A Texas Judge on Trial: Closed to a Death-Row Appeal?

[Peikko 1,575]

I guess you didn't read the article?

No surprises there

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Courts are supposed to uphold not only the law but the mechanisms by which the law operates. Whether anyone agrees with it or not - the moratorium over lethal injections was a real issue that delayed many executions until its resolution (as it should have).

Even though the guy would been executed anyway - the fact that this new avenue of appeal opened up on the day of the execution should have been considered as a reason for delay. Essentially the reason that the appeal wasn't filed in time was because of logistical failures.

Edited August 13, 2009 by Private Pike

[_Simpson_ 250]

they should....it is a situation where they have a public charge and legal responsibility .....and her job and duties do not always end at 1700 hrs

So she was dealing with a handyman at her home when she made that statement... It certainly doesn't look good... Someone died because she was too busy having a new carpet installed...

No maybe you missed this part...

In 1986, two months after being released from his second prison term, Richard killed Marguerite Lucille Dixon, 53, a nurse and mother of seven. Dixon had invited him in for a cold glass of water after Richard had knocked on her front door and asked if her van was for sale. Two of her children found her. She had been sexually assaulted, then killed and her van and television stolen. A year later, Richard was on death row. After confessing, Richard claimed he was innocent

AND

"Richard had two trials, two direct appeals (including to the United States Supreme Court), two state habeas corpus proceedings and three federal habeas corpus hearings or motions."

AND

One sobering what-if: even if Richard had gotten his appeal accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court, he would most likely have extended his life by only eight months.

he's a scumbag that got what he deserved, although not as quick as it shoulda been.

You know this how? The evidence we are presented with doesn't actually give us any confidence that this is so. What it tells us is that some people are executed and some people are not and this is not based on whether they are 'scumbags' that deserve it, but on whether they have experienced fair treatment at the hands of the justice system or not. What a stupid way to decide who gets executed and who does not.

He was tried twice, I will give benefit to the jury of 24 over you any day of the week.

In this day and age with forensics what it is and how tough it is to get a death penalty,I think that alone would be enough to justify having the death penalty.

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

they should....it is a situation where they have a public charge and legal responsibility .....and her job and duties do not always end at 1700 hrs

So she was dealing with a handyman at her home when she made that statement... It certainly doesn't look good... Someone died because she was too busy having a new carpet installed...

No maybe you missed this part...

In 1986, two months after being released from his second prison term, Richard killed Marguerite Lucille Dixon, 53, a nurse and mother of seven. Dixon had invited him in for a cold glass of water after Richard had knocked on her front door and asked if her van was for sale. Two of her children found her. She had been sexually assaulted, then killed and her van and television stolen. A year later, Richard was on death row. After confessing, Richard claimed he was innocent

AND

"Richard had two trials, two direct appeals (including to the United States Supreme Court), two state habeas corpus proceedings and three federal habeas corpus hearings or motions."

AND

One sobering what-if: even if Richard had gotten his appeal accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court, he would most likely have extended his life by only eight months.

he's a scumbag that got what he deserved, although not as quick as it shoulda been.

You know this how? The evidence we are presented with doesn't actually give us any confidence that this is so. What it tells us is that some people are executed and some people are not and this is not based on whether they are 'scumbags' that deserve it, but on whether they have experienced fair treatment at the hands of the justice system or not. What a stupid way to decide who gets executed and who does not.

spare me the hysterics.

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

Another example that we need to end capital punishment.

Charles,

Support for Capital punishment is against the VJ TOS. William and Ewok have both weighed in on this matter. We are not allowed to call for the taking of lives of others.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...t&p=3205514

it's obe (overcome by events, not officer of the british empire) in that the guy being talked about is already dead...

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What gets me about topics like this is why people insist on getting so emotionally attached to the cases in question. Noone who allows themselves to get so emotionally compromised would be allowed within 1000 yards of a court house let alone on a Jury panel. There are rules and procedures to the implementation of justice - they don't just take people out and throw a rope over a tree while sadistic spectators cheer with glee.

