We’ve posted a couple of times on this ludicrous case. How can you convict someone of a crime they didn’t know was being committed simply because they were with the real killer later? That type of guilt by association sounds so Soviet Union/totalitarian/US by the the time Big Brother Bush leaves office. This may have broken the back of the Texas death machine that, thankfully, was already in decline.
Why the Texas Governor Commuted a Death Sentence
Kenneth Foster clearly did not deserve to die. His crime: driving a car used in a robbery that led to a murder he never took part in. But his case was by no means unique in Texas, and so it came as a surprise today when Gov. Rick Perry commuted his sentence. “I’m concerned about Texas law that allows capital murder defendants to be tried simultaneously,” Perry said in a statement, “and it is an issue I think the legislature should examine.” A conservative Republican wants to examine capital murder law?
Consider this: death penalty prosecutions in the nation’s execution capital, Harris County, Texas, have been in steep decline; every major newspaper in Texas has called for a moratorium on the death penalty or opposes it entirely; and in 2005 the state legislature passed a law allowing life imprisonment without parole, which has given judges and jurors a new way to be “tough on crime” without killing people.
“Ten years ago if you told people that the criminal justice system falsely convicts the innocent, you were either a communist or a nut or both,” Blackburn says. “Now, everybody gets that. Everybody has seen it fail.”
Innocent? MY ASS! He was driving around with his gang banging buddies looking for trouble. The World is going to hell in a hand basket if even Texas is getting soft on crime.
Found it a little tough to find a clear explanation of exactly what happened, but apparently Foster’s friend got out of his car, shot someone then jumped back in and they fled the scene of the crime. He was an accomplice, his actions DID help cause the death of that man because he brought the murderer to him. If it had been a close friend/relative of yours you would be calling for justice too.
I’m no conservative or Bush supporter, but why should we put this man in jail and give him free rent/meals for the rest of his life when he was an accomplice to murder?
Apparently the group of men in the car had committed 2 armed robberies earlier that night before shooting the man over an argument.
#3: Let’s take a similar, yet slightly different scenario dealing with the law, not specifically this case. You and your buddy are driving around. You stop, your buddy jumps out of the car saying to wait for him, then disappears around the corner. You don’t know where he’s going or what he’s doing. A few minutes later he’s back.
When you’re both caught, tried and you’re on death row, will you die willingly for your buddy’s crime of killing someone? Will you not complain since you approve of this law, although you not only had no intent to kill someone, you had no idea anyone had been killed?
Obviously, not from your comment. Neither would you complain about a close friend/relative who was to be executed despite not knowing about a crime someone else committed.
By this reasoning, a bus or cab driver who drives a murderer away from the scene — not knowing about the crime — should be executed, too. Have to get reveng… er, justice on someone. Right?
Dave-not knowing about a crime someone else committed? he was 80feet away, the radio is not going to drown out the noise of a pistol going off from that distance. He knew his friend shot that guy, and he knew he had robbed 2 other people at GUN point earlier in the night. He even started to drive off as his friend was running back to the car, the argument that he didnt know just doesnt hold up.
Any innocent person would have stopped after the first armed robbery, but no, this guy is the get-away driver for 2 robberies and a shooting that he knew about. How can anyone support him?
If our system of justice were perfect and we could be sure no mistakes were ever made I would still be opposed to the death penalty.Police lie,D.A.s screw up and no one is perfect.The attitudes that have been expressed here today are so !4th century.Bull baiting,Dog fights,beating your wife all were part of our culture once and we left those things behind.The Gov. of Texas understands that what passes for justice is a sham.Always choose life and mistakes can be fixed choose death and the blood of thousands of innocent people are on your hands.Judge not and you will not be judged.
>>but why should we put this man in jail and give him free rent/meals
>>for the rest of his life when he was an accomplice to murder?
Well, the easiest to understand and least controversial answer is because it’s a hell of a lot CHEAPER than murdering a murderer (http://tinyurl.com/63b37). The US could save hundreds of millions of dollars by abolishing the death penalty and giving life WoP as the maximum sentence. A capital case costs, on average, $500,000 more to try (including mandatory appeals, etc.) than a case where life without parole is the maximum penalty.
Another possible reason might be so that if/ when the accused is later exonerated on the basis of new evidence (which happens all too often), it’s easier to let the guy out of jail and say “woops, sorry” than it is to bring him back from the dead.
>>You and your buddy are driving around. You stop, your
>>buddy jumps out of the car saying to wait for him, then
>>disappears around the corner.
Weeeeel, that’s more than just “slightly” different, Uncle Dave.
It’s not that Foster was out cruising with his homeboys, looking for a burger or to pick up chicks. They were driving around, drunk and stoned, committing serial armed robberies. The first two went off OK (from their standpoint), the third one got out of hand and the gun used in the first two robberies had to be USED for the reason they were carrying it around.
While I don’t think the guy should be KILLED for his role in the botched armed robbery, he is FAR from innocent (assuming the cops didn’t lie, the DA didn’t suborn perjury, etc.) , and should be punished accordingly.
It was his choice to have a engage in a profession in which the dangers are clear. Don’t play if you can’t pay.
