The Fate of Stanley 'Tookie' Williams

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
141

[quote]Professor X wrote:

So you believe there will never be a case where someone’s life lived between the time of conviction and the time of his death penalty (if it happens to be several years between) will ever need to be reviewed? [/quote]

In my view, not very much - otherwise every prisoner who committed a capital or otherwise infamous crime would suddenly become the world’s most devoted children’s book author or born-again do-gooder.

The damage is done - they should have thought about all the charitable service before they committed the crime.

142

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

In my view, not very much - otherwise every prisoner who committed a capital or otherwise infamous crime would suddenly become the world’s most devoted children’s book author or born-again do-gooder.

The damage is done - they should have thought about all the charitable service before they committed the crime.

[/quote]

Granted, that would be pretty wierd, but I doubt every prisoner would do it.
If it did happen and all these death row guys suddenly turned into the Dhali Llama or Ghandi and created works that prevented crime and death in the future, why should we stop that flow of positive influence, even if it does come from convicted killers?
Like community service, only forever, in prison.

143

[quote]AZMojo wrote:

If it did happen and all these death row guys suddenly turned into the Dhali Llama or Ghandi and created works that prevented crime and death in the future, why should we stop that flow of positive influence, even if it does come from convicted killers?
Like community service, only forever, in prison.[/quote]

Do you think they would do it if they knew the worst they would face is life in prison?

I doubt this ‘flow of positive influence’ would amount to anything more than a trickle without the motive of trying to save their ass from lethal injection by convincing a governor their good works deserves clemency.

144

Wow, I can’t believe people aren’t able to pick apart the notion of what is correct or just and what is done because of rights.

Again, retribution is only done to make the survivors, whether it is family or society in general, feel that justice has been served or that others will be detered.

Their is nothing wrong with honoring the dead, honoring their last wishes, perhaps seeking retribution or revenge via appropriate means, but none of it has to do with the dead.

They are simply gone. Any actions, feelings or sense of importance is all about the wants, needs and feelings of the living.

I’m not speaking against anything… or suggesting that justice shouldn’t be done, only trying to point out that it isn’t done for any reason except to serve the needs of society, of the living, in some way… even if only to allow the living to feel better by honoring the wishes or memory of the “recently” departed.

145

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Wow, Cass Sunstein is making this argument? I’m shocked – Sunstein is extremely liberal. Do a google search on him and you’ll soon se what I mean.[/quote]

You shouldn’t be shocked. It’s no surprise.

The University of Chicago, for which Cass works, has been losing its relevance for a while, not being able to attract law students as well as, say, Stanford and Ivy League schools are. He needs to create some controversy to steal back the thunder. He can’t compete on the liberal side of the fence, since, as it became abundantly clear in this case, he’s outclassed, outsmarted and outnumbered by younger and more prolific people in both coasts, so people will just ignore him. So he does the “smart” thing: tries to create a controversy in the other side of the fence, knowing he’d be immediately torn apart – and attracting a lot of attention from the press and then people who do support the death penalty (a large chunk of the US population) in the process. He lost some credibility with the academic community with this – not because of his conclusions, but because of his extremely poor methodology, and his clear agenda – but the prospect students and recognition he is gaining on the conservative side make up for it, at least in his mind.

Personally, I find it to be despicable and akin to selling your soul to the Devil, but I’ll admit I’m a purist scientist who often finds himself frowning upon methodologies adopted by non-scientists; so maybe I’m biased.

In reality, I’ve seen many academics pull similar stunts before and I understand their motivation$.

Or maybe, as a colleague of mine said yesterday, it’s just him undergoing a middle-age crisis… :wink:

146

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

Do you think they would do it if they knew the worst they would face is life in prison?

I doubt this ‘flow of positive influence’ would amount to anything more than a trickle without the motive of trying to save their ass from lethal injection by convincing a governor their good works deserves clemency.[/quote]

I don’t know if they would do it or not, I don’t pretend to know what’s going on in the mind of a convicted murderer, but I doubt that many would. We’re not talking about the thousands of death row inmates. We’re talking about one. If it sets a precident, what harm comes from that?

You’re probably right about your “trickle” theory, but how much does the motive matter vs. the product? If, IF, it helps others then maybe they should be allowed to continue, regardless of their original motive.

147

[quote]vroom wrote:
Wow, I can’t believe people aren’t able to pick apart the notion of what is correct or just and what is done because of rights.

Again, retribution is only done to make the survivors, whether it is family or society in general, feel that justice has been served or that others will be detered.

Their is nothing wrong with honoring the dead, honoring their last wishes, perhaps seeking retribution or revenge via appropriate means, but none of it has to do with the dead.

They are simply gone. Any actions, feelings or sense of importance is all about the wants, needs and feelings of the living.

I’m not speaking against anything… or suggesting that justice shouldn’t be done, only trying to point out that it isn’t done for any reason except to serve the needs of society, of the living, in some way… even if only to allow the living to feel better by honoring the wishes or memory of the “recently” departed.[/quote]

Some of us have a more cosmic view of justice vroom.

