If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Boston.com)   Surprisingly sensible details of Governor Romney's 2005 death penalty law released. List includes a ban on executing minors and a call for mandatory judicial review of all cases   (boston.com) divider line 88
    More: Interesting, judicial review, Supreme Judicial Court, death penalty, governors  
•       •       •

679 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Jul 2012 at 9:54 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



88 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-07-16 09:29:59 AM
mandatory judicial review of all cases

Massachusetts law already has a special provision for first degree murder appeals. It was passed a long time ago when Massachusetts enforced the death penalty.

First degree murder sentence (now) is mandatory life without parole. Appeals go directly to the supreme court. The supreme court is directed to examine the record independent of the defendant's appeal. The court can ignore technicalities like unpreserved objections. If the court feels justice calls for a new trial or a conviction of a lesser offense, the court can make it happen. In return for this generous standard of review there is no right to appeal denial of future motions for new trials. One justice of the court looks at the appeal and if he says it's not worth hearing, his decision is final.

The standard of review is similar to the one the trial judge used to reduce Louise Woodward's conviction from murder to manslaughter.

/DNRTFA
 
2012-07-16 09:56:10 AM
This will hurt him with is base. Not enough killing.
 
2012-07-16 09:57:11 AM
Romney haunted by past of trying to help convicted people.
 
2012-07-16 09:57:27 AM
RINO!
 
2012-07-16 09:59:22 AM
Well, he just lost Texas.
 
2012-07-16 09:59:34 AM

bmongar: This will hurt him with is base. Not enough killing.


Teabaggers: Where are the fast track provisions for killing the minorities?
 
2012-07-16 10:00:45 AM
It's not surprising. There is a reason Romney isn't trying to run on his experience as a Governor. . . .being good at that kind of thing doesn't play well with Republicans.
 
2012-07-16 10:00:57 AM
California might overturn it this year i heard
 
2012-07-16 10:01:24 AM

-- Required conclusive scientific evidence, such as DNA, linking the suspect to the crime scene.
-- Mandated a scientific review of the physical evidence before an execution was carried out.
-- Established a "no doubt" standard which meant that even after a guilty verdict was rendered, the death penalty could not be imposed if any juror harbored the slightest doubt about the defendant's guilt.
-- Required an automatic review by the Supreme Judicial Court.
-- Barred the execution of anyone who was younger than 18 at the time of the crime.
-- Required the creation of a list of "capital case qualified" defense attorneys to represent any defendant facing the death penalty.

Sooo... science and bleeding heart liberalism being applied before we just chuck somebody in the chair and shoot 'em up with toxic chemicals?

Yea, this will go over real well in the bible belt. If there's one thing Christ-lovin' southerners in the "moral majority" hate more than the queers it's ivory tower libs like Romney getting in the way of their revenge killings.
 
2012-07-16 10:01:25 AM
Why would this be surprising? This is BEFORE he had to appeal to the nutjobs.
 
2012-07-16 10:01:41 AM
Ooooh man. "The Base" isn't gonna like that. The idea of sending a black mentally-retarded minor to the electric chair gives them erections.
 
2012-07-16 10:01:56 AM
RINO!!!
 
2012-07-16 10:02:26 AM
At one point he was pro-choice, pro-Romneycare, sensible in death penalty matters. What will we find out next in his not so conservative life?
 
2012-07-16 10:02:55 AM

sprawl15: Romney haunted by past of trying to help convicted people.


And yet he'll turn around and rape and pillage companies for profit.

*headisfulloffark.jpg*
 
2012-07-16 10:03:47 AM

dywed88: Why would this be surprising? This is BEFORE he had to appeal to the nutjobs.


I'm sure he'll try to explain it away that he was influenced by the liberalism in the water & air in MA. Since he's gotten out of the state he's been able to "detox" and he's much better now.
 
2012-07-16 10:04:42 AM

dywed88: Why would this be surprising? This is BEFORE he had to appeal to the nutjobs.


He doesn't have to appeal to the nutjobs. In fact, at this point, the only way republicans have a chance long term is if one of two things happen:

1. The nutjobs finally actually follow through on their increasingly violent rhetoric and really do start shooting people AND somehow wind up winning the war they start.

2. One of their few remaining sane candidates like Romney steps up to the podium and says in a very public and blunt way "Dear 20 percenter racist idiots, fark you. I'm running to represent the country, you people are nuts, go to hell I'm not going to pander to you lunatics anymore."

