Scott Peterson gets death penalty recommendation- Page 6

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 3/16/05 at 11:40pm

Tiff – how does the theory of RJ apply to the Kobe case? You could assume that Kobe did indeed commit the crime. He then reached a monetary agreement with the victim. She would not testify in the criminal case and then later the civil case would be dismissed pursuant to the agreement reached behind the scenes.

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 3/17/05 at 12:03am

Hmm...the Kobe case would be a toughie, because a fundamental aspect in its success is that the offender takes responsibility for his actions. If I remember correctly, Kobe admitted to having consensual sex with the girl and denied that it was ever rape, just miscommunication. So in his case, it wouldn't work.

On the other hand, assuming that he did admit that he raped her, the monetary agreement is a start, but there would also have to be mediation in the sense of him understanding how his actions negatively impacted her, and her understanding his life circumstances and eventually forgiving him.

The problem with the monetary agreement in this case is that while it was voluntary in the sense that it was out of court, it was still an exchange with her not testifying against him in criminal civil court in return. In true RJ fashion, this monetary agreement has to have more of a free-will aspect to it instead of seeming like a trade off.

[Jess1483]

Posted: 3/17/05 at 12:05am

Thanks for the URL Tiff. I really do appreciate it.

As for the link to my poll, it was published in a book I have called Capital Punishment: A Reader, edited by Glen H. Stassen.

As for restorative justice, I can't say I know enough about it to make a strong enough claim. The reason I use the poll when talking about CP is just to demonstrate that the "overwhelming support of the majority for CP" is not necessarily as overwhelming as one may think.

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 3/17/05 at 12:08am

Oh, without a doubt. I don't think it's very overwhelming at all. Even though the majority of states have it, it wouldn't be so controversial unless there was a strong dissent!

What other literature are you using? I have to do a quantitative analysis next week on the public's perception on punishment and the independent variables related to crime and life that influence this.

[Jess1483]

Posted: 3/17/05 at 12:13am

That's one of the main sources--it's an anthology that looks at CP (and punishment in general) from a variety of views. Very interesting.

Also using "Morality and Moral Controversies: Readings in Moral, Social, and Political Philosophy," an anthology edited by John Arthur.

Contemporary Moral Issues in a Diverse Society, Ed. Julie McDonald. Wadsworth Publisher, 1998.

And an obviously biased link, but:
http://www.amnestyusa.org/abolish/worldwide.html
And another:
www.deathpenaltyinfo.org

And may I say, wow, that sounds like fun!

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 3/17/05 at 12:14am

Do you have any academic journals? I've been on the criminology and sociology databases, but it's hard to find any empirical studies done on this. I'll check out the books you mentioned though. Do they consider punishment/deterrence as a whole or just CP?

[Jess1483]

Posted: 3/17/05 at 12:19am

Both.
The Capital Punishment definitely covers both, as does "Morality and Moral Controversies."

That study was analyzed in a couple journals, here they are if that's of any help:

American Journal of Criminal Law 22 (1994)
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 32 (1995)

[Jess1483]

Posted: 3/17/05 at 12:22am

And just to clarify the LPOW+R, that's plus restitution, not restoration. Very different. Though I'm not opposed to the idea of restorative justice as well...

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 3/17/05 at 10:13am

You lost me at LPOW+R. Too many acronyms. Wha?

Thanks for the journals. I'll try to check them out today.

[Jess1483]

Posted: 3/17/05 at 3:01pm

Haha, sorry. Maybe that's 'cause it was late and I typed LPOW instead of LWOP (life w/out parole.)
Mea culpa.
Hope the journals are helpful.

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 3/17/05 at 3:08pm

Jess and Tiff: thanks for the exchange.

[Earl of Duke2]

Posted: 3/17/05 at 3:45pm

Let's just take out and put two bullets into the back of his head, after gets passed around like the punk b1tch he his, and will be after he gets to death row.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 3/17/05 at 7:52pm

Re Juvenile Offenders

If you are old enough to pull the trigger & snuff out an innocent life, you are old enough to get adult punishment or get it once you turn 18

Some of the most vicious killers are under 18 including 1 of the beltway snipers

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 3/17/05 at 7:54pm

Kind of off-topic now that it has branched out, but as far as Scott Peterson is concerned, I would rather see him get life in prison than a quick, easy, painless death.

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 3/17/05 at 8:55pm

Mr Roxy: Here are a few selected quotes from the recent Supreme Court decision that might shed a little light on the issue of the death penalty for juvenile offenders:

The prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishments," like other expansive language in the Constitution, must be interpreted according to its text, by considering history, tradition, and precedent, and with due regard for its purpose and function in the constitutional design. To implement this framework we have established the propriety and affirmed the necessity of referring to "the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society" to determine which punishments are so disproportionate as to be cruel and unusual.

Three general differences between juveniles under 18 and adults demonstrate that juvenile offenders cannot with reliability be classified among the worst offenders. First, as any parent knows and as the scientific and sociological studies respondent and his amici cite tend to confirm, "[a] lack of maturity and an underdeveloped sense of responsibility are found in youth more often than in adults and are more understandable among the young. These qualities often result in impetuous and ill-considered actions and decisions."

The second area of difference is that juveniles are more vulnerable or susceptible to negative influences and outside pressures, including peer pressure.

The third broad difference is that the character of a juvenile is not as well formed as that of an adult. The personality traits of juveniles are more transitory, less fixed

The susceptibility of juveniles to immature and irresponsible behavior means "their irresponsible conduct is not as morally reprehensible as that of an adult."

You can read the entire opinion at:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=03-633&friend=washingtonpost

Updated On: 3/17/05 at 08:55 PM