Noone here who is objecting to the judge's actions is offering any personal opinion on the prisoner, his crime nor his guilt thereof - for the simple reason that its totally irrelevant to the argument that's being advanced. Specifically, that the Judge couldn't be arsed to do her job at a point when exceptional circumstances arising on the day of execution should have granted the prisoner a legitimate appeal pending conclusion of an Statewide investigation into the method of execution.

Edited August 13, 2009 by Private Pike

[Peikko 1,575]

they should....it is a situation where they have a public charge and legal responsibility .....and her job and duties do not always end at 1700 hrs

So she was dealing with a handyman at her home when she made that statement... It certainly doesn't look good... Someone died because she was too busy having a new carpet installed...

No maybe you missed this part...

In 1986, two months after being released from his second prison term, Richard killed Marguerite Lucille Dixon, 53, a nurse and mother of seven. Dixon had invited him in for a cold glass of water after Richard had knocked on her front door and asked if her van was for sale. Two of her children found her. She had been sexually assaulted, then killed and her van and television stolen. A year later, Richard was on death row. After confessing, Richard claimed he was innocent

AND

"Richard had two trials, two direct appeals (including to the United States Supreme Court), two state habeas corpus proceedings and three federal habeas corpus hearings or motions."

AND

One sobering what-if: even if Richard had gotten his appeal accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court, he would most likely have extended his life by only eight months.

he's a scumbag that got what he deserved, although not as quick as it shoulda been.

You know this how? The evidence we are presented with doesn't actually give us any confidence that this is so. What it tells us is that some people are executed and some people are not and this is not based on whether they are 'scumbags' that deserve it, but on whether they have experienced fair treatment at the hands of the justice system or not. What a stupid way to decide who gets executed and who does not.

spare me the hysterics.

I have, there are no hysterics in that post - so how do you get to that particular conclusion?

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

they should....it is a situation where they have a public charge and legal responsibility .....and her job and duties do not always end at 1700 hrs

So she was dealing with a handyman at her home when she made that statement... It certainly doesn't look good... Someone died because she was too busy having a new carpet installed...

No maybe you missed this part...

In 1986, two months after being released from his second prison term, Richard killed Marguerite Lucille Dixon, 53, a nurse and mother of seven. Dixon had invited him in for a cold glass of water after Richard had knocked on her front door and asked if her van was for sale. Two of her children found her. She had been sexually assaulted, then killed and her van and television stolen. A year later, Richard was on death row. After confessing, Richard claimed he was innocent

AND

"Richard had two trials, two direct appeals (including to the United States Supreme Court), two state habeas corpus proceedings and three federal habeas corpus hearings or motions."

AND

One sobering what-if: even if Richard had gotten his appeal accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court, he would most likely have extended his life by only eight months.

he's a scumbag that got what he deserved, although not as quick as it shoulda been.

You know this how? The evidence we are presented with doesn't actually give us any confidence that this is so. What it tells us is that some people are executed and some people are not and this is not based on whether they are 'scumbags' that deserve it, but on whether they have experienced fair treatment at the hands of the justice system or not. What a stupid way to decide who gets executed and who does not.

spare me the hysterics.

I have, there are no hysterics in that post - so how do you get to that particular conclusion?

are we gonna have to bring out a straitjacket for you?

[Peikko 1,575]

they should....it is a situation where they have a public charge and legal responsibility .....and her job and duties do not always end at 1700 hrs

So she was dealing with a handyman at her home when she made that statement... It certainly doesn't look good... Someone died because she was too busy having a new carpet installed...

No maybe you missed this part...

In 1986, two months after being released from his second prison term, Richard killed Marguerite Lucille Dixon, 53, a nurse and mother of seven. Dixon had invited him in for a cold glass of water after Richard had knocked on her front door and asked if her van was for sale. Two of her children found her. She had been sexually assaulted, then killed and her van and television stolen. A year later, Richard was on death row. After confessing, Richard claimed he was innocent

AND

"Richard had two trials, two direct appeals (including to the United States Supreme Court), two state habeas corpus proceedings and three federal habeas corpus hearings or motions."

AND

One sobering what-if: even if Richard had gotten his appeal accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court, he would most likely have extended his life by only eight months.

he's a scumbag that got what he deserved, although not as quick as it shoulda been.

You know this how? The evidence we are presented with doesn't actually give us any confidence that this is so. What it tells us is that some people are executed and some people are not and this is not based on whether they are 'scumbags' that deserve it, but on whether they have experienced fair treatment at the hands of the justice system or not. What a stupid way to decide who gets executed and who does not.

spare me the hysterics.

I have, there are no hysterics in that post - so how do you get to that particular conclusion?

are we gonna have to bring out a straitjacket for you?

Are you bored today or something? You seem to want to engage in some kind of posting game but I am sorry, I am not interested.

[scandal 951]

Another example that we need to end capital punishment.

Charles,

Support for Capital punishment is against the VJ TOS. William and Ewok have both weighed in on this matter. We are not allowed to call for the taking of lives of others.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...t&p=3205514

it's obe (overcome by events, not officer of the british empire) in that the guy being talked about is already dead...

For the record - my argument is not with you. As usual, it's with VJ mod policies.

As I understand it, calling for the death of someone is against VJ TOS (eg daboyz call for the death of Thaksin)

Ok - so death rows across America are full of people slated for death.

Comments like this one from death-penalty supporters:

In this day and age with forensics what it is and how tough it is to get a death penalty,I think that alone would be enough to justify having the death penalty.

would appear to advocate killing currently live people. Ergo, TOS violation.

Silly argument, you say? Sure.

looking_up is entitled to his opinion. It's mainstream in this country, even if I happen to disagree. I don't think he should be barred.

I'm just pointing out the inconsistency in the treatment daboyz got.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Ron, brother...I really see no point in continuously and publicly antagonizing the Administrator and Mods over such issues. Let it go or send them a PM...seriously.

[thepizzadude 26]

they should....it is a situation where they have a public charge and legal responsibility .....and her job and duties do not always end at 1700 hrs

So she was dealing with a handyman at her home when she made that statement... It certainly doesn't look good... Someone died because she was too busy having a new carpet installed...

No maybe you missed this part...

In 1986, two months after being released from his second prison term, Richard killed Marguerite Lucille Dixon, 53, a nurse and mother of seven. Dixon had invited him in for a cold glass of water after Richard had knocked on her front door and asked if her van was for sale. Two of her children found her. She had been sexually assaulted, then killed and her van and television stolen. A year later, Richard was on death row. After confessing, Richard claimed he was innocent

AND

"Richard had two trials, two direct appeals (including to the United States Supreme Court), two state habeas corpus proceedings and three federal habeas corpus hearings or motions."

AND

One sobering what-if: even if Richard had gotten his appeal accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court, he would most likely have extended his life by only eight months.

he's a scumbag that got what he deserved, although not as quick as it shoulda been.

You know this how? The evidence we are presented with doesn't actually give us any confidence that this is so. What it tells us is that some people are executed and some people are not and this is not based on whether they are 'scumbags' that deserve it, but on whether they have experienced fair treatment at the hands of the justice system or not. What a stupid way to decide who gets executed and who does not.

"In 1986, two months after being released from his second prison term"

So this is his THIRD prison term...and he rape and robbed a woman in her home.

Maybe this is what the RIGHT, INDEPENDENTS sees wrong with the LEFT, your lack of ability to SEE.

Oh pooor poor man he only went to jail three times, raped and murdered a woman, got plenty of justice, appeals and now he's dead :crying: :crying:

Pardon me if I think your viewpoint is just a bit contrary to human nature, SEE we should feel MORE compassion for the victim NOT THE SCUMBAG who got what he deserved.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Again - I don't believe anyone here has expressed sympathy for the murderer, or has offered any comment on his character or his crime.

It just isn't relevant to what is described in the article.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

they should....it is a situation where they have a public charge and legal responsibility .....and her job and duties do not always end at 1700 hrs

true. This is, after all, a real matter of life/death. Whether one is for or against state-sanctioned-murder/capital punishment or not; when you take on public office, you work for the public. B1tch... like almaty says, hang her by the.... wait, she has no nabs. DAMNIT!!!

[EstebanTrabajos 7]

yeeeha!