And #1 just ain't gonna happen. The winning part, I mean. I don't' have any doubt that they could actually start shooting people they disagree with (in larger numbers than they have been, anyway).
 
2012-07-16 10:05:27 AM
Or you could save the money on those endless reviews and just not execute people.

But that wouldn't satisfy the bloodlusts of the masses, would it?
 
2012-07-16 10:05:29 AM

TV's Vinnie: Ooooh man. "The Base" isn't gonna like that. The idea of sending a black mentally-retarded minor to the electric chair gives them erections.


And Rick Perry is sitting on the sidelines because he could not remember that third dept to dissolve...
 
2012-07-16 10:06:02 AM
Well, though that's nice to hear from a purely humanitarian standpoint, good luck getting the pro-life base to sign-off on your not pro-automatic-death stance.
 
2012-07-16 10:07:04 AM

Wendy's Chili: Or you could save the money on those endless reviews and just not execute people.

But that wouldn't satisfy the bloodlusts of the masses, would it?


If only the masses realized it was cheaper to let someone rot in prison. WHAR TEA PARTY ON MORATORIUM WHAR?
 
2012-07-16 10:07:45 AM
No sense killing potential workers for private prisons.
 
2012-07-16 10:07:57 AM
"I'm a Republican. I just seem liberal because I believe hurricanes are caused by changes in barometric pressure, not by gay marriage."

Romney just seems liberal because not all of his past positions are pants-on-head. Of course, the problem manifests when he takes a problem, strips off its pants, then wears those problem-pants on his head. Proudly. For weeks at a time. And when Dave Axelrod or Candy Crowley or anyone not Mitt Romney or Ed Gillespie asks what those pants are and why they're on Mitt's head, Romney attacks Obama for attacking outsourced women and claims that he (Romney) invented pants while working at the Bain Olympics. And he got a $50,000 tax credit for it.
 
2012-07-16 10:08:15 AM
Oh no his base isn't going to like it!! Unless Romney literally kills a baby unicorn on live television "his base" is going to vote for him.
 
2012-07-16 10:08:20 AM

ha-ha-guy: bmongar: This will hurt him with is base. Not enough killing.

Teabaggers: Where are the fast track provisions for killing the minorities?


Funny coming from the party of "The President can kill US Citizens without trial"
 
2012-07-16 10:08:59 AM

dywed88: Why would this be surprising? This is BEFORE he had to appeal to the nutjobs.


This was put forward to burnish his bagger credentials. He was trying to BRING BACK the death penalty.

"We gotta find a way to kill people. We just gotta!"
 
2012-07-16 10:09:29 AM

rudemix: At one point he was pro-choice, pro-Romneycare, sensible in death penalty matters. What will we find out next in his not so conservative life?


Romneybot can be reprogrammed for different behaviors.
 
2012-07-16 10:09:37 AM

Dr Dreidel: "I'm a Republican. I just seem liberal because I believe hurricanes are caused by changes in barometric pressure, not by gay marriage."

Romney just seems liberal because not all of his past positions are pants-on-head. Of course, the problem manifests when he takes a problem, strips off its pants, then wears those problem-pants on his head. Proudly. For weeks at a time. And when Dave Axelrod or Candy Crowley or anyone not Mitt Romney or Ed Gillespie asks what those pants are and why they're on Mitt's head, Romney attacks Obama for attacking outsourced women and claims that he (Romney) invented pants while working at the Bain Olympics. And he got a $50,000 tax credit for it.


That man (basically David Frum) should be put behind 3 feet of steel. He's an endangered species. A sane Republican. Hell, I am starting to be convinced that the only ones left are those who hit the wrong button at the DMV.
 
2012-07-16 10:10:48 AM
Too lazy to Google at the moment, but how many prisoners were executed during Romney's term as Gov? Did he give a stay of execution to anyone?
 
2012-07-16 10:11:21 AM

I alone am best: Oh no his base isn't going to like it!! Unless Romney literally kills a baby unicorn on live television "his base" is going to vote for him.


Or stay home. Or crap themselves in a retirement home and have the acidic juices of diarrhea eat away at their flesh. Or they'll be incarcerated in Northern Florida. Or they'll be out hunting squirrels. Or they'll be having sex with their cousins.