While serving the needs of society is part of this argument, I think there is something deeper here.

If you believe in an afterlife, your point about the dead not figuring into this equation goes right out the window.

Even if you deny the possibility of an afterlife, we owe victims justice, even if they are no longer here to see it done. I dont think this is that hard a concept to grasp.

148

[quote]hspder wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
By the way, you can’t beat NJ. Make fun all you want. Just stay the hell out. We like it without everyone else knowing how good it is…and we sure as shit don’t want you bumbkins driving on our highways.

I’m sorry to say, but this bumbkin here will be driving on “your” highways next weekend. :slight_smile: My apologies. ;-)[/quote]

Haha. Just remember, 55 means 70. And we will cut you off! :wink:

149

You said it yourself… we owe. We accept a feeling of responsibility and we take actions because we are compelled to.

I’m not arguing it is wrong or should not be done and it has nothing to do with whether or not there is an afterlife.

150

[quote]hspder wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
Wow, Cass Sunstein is making this argument? I’m shocked – Sunstein is extremely liberal. Do a google search on him and you’ll soon se what I mean.

You shouldn’t be shocked. It’s no surprise.

The University of Chicago, for which Cass works, has been losing its relevance for a while, not being able to attract law students as well as, say, Stanford and Ivy League schools are. He needs to create some controversy to steal back the thunder. He can’t compete on the liberal side of the fence, since, as it became abundantly clear in this case, he’s outclassed, outsmarted and outnumbered by younger and more prolific people in both coasts, so people will just ignore him. So he does the “smart” thing: tries to create a controversy in the other side of the fence, knowing he’d be immediately torn apart – and attracting a lot of attention from the press and then people who do support the death penalty (a large chunk of the US population) in the process. He lost some credibility with the academic community with this – not because of his conclusions, but because of his extremely poor methodology, and his clear agenda – but the prospect students and recognition he is gaining on the conservative side make up for it, at least in his mind.

Personally, I find it to be despicable and akin to selling your soul to the Devil, but I’ll admit I’m a purist scientist who often finds himself frowning upon methodologies adopted by non-scientists; so maybe I’m biased.

In reality, I’ve seen many academics pull similar stunts before and I understand their motivation$.

Or maybe, as a colleague of mine said yesterday, it’s just him undergoing a middle-age crisis… :wink:
[/quote]

Academics are so catty.

151

I’m a republican, but against the death penalty in general for several reasons. For one, look at how many people have been found innocent after DNA testing. There have even been cases were DNA was mishandled and innocent people STILL went to jail or were released, so it’s not foolproof. I’m just not comfortable taking a person’s life where even a .00001% chance exists that he may be innocent.

Yes, the guy helped found the Crips. But did people still have a choice to not participate in the gang? Would there be no gangs without Tookie’s help? Did he force people into a gang lifestyle?

If he is kept in prison for the rest of his life, I see no reason why clemency shouldn’t be granted. I think he is trying to do good things now, like keep kids out of gangs. If he can save even one life through his writings and his example now, I think it’s worth it to let him live.

Yes, I know justice should be fulfilled and I think life in prison would do. There is another concept though called mercy, taught by the greatest One to ever walk the earth. It is His example that we should follow. If the guy is trying to repent and turn his life around and do good, let him. We are not the ones that will ultimately pass final judgement on him, God will do that. So by giving him life in prison, it’s not like we are letting him off his final punishment.

I think our world would be better off if we demonstrated a lot more mercy.

I recently heard a great story in a church conference we had last month. Here’s an excerpt:

"How would you feel toward a teenager who decided to toss a 20-pound frozen turkey from a speeding car headlong into the windshield of the car you were driving? How would you feel after enduring six hours of surgery using metal plates and other hardware to piece your face together, and after learning you still face years of therapy before returning to normal?and that you ought to feel lucky you didn’t die or suffer permanent brain damage?

"And how would you feel after learning that your assailant and his buddies had the turkey in the first place because they had stolen a credit card and gone on a senseless shopping spree, just for kicks? . . .

"This is the kind of hideous crime that propels politicians to office on promises of getting tough on crime. It’s the kind of thing that prompts legislators to climb all over each other in a struggle to be the first to introduce a bill that would add enhanced penalties for the use of frozen fowl in the commission of a crime.

"The New York Times quoted the district attorney as saying this is the sort of crime for which victims feel no punishment is harsh enough. ‘Death doesn’t even satisfy them,’ he said.

"Which is what makes what really happened so unusual. The victim, Victoria Ruvolo, a 44-year-old former manager of a collections agency, was more interested in salvaging the life of her 19-year-old assailant, Ryan Cushing, than in exacting any sort of revenge. She pestered prosecutors for information about him, his life, how he was raised, etc. Then she insisted on offering him a plea deal. Cushing could serve six months in the county jail and be on probation for 5 years if he pleaded guilty to second-degree assault.

"Had he been convicted of first-degree assault?the charge most fitting for the crime?he could have served 25 years in prison, finally thrown back into society as a middle-aged man with no skills or prospects.