Cheers
#11 Me Damn my typing… Anyway you can figure out what I meant!
Cheers
Nope. He ain’t innocent, period. He’s a sorry-ass violent criminal scumbag.
But he didn’t pull the trigger and therefore doesn’t deserve the ultimate penalty. Life without parole is the appropriate sentence.
He was a willing participant in a crime that resulted in death. Our system of justice decided that a willing accomplice is just as guilty as the one who does the actual crime. There is no innocence here. He has admitted to driving the car, he knew there was the gun and that the gun had already been used earlier that day.
The death penalty is cruel and barbaric. A holdover from when we were less civilized. So is life w/o parole. I would much rather have life with a minimum 25 yrs before being eligible for parole. That being eligible does not mean an automatic parole, it means the criminal will have to persuade a parole board he is reformed and will lead a model life. Because he would be on parole, he may be brought back at any time. If he doesn’t behave in prison, then he won’t be getting out.
We have to change our attitudes about prison. Currently we lock people up. Too often, the longer the better. When they are released they have a stigma attached that prevents them from getting a decent job or reintegrating into society. They are seldom taught skills in jail, offered mental health help other than AA, or given counseling or help after release. Then they end up right back inside because society rejects them.
While there may always be some prisoners that can’t be redeemed, most can be reformed. It costs a lot less to give someone life skills and integrate them into society then it is to warehouse them with an attitude in a prison.
Capital punishment is a tricky topic for a Saturday afternoon.
I don’t believe in “the State” executing people because “the State” is comprised of a lot of stupid, mean, cruel, careless people I don’t trust.
On the other hand, if I come across a guy raping my daughter, I do believe in “instant capital punishment” because I do trust me.
The death penalty is dumb. It should be replaced with Soviet style 40 years hard labor so it is a living hell on Earth.
#14: “Our system of justice decided that a willing accomplice is just as guilty as the one who does the actual crime.”
What do you think “our system of justice” is other than ourselves? What you’re saying is you, by voting in people who created this kind of law, decided this is what you want. Man up and admit you want someone killed who wasn’t involved directly and personally in the specific crime. Guilty of something, yes, but not the actual murder.
Uncle Dave sums it up nicely in his comment #5
Uncle Dave’s example is completely valid regardless of the particulars of Kenneth Foster’s case.
The issue here is whether or not a person should be held responsible for crimes they did not commit. Kenneth Foster may have driven a “getaway car”, he did not shoot anyone.
Because it’s the law doesn’t make that law just.
#14 That is how the Texas law of Parties is written,but it was passed in 1974, The Supreme Court ruled in 1982 that using the death penalty on an accesory to murder is unconstitutional. See the link: http://tinyurl.com/2lyzjh
I think this is an illustration on just how boneheaded the legal system can be. The prosecutor didn’t know about this precedent nor did the judge, jury, or Mr. Foster’s incompetent court appointed defense attorney. Given that Project Freedom has resulted in the release of 200 wrongly convicted criminals and we have seen in this case that the courts can be so damned incompent they can’t even follow the law, how in the world can anyone be for the death penalty?
Foster is an admitted criminal, but he is no kiler and doesn’t deserve the dealth penalty.
>>The issue here is whether or not a person should be held
>>responsible for crimes they did not commit
If they were complicit in the commission of those crimes, of COURSE they should be held responsible.
Osama bin Laden never flew any planes into the World Trade Center or Pentagon either, but we’re holding HIM responsible (at least those of us who don’t still think Iraq was responsible for the attacks).
And this guy was driving around with his homie, using deadly force to rob people (which he knew full well, even if he himself wasn’t wielding the gun, he was driving the car). And when an armed robbery comes to its logical conclusion, the motherfucker is BUSTED.
Still, the death penalty (except for the “Instant” one mentioned by Cinaedh) should have gone out with burning witches at the stake and crucifying people. It’s the sign of a barbaric, uncivilized people.
#21 “And this guy was driving around with his homie, using deadly force to rob people”
I must take issue with this statement. This is the crux of the matter. Kenneth did not use deadly force; Kenneth drove a car; Kenneth is not guilty of murder.
Because it is law does not make it just.
To extend your logic everyone working for Boeing is guilty of the deaths of thousands of civilians in Iraq.
Here I was thinking that Texas was looking to design the electric couch. This is good news that they are reconsidering their position. The big issues with the death penalty include, but are not limited to:
* Execution of the innocent.
* Inequality, for race, sex, and wealth, with regard to both counsel and and specific death penalty prosecution.
* Cost, it really is, as Mustard pointed out, more expensive to execute than to fund life in prison.
I used to include cruelty of execution. However, if we can assume we’re executing animals for food at least reasonably humanely, which I hope to be the case, but will not assert, then we should be able to execute humans at least as humanely.
The ACLU has a team of lawyers that examine issues such as this with respect to constitutionality. I would also strongly recommend that anyone truly interested in aspects of the death penalty read the ACLU statement about it. Regardless of which side you are on, it should make for educational reading.
http://tinyurl.com/2zbzys
#2 – hahnarama,
Life without parole is tougher for some people than the death penalty. And, if you have no problem executing the innocent, perhaps that makes you a murderer, or at least an accessory to murder.
