Kansas Supreme Court Overturns Carr Brothers' Death Sentences

[Lzen]

If you will recall, there was quite a long thread of discussion on CP when these scumbags were on trial. The story is truly disgusting. Wish I could find the original thread.

Updated: Fri 10:45 AM, Jul 25, 2014










TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) -- The Kansas Supreme Court has overturned the death sentences of two brothers convicted of capital murder in the shooting deaths of four people whose bodies were found in a snow-covered Wichita soccer field in 2000.


The state Supreme Court on Friday also struck down three of the four capital murder conviction each against Jonathan and Reginald Carr. But it upheld one capital murder conviction each.
Their cases will return to Sedgwick County District Court for further hearings and a new sentencing.


The court's majority overturned the death sentences because, it said, the presiding judge failed to have separate proceedings for each brother.
In overturning most of the capital convictions, the majority said the instructions to jurors were flawed.


Posted by Greg Palmer



http://www.wibw.com/home/headlines/K...#disqus_thread

[GloucesterChief]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

What about in the cases where there is a 100% chance the person is guilty. You OK with the death penalty being used without appeals?

No. The state shouldn't have the power to execute its own citizens because it will be abused and innocents will be executed as has happened already. Imprison them, sure. Not kill them because killing them is something you can't undo.

What may seem 100% right now may not in the future. Lots of people who were put on death row were later freed after DNA testing became available. These were innocents that in your 30 day window system would of been executed.

How is that moral? What good does executing someone do? It is not a deterrent. We know we have executed people who were innocent. It costs the taxpayer money.

[Al Czervik]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

Feel free to disagree. I and my extended family have sacrificed or chanced ultimate sacrifice for the greater good. I understand the concept.

Don't preach to me about this, I don't need it.


If you don't understand that you can risk the safety .0005% of the population to ensure quality life for the 99% then I can't help you.

Altruism is great in a world where no one wants you harmed.

Rep.....if one innocent is killed while 999 Carr brothers are executed....I can live with that all day long and twice on Sunday......And, if I was the innocent one....I would still be fine with it!!!

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by GloucesterChief

No. The state shouldn't have the power to execute its own citizens because it will be abused and innocents will be executed as has happened already. Imprison them, sure. Not kill them because killing them is something you can't undo.

What may seem 100% right now may not in the future. Lots of people who were put on death row were later freed after DNA testing became available. These were innocents that in your 30 day window system would of been executed.

How is that moral? What good does executing someone do? It is not a deterrent. We know we have executed people who were innocent. It costs the taxpayer money.

Oh, OK. So you are just an idiot. I asked about instances where it is 100% sure that the person is guilty not some bullshit instance where we "think" they are guilty. The Carr brothers, BTK, the Colorado movie shooter, etc... there is no doubt that these people are guilty. If you are OK with pieces of shit like this clogging up the judicial system and wasting tax payers money, I guess you are entitled to your opinion. I for one think in cases such as these that the guilty parties should be dead within a month of being found guilty.

[GloucesterChief]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

Oh, OK. So you are just an idiot. I asked about instances where it is 100% sure that the person is guilty not some bullshit instance where we "think" they are guilty. The Carr brothers, BTK, the Colorado movie shooter, etc... there is no doubt that these people are guilty. If you are OK with pieces of shit like this clogging up the judicial system and wasting tax payers money, I guess you are entitled to your opinion. I for one think in cases such as these that the guilty parties should be dead within a month of being found guilty.

No, I don't let my sense of vengeance override my reason. There should be no death penalty because the state has shown itself incapable of only executing the truly guilty of heinous crimes. Whatever small gains, if there are even any to be had, from executing criminals are wiped away when you execute an innocent person.

They wouldn't be clogging up the justice system if there was no death penalty just languishing in prison. The cause of your annoyance is the the thing that you are advocating for. The endless appeals are not going to go away because executing innocent people is generally considered an evil thing despite what Marcellus and Al Czervik seem to think. Even with endless appeals we know that at least two people who were executed were innocent and many more who were executed were probably innocent.

State execution all in all is a bad idea. It is no deterrent, innocent people have been executed, it costs a lot of money, and there is no liability on the part of the prosecutors or cops to get it right.

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by GloucesterChief

No, I don't let my sense of vengeance override my reason. There should be no death penalty because the state has shown itself incapable of only executing the truly guilty of heinous crimes. Whatever small gains, if there are even any to be had, from executing criminals are wiped away when you execute an innocent person.

They wouldn't be clogging up the justice system if there was no death penalty just languishing in prison. The cause of your annoyance is the the thing that you are advocating for. The endless appeals are not going to go away because executing innocent people is generally considered an evil thing despite what Marcellus and Al Czervik seem to think. Even with endless appeals we know that at least two people who were executed were innocent and many more who were executed were probably innocent.

State execution all in all is a bad idea. It is no deterrent, innocent people have been executed, it costs a lot of money, and there is no liability on the part of the prosecutors or cops to get it right.

You are one stubborn SOB. I am only talking about cases where it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the person is guilty. You can keep all the reasonable doubt cases in prison.

Currently the death penalty isn't a deterrent because criminals know they can sit on death row for 20 years and file appeals. This is also what makes the death penalty expensive. In my plan, you only use the death penalty in cases where there is absolutely no doubt that the person is guilty. There are literally dozens of such cases where nobody denies the person is guilty. These are the cases where the death penalty needs to be used and it needs to be executed swiftly and without appeal.

[GloucesterChief]

Its called having principles.

I am saying that due to government creep, societies emotional lust for vengeance, and winning a death penalty conviction being a trophy for prosecutors to show they are tough on crime it will never stay to just the open and shut cases. We also know that the justice system is very slow and reluctant to admit mistakes even in the face of overwhelming evidence.

This has happened since the death penalty was reinstated.

We know forensics labs have botched evidence, we know prosecutors have withheld exculpatory evidence, we know police officers have tortured and beat people to get confessions, we know that police have used unscientific methods and wholly junk science to finger suspects, we know police and prosecutors have paid off prison informers to finger the defendant, we know advances in science have lead to exoneration of persons that were put on death row, and we know thanks to immunity if an innocent person is executed none of the people responsible will be held liable either civilly or criminally.

Despite all these things we know,you still think that having execution on the table is a good idea? It is not logical. We know there are tons of problems with the justice system. The case in the op is just an example of sheer incompetence, yet you trust the system enough to take another's life? That is a faith in a system so flawed that it denies all logic.

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by GloucesterChief

Its called having principles.

I am saying that due to government creep, societies emotional lust for vengeance, and winning a death penalty conviction being a trophy for prosecutors to show they are tough on crime it will never stay to just the open and shut cases. We also know that the justice system is very slow and reluctant to admit mistakes even in the face of overwhelming evidence.

This has happened since the death penalty was reinstated.

We know forensics labs have botched evidence, we know prosecutors have withheld exculpatory evidence, we know police officers have tortured and beat people to get confessions, we know that police have used unscientific methods and wholly junk science to finger suspects, we know police and prosecutors have paid off prison informers to finger the defendant, we know advances in science have lead to exoneration of persons that were put on death row, and we know thanks to immunity if an innocent person is executed none of the people responsible will be held liable either civilly or criminally.

Despite all these things we know,you still think that having execution on the table is a good idea? It is not logical. We know there are tons of problems with the justice system. The case in the op is just an example of sheer incompetence, yet you trust the system enough to take another's life? That is a faith in a system so flawed that it denies all logic.

You could have just typed "I'm against the death penalty ever being used and am content with criminals that are guilty of murder, and this guilt is not in question by anyone, living the rest of their lives in prison." It would have saved us a lot of back and forth and you wouldn't have had to spend time typing up bullshit scenarios where every level of the justice system is corrupt as the justification for your opinion.

[GloucesterChief]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

You could have just typed "I'm against the death penalty ever being used and am content with criminals that are guilty of murder, and this guilt is not in question by anyone, living the rest of their lives in prison." It would have saved us a lot of back and forth and you wouldn't have had to spend time typing up bullshit scenarios where every level of the justice system is corrupt as the justification for your opinion.

I am. There is a logical reason to be against the death penalty. Mainly that the justice system is too flawed to have the power to execute someone. Also, giving the state the power to execute people is not a good thing generally because it will be abused.

You are for it for what I can see mostly emotional reasons despite the flaws of the justice system and that innocent people have been executed by the state.

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by GloucesterChief

I am. There is a logical reason to be against the death penalty. Mainly that the justice system is too flawed to have the power to execute someone. Also, giving the state the power to execute people is not a good thing generally because it will be abused.

You are for it for what I can see mostly emotional reasons despite the flaws of the justice system and that innocent people have been executed by the state.

I am only for it in very specific cases where regulations can be put in place to prevent innocent people from getting executed. This isn't difficult to accomplish. I'm not emotional about the issue. I just see that it can be improved and should be implemented swiftly in certain cases.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by GloucesterChief

Its called having principles.

I am saying that due to government creep, societies emotional lust for vengeance, and winning a death penalty conviction being a trophy for prosecutors to show they are tough on crime it will never stay to just the open and shut cases. We also know that the justice system is very slow and reluctant to admit mistakes even in the face of overwhelming evidence.

This has happened since the death penalty was reinstated.

We know forensics labs have botched evidence, we know prosecutors have withheld exculpatory evidence, we know police officers have tortured and beat people to get confessions, we know that police have used unscientific methods and wholly junk science to finger suspects, we know police and prosecutors have paid off prison informers to finger the defendant, we know advances in science have lead to exoneration of persons that were put on death row, and we know thanks to immunity if an innocent person is executed none of the people responsible will be held liable either civilly or criminally.

Despite all these things we know,you still think that having execution on the table is a good idea? It is not logical. We know there are tons of problems with the justice system. The case in the op is just an example of sheer incompetence, yet you trust the system enough to take another's life? That is a faith in a system so flawed that it denies all logic.

I have basic principles as well and they do not include cowtowing to murders and rapist.


There is less and less chance today a person gets wrongly convicted than ever due to science so its time to tighten up the laws and rules to apply to those advances.

[Perineum Ripper]

**** it..if you are sentenced to life and after 20 years you are still sitting there..put to death..if you can't prove yourself innocent in 20 years then you are probably guilty or broke and either way you are a waste of tax money..if you are guilty without a doubt..death..repeat offender..death

It's very simple..the prison systems are way overcrowded..insane amount of tax money goes to giving these people 3 hot meals free medical care and free school..they only have to worry about their butthole being ripped apart and being shanked in the courtyard..this world is filled with pussy ass people saying we can't use death penalty because it's unfair or can be abused..horseshit..what about the people who are ****ing guilty without a doubt..**** them..the people they committed crimes against didn't get a choice or somebody saying oh you can't do that so leave them alone

People who are guilty without doubt..life sentences with over 20 years..repeat offenders on 3rd strike..all death..if you are so worried about the worst case officials ruining the system then have a law set in so the governor has to sign off or some bullshit that keeps you feeling good about your morals or whatever

[Lex Luthor]

Originally Posted by mac459

**** it..if you are sentenced to life and after 20 years you are still sitting there..put to death..if you can't prove yourself innocent in 20 years then you are probably guilty or broke and either way you are a waste of tax money..if you are guilty without a doubt..death..repeat offender..death

It's very simple..the prison systems are way overcrowded..insane amount of tax money goes to giving these people 3 hot meals free medical care and free school..they only have to worry about their butthole being ripped apart and being shanked in the courtyard..this world is filled with pussy ass people saying we can't use death penalty because it's unfair or can be abused..horseshit..what about the people who are ****ing guilty without a doubt..**** them..the people they committed crimes against didn't get a choice or somebody saying oh you can't do that so leave them alone

People who are guilty without doubt..life sentences with over 20 years..repeat offenders on 3rd strike..all death..if you are so worried about the worst case officials ruining the system then have a law set in so the governor has to sign off or some bullshit that keeps you feeling good about your morals or whatever

So much FAIL in this post that I don't know where to begin. And I'm a strong supporter of the death penalty.

[Jimmya]

I'm for the death penalty 100%. Only bleeding heart liberals believe that criminals should have rights.

[Al Bundy]

Originally Posted by Al Czervik

Rep.....if one innocent is killed while 999 Carr brothers are executed....I can live with that all day long and twice on Sunday......And, if I was the innocent one....I would still be fine with it!!!

I sure in the **** wouldn't. I wouldn't be ok if it were my sister, my mom, my best friend or anyone else close to me.

[Perineum Ripper]

Originally Posted by Brainiac

So much FAIL in this post that I don't know where to begin. And I'm a strong supporter of the death penalty.

What is wrong with it