Posted on 12/04/2010 3:51:58 PM PST by Graybeard58
"I have seriously considered suicide many times. I have no wife, no children, no home and no interest in life in general." "I used to have trust and faith in humanity and you have taken that from me."
"You destroyed our family."
"He does not deserve life."
Those are just a few of the statements made by members of the Petit and Hawke families when Steven Hayes, who was convicted of murdering Jennifer Hawke-Petit and her daughters Hayley and Michaela during a savage July 2007 home invasion in Cheshire, was formally sentenced to death Thursday by New Haven Superior Court Judge Jon Blue.
Hayes has a criminal record dating to 1980, when he was in his teens. Among his crimes were forgery, disorderly conduct, burglary and larceny.
During Hayes' trial, prosecutors presented a three-year old letter the defendant's younger brother, Matthew Hayes, wrote to the state police. He painted a picture of Steven Hayes as someone who exhibited sociopathic tendencies at a young age.
Matthew Hayes described having had his hand placed on a hot stove burner by his brother while they were in their teens. He also described having a gun placed to his head by his brother, and how Steven Hayes stole from and struck their mother.
During the penalty phase of the trial, a retired prison official, Frederick Levesque, testified that while in prison, Hayes threatened to kill corrections officers on two separate occasions: once in 1986, when Hayes was upset about needing permission to make a phone call; and the other last March. According to a published report, Hayes has received 23 disciplinary citations in the 30 years he has spent in the Connecticut correctional system. The most serious of these citations followed a June 1992 incident in which a homemade blowgun and dart were found in his cell.
Then there is the invasion of the Petit family home. Hayes was found guilty of six capital felonies stemming from the massacre. They included killing two or more people, the killing of a person under 16, murder in the course of a sexual assault, and three counts of intentionally causing death during a kidnapping.
During sentencing Thursday, Hayes apologized for and accepted responsibility for his actions. This apology, while extensive, will do nothing to erase the pain his actions have caused these families.
Even the most cursory analysis of Hayes' background reveals a man with a long history of anti-social behavior who has perpetrated or threatened to perpetrate unspeakable acts of violence. Connecticut courts correctly reserve death row for the worst of the worst, and Hayes has more than earned his place in line for execution.
If this had happened to my family, I would have done everything possible, that I could think of, to smuggle in a gun, and blow the a-holes brains out! Damn the consequences!
Sorry.
I don’t think any one reasonable would insult you for your views - anyone who believes in intelligent discourse and discussion would at least respect the person while disagreeing with the position.
I am of the like mind with those that say that if there is a crime that fits the death penalty, this is it. No ifs, ands or buts.
The tragedy will continue for Dr. Petit and his family as the appeals process begins, and Hayes will live warm, comfortable albeit confined existence for years, if not his natural life, while the state of Connecticut refuses to carry out the sentence that was given to him properly by a judge and jury. That he breaths another breath after what he did to that family is an insult to that family, their friends, and to civil society.
Hayes and his partner in crime deserve to die for their actions, and the sooner, the better.
Perhaps you can stand before Dr. Petit and tell him your tale of respect for the life of the murdering pig who beat him, raped his young daughter and wife and set them on fire while tied to their beds.
I am sure he is interested in your ‘feelings’ about the death penalty.
If a person is charged with murder (with intent or during a crime) and found guilty, then the sentencing goes to the family or bereaved closest to the victim. Appeals are considered only on the basis of new evidence. Thumbs up and the perp does absolute life in prison. This includes no gym time, phone calls, rec room, TV, education or any of the other crap now going on in prison. The perp works 10 hour days six days a week and any monies beyond support costs go to the family. Three hots and a cot. Medical care for minor medical and pain relief. Terminal illness is given it's course. Sentence is carried out within one year.
If thumbs down, the closest family member/legal representative pulls the lever, pushes the plunger or throws the switch.
In this way, multiple benefits are achieved:
1. The perp is punished.
2. The victim is avenged.
3. The family has a measure of revenge.
4. The law is upheld and will increase respect for the law.
4. Society is protected.
5. No costs are incurred to the state.
6. The state does NOT have the power of life and death over the individual.
7. Mercy or death is the option of the justly aggrieved and part of the historic purpose of punishment and justice in the emotional and spiritual realm.
8. Fear is instilled in evil doers.
9. There is no recourse for the convicted, thus, no protracted legal costs or wrangling.
10. The general populace has renewed confidence in governance and security in society.
‘Early and often’ indeed. I support the Texas Fast-Track.
The poor victim, though — what a terrible thing. May the Lord touch him and hold on tightly.
In theory at least I've got nothing against hanging somebody like Manson, Dennis Rader, Paul Bernardo, John Mohammed...
Here's the problem: I'd want several changes to the system before I could feel good about capital punishment anymore.