Let me first say…..that under Texas law, he is guilty. Texas is the only state that has a law like this that covers anyone even remotely attached to the actual killer. It has never gotten to the Supreme Court as yet, but has been upheld in the U.S. Court Of Appeals. So it’s anyone’s guess how it will fare when it finally does reach the Supreme’s.
Of course, this law is bullshit. It should never have been able to go this long without Judicial review at the highest level.
I agree with Fusion that the death penalty is barbaric, but I don’t agree with him about the life w/o parole option. Having spent the better part of the last 5 years in the UK….you learn that the 25 year minimum sentance is a joke. The UK has no death penalty and has no life without parole, but it used to have both. First the death penalty was abolished and the life w/o parole was the max for some years. But more liberal Judges soon got that changed to so called *life* sentences that no one has actually ever served. The average murderer in the UK serves 11.5 years in jail, no matter how horrible the crime, even when it involves the rape and murder of multible children. There are a rare few in prison in the UK that committed such barbaric crimes that they have been afraid to release them because of public outcry….but even then they are out before the 25 year sentence is up. I feel the law has gone to far the other way in the UK and it is slowly doing the same here.
As far as rehab is concerned, I don’t think any state or country has a real rehab program that actually works. The idea is a good one, but the reality is most(not all of course) murderer’s are not going to be rehab’ed.
I’m against the death penalty, just as I’m against abortion, and non-defensive war. Killing another human is just wrong. Thats not to say there aren’t some people who actually deserve to die.
Life w/o parole should be the max…..reserved for the worst killers(serial, rapists that kill their victims, child killers, cop killers).
>>Kenneth did not use deadly force; Kenneth drove a car.
Osama bin Laden did not kill 3000 Americans; he had others do that for him. Kenneth did not use deadly force, Kenneth drove the guy around who DID use deadly force, with the goal of applying that deadly force to innocent citizens for profit, and then split the profits with the applier of deadly force.
And your point is…..?
>>Texas is the only state that has a law like this that covers anyone
>>even remotely attached to the actual killer.
Where the fuck did YOU go to law school? Sears & Roebuck? I can’t think of a state where someone who assists another in the commission of a murder isn’t guilty of felony murder. And Kenny wasn’t “remotely attached” to the actual killer, he was the driver bringing the killer around to rob innocent citizens at gunpoint, under threat of death if they did not pony up their valuables.
Are you just jerking us around, or are you serious??
#25
I don’t know what Kenneth has to do with Osama but if your up to it I’m game.
Osama allegedly masterminded the 911 attacks. Consequently America bombed and invaded Afghanistan.
Osama Bin Laden is a Saudi national not an Afghani. So I guess maybe there are some similarities. I guess I should be relieved that America didn’t decide Osama was hiding in Canada…
American justice: Kill em all let god sort em out!
>>I don’t know what Kenneth has to do with Osama
Well, let me explain it to you, then.
Osama didn’t fly the planes into the World Trade Center, yet most people consider him guilty of a crime for 9/11.
Kenneth didn’t pull the murdering trigger in the armed robberies he participated in, yet most people consider him guilty of a crime in the robberies.
Should Kenneth be killed? No. Should Kenneth do some hard time for his role in the armed robberies and resulting death? Of course.
#28: You’re kidding, right? 9/11 wouldn’t have happened without Bin Laden. He masterminded it. He funded it. The hijackers were simply his tools to accomplish his mission. On no level is that comparable to Kenneth and his buddy.
Of course, Kenneth should be punished. But his buddy could have pulled the robberies and killing without Kenneth. The same can’t be said for the hijackers. Kenneth and his buddy didn’t set out to kill, they set out to rob. Osama’s primary goal was mass murder.
Bin Laden’s intent was killing. Kenneth’s was not. Bin Laden was directly responsible for 9/11. Kenneth was, at worst, indirectly responsible because he drove the car. He took no part in the actual acts his buddy perpetrated, which he could have done without Kenneth.
See the difference? Intent and need. Choose a different comparison next time that is actually comparable.
>>But his buddy could have pulled the robberies and killing
>>without Kenneth.
But he didn’t. That’s the point. Kenneth was part and parcel of this robbery and murder spree, whether his involvement was “necessary” or not. The two of them were out driving, robbing at gunpoint, and as it turned out, murdering.
I guess whether or not the buddy could have done both the driving AND the robbing/ murdering without the aid of an accomplice is a matter for debate.
What is NOT a matter for debate, though, is that Kenneth is guilty as sin, and at a MINIMUM, guilty of conspiracy to commit murder. And maybe HE was the mastermind, like Osama, and the other guy got stuck doing the shit work.
In any case, I don’t think Kenneth should be murdered for his participation in this heinous crime spree. But to claim he is somehow “innocent” is just ludicrous.
#30
Soooooo, if Osama merely meant to steal the jets and his henchmen got carried away and decided to use them as weapons your analogy would be valid right?
BTW caveat here I don’t believe in the official conspiracy theory of 911 so you may want to dismiss me as a crackpot. Not to say that would be logical. ^^
http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=13342