I think you underestimate Romney's base / your kinfolk.
 
2012-07-16 10:11:41 AM
damn liberal
 
2012-07-16 10:12:29 AM

Splinshints: dywed88: Why would this be surprising? This is BEFORE he had to appeal to the nutjobs.

He doesn't have to appeal to the nutjobs. In fact, at this point, the only way republicans have a chance long term is if one of two things happen:

1. The nutjobs finally actually follow through on their increasingly violent rhetoric and really do start shooting people AND somehow wind up winning the war they start.

2. One of their few remaining sane candidates like Romney steps up to the podium and says in a very public and blunt way "Dear 20 percenter racist idiots, fark you. I'm running to represent the country, you people are nuts, go to hell I'm not going to pander to you lunatics anymore."

And #1 just ain't gonna happen. The winning part, I mean. I don't' have any doubt that they could actually start shooting people they disagree with (in larger numbers than they have been, anyway).


He did have to appeal to them a few months ago in the primaries in order to get the nomination. Even if he could draw enough moderates away from Obama to win, coming out and saying "I lied repeatedly to get the nomination and am going back on everything I said" would get him destroyed in the election (and to run as a independent in 2016 if he won)
 
Ant
2012-07-16 10:12:33 AM

Splinshints: dywed88: Why would this be surprising? This is BEFORE he had to appeal to the nutjobs.

He doesn't have to appeal to the nutjobs. In fact, at this point, the only way republicans have a chance long term is if one of two things happen:

1. The nutjobs finally actually follow through on their increasingly violent rhetoric and really do start shooting people AND somehow wind up winning the war they start.

2. One of their few remaining sane candidates like Romney steps up to the podium and says in a very public and blunt way "Dear 20 percenter racist idiots, fark you. I'm running to represent the country, you people are nuts, go to hell I'm not going to pander to you lunatics anymore."

And #1 just ain't gonna happen. The winning part, I mean. I don't' have any doubt that they could actually start shooting people they disagree with (in larger numbers than they have been, anyway).


I doubt #2 is gonna happen either. For some reason, there's a perceived need to get the support of the nutjobs, even if it is not necessary in reality, as evidenced by R-Money's nomination.
 
2012-07-16 10:12:40 AM

Klivian: Too lazy to Google at the moment, but how many prisoners were executed during Romney's term as Gov? Did he give a stay of execution to anyone?


Zero. Nobody's been executed in Massachusetts since the 1940s.
 
2012-07-16 10:14:49 AM

Pro Zack: ha-ha-guy: bmongar: This will hurt him with is base. Not enough killing.

Teabaggers: Where are the fast track provisions for killing the minorities?

Funny coming from the party of "The President can kill US Citizens without trial"


Why do you believe that American citizens fighting for the enemy on a battlefield should be treated differently than any other enemy soldier? Would you say that American citizens who were killed in battle while fighting for the Nazis should not have been killed and deserved a civilian trial in the United States? Why?
 
2012-07-16 10:15:09 AM

BunkoSquad: Klivian: Too lazy to Google at the moment, but how many prisoners were executed during Romney's term as Gov? Did he give a stay of execution to anyone?

Zero. Nobody's been executed in Massachusetts since the 1940s.


Interesting that he felt it needed to be addressed then. Any death row pardons?
 
2012-07-16 10:16:29 AM
What might be good for one state isn't necessarily good for the entire country. You can't necessarily extrapolate a policy platform at a federal level from someone's history at a state level. The circumstances are entirely different.
 
2012-07-16 10:18:02 AM
Romney gave us socialist healthcare, empathy for murderers, and profits on abortions.

He's the libbyist lib who ever libbed.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-07-16 10:19:38 AM
Zero. Nobody's been executed in Massachusetts since the 1940s.

Men were sentenced to death at least into the 1960s, but the Supreme Court and Mike Dukakis kept them out of the chair. Kendall Square has a memorial plaque for a murdered police officer (Lawrence Gorman, if Google serves me). His killer was sentenced to die in the 1960s, but lived out his life in prison.
 
2012-07-16 10:20:01 AM
Created a commission to review complaints and investigate errors.

Romney favors death panels!!!
 
2012-07-16 10:20:14 AM
"Sensible"? Not so much. FTA:

-- Established a "no doubt" standard which meant that even after a guilty verdict was rendered, the death penalty could not be imposed if any juror harbored the slightest doubt about the defendant's guilt.