1. Guilt should be beyond any doubt whatsoever; the usual criteria of guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" doesn't cut it for hanging somebody.
2. The person in question must represent a continuing threat to society should he ever escape or otherwise get loose. The "bird man" of Alcatraz would not qualify, John Mohammed clearly would.
3. I'd want all career/money incentives for convicting people of crimes gone which would mean scrapping the present "adversarial" system of justice in favor of something like the French "inquisitorial" system in which the common objective of all parties involved was a determination of facts.
4. I'd want there to be no societal benefit to keeping the person alive. Cases in which this criteria would prevent hanging somebody would include "Son of Sam" who we probably should want to study more than hang, or Timothy McVeigh who clearly knew more than the public ever was allowed to hear.
Given all of that I could feel very good about hanging Charles Manson, John Muhammed, or Paul Bernardo, but that's about what it would take.
In fact in a totally rational world the job of District Attorney as it is known in America would not exist. NOBODY should ever have any sort of a career or money incentive for sending people to prison, much less for executing people. The job of District Attorney in America seems to involve almost limitless power and very little resembling accountability and granted there is no shortage of good people who hold the job, the combination has to attract the wrong kinds of people as well.
They expected DNA testing to eliminate the prime suspect in felony cases in something like one or two percent of cases and many people were in states of shock when that number came back more like 33 or 35%. That translates into some fabulous number of people sitting around in prisons for stuff they don't know anything at all about since the prime suspect in a felony case usually goes to prison. Moreover, in a state like Texas which executes a hundred people a year or thereabouts, that has to translate into innocent people being executed here and there.
The guy being described here however meets all the criteria; I'd have no realproblems with the idea of hanging him.
Check this out: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2637529/posts?page=24#24
Hope this meets your approval and fills the requirements you hold . . .
He deserves a slow execution. Very slow.
I am not a big fan of the death penalty, either, however, in some cases, it is warranted,IMHO. This is probably one of them. In situatons where the person is convicted on mostly circumstantial evidence, or maintains his innocence when there is any chance that someone else COULD have committed the crime, I am not so much in favor of it. For the simple reason that the person is being asked to trust his life to a lawyer that probably can’t be trusted with 25 cents. I do believe that my own state, Texas, is a bit too generous with the death penalty at times, as well as other states don’t pass it out often enough. I believe Manson should have gotten the death penalty.JMO...
Revenge is good.
I save my vitriol for those who are violently pro-abortion, but think the death penalty is horrible.
For many of us, it is not about an eye for an eye, but whether a life has become so irredeemable as warrant termination. In this instance, with the heinous nature of this crime, and the circumstance of his capture by the police, execution is indeed the only just punishment.
To me I believe that this individual has surrendered his right to continue living. He has spent 30 years in prisons for various crimes. This was the natural, inevitable, conclusion.
His execution should be equivalent to the pain and torment he inflicted on those young girls.
I struggle to be against the DP but cases like this...geesh....it makes you cringe the painful deaths these lovely young women suffered...the darkest hour of the darkest day and no one could help them...
these animals....the DP is almost too good for them...the DP is one quick moment and then nothing.....compared to the endless hrs this mother and her dtrs went thru....
I'd be glad to get rid of the DP if life in prisonment meant life in prison...but also included banishment....no media to talk to ...no pen pal letters...no internet....
Thanks for the ping Graybeard.
Sometimes, people do relinquish their right to life when committing heinous acts as this man did. And, society has a right to defend itself against people who have no regard for life. I lost a cousin to such a murderer. His parents still have not gotten over it.
"Innocent" is an interesting word.
1) Despite all the hoopla, AFAIK nobody has definitively proved anyone has been executed in America for a crime he didn't commit.
2) A very large percentage of those released as "innocent" due to new evidence, usually DNA, are not innocent in any meaningful sense, they are merely innocent of the particular crime of which they were convicted. Many if not most of them are career criminals who have committed dozens or hundreds of crimes for which they were never charged, much less convicted. If one of these career criminals is occasionally convicted of a crime he didn't actually commit, I have some difficulty seeing this as anything other than a case of poetic justice, or perhaps of God having a sense of humor.
Which is not to say we shouldn't improve our criminal justice system wherever we can. I really am not in favor of punishing people for crimes they didn't commit, even if they are indeed "bad people."
But I don't think there are large numbers of "innocent people," in the sense of non-criminal types, in prison for capital murders they didn't commit.
I like your thinking.
I favor the death penalty, not only for this vermin but for the judge who let him out to do this heinous deed.
“I believe Manson should have gotten the death penalty.”
He did get the death penalty but it was commuted to life:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_Charles_Manson_on_death_row
“No, Charles Manson is not on death row. His death sentence was changed to life imprisonment after the Supreme Court of the State of California acted to abolish the death penalty. His next scheduled parole hearing is in 2012.”
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.