Colin McEnroe Show: Should We Kill A Murderer?

death penalty

I've recently taken a online masters degree in criminal justice and I read a lot about the death penalty. I don't consider it to be a punishment I would rather say that it is a relief for those dangerous killers. I am sustaining Mamie Till-Mobley's position and I really believe that the right penalty for those guys who commited murder is to spend years in prison.

OR,

"Should we murder a killer?"

Should a 1st degree murderer be executed?

Life without parole cruel and unusual punishment. And should therefore be considered unconstitutional. Lethal injection is painless and is over quickly. Either the state paroles 1st degree murderers, in which case society admits cold blooded, pre-meditated murder is no more heinous than robbery or embezzlement, both being crimes where time off for good behavior is possible, or we accept the fact pre-meditated murder is in a class by itself as a crime against all of humanity, and deal with it by removing the offender from life on earth.

How could they do it?

I've often wondered how people like Hayes and his partner could do something so heinous. Perhaps part of it comes from ceasing to see their victims as human beings and instead seeing them as nothing other than some low animals.

Innocence Project anyone?

Innocence Project anyone? Anyone?

Punishment / Resolution

Thanks for taking my call today. I know this topic brings tremendous emotions and polarization in our society. I did spend some time in Europe and it was a continuing aspect of conversation brought to me about the death penalty in the USA.

Clearly our overseas friends felt that the loss of your daily freedom to do as you wish with your life was a tremendous punishment to bear as a result of a conviction of a crime.
It seems that time has shown the death penalty is not a deterrent and as a it was discussed does opt heal the surviving loved ones. I hope your shoe and thoughtful discussions today will display that a "life sentence without possibility" is not a life's vacation with 3 squares and a warm cot, that the taxpayer foots but a true ultimate punishment for the worst conduct that an individual participates in against society.

Hayes trial and sentencing

Hayes and his partner are not human just some low animals.They should be put to death the same way they killed the girls.they should be put into a old house tied to a bed but before having gas poured on them and ignited they should have their peckers cut off and stuffed in there mouths so they choke on it

E-mail from Bruce

Ok..here's the always necessary precursor to viewer comments to assuage your ego and gain your attention - I listen to your show frequently, enjoy your espousing on the topics of the day and look forward to your comments on current events in this potentially great state of ours. With that in mind, I would like to preface any further remarks with the following: the Cheshire home invasion occurred less than 300 feet from my back door. My daughter was scheduled to play with Michaela the very next day.

I am absolutely for the death penalty - always have been. Old Testament justice has a very stong appeal for me in the sense that there needs to be an ultimate penalty perceived by the public in general and specifically for the perpetrator.
The people who are most directly related to the victims perhaps deserve the right to waive the the death penalty, however, in the absence of that waiver, when there exists incontrovertible evidence of guilt, the penalty must be carried out.

Its disingenuous to host a show that will obviously serve the pro-life line of reasoning and disguising it as a factual, intellectual argument against the death penalty. Of course no one wants innocent people put to death! That truly is a valid argument for more careful reliance on better forensic decisions based on hard evidence. Whenever a pro-life advocate is approached on proof-positive evidence of murder, they revert to the argument supporting the victim's family not feeling any better about justice served after the death juice has done its job. How pretentious!

Bill Petit's motive for sitting through the horrors of a trial is specifically designed to showcase the inadequacies of the parole system and to ensure the possibility of death for those monsters. It sickens me that under state statute there could be any possibility that fabricated and unsubstantiated mitigating evidence could be used to guarantee them life behind bars with three squares, TV and reading material. Komisarjevsky could possibly one day reestablish a relationship with his daughter, perhaps through correspondence and, even worse, a visit of sorts. Bill will never get that opportunity with his family -the only guarantee to prevent that option for Komisarjevsky is certain death.

The arguments for life imprisonment revolve around mistaken executions and the idea that the victim's family never feels that justice is served through state-sponsored execution are so opaque. A squeamish society will send a wrong message to potential murderers. The recidivism rate for criminals is way too high, so therefore, get rid of the problems permanently. I could even live with Dr. Petit not feeling better after an execution, as long as I know that there is no possibility of those two idiots breathing even one more breath.

I could not listen to the whole segment due to work obligations. If you fairly represented the other side, then I fervently apologize to you for coming down so hard . However, If you gave brief arttention to the opposing viewpoint, you owe Dr. Petit an apology.

Something tells me if all the

Something tells me if all the media was all over where the murderer is black, you would cite that as evidence of racism as well. Guys like you are just hunting the news to find something to tie a racism pin on. And when you can't because the victims and perpetrators are white, you resort to looking at other cases that are happening in the building. Just sad. So many better things to do in your day then just go around making crap up.

Colin, you do great work.

Colin, you do great work.

The state kills people, that killed people to prove that killing

Excerpt from a great commentary on Petit's case :

"... I cannot escape the mental image of a horde of vultures circling a sad, deteriorating carcass, pecking away at it, tearing off pieces of flesh, bit by bit and then those vultures morphing into hyenas, cackling wildly.

Sure, the crime is offensive. Sure the crime is heinous. I’ll accept whatever adjective you choose to throw at me. But there is an unmistakable stench of race and class politics emanating from that courthouse in New Haven. Out of curiosity, I called a source who is familiar with the goings on in that courthouse. “Are there any other trials going on currently?”, I asked. Sure enough, there is one other, just a floor below the Cheshire spectacle: State v. Brandon Bellamy.

By the information provided at that link, Mr. Bellamy is accused of two murders. That’s two victims, two families devastated, multiple lives ruined. Mr. Bellamy is also black. Perhaps his alleged victims are too, I don’t know. “How many reporters there?”, I followed up.

None....

http://apublicdefender.com/

Dan Malloy and Tom Foley were

Dan Malloy and Tom Foley were on WPLR this morning and both were asked about the death penalty. Foley gave the simple answer, as always, that 'yes' he favors the death penalty. Malloy gave a more complex answer - that he would sign a bill ending the death penalty but would not allow it to be retroactive. He was obviously fearful that he shouldn't say that he wouldn't execute the Cheshire felons. In fact, Hayes was mentioned by name and they both agreed he should die. The GOP reason for supporting the death penalty is the same as their reason for everything else they support - it's cheaper than keeping someone around for the rest of their life. It also fits their tough-on-crime with harsher punishment image. Foley also told Malloy that it would be arrogant of Malloy to sign a bill abolishing the death penalty when "the majority of the state approves of the death penalty". Malloy responded that Foley is the most arrogant person he's ever met. How would we determine the veracity of Foley's assertion?

E-mail from Karl

I have for some months bailed on all the media coverage of the Petit case.

It feels as if it's been over-covered, and that additional breathless updates from the courthouse steps are adding nothing to the public's knowledge, or the surviving relatives' comfort. Maybe it has to do with the state's small size, population density, three TV stations, and few daily papers, which seems to just concentrate everything. It just seems like the brick wall of usefulness had been hit a long time ago.

That said, if nobody files one more report on this whole thing, your show today was worth listening to.

E-mail from Anonymous

A different perspective on the death penalty:

A number of years ago I was incarcerated in a maximum security prison. For a time I shared a cell with a mass murderer - a man with a 120 year sentence. This man had already been incarcerated for 20 years. He had no hope of ever being released. He was the most pathetic individual I ever met! Based on my observations, and my experiences in prison. I believe that leaving a man to rot behind bars - for 40 - 50 or whatever years he has left is a more appropriate punishment than death. For those who are religious I would suggest that they might see this as leaving the time of a heinous killer's punishment up to God. For me I just see it as the worst punishment imaginable. Those who have never done time have no clue what life in a maximum security prison is like and how fitting a punishment it can be!