Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jury: Lisa Montgomery should be executed
Kansas City Star ^ | 10/26/07 | John Shultz

Posted on 10/26/2007 11:47:50 AM PDT by Huntress

Jurors unanimously agreed today that Lisa Montgomery be put to death for killing Bobbie Jo Stinnett and stealing her unborn daughter nearly three years ago.

The federal jury deliberated about five hours. If jurors had not reached a unanimous decision in favor of the death penalty, Montgomery would have received life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Before the decision was announced, the judge ordered spectators to control their emotions or leave the courtroom.

(Excerpt) Read more at kansascity.com ...


TOPICS: Local News
KEYWORDS: animal; barbarian; barbaric; bobbiejostinnett; deathpenalty; lisamontgomery; murder
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 last
To: indylindy

People opposed to the death penalty spend too much time thinking about the perpertrator than they do the victim. Can you imagine the horror of being attacked? Can you hear the screams of pain? Can you imagine Bobby Jo pleading for her life and the life of her baby? Did Bobby Jo see her own blood splattered on Lisa Montgomery? Can you imagine the agony Bobby Jo must have experienced when she knew she was dying? Those are things that need to be taken into consideration too.


81 posted on 10/26/2007 5:33:32 PM PDT by SootyFoot2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: martin_fierro

Oh. My. God.


82 posted on 10/26/2007 5:35:35 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin (Save The Earth. It's The Only Planet With Chocolate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Huntress

I say prod her of a bridge with pool of lava if you don’t know what I refer to. Look up Super Mario Brother.


83 posted on 10/26/2007 5:54:54 PM PDT by CurlyQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%
They are statistics

They're numbers you're misrepresenting as "statistics" relevant to the point you're trying to make. But they're not valid statistics -- they don't apply in the way you try to make them apply.

In fact, the manner in which you employ those numbers makes them the sort of "statistics" that fall just past "damned lies."

84 posted on 10/26/2007 6:23:53 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: SootyFoot2
People opposed to the death penalty spend too much time thinking about the perpertrator than they do the victim.

Nice strawman, but it leaves out the possibility that people like me oppose it for different reasons altogether. I'm horrified by what happens to the victims, and I'm not much bothered by the death of the criminal.

What I worry about, is what the death penalty does to the rest of us.

85 posted on 10/26/2007 6:28:58 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: montag813
"Thou shalt not murder". Thus saith the Lord.

The last place I would like to find myself is on a jury to make this decision, but the penalty given for committing murder was death. This gal needs to face her victim...post haste!!!

86 posted on 10/26/2007 6:32:42 PM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: ken in texas
Good reference... now go read the rest of the Bible. Maybe then you'll stop quoting things out of context.

That was from Exodus, as the Lord was engraving the Ten Commandments. Is it too vague for you? Liberals love to say it is "Thou shalt not kill", and say "SEE...ALL killing is wrong, so capital punishment is wrong!" However it does not say that. The Aramaic word used was "murder" not "kill". there is a big difference, apparently lost on you.

87 posted on 10/26/2007 6:41:11 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: samiam1972
Murder: The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice. That’s not what the death penalty is.

Exactly. I am amazed with all the "consciences" on this forum who are unable to make that distinction. When did FR get all these bleeding hearts?

88 posted on 10/26/2007 6:49:29 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: frannie
In other words, Thou shall not kill, was changed from , Thou shall not murder. I believe the original was in Greek.

The Ten Commandments were handed down in Hebrew not Greek. The New Testament was originally written in Greek. In Romans 13 Paul wrote that the government was given the power of the sword to punish wrong doers. See Genesis 9:6 also.

89 posted on 10/26/2007 8:20:59 PM PDT by Vor Lady (Objects in vehicle are better armed than they appear...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ken in texas
That was from Exodus, as the Lord was engraving the Ten Commandments. Is it too vague for you? Liberals love to say it is "Thou shalt not kill", and say "SEE...ALL killing is wrong, so capital punishment is wrong!" However it does not say that. The Aramaic word used was "murder" not "kill". there is a big difference, apparently lost on you.

The Ten Commandments were handed down in Hebrew not Greek. The New Testament was originally written in Greek. In Romans 13 Paul wrote that the government was given the power of the sword to punish wrong doers. See Genesis 9:6 also.

In addition to what I said...what they said.

90 posted on 10/27/2007 12:42:19 AM PDT by Impugn (I am standing in an open field west of a white house, with a boarded front door.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: r9etb

Are you sure you’re posting to the right person?

My post #28 contains nothing but raw stats.

I haven’t made any attempt to draw conclusions or propose actions.

Although I have lots of ideas.


91 posted on 10/29/2007 9:52:30 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%
My post #28 contains nothing but raw stats. I haven’t made any attempt to draw conclusions or propose actions.

Here is your post #28, in its entirety.

Almost 20,000 people were murdered and 1.3 million people violently assaulted in the US in 2006. 80% of these crimes were committed by repeat offenders, criminals who had been previously convicted of violent crimes. There were only 53 criminals executed in that same time. Every time a violent criminal is put to death, it saves the lives of 18 people on average. Between 1967 and 1977 there were no violent criminals put to death and the homicide rate doubled. Something to consider.

You'll note that you do, in fact, draw conclusions -- specifically, you state that executing a "violent criminal" saves the lives of 18 people.

You clearly imply that the increase in murder rate between 1967-1977 results from the lack of executions during that time -- "something to consider".

At any rate, there's a huge difference between "violent criminals" and "people who commit murder." Your "raw statistics" have nothing to do with the murder rate.

92 posted on 10/29/2007 10:02:43 AM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
You'll note that you do, in fact, draw conclusions -- specifically, you state that executing a "violent criminal" saves the lives of 18 people.

That's actually a statistic.

You clearly imply that the increase in murder rate between 1967-1977 results from the lack of executions during that time -- "something to consider".

I didn't imply anything. That is a statistic. There were no executions and the homicide rate doubled during that time period.

At any rate, there's a huge difference between "violent criminals" and "people who commit murder." Your "raw statistics" have nothing to do with the murder rate.

All murderers are violent criminals. And I do mention murders.

93 posted on 10/29/2007 10:11:49 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%
That's actually a statistic

So is "three dogs live within 75 feet of me."

The question is whether it's a meaningful statistic, and the answer is no.

All murderers are violent criminals. And I do mention murders

Yes, but not all violent criminals are murderers -- in fact, the vast majority of violent criminals are not murderers.

94 posted on 10/29/2007 10:23:05 AM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson