Skip to comments.
Judge: Federal Death Penalty Unconstitutional
Associated Press ^
| Monday, July 01, 2002
Posted on 07/01/2002 9:04:54 AM PDT by Dog Gone
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 next last
To: antivenom
A judge declared the federal death penalty unconstitutional Monday, saying too many innocent people have been sentenced to death.Given that he probably also judges execution by abortionist as constitutional, what's his problem with the execution of innocent people?
Cordially,
81
posted on
07/01/2002 10:35:11 AM PDT
by
Diamond
To: JimSEA
No. It's just something liberals like to SAY.
82
posted on
07/01/2002 10:35:49 AM PDT
by
Howlin
To: FreeTally
Well I don't think counterfeiting deserves the death penalty, but I do think kidnapping over state lines or out of the country does.
83
posted on
07/01/2002 10:37:33 AM PDT
by
bvw
To: bvw
Would also include provision for interstate murder -- say standing in one state and shooting someone in another state.
84
posted on
07/01/2002 10:40:17 AM PDT
by
bvw
To: Dog Gone
Rakoff, Jed Saul
- Born August 1, 1943, in Philadelphia, PA
Federal Judicial Service:
U. S. District Court, Southern District of New York
Nominated by William J. Clinton on October 11, 1995, to a seat vacated by David N. Edelstein; Confirmed by the Senate on December 29, 1995, and received commission on January 4, 1996.
Education:
Swarthmore College, B.A., 1964
Oxford University, Balliol College, M.Philosophy, 1966
Harvard Law School, J.D., 1969
Professional Career:
Law clerk, Hon. Abraham Freedman, U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, 1969-1970
Private practice, New York City, 1970-1972
Assistant U.S. attorney, Southern District of New York, 1973-1980
Chief, Business and Securities Fraud Prosecutions, 1978-1980
Private practice, New York City, 1980-1995
Race or Ethnicity: White
Gender: Male
To: NY.SS-Bar9
"
In the past I have been very pro death penalty. I am beginning to have second thoughts...Do we really want the government to have the ability to execute its' subjects citizens?"
That's been my thinking lately also. The Feds have overstepped their Constitutional authority and must be reined in. This is not like the decision on the pledge.
86
posted on
07/01/2002 10:50:09 AM PDT
by
Badray
To: Dog Gone
I tell you, these insulated judges have been in their own little world for so long that they don't even know that they are inviting trouble from the public when they commit judicial activism. This will once again help elect more Republicans. I wonder why this judge did not provided proof of even ONE criminal being wrongly convicted?
To: Dog Gone
A judge declared the federal death penalty unconstitutional Monday, saying too many innocent people have been sentenced to death.Really? Perhaps this Feral Judge could name one.
88
posted on
07/01/2002 10:58:07 AM PDT
by
Redcloak
To: an amused spectator
A Clinton judge. Consider today's decision to be Der Shlickmeister's legacy to posterity.
To: lelio
What do you have to do to get a federal death sentence? Does that trump a state's law against murder? Killing a federal employee will get you a federal execution, even if the state that it occurred in does not have the death penalty. And perhaps even if, under state law, you would have gotten off under "self-defense".
Comment #91 Removed by Moderator
To: Dog Gone
A judge declared the federal death penalty unconstitutional Monday, saying too many innocent people have been sentenced to death. Based upon what evidence?
The court found that the best available evidence indicates that, ``on the one hand, innocent people are sentenced to death with materially greater frequency than was previously supposed and that, on the other hand, convincing proof of their innocence often does not emerge until long after their convictions.''
And where is the evidence of this?
In 14 years that the federal death penalty has been in place, none of the 31 defendants sentenced to death have later been found to be innocent, the government said.
Uh, actually, they would have been found "not guilty", but the point is still valid.
Another case of a leftist judge pushing the leftist agenda. Thes a**holes will never change, no matter how much evidence (or lack thereof) refutes their positions. Best to quickly move this one to the Supremes.
To: Poohbah
Had he been acquitted of the federal charges, or not gotten the death penalty, he would have faced 160 counts of murder under the laws of the State of Oklahoma. Exactly. Murder is a crime in all 50 states. No need whatsoever for federal enforcement, regardless of the constiutionality.
To: FreeTally
Murder is a crime in all 50 states. No need whatsoever for federal enforcement, regardless of the constiutionality.When federal officials are murdered, it should be tried at the federal level. Let the states prosecute on everything else (it's not as if their prosecutors would go without work).
94
posted on
07/01/2002 11:50:59 AM PDT
by
Poohbah
To: an amused spectator
Swarthmore College, B.A., 1964
Oxford University, Balliol College, M.Philosophy, 1966
Harvard Law School, J.D., 1969
In otherwords, the classic leftist pedigree.
95
posted on
07/01/2002 12:06:27 PM PDT
by
Clemenza
To: Poohbah; Dog Gone; Miss Marple; Howlin
Guess who appointed this judge.......Clinton in 1995!
96
posted on
07/01/2002 12:07:20 PM PDT
by
Dog
To: Poohbah
Had he been acquitted of the federal charges, or not gotten the death penalty, he would have faced 160 counts of murder under the laws of the State of Oklahoma.
Wouldn't this be a case of Double Jeopardy? You get one shot at the defendant. Don't know if this stops the .gov from filing 160 different murder cases against him though.
97
posted on
07/01/2002 12:07:55 PM PDT
by
lelio
To: Dog Gone
This judge is a loon.
98
posted on
07/01/2002 12:16:21 PM PDT
by
rintense
To: Poohbah
When federal officials are murdered, it should be tried at the federal level. Let the states prosecute on everything else (it's not as if their prosecutors would go without work). But why? If someone is killed in Oklahoma or Florida, they have violated crimes in those states, regardless of their employer. Why even open up that can and give the feds that power?
But, what if I agreed with you here. Would you then agree that the State could not be able to prosecute for murder if it involved a federal officer?
To: lelio
Wouldn't this be a case of Double Jeopardy? You get one shot at the defendant.The death toll from Oklahoma City was 168. Eight of these were Federal law enforcement officers. He was tried on eight counts of murdering Federal LEOs. The other 160 counts were at the state level--they were not included in the charges filed at the federal level. It's not double jeopardy. If the state had tried to include those eight federal LEOs in their indictment, then it would be double jeopardy.
100
posted on
07/01/2002 12:18:05 PM PDT
by
Poohbah
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson