It’s a relief that the Kansas Supreme Court saw fit Friday to uphold the conviction of Gavin Scott in the 1996 murders of Doug and Beth Brittain of rural Goddard, even as it overturned his death sentence. That spares the victims’ family, as well as taxpayers, of having to go through another trial. But with the third man convicted under Kansas’ 1994 death penalty now awaiting resentencing before completion of his case, something that could take several years, Kansans are left to wonder about the point of having a death penalty so complicated, costly to prosecute and prone to technical errors.
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- DorisKing on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- george on Health care reform would save state money
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- Politico on So they said
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- JWink on Health care reform would save state money
- Politico on Health care reform would save state money
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
48 Comments
Let’s make attorneys think a little bit before they filing appeals by setting a law that if they appeal and lose they would be req’d to pay all the court costs.
Let’s also set a law that would hold the attorney’s liable for people they get off on some frivolous
technicality such that if the persons goes right back into the life of crime and caught again the attorney goes to jail for the first crime.
It does make one wonder if the State will ever put someone to death, I would not be for a one size fits all death penalty. Every case no matter how horrorable are different and with their own details. Not all Capital murder cases are like the Carr brothers. But when a guy whom is a civilian employee that works at the SP at El-dorado told me the state has no intention of putting anyone to death. I asked him what he meant and he said the death room is used as storage I have met differing degrees of 1st degree murders and not all are worthy of death. I am also concerned about wrongful and over convictions, we need the death penalty but not in ever case.
I have no moral objections to capital punishment in principle; there are cases that scream for it. But, given that:
1) there is no evidence that a death penalty has any significant deterrent effect in preventing murders (aside from the person executed, of course)
2) it costs significantly more to prosecute a capital case and defend the conviction on appeal than it does to keep a prisoner in prison for life
3) there is the certainty that persons have been, and will be, executed for crimes they did not commit; not because of any evil intent, but simply because human beings are fallible and will make mistakes
why do we have a death penalty at all?
As a practical matter, the costs are not worth the benefits.
Abolish it, except perhaps for one case – the long-term prisoner (say 20 yrs +) who kills in prison, simply because there is little other deterrent available.
Doug and Beth Brittain appear to have been given the death penalty. When does their appeal come up?
Would agree with GMC on this issue.
I agree with GMC on this one.
I find it highly illogical that we are so hesitant to enact captial punishment to individuals who have been convicted of murder through thorough presentation of the evidence to a jury, yet there are those who believe that abortion is justified since it pre-emptively executes a would be future criminal even though the unborn child has no record of wrong doing whatsoever.
For whatever reason, our society leans heavily on the side of protecting the life of a convicted murderer while ignoring the life of an unborn innocent child. Such logic can not be comprehended.
I certainly agree that all life is valuable, which is why it is such a grevious offense to take innocent life. Deterrent is not the key issue to be inacted in capital punishment cases. Justice is THE issue.
But with the impracticalities of the process due to our excessively litigous society, capital punishment may no longer be appropriate for all but the most horrific cases.
I wonder if there would be any outcry if convicted murderer’s heads were grabbed by tongs and crushed; then their brains and other bodily fluids sucked clean from the floor with a vacuum?
“I wonder if there would be any outcry if convicted murderer’s heads were grabbed by tongs and crushed; then their brains and other bodily fluids sucked clean from the floor with a vacuum?”
I do not know but I am sure there would be money to be made on pay-for-view.
The death penalty likely would deter more people from committing murder if it were actually used. Our prisons are cake walks and venues for organized crime and death row is a permanent hotel. Take prisoners’ privileges away unless they are truly earned and expose murderers to the same fate they chose for someone else!
Ahh, the death penalty. Legalized murder of innocent people so everyone in America becomes a murderer. In the past 35 years 129 people have been found innocent through DNA testing or other evidence and freed from death row.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=110
But I’m certain there are those who will say justice demands the deaths of innocents.
So Maggot,
No one killed Doug and Beth Brittain?
Regular, you can spit out non-sequiturs like snails leave a slime trail.
To me the key is to be CERTAIN of guilt. When I see something like BTK or the Carr brothers my first reaction is to get a rope. However, as has been noted time and time again we are all to often not certain – or worse yet we are certain but wrong.
So Maggot, is there DNA evidence is “this” case that states the death penalty shouldn’t be invoked?
Or are you just focusing in on the usual DNA sewer soup that comes up when death penalty cases are discussed?
bth
Posted May 20, 2008 at 11:51 am | Permalink
To me the key is to be CERTAIN of guilt. When I see something like BTK or the Carr brothers my first reaction is to get a rope. However, as has been noted time and time again we are all to often not certain – or worse yet we are certain but wrong.
————————
In the Carr brother’s case, there was a victim eyewitness.
BTK confessed to his crimes and enjoyed reliving the moments.
There is no doubt in my mind in either case that they were guilty of murder(s).
“Or are you just focusing in on the usual DNA sewer soup that comes up when death penalty cases are discussed?”
Contrary to popular opinion, few of the 129 cases of people being falsely convicted and sentenced to death were overturned due to DNA evidence.
Try reading the case studies.
Until this HUGE issue is resolved, all executions should be halted.
Again Clark, was this case going to be overturned because of DNA?
As the attorneys say in court, “irrelevant and argumentative.”
I believe people in favor of the death penalty should have the opportunity to carry it out themselves. Then they can satisfy their bloodlust for revenge by their own hand.
Again, another non-sequitur from Regular.
Grateful_Dave
Posted May 20, 2008 at 12:05 pm | Permalink
I believe people in favor of the death penalty should have the opportunity to carry it out themselves. Then they can satisfy their bloodlust for revenge by their own hand.
—————–
No problemo,
Show me where the ’switch’ is.
regular – agreed. That makes them easy ones. With Scott however do we KNOW he did it? It is that sort of thing that nags at me.
On the other hand there is this:
http://www.kansas.com/213/story/409696.html
How do we deter murder in prison when there is nothing to lose?
bth
Posted May 20, 2008 at 12:15 pm | Permalink
regular – agreed. That makes them easy ones. With Scott however do we KNOW he did it? It is that sort of thing that nags at me.
On the other hand there is this:
http://www.kansas.com/213/story/409696.html
How do we deter murder in prison when there is nothing to lose?
————————–
I would suggest ‘Prison Planets’ were they would be isolated and out of mind.
Of course, they would have to wear Star Trek costumes as well.
“Again Clark, was this case going to be overturned because of DNA?”
One, this specific case is irrelevant.
Two, there has been no mention of DNA related to this case.
Three, you conveniently ignore the fact the 129 people have been erroneously convicted and sentenced to death only to later be exonerated.
Four, the statement was that UNTIL the issue of false convictions is resolved, all executions should be halted. If some folks had their way, the condemned would get little or no appeal and there would have been (at least) 129 innocent people executed. That is unacceptable in a civilized society.
Five, the convict did not have his conviction overturned, nor was his sentence reduced. He has another penalty phase trial and he may well be resentenced to death.
Justice is THE issue.
No, it’s revenge. And yet, once the death penalty has been carried through, the family and friends of the victim still aren’t always able to move on. Killing the killer isn’t the answer. In fact, capital punishment gives them release.
I agree with GMC70 because of the points he stated and have for some time. Several years ago I listened to a local radio program and heard those same points discussed by local prosecutors. Until then, I was on the fence.
If you want justice, then take the Carr brothers out into a field, rape them, shoot them, and run them over with a truck. That’s justice, when the punishment fits the crime.
Here’s what needs to be done. Life sentence, no chance of parole. When allowed visitors, there is no human contact, meaning they never again can touch a loved one. No visual contact would suit me, too. No TV, no entertainment. Just four walls to stare at and contemplate. Let God be the judge of their life after death. And if you’re not a Godly person, wait for Karma to take effect.
And before anyone asks, yes, my family has lost a friend to murder. At the time, my kids wanted the death penalty. They’re now glad of the life sentence and have realized that the murderer’s death would not bring back our friend, nor would it bring peace anymore than the sentence he received.
“If you want justice, then take the Carr brothers out into a field, rape them, shoot them, and run them over with a truck. That’s justice, when the punishment fits the crime.”
No. Making the punishment match that of the crime would not be justice because it would mean sinking to the base level of the criminal. Such would not befit a civilized society.
The death penalty is not about revenge, vengeance or even justice.
It is about what to do about a person that absolutely refuses to live by the will and conditions set forth by the controlling social structure of a society.
A good example is the execution of Jesus Christ, the Roman soldiers carried out the act but the Church in that place and of those times is guilty of favoritism of another well known to them and the condemnation of an innocence man that was a stranger to them.
Because of the will and conditions set forth by the controlling social structure of a society, how do you condemn and who is really the guilty ones?
The death penalty serves its purpose and is a tool of society but what is the message that you would want to conceive?
In BTK’s case, I’m not so sure he confessed to ALL the murders… just the ones he’d only get life for.
GMC & PreD: you make excellent logical points that are hard to argue against. However, I still think that BTK and the Carr brothers deserve the death penalty. In these 2 cases I think a field and 30 seconds headstart should be sufficient.
There’s a rather vicious punishment I always thought fit the crime of rape. Nail their member to a tree stump, set the stump on fire and hand them a broken beer bottle. Let them make the choice.
I have no mercy for those who had none for their victims. And some thought I was just a bleeding heart ‘you people’ liberal. : ) Just proves there is no ‘one size fits all’ label.
“There’s a rather vicious punishment I always thought fit the crime of rape. Nail their member to a tree stump, set the stump on fire and hand them a broken beer bottle. Let them make the choice.”
Hey, that’s my line! I love it though.
When you advocate a horrible death for a convict, just remember that a jury of twelve convicted 129 people of murder and recommended that they die.
Later, they were exonerated.
I am not suggesting that Rader or the Carr Brothers are innocent, but the juries that convicted the 129 were just as sure that the condemned were guilty as we are that those on Death Row in Kansas are guilty.
Let’s not compound the tragedy of murder by executing innocent people.
Understood WS. However, in the event of unrefutable DNA evidence I’m standing by the death penalty.
I have no doubt whatsoever that there are scumbags in this world who deserve to be taken out into the street and shot like the mad dogs they are. Charlie Manson, Ted Bundy, the guy who dreamed up “Cop Rock”… Those people should be held responsible!
But I have deep and sincere doubts about the judicial system’s way of meting out criminal penalties. The same kinds of people who, for example, returned the multi-million dollar hot coffee verdict against McDonald’s were on the juries a few years back in Illinois who condemned the 8 men who were later proven by DNA evidence to be innocent of the crimes that put them on Death Row. The judicial system is inherently flawed because it depends on inherently-flawed human beings. And there’s no way to rectify an unjust execution. That’s the rub.
Whether an unjust conviction is due to bad lawyers, bad juries, bad evidence, over-zealous prosecutors, incompetent judges, bad luck… it seems to me that a system that aspires to justice should have in its intrinsic structure the capability to right wrongs. And there’s no way to un-do an execution.
And it’s altogether too easy to put people on death row and kill them.
If there is to be a death penalty — and I see no constitutional provision in the United States to prevent it — I think the death warrant should be signed by the governor (or President) in the presence of the condemned, and only after a face-to-face meeting. I think, instead of simply signing a piece of paper, the Chief Executive of the state or nation should be required to pull the switch him/herself. And if — as it could very
well have happened in Illinois where fully half the prisoners on Death Row were conclusively proven innocent — a person is put to death unjustly, the governor and the trial judge and the jury members responsible should be summarily executed for murder.
As a practical matter, though, I suspect most Death Penalty politicians lack the cajones to sign a death warrant if their own lives were on the line.
Personally, I think the death penalty is far too easy a way out for the really heinous murderers. They should live long lives exiled as much as possible from any human contact. If they go crazy from isolation, so be it!
“Jed” posted –
“…the death penalty is far too easy a way out for the really heinous murderers. They should live long lives exiled as much as possible from any human contact.”
Not all that many years ago, a friend of mine had to do 30 days in the Neosho County (Kansas) county jail. At the time (I have no idea how it works now), the sheriff had control of the meals budget; something like $10 per inmate per day. He hired his wife and she provided two meals a day: at about 10 am prisoners got half a baloney sandwich and half a cheese sandwich. For “dinner,” around four o’clock, they got the other halves of the baloney and cheese sandwiches.
I’ve seen those shows on cable about the various prisons. Super-Max is incredibly expensive, but it seems like appropriate punishment to me (with the Neosho County jail diet thrown in).
But I’d add one other element. In every cell there’d be a cyanide capsule available for the inmate to use or not use any time s/he chooses.
If that were the case, Jed, then why do they fight so hard to live? Many become so used to incarceration that they don’t what to live on the outside and will commit crimes to sabotage their freedom.
There is no doubt about Gavins Scott’s guilt…he should pay with his life for taking the lives of two innocent people and leaving their children orphans. He didn’t have to shoot them, but he did it for fun. I knew Gavin when he was 13. He didn’t have a conscience then, and I’m sure he doesn’t have one now.
Let’s change the laws so that the death penalty isn’t so complicated and can’t be drawn out for years for the profits of the lawyers. When there is no doubt about a person’s guilt at all (ie the Carr brothers, Dennis Rader, and Gavin Scott) let it be carried out swiftly and simply. Just put them mercifully to sleep. They won’t suffer nearly as much as their victims and society will have closure.
Mary,
In the first place, Gavin, if you remember correctly, would be a sociopathic personality. The usually accepted cause for that is horrific abuse at a very young age, and there is no known technique for reversing it. In his case, capital punishment might be the humane way to go. Second, the people who fight their convictions from death row are no different that those who fight a sentence life without parole, you just don’t hear as much about those cases. These prisoners are still holding out hope for freedom. I’m suggesting removing that hope entirely.
Third, the “institutionalized” prisoners in “The Shawshank Redemption” are in actuality pretty rare birds. How many prisoners in real life have you heard of who refused to be released?
Stone walls may not a prison make, but add in the guards, shitty food, no privacy and constant fear of brutality, and you’ve got a pretty reasonable approximation of one. It’s not exactly Aruba!
“I knew Gavin when he was 13. He didn’t have a conscience then, and I’m sure he doesn’t have one now.”
Scary. I have heard of this before – sociopaths who are destined to kill. How do we stop that? Is there a way?
Wichi,
“However, in the event of unrefutable DNA evidence I’m standing by the death penalty.”
Please try to keep in mind that DNA is a molecule. It only becomes evidence when interpreted by a human being who is just as fallible as the rest of us. No evidence is “unrefutable,”
bth..I don’t think you can do anything. His family was dysfuctional, but no more than a lot of families whose kids turn out OK. I think it is a combination of environment and genetics. Anti-social personalities don’t have the ability to empathize with their victims, and they lack anxiety..which enables them to act out without hesitation or fear. I’ve seen good kids come from the most horrific families you can imagine, and really bad kids come from loving homes. It’s all a crap shoot as far as I’m concerned, because there are so many factors involved in addition to how a kid is raised.
Monk,
“Super-Max is incredibly expensive, but it seems like appropriate punishment to me (with the Neosho County jail diet thrown in).
But I’d add one other element. In every cell there’d be a cyanide capsule available for the inmate to use or not use any time s/he chooses.”
No, I’d want to keep them physically healthy as long as possible. That requires a nourishing, if tasteless diet. And given the amount of unstructured time prisoners have on their hands, they’d figure out some way to use those cyanide capsules on the guards or each other.
GMC70
Posted May 20, 2008 at 8:47 am | Permalink
I have no moral objections to capital punishment in principle; there are cases that scream for it. But, given that:
1) there is no evidence that a death penalty has any significant deterrent effect in preventing murders (aside from the person executed, of course)
2) it costs significantly more to prosecute a capital case and defend the conviction on appeal than it does to keep a prisoner in prison for life
3) there is the certainty that persons have been, and will be, executed for crimes they did not commit; not because of any evil intent, but simply because human beings are fallible and will make mistakes
why do we have a death penalty at all?
As a practical matter, the costs are not worth the benefits.
Abolish it, except perhaps for one case – the long-term prisoner (say 20 yrs +) who kills in prison, simply because there is little other deterrent available.
=======================================
GMC, I agree with you 100%
My sister and another person were murdered, shot dead, because she was ‘there’. The killer had a choice to follow through with his plans to kill the guy she was staying with ’she wasn’t supposed to be there’ or leave and settle up later with this guy. After going to the bathroom and looking in the mirror he decided to shoot them both.
The reason the death penalty in Kansas is said to NOT be a determent is because it is not carried out. To be effective we should construct gallows on the courthouse lawn and require all school age kids to be present. Let them see what could happen if you commit such a crime. Our society is such a bunch of wussies. Hang em and hang em high.
First line second paragraph: deterrent, not determent.
How many murderers get out of prison and then kill again?…or how many kill other inmates or guards while they’re in prison. How can anyone say it’s not a deterent? If they are put to death, they won’t be able to kill again.
The murderer of my two friends is getting out next month..who’s to say he won’t do it again?
Do we want to be civilized, or are we satisfied with blood revenge? If blood revenge is good enough, and when some innocent person is executed by the society, does his family then have the right to exact blood revenge on the society?
In order to be a civilized society, we gave up revenge killing in exchange for justice. This is not a matter of allowing the state to take revenge for us. Justice is, as far as possible the righting of a wrong. Revenge simply compounds the wrong.
Mary,
“The murderer of my two friends is getting out next month..who’s to say he won’t do it again?”
And who’s to say he will? Your crystal ball?
So you don’t mind if he moves in next door to you, Jed?
It’s only fair that when someone takes a life..maliciously and intentionally..they should have to give up their own.
How would you feel Jed, if your child or wife was murdered in cold blood? Would you be anxious for the murderer to walk the streets and enjoy their freedom again? Or would you want them dead, so you could be sure they would never put anyone else through what they put you and your loved one through?
It’s not too hard to have compassion for a murderer when you’ve never had anyone you loved or cared about murdered.
Walk in my shoes for awhile, Jed, then you can judge me.
Mary,
I’ve had good friends murdered by upstanding members of the community who weren’t even arrested after admitting to it. All they had to do was say their victims were gay (not the term they used) and claim they came on to them. I hope that isn’t still as effective a get-out-of-jail-free card as it used to be. One of them still lives on the west side and for all I know may be your neighbor.
As far as moving in next door, I had several ex-cons as neighbors, and they weren’t any worse than some of the ones that weren’t. One eventually became a friend.
It never occurred to me that I had my choice of neighbors. Gee, I could have opted for a few exremely rich and gullible ones!
One Trackback
illinois lawyers…
When the time comes to choose a lawyer, will you know the type that you need?. If your legal problem is complex or involves lots of money, you definitely do NOT want to represent yourself. The money you save will end up costing you dearly in the long…