« Why Is There So Much Anger In This Country Towards The Government? | Main | New METRO Policy »
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b13369e20133f36674e1970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Less Than One Month Until McDonnell Executes A Mentally Retarded Inmate:
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Travesty of justice, my ass.
Since this happened in my hometown, I've followed this case since the beginning.
Teresa Lewis is not mentally retarded. She bought the shotguns that the killers' used and waited 50 minutes after the shooting to call for rescue crews.
NLS, you're totally wrong on this one. Let her fry.
Posted by: SouthsideCentral | August 29, 2010 at 03:55 PM
I am completely against the death penalty for people that didn't actually pull the trigger.
There is way too much gray area in believing the story of someone who did the killing about the role of someone who did not.
If the prosecution needs the testimony of the trigger-man to get convictions on the others, then they should all get life in prison.
If this was the other way around, and she had testified against the trigger-man, then I wouldn't be complaining.
Posted by: Not Larry Sabato | August 29, 2010 at 04:03 PM
She plead guilty to the crime in question. Plain and simple. Hiring someone to commit a murder is extremely heinous and I couldn't imagine if it was anything less than a capital crime to hire a hitman to kill someone. So far, many people who are familiar with this case and the facts who live in the area aren't crying too many sobs of sympathy for this woman. It's up to a judge and jury to determine if she is retarded or not. There are hired guns in the legal field to where if they are paid enough they'll testify that someone is insane, retarded or anything else. This is not a travesty of justice at all....She is guilty of the crime and should be punished in accordance with our laws. The article was pretty stupid as well with the chaplin talking about "certainty" even in a guilty plea. There is no doubt, to include the defendant that she did what she did.
Also, no need to call Cooch a coward over this. You have a better chance of Cooch asking for a motion to dismiss his health care lawsuit than him coming out on the side of this woman. Finally, he is actually in favor of expanding the death penalty and hasn't spoke out against this aggravating factor in the capital murder statute. Unless the Supreme Court steps in there is no way be alive in another month.
Posted by: DanielK | August 29, 2010 at 04:16 PM
Although, I do want to point out this case shows what a complete liar John Brownlee is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flelzjnEvAU
Posted by: Not Larry Sabato | August 29, 2010 at 04:35 PM
While I understand your principles, you're an idiot if you think any "gray area" applies to this case.
She gots to go.
Posted by: SouthsideCentral | August 29, 2010 at 05:36 PM
Ben,
I am not surprised by the negative reaction to this post. I know that you are opposed to the death penalty and that you hate Cooch. But this is a very weak case for you to make.
In addition to the fact that Lewis bought the murder weapons, as Southside pointed out, former Chaplain Litchfield conveniently forgot to also mention that Lewis offered sex with herself and her 16 year-old daughter to the two contract killers as a further inducement.
I have to agree with DanielK. "Expert witnesses" are often bigger whores than the lawyers who hire them and will say just about anything that they are paid to say. But even the hired witness that the defense brought in could not maintain that Lewis is mentally retarded, only that she has a low IQ that does not reach the threshold of mental retardation.
As to the shooter who changed his testimony, there is a reason why courts treat recanted or modified testimony by convicts with great skepticism. In prison culture, there are few people more despicable than a rat. It is common for those who gave testimony that convicted another person to recant it in a desperate attempt at redemption. That is why you rarely hear of recanted