[Ancesthntr]

There was no strategic advantage to prosecuting the slaying as a hate crime, because that and murder by itself carry a maximum sentence of life in prison, St. Martin said.

What?! The maximum sentence is LIFE? For a premeditated murder like this, the penalty should be EXECUTION - period. This is Texas, where we put down a convicted murderer/oxygen thief every couple of weeks, and I see no reason to treat this murdering scumbag any differently from any other murdering scumbag.

As to the "hate crime" issue: I'm against it on principle - you want to punish bad acts, not bad thoughts (it is supposed to be a free country, after all, and freedom to think what you wish, no matter how absurd or insane, is our birthright). I also wouldn't want to see a white murderer of someone I'm related to punished any less harshly than a non-white because of this legislation - the fact that such a person was dead would be enough for me, regardless of the melanin content of the murderers skin. However, if any crime qualifies for "hate crime" status, this one does; the fact that it wasn't prosecuted as such betrays the motivation of those who proposed and enforce such laws.

[eastforker]

He plead guilty , no trial. This is why I am against plea bargains especialy in capitol cases.

[eastforker]

One more thing, it was a single murder and a firearm was not used. No other crime was committed other than simple murder. Had they went to trial motive would have to have been proved.Now, had he robbed the guy and used a gun that would be a death penalty case.

[eastforker]

One more thing, it was a single murder and a firearm was not used. No other crime was commited other than simple murder. Had they went to trial motive would have to have been proven.Now, had he robbed the guy and used a gun that would be a death penalty case.