This is the crux of it right here. If somebody says they can accept the death penalty as long as it's certain the state gets it right, and the person's guilt is incontestable, I can accept that.

But again, I get the feeling certain people are more against the death penalty in general than just because of the risk an innocent person could be put to death. But they're hesitant to make that argument because it doesn't look too good when you're advocating the right for murderers to live.

There are various honorable reasons to be against the death penalty. It's arbitrary; most first degree murderers won't face it. It's applied unequally for class and race. It's more expensive than life imprisonment. It doesn't act as a deterrent. And yes there are some people who really do take the "Sermon on the Mount" seriously/literally and are fiercely opposed to the death penalty for religious and/or moral reasons. The Catholic Church in particular has some powerful writings and arguments against it. I'm not bothered by the concept of fair retribution but I'm leery of giving this society (particularly the State of Texas) the ability to kill people.

All reasons to fix the system, not necessarily do away with capital punishment.



I've noticed most people who bring up this are those opposed to the death penalty using it as a straw man argument. It's more about justice than deterrence.



And I can fully accept and respect the Catholic position because it's consistent, i.e. they don't oppose the death penalty while supporting abortion.

So John Travolta isn't just facing one gay assault lawsuit, he's facing two.

Carrie Fisher was telling the truth after all?

It would be a shame, if true, because his wife is pretty hot; even at 50.

A marriage of convenience at the Hollyweird Church of Scientology?

I don't believe it. Next thing you'll be telling me is that Tom and Katie also have an arrangement.

My legal advice to Travolta would be to resort to the Vinny Barbarino persona and play dumb.

What? Where?

Him being gay in itself wouldn't be a shame in my eyes, even if he's a rather public figure member of the notoriously homophobic Church of Scientology. (Director Paul Haggis recently quit the church because they were violtile to his gay daughter.) Of course hypocrisy is a proud tradition in Hollyweird, so I shouldn't be surprised.

Of course he could be the rare divergence and be a bisexual, which is fully possible. Or would be if I actually cared. All I know is that these rumors have followed him for decades. The same with Tom Cruise, who in looking at pictures of his youth bore a canny resemblance to that young actor character in L.A. CONFIDENTIAL resorting to gay prostitution to help his career. (Just saying.)

Also I wish our news would cover the news like Tawain does.

Who says Socialists have no sense of humor?

See what's happened to Florida since Tebow left:

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/0...in-florida?lite

Last July, I posted a story and video in the Random Post Whoring thread on the beating death of a schizophrenic homeless man in Fullerton, CA (the city where I live). The beating itself was bad enough, but the fact that the beating was administered by our police department makes it that much more disturbing. Here's the link to the post for those interested:

Kelly Thomas Beating

One of the police officers in the case has been charged with second-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter, and another has been charged with involuntary manslaughter and one count of excessive force. The judge hearing the case has decided the case will go to trial...due mostly to the surveillance video that recorded the whole incident. The DA has finally released the video, and it is honestly one of the most disturbing things I have ever witnessed...

Fourth accuser has come out against John Travolta.



http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news...-report-2012125

The masseurs should have got together, restrained him, and cut his hair off.

Hey Kly, your opinion about the following:

In a Law & Order episode, the DA charged suspects with terrorism for fighting in public. Why not charge Mafiosi with terrorism generally and, in particular, because their associations could be with foreign agents? I think it's a theory of the crime that should be explored.

A very good question, olivant. I wish I saw the episode.

The short answer to your question is in some instances a proven association with a foreign entity could provide a basis for a charge under federal anti-terrorism legislation (with which I have no experience).

As I understand it, federal terrorism laws address threats to the widespread civilian population, threats of intimidation or coercion against the US government or attacks linked to federal policy or governmental functions and objectives among other things.

Two reasons why these statutes aren't applied to instances of violence from organized crime syndicates go hand in hand. First, the burden of proof in these cases is probably very difficult to establish a specific criminal relationship between overseas entities and domestic perpetrators. Secondly, criminal process generally requires that a defendant be charged with the more specific charge when two or more theories of guilt can be stated. The RICO Act was designed specifically for organized crime and there is legislation within the Act and associated with it that more directly address the situation you described. Therefore, prosecutors probably regard the anti-terrorism laws as overkill, requiring a harder burden, and offering possibly less chance of success at trial.

A prosecutor won't hesitate bringing multiple counts on an indictment for a single crime when the charges include lesser included offenses. That, of course, would be something like murder 1, murder 3, manslaughter, in which he present the facts and let the jury pick a result among several choices, sharing some of the same elements.

dontomasso would certainly have interesting opinions on this.

I think it's only a matter of time. Eventually some wiseguy will get caught in a drug deal with a foreign national, who uses the cash to help finance al-Qaeda, and they'll use the anti-terrorism statutes to try everyone up and down the line. Kill two birds with one stone.

It just seems to me that organized crime uses terror to get their way. To be sure, it's not the same widespread terror such as Al Queda seeks to perpetuate, but it is terror. I wish an enterprising federal DA would give it a try. As Kly points out, there are legal arguments to be overcome, but maybe the threat of it would prompt some OC members (or prospective members) to give it alot of thought.

Or hell, what about the Patriot Act in general?

A medical report compiled by the family physician of accused Trayvon Martin murderer George Zimmerman and obtained exclusively by ABC News found that Zimmerman was diagnosed with a "closed fracture" of his nose, a pair of black eyes, two lacerations to the back of his head and a minor back injury the day after he fatally shot Martin during an alleged altercation.

http://news.yahoo.com/abc-news-exclusive...topstories.html

The first Travolta accuser has filed papers to dismiss his lawsuit.

Autopsy results reportedly indicate Trayvon Martin suffered injuries to knuckles
Published May 16, 2012
FoxNews.com


Autopsy results reportedly indicate that 17-year-old Trayvon Martin had injuries to his knuckles when he died, which could support George Zimmerman’s claim that the unarmed teenager assaulted him before he was fatally shot.

WFTV.com reports that a medical examiner found two injuries on Martin’s body: the fatal gunshot wound to the chest and broken skin on his knuckles. The autopsy results surface as court records indicate that Zimmerman had a pair of black eyes, a fractured nose and two cuts to the back of his head after the fatal shooting on Feb. 26.

A message left with Zimmerman’s attorney, Mark O’Mara, was not immediately returned Wednesday.

Bill Sheaffer, a legal analyst for WFTV.com, said the autopsy evidence likely helps Zimmerman’s defense.

“It goes along with Zimmerman’s story that he acted in self-defense, because he was getting beaten up by Trayvon Martin,” he said.

But the injury could also be consistent with Trayvon “either trying to get away or defend himself,” Sheaffer continued.

Meanwhile, ABC News reports that Zimmerman’s medical records were part of evidence released Tuesday that prosecutors have in the second-degree murder case.

Zimmerman, who was treated Feb. 27 at Altamonte Family Practice, has pleaded not guilty and has claimed he acted in self-defense. The 28-year-old is free on $150,000 bail and is living in an undisclosed location.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/05/16/aut.../#ixzz1v4Bfyc4t

I read that Zimmerman is being charged with a hate crime which is death penalty eligible in Florida...this trial will be interesting.

I don't think it will come to a trial. At best, I see a plea bargain.

That's what I initially thought, Oli. But I think all of this new forensic evidence (Zimmerman's injuries and Trayvon's "bruised" knuckles) may just be enough to hang the jury. And Florida juries are unpredictable, to say the very least. So I have a feeling that Zimmerman's lawyers may decide to try this case after all.

Personally, I'd rather see a plea bargain, because the worst thing that can happen is if they try Zimmerman and he's acquitted. If that happens, there will almost certainly be riots (and not just in Florida).

What is sad is that the state of Florida let it get this far, and I mean that for both Zimmerman and the Martin families. This is a case that, had there been an arrest at the start, would never have made headlines. And if that was the case, I doubt he would have been charged with murder, I think it would have been manslaughter.

Although Zimmerman may have felt he was defending himself, why did he feel compelled to shoot? If the confrontation had become physical, obviously Zimmerman was free enough to get his gun out and shoot. Why didn't he just smack Trayvon across the face with it?

Or just shoot him in the leg.

I agree about Zimmerman's lawyers and I agree about a hung jury both as possibilities. I'm thinking misdemeanor assault. But I don't want the justice system being a function of popular intimidation.

I also think that comments about Zimmerman's behavior at the time as the encounter was takig place should be stated with caution. It's analogous to criticizing football officials for not calling a fumble because replay illustrated that it was.

I agree a million percent. That's a lynch mob mentality.

Marvin Winans, Whitney Houston's Pastor, Carjacked in Detroit

Pastor Marvin Winans -- the guy who M.C.'d Whitney Houston's funeral service -- was carjacked at a Detroit gas station yesterday.

According to WXYZ, Winans was pumping gas when some scumbag roughed him up and stole the 54-year-old's Infiniti QX56 SUV. The pastor told a WXYZ reporter he had a feeling this was "not a good situation" when he first saw the group of guys who eventually jumped him.

Winans -- whose family is legendary in the gospel music world -- was not seriously injured, but his son, Marvin Winans Jr., tells TMZ his dad has checked into a hospital to get treatment.

According to police, 4 suspects jacked an undisclosed amount of cash from Winans, and got away in the SUV. They describe three of the suspects as Black males.

Marvin gave the eulogy at Whitney's funeral in New Jersey back in February -- and thanked Whitney's mom for bringing "the world" to church.