY A STRANGER IN A PARK… HE has more rights. How sad someone thinks a “MURDERER” like WESLEY HARRIS should live “YOU” …pay for him to live! DNA was not an issue! Be informed! DNA was not an issue! Know what you are arguing about and for! That “COWARD” in this case…said that: he would tell me just what happened if I would agree not to go for “THE DEATH PENALTY”. Do you people really know how this works? I don’t want anyone to die that doesn’t deserve to! But, when you admit it then the “DEATH PENALTY” should apply whenever the state seeks it. MAJORITY is the key word here … that is the way we run this country. Why should a MINORITY vote decide? Put yourself in my place! The people that think a MAJORITY VOTE is wrong! are either DEFENSE Attotrneys or CLUELESS!! get off of the DNA thing! It doesn’t apply always! This DNA that now frees people …{I AM GLAD when it does!} will also CONVICT murderers or criminals as it applies. Get off of this school teacher thing; she was there and witnessed this GROSS INJUSTICE . . there were others …A MAJORITY! on that jury that agreed with her!!!! She has a right to her opinion … she is not VENGEFUL! What are YOU and WHO are YOU?

By DS

April 17, 2007 10:51 PM | Link to this

I am the teacher who campaigned and will continue to campaign for house bill 185 until it passes. It is in error that you say this is out of vengeance. I am hoping to find justice for those people, like Whitney and Jordan, who can no longer do it for themselves because their opportunities were stolen from them. What I don’t understnad is how this became about a “vengeful” teacher and not about the the issues. Some jurors lie and could never give the death penalty and, better yet, what about the victims. Where do they fit in the pretty puzzle of ‘let them walk’? Where is the justice in that? The death penalty never crossed mind before this trial but until I know my kids and the kids I teach are able to be granted the justice they diserve if some lunatic decides to do the unspeakable, those pictures I can’t get out of my head, then I won’t stop. Call it vengence if you like, call it what you want.

By Poster

April 18, 2007 6:41 PM | Link to this

What exactly is the issue here? Life, death, vengeance, justice, pain and suffering, crime and punishment, right, wrong, race, social status, results of family problems, opinion versus facts or some things ones not related to this case just simply fail to see? There are MANY factors the courts must consider when deciding ones fate. This is where qualified judges, jurors and attorneys come in. The problem is, it is far too simple for people to lie to get on a jury and then allow an admitted criminal to escape justice. When this happens it places doubt in the minds of the other jurors and when the verdict becomes public, the public doesn’t really know what to think. They do not know who to trust. Regardless of the afore mentioned problems, an admitted criminal that has been convicted of a particularly heinous crime should receive an equally heinous punishment. This would potentially change the mindset of that person BEFORE they decide to commit the crime. I have seen only ONE person want to fight the police when the K-9 unit showed up and they were confronted with the thought of bodily harm from the dog. This also applies to the Taser deployment. If people know that there is a REAL penalty for their behavior, they WILL consider the outcome and this would prevent many crimes. Look at today’s school children. Their behavior correlates to the teacher’s inability to discipline them. The same applies to adults. Why do YOU not break the law? You do not want the punishment!

By Ed Stone

April 19, 2007 11:45 AM | Link to this

The jurors on this particular panel refused to impose the death penalty because of the issue of race. It is as simple as that. I am sure you will all agree that the race of the defendant and his murder victims should not determine what punishment is meted out.

There is no issue of unanimity in HB 185, because the jury must unanimously convict the accused of murder (which was done in record time in this case). HB 185 simply prevents one or two holdouts, who lied under oath to get on the jury, from keeping a murderer from his reward.

There should be no penalty for actual murder but death.

HB 185 will be back, and the sponsor will show up for the committee hearing, and it will become law.

Sparing those who murder the ultimate penalty does not value life. On the contrary, it cheapens it. Those who will murder an innocent woman and her toddler must know that they will pay the most severe penalty this society has to offer.