Posted on 05/22/2005 5:16:19 AM PDT by nuconvert
Texas May Add Life Without Parole Option
By JIM VERTUNO /Associated Press Writer
May 22, 2005
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- In Texas, the state that leads the nation in executions, lawmakers are considering an option already available in all but one other death penalty state: life without parole. Death penalty opponents think a sentence that would ensure murderers never get back on the streets would make a death sentence less appealing.
Currently, juries in Texas capital murder cases here have two choices - death or life in prison with the possibility of parole after 40 years.
A measure approving life without parole passed the Senate last month but has stalled in the House, with the session set to end May 30.
"It's frustrating to see something so important to the criminal justice system not move forward," said Sen. Eddie Lucio, who has sponsored a life-without-parole bill for the past four sessions.
But many lawmakers and prosecutors are skeptical of life without parole, saying it would decrease the number of death sentences and their ability to deter crime.
"If you take away the ultimate penalty, maybe it's not enough of an incentive to stay out of trouble," said Rep. Beverly Woolley, a Houston Republican.
The Legislature took a hard look at Texas criminal justice after former governor Gov. George W. Bush's presidential campaign, but a life-without-parole measure that passed the Senate in 2001 narrowly failed in the House.
Bill sponsors felt their case was bolstered by the Supreme Court ruling in March that banned the execution of murderers who kill when they are younger than 18. In 2002, the courts also struck down executions of mentally retarded inmates.
Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington, D.C., said juries who have the option of life without parole are less likely to choose the death penalty. Of the 38 states with the death penalty, only Texas and New Mexico don't have the life-without-parole option.
"Virtually every other jurisdiction in America has life without parole," said Steve Hall, a member of Stand Down Texas, which supports a moratorium on the death penalty.
Texas has put eight inmates to death so far this year for a total of 344 since the state resumed executions in 1982, the most of any state.
Lucio, a Democrat, said he plans to meet with House leaders in the next few days to try to push the bill along. He said there are enough votes to pass it and send it on to Republican Gov. Rick Perry for his consideration.
"I don't understand why at this time of the session, with the support this bill has, why it would be on hold," Lucio said.
Seventy-five percent of Texans support the death penalty, but 78 percent favor giving juries the life without parole option, according to a Scripps-Howard poll in October.
Tony Goolsby, a Republican sponsor of the House bill, said life in prison is a harsh enough penalty.
"If you want to punish a person who violated the law, you let them go to bed every night and wake up and see steel bars, a cold concrete floor and a stainless steel potty. That's their life until they die," Goolsby said.
Dianne Clements, a member of the Houston-based victims rights group Justice For All, said she trusts juries to choose the death penalty when appropriate, even if given the option of life without parole.
"I believe juries will still look at cases that deserve death and vote for death," she said.
so here is a question: Which is the other state that doesn't have a life without parole option?
nevermind, its New Mexico....
man I have to wake up!!!
When the law says "without parole," does anyone really believe it? I certainly do not. The courts don't respect the law anymore. Some judge will find a way to release these guys.
Fine with me so long as they are never paroled. I would give up the Death Penalty if the other side would make abortions illegal. Good trade.
Here's a better idea...death penalties can only be applied if DNA confirmation can be made. Juries would feel more at ease if they knew that the perps could be definitively linked to the crime.
Off hand, having the sentencing choice sounds like a good way to go. Juries that don't want to execute some criminal, will now be able to put the clown in permanent storage. Another thing is the tax savings. The cost of the trials with all the mandatory appeals have made the death penalty more expensive than life imprisonment. Sure, some can 'believe' that the killers will be paroled just as it's possible to 'believe' anything we want. The rest of us have to work with what is.
The criteria has to be guilt beyond any doubt whatsoever and not beyond a "reasonable" doubt if you're going to hang somebody. The other thing which might make me feel a bit better about capital punishment even in the obvious cases would be getting rid of our present adversarial system of determining guilt or innocence. There are too many stories like those of Gerald Amirault or Frank Fuster out there for me to feel terribly good about clowns like Janet Reno or Scott Harshbarger being allowed to hang people.
"Here's a better idea...death penalties can only be applied if DNA confirmation can be made. Juries would feel more at ease if they knew that the perps could be definitively linked to the crime."
There are far too many murders where there are witnesses but no DNA involved. I can't see that as a substitute for the death penalty in preventing recidivism, either.
I love this quote: "If you take away the ultimate penalty, maybe it's not enough of an incentive to stay out of trouble," said Rep. Beverly Woolley, a Houston Republican.
Yeah, because murderers are generally worried about how long they'll go to jail. I can see them reflecting on it before they shoot someone..."Gee, I WON'T get the death penalty? Heck, he's dead meat NOW!"
Dumb dumb dumb.
The only reason the death penalty makes sense is that people don't trust the government to enforce a life-without-parole provision. If I found out someone had committed murder in a context deserving of life in prison, I'd fight to see them get the chair anyway. Who really believes a Texas murderer sentenced to 'life without parole' won't be reviewed for commutation by the next Ann Richards?
Screw that. Fry `em all, then they'll die in prison either way.
"Life without parole" is a bait and switch game that allows weak-kneed juries and judges to cop out on their responsibility to do justice and later allows liberal judges to release convicted murderers.
Just take a look at the Leopold/Loeb case in Illinois in the 1920's. Nathan Leopold and his buddy, Richard Loeb, murdered a neighbor boy, Bobby Franks, for the pure fun of it. Their lawyer, Clarence Darrow, opted for a bench trial and talked the judge into giving them "life without parole." Loeb was later killed in a prison fight. Leopold was paroled in 1958.
This is the most notorious bait and switch case involving "life without parole." If Leopold could beat his sentence, infamous as he was, it's a lead pipe cinch that many other murderers, who're less notorious but who've committed even worse crimes, could beat theirs. Also, remember Illinois' unlamented, departed RINO governor, George Ryan, who commuted ALL of the Illinois death sentences. The same thing could be done by a lib governor to "life without parole" sentences.
How about Life without Possibility of Pardon?
I believe that there are a lot of criminals who should be executed. Unfortunately not all of them get death sentences and not enough of them get executed promptly. The principal whiners about life without parole seem to be the District Attorneys who see themselves having to really try cases instead of using the death penalty in plea bargining. Many of these prosecutors don't seem to acknowlege that their plea bargins can, and do, get out to kill again.
The argument is that if life without parole can be changed to "life with parole" it's no good. So if the death penalty can be changed to life with parole it's no good either? ("RINO governor, George Ryan, who commuted ALL of the Illinois death sentences...")
Maybe the problem isn't "Life without parole", but "liberal judges" instead.
This won't even reach Governor Perry's desk.
My oldest son had a bumper sticker on his government notebook that read: "US GOVERNMENT POLICY. IF IT AIN'T BROKE, FIX IT 'TIL IT IS!"
Liberal judges are the real problem.
With LWP, even if it's really imposed, the other problem is it encourages killing witnesses to violent crimes. If as perp is on his third strike in a "three srikes and you're out" state, he has everything to agin and little to lose if he kills all the witnesses to his "third strike" in a state that allows LWP.
The only place LWP can be a really good option, IMHO, is the situation, like the juvenile criminal, whom the states can no longer legally execute, thanks to 5 lib SCOTUS justices.
"Believe"? Maybe you better keep up with current events, pal. As long as the perp is alive, liberal judges can and will let them out. Personally, I find it offensive that a serial murderer can be set free because of some innocuous mistake a cop made twenty years ago.
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.