"But this is only half the story. The rest of it, what happened the day this all played out in court, is the truly remarkable part.

"According to an account in the New York Post, Cushing carefully and tentatively made his way to where Ruvolo sat in the courtroom and tearfully whispered an apology. ‘I’m so sorry for what I did to you.’

“Ruvolo then stood, and the victim and her assailant embraced, weeping. She stroked his head and patted his back as he sobbed, and witnesses, including a Times reporter, heard her say, ‘It’s OK. I just want you to make your life the best it can be.’ According to accounts, hardened prosecutors, and even reporters, were choking back tears” (“Forgiveness Has Power to Change Future,” Deseret Morning News, Aug. 21, 2005, p. AA3).

Obviously this case is different from murder, but it still demonstrates a great lesson in mercy and forgiveness.

152

Regardless of weather he is executed or not, I think it is a travesty that this man is being turned into a hero. In twenty five years, the victims have been completely forgotten in the case and their suffering along with the suffering of their families is being tossed aside while self important Hollywood pricks jump on the bandwagon. Fuck them and Fuck Tookie.

If he gets his sentence commuted to life, do you think the celebrities will forget about him and move to another cause, or will they still consider him a hero?

153

I wonder that if in 20 years or so, provided Scott Peterson has been a model prisioner, if Jesse Jackson will be campaigning for his death sentence to be overturned.

“Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time”.

154

Another scumbag gang leader pleading for his life after he failed to show any mercy to his victims.

157

I am leaning towards granting clemency. His ongoing work against gangs has more value to the public than his death would.

Letting my own sense of right and wrong override the needs of the greater public good would be selfish.

158

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Minister Tony Muhammad
Western regional minister for the Nation of Islam and a leader of the community and antiracist struggle in Los Angeles
THIS IS a young man who I have met with Minister Farrakhan. Not only did we get a chance to hear from him, but we also had a chance to observe a redeemed human being–a restored human being.

He is a man who I know is not a fake. If you are a fake, you cannot redeem others. Stan Tookie Williams has done more to redeem young men and women in urban cities in America and around the world–to get them out of a life of gang-banging, to get them out of a life of ill-repute–than many people who are free.

The Bible says you can tell a tree by the fruit that it bears, and you can tell a man by his work. His work is outstanding. He has also professed, ?I am innocent of the crimes I have been charged for, but I am guilty of some other things that I have done that I didn?t get caught for.?

I have visited almost 20 of the 33 state prisons in California. There is no atmosphere of rehabilitation. For someone like Tookie Williams to conquer his demons on death row, to use his life to reach out and save the lives of others, to be a five-time Nobel Peace Prize nominee–that is a redeemed man.

I have seen his works. I have seen real-life gang members–hardened criminals–hear his work and have tears rolling down their face.

And if we are going to try Stan for starting the Crips, than let?s also try the Los Angeles Police Department for their crimes. They don?t have a very good track record.

Stan Tookie Williams deserves clemency.

[/quote]

While your two posts make some good arguments overall, I wouldn’t exactly use Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam to make my case for anything.

159

Fighting

That would make you the true definition of a bleeding heart liberal.

I’m quite sure I could post 100’s of letters from the victims impacted by this guys life and decisions.

Once granted clemency, I’ll be quite interested in his ‘path.’ My guess is you’ll never see another book or ‘message.’

160

[quote]sasquatch wrote:

Once granted clemency, I’ll be quite interested in his ‘path.’ My guess is you’ll never see another book or ‘message.’[/quote]

What if you are wrong. Then what?

161

[quote]Professor X wrote:
sasquatch wrote:

Once granted clemency, I’ll be quite interested in his ‘path.’ My guess is you’ll never see another book or ‘message.’

What if you are wrong. Then what? [/quote]

Then I’ll apologize.

I’m not trying to be whimsical here. I understand a life is at stake. I happen to believe in the death penalty. Not as a deterent, I think that’s been shown untrue, but for penalty of the most heinous crimes.

This qualifies in my book.

162

[quote]sasquatch wrote:
Professor X wrote:
sasquatch wrote:

Once granted clemency, I’ll be quite interested in his ‘path.’ My guess is you’ll never see another book or ‘message.’

What if you are wrong. Then what?

Then I’ll apologize.

I’m not trying to be whimsical here. I understand a life is at stake. I happen to believe in the death penalty. Not as a deterent, I think that’s been shown untrue, but for penalty of the most heinous crimes.

This qualifies in my book.[/quote]

In my honest opinion, the possibility of greater good outweighs the act of putting someone to death for retribution. I’m not trying to downplay what he did at all.

I wouldn’t mind if they made him wear a shirt that read “I killed people” or got the victims’ names tattooed on his forehead…but killing just for the sake of carrying out a penalty seems barbaric.

I would hate to be Arnold S. as far as this decision. The weird thing is, he may be the one politician that I believe we have less of a chance for a decision being made strictly for political reasons. I could be wrong about him, but that’s the way I have viewed up to this point. I’ll go with whatever he decides on this one.