Replies

11 August 2006

This scale raises a lot of questions for me. First, why is an individual, who kills out of a desperate need to end abuse(5) higher on the scale than a jealous lover (2)? It seems to me that a jealous lover would have far less justification to murder someone than an individual, who kills to end his or more likely her own suffering. He, or more like she, would certainly be in greater danger than a jealous lover, right? Or, does motive carry more weight on this scale than justification?

Secondly, why is a psychopathic individual (10+), one who has lost touch with reality, ranked higher on this scale, than a non-psychopathic individual (-8)? Shouldn't the individual, whose power of reasoning has been significantly diminished; bear greater consideration for clemency than one who knows what he/she is doing is wrong, but does it anyway?

I watched the program on TLC last night. After watching, I did not become any more supportive of the death penalty than I was before I viewed the program. I still don't believe that we have enough information about what causes sociopathic processes, both organically and environmentally, to justify the penalty of death. There are just too many factors. I am not saying that we should just let all these individuals roam free. But, I don't feel that killing them is the right idea either.

Why not make them submit to submit to a longitudinal research study. I realize that this may raise a few eyebrows ethically. However, where are those ethicists when the sates decides to execute these individuals.

This scale raises a lot of questions for me. First, why is an individual, who kills out of a desperate need to end abuse(5) higher on the scale than a jealous lover (2)? It seems to me that a jealous lover would have far less justification to murder someone than an individual, who kills to end his or more likely her own suffering. He, or more like she, would certainly be in greater danger than a jealous lover, right? Or, does motive carry more weight on this scale than justification?

Secondly, why is a psychopathic individual (10+), one who has lost touch with reality, ranked higher on this scale, than a non-psychopathic individual (-8)? Shouldn't the individual, whose power of reasoning has been significantly diminished; bear greater consideration for clemency than one who knows what he/she is doing is wrong, but does it anyway?

These are all excellent questions and I regret that I don't have a clear answer because the article does not go into that level of detail. The categories were developed and defined as a result of one doctor examining the biographies of 500 killers. This is not a method that I would consider in any way definitive or representing any absolute and universal truth. I viewed the article and the chart as merely a starting point in developing a legal definition of the gradations of evil, and I confess that I was rather startled by the vociferous reactions that I got a year ago when I posted this article, which seem to be continuing now from some. I think that many didn't read the article carefully.

I watched the program on TLC last night. After watching, I did not become any more supportive of the death penalty than I was before I viewed the program. I still don't believe that we have enough information about what causes sociopathic processes, both organically and environmentally, to justify the penalty of death. There are just too many factors. I am not saying that we should just let all these individuals roam free. But, I don't feel that killing them is the right idea either.

Well, this article doesn't address the death penalty or the issues surrounding it except only tangentially and so I can't make use of it to respond to your statement. Going entirely from my own perspective on the matter and of my limited understanding of the foundations of death penalty law (I am not an attorney) I would wish to suggest that you are making your judgments and forming your opinions based upon completely different criteria than what the law (as I understand it) is based upon. The death penalty is society's response to the most vicious of all crimes, and is intended to be a statement by the Government that it has the power and the right to provide the most serious possible punishment for the most serious crimes. It is a statement about the regard that society holds for the life and the welfare of the victim(s) of the very worst crimes. Whether or not the death penalty is invoked is up to existing laws and the jury, and as the article states, this depravity rating is merely intended to be a tool by which a jury can define the level of a person's evil, and thereby assist them with coming toward a conclusion in their deliberations.

Why not make them submit to submit to a longitudinal research study. I realize that this may raise a few eyebrows ethically. However, where are those ethicists when the sates decides to execute these individuals.

Studies are all fine, Lord knows we have bushel baskets of them. I have no problem with studies as long as they don't interfere with Government's obligation to mete out just, swift and sure punishment to criminals.

I don't know how many of these programs you have seen but I on the other hand watch them all. I also watch every episode of Forensic Files and read constantly regarding this topic. I have been studying Serial Killers for several years and trying to understand their mental structures.

I understand from this posting that you do not believe in the death penalty???? What about Gary Ridgway "The Green River Killer"? Do you know why he pled guilty to 48 murders? Because he was afraid to go to trial. He was afraid he would get the death penalty. What scares him about that?? He is afraid of being cut up and examined to find the evil that lurks within him. By the way to this day we the tax payers get to pay his living expenses but while on the street any one of us could have been his victim. There is also Tommy Lynn Sells - didn't care who, when, where or why - just killed. He said it was like a drug and if he were to be released from prison he would do it again.

These are the types of individuals that our tax dollars need to be spent on????? We should do more medical testing on these people - but some like Ridgway will not allow that. What about our children's education? The streets that we drive on daily? The children in our country that are starving? The good people in our country that have no medical insurance? I guess I don't understand and probably never will since my son was almost murdered and the son of a bitch got out of prison in 5 years and will soon be off parole - leaving my son defenseless!!!! This is a sad world when people stand up for killers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!