Posted on 12/22/2004 1:26:11 AM PST by nickcarraway
DON'T hog that lethal injection needle, Scott Peterson. Pass it on down to Lisa Montgomery when you're done.
Montgomery's alleged crime is so gruesome, it is enough to turn even the strongest stomach. And her motive is so diabolically vicious, it should be sufficient to turn sensitive people to hate.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Kansas is the home of Tiller the Killer the "abortionist" who murders preborn babies at all stages of their developement. He has been the subject of many pro-lifers standing up for the right to live for these precious babies. What this awful woman did was sort of a reverse abortion. She "chose" the baby. We live in a culture of death and are reaping it's murderous effects.
Lisa Montgomery, amazingly enough, has managed to surpass even Susan Smith (of South Carolina drowned babies infamy) for unmitigated cruelty and brutality. She has confessed to the crime, I doubt if any serious attempt will be made to try the insanity defense (although one will probably hear the usual arguments about "one would have to be insane to commit such a horrible crime"), and she will hopefully be sentenced to death.
Having said that, I am sick and tired of this trend to sanitized, medically supervised and tranquilized executions, which provide NO deterrent factor whatsoever to other potential killers. How nice it is, to be wheeled in on a gurney, floating comfortably after any number of tranquilizers have been administered so you won't be too anxious about checking out, you get to read a last statement (if you're coherent enough after the tranquilizer), then a minister will say a few comforting words to you as they open the valve for the heart muscle relaxants so you just drift on away into eternity.
Instead of being grabbed by the arms by two burly correctional officers, muscled up a short flight of stairs to a gallows, having your head thrust thru a noose which is then tightened up around your neck "just so", and instead of a nice hazy tranquilized feeling, you are fully aware of your soon-to-be unbeating heart pounding wildly in your chest, because you know you are going to hang, swing from your neck until DEAD. The warden proclaims the death sentence as being legal and authorized by the Governor of your State, he says "may God have mercy on your soul", and that stark feeling of horror grabs you as the floor drops out from beneath your feet, and THEN, at that moment, you pay your debt to society for your crime.
Now THAT is the way the death penalty ought to be administered, the ACLU, the weak sisters and the sad sacks notwithstanding. A death penalty by tranquilized lethal injection is in many cases, a nicer way to go than if someone died of natural causes.
Violent killers deserve a violent, but controlled death.
This concludes your morning MM rant.
Well said. Kudos.
So, retract your delegation of the kids' education and home school them.
Doing it right the first time is both more efficient, and more effective.
This happened in Houston a year or so ago too.
She might be eligible for the Dahmer method. Or the method that happened to that pedophile priest. The women in prison are mean. But they love their babies.
The 'man', and I use that word loosely, was sentenced to death while the woman got life in prison IIRC. However, our soon to be imprisoned RINO governor George Ryan put a 'moratorium' on the death penalty.
There truly is nothing new under the sun.
L
I like the way you think MM. I have long thought Hanging would be the best way to execute. Scary, but relatively painless if done correctly. Actually much more traumatic to watch than to experience as long as the neck is snapped.
Now hanging there kicking wildly, turning blue and biting tongue, while admittedly enjoyable to watch, is probably over the top.
Ryan's going to jail?
"But I can't believe some kind of insanity defense won't be provided."
I find an insanity plea here would be totally out of line. What I've read on this story it sounds like Montgomery planned this out pretty well except for after she got the baby. She knew exactly what she was doing and how she was going to do it. There are certain cases that cry out for the death penalty and this is one. If she wanted a baby so bad there were legal alternatives but supposedly her lies about being pregnant clouded her judgement to the point she felt she had to commit this despicable act. Giving her the needle is just too humane compared to what she did. My heart goes out to the Stinnett family. I hope they get the justice they so rightly deserve because this child will never know her mother.
If I have my facts correct, the defendant's hair was found in the victim's hand - DNA - and many witnesses saw the defendant with the kidnapped child in her possession. That doesn't leave much room for a not guilty defense. Either the prosecutor cuts a deal (which would be something less than death, otherwise it's not a deal) or the defense is left with few alternatives. Insane or retarded are the two I can come up with. The facts of the case seldom enter into the defense offered by the attorney. If there's no room to argue a reasonable doubt, they've got to argue something. I don't know enough about it to know what a defense attorney might have, but what I do know suggests to me he won't have much other than trying to show that there's something wrong with the defendant that she's incompetent.
The only thing wrong with this defendant is she's morally deficient. I don't believe she's insane or mentally retarded. The facts that I've seen show she obviously thought this out to some extent. It'll be interesting to see what the defense feels they can argue to keep her from the needle.
well if she has the low IQ and managed to convince the minister, husband, neighbors etc. what the heck kind of IQ must they have to fall for it???
Kinda hard to do after a tubal, isn't it?
And that's my point. They'll have to argue something and they seem to be pretty limited in what they can argue.
I once saw a defense attorney in a murder case rest immediately after the prosecution, providing no witnesses at all. He relied only on his cross of the prosecution's witnesses and his closing argument where he attempted to show the prosecution had holes in its case. I was shocked when the jury came back with a not-guilty verdict.
Sometimes jury nullification is the best defense.
I don't know that she has a low IQ. But the fact that the people around her claim to have believed that she had delivered a baby suggests to me they have a low IQ. I'm presuming, therefore, that she might also.
her atty might argue it, but it will be weak. just like laci peterson, this victim tugs at the heartstrings, and i don't see a jury letting this monster off the hook over some marginal argument like that. The planning and premeditation that this required mitigate against a low IQ argument.
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.