WTF? If there is any reasonable doubt, they shouldn't be convicted in the first place. What are they looking for, irrational doubts? Imagine there is one schizophrenic one the jury who manages to keep a sicko alive because he thinks alien brain control machines influenced the killer's state of mind. Are all murder suspects going to ask for a crazy person to be on their jury to add an element of irrational doubt?

As for the rest of it, special "capital case qualified" attorneys operating at the public expense, new commission, extra trials, supreme court review of all cases... sounds damned expensive. It also sounds unlikely that anyone would ever actually be executed, just lots of money spent. Is this what small government is supposed to look like?

At some point, it's a lot cheaper and less hassle just to keep them in solitary the rest of their lives. This is all way past that point. It is the opposite of efficiency.
 
2012-07-16 10:20:19 AM

Klivian: Interesting that he felt it needed to be addressed then. Any death row pardons?


From a quick Googling it looks like execution's been pretty much off the table here since 1982. I assume he brought it up because he had national ambitions and knew that much of the Republican base really, REALLY likes killing people.
 
2012-07-16 10:20:30 AM

Shaggy_C: What might be good for one state isn't necessarily good for the entire country. You can't necessarily extrapolate a policy platform at a federal level from someone's history at a state level. The circumstances are entirely different.


That seems to be what they run with these days.

JUST BECAUSE I DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING AT THE STATE LEVEL DOESN'T MEAN OBAMACARE IS GOOD! I mean, I can't tell you WHY Obamacare would be bad other than it's being enacted by a socialist!
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-07-16 10:23:10 AM
What are they looking for, irrational doubts?

The bill was a political move. He wanted a death penalty law on the books as an accomplishment and he wanted to preempt some of the usual arguments against it. I don't think it would have been effective, even by comparison with the weak laws the rest of the country has. If you want effective capital punishment in this country you need to amend the constitution or the U.S. Supreme Court.
 
2012-07-16 10:25:29 AM
Wow this governor Romney guy sounds pretty swell. He should run for president or something.
 
2012-07-16 10:25:32 AM

qorkfiend: Would you say that American citizens who were killed in battle while fighting for the Nazis should not have been killed and deserved a civilian trial in the United States? Why?


false equivalency.
 
2012-07-16 10:25:35 AM
Massachusetts does not have a death penalty. We almost did a few years ago.

There was perfect Nancy Grace storm. The case that brought the term "NAMBLA" into the lexicon.

Two men kidnapped, raped, and murdered a little boy. The little boy was from a working class Irish family, adorable, and the papers all used his little league photo. His dad was a firefighter or iron worker or something, and he was active in the Catholic Church.

The men were career criminals and minorities. They drove the boy out of the state and dumped his body in a storage container in a river.

A vote in the Massachusetts house to allow the death penalty, naming it after the child, was quickly raised. It looked like it would pass, but a representative who had been on record as being for the death penalty changed his vote, stating that were making laws based on fear and anger, and that was never good.

The law was defeated and that guy lost his seat. I wish I remember his name. He was an actual leader, not just a politician.
 
2012-07-16 10:25:41 AM

coeyagi: Shaggy_C: What might be good for one state isn't necessarily good for the entire country. You can't necessarily extrapolate a policy platform at a federal level from someone's history at a state level. The circumstances are entirely different.

That seems to be what they run with these days.

JUST BECAUSE I DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING AT THE STATE LEVEL DOESN'T MEAN OBAMACARE IS GOOD! I mean, I can't tell you WHY Obamacare would be bad other than it's being enacted by a socialist!


Yep. Has anyone attempted to explain exactly why it's OK for Mass. but not OK for the rest of the country? Just curious...
 
2012-07-16 10:26:33 AM
I bet if pressed he would claim to be much more bloodthirsty. There were a lot of arguably sensible policies enacted during his formative years, none of which he supports any more and all of which he disavows...retroactively.
 
2012-07-16 10:27:26 AM
Obama should do a speech praising Romney for this action, high lighting how fair and progressive each of the points that Romney did.
 
2012-07-16 10:29:08 AM

what_now: The law was defeated and that guy lost his seat. I wish I remember his name. He was an actual leader, not just a politician.


John Slattery. Story about the vote.
 
Displayed 50 of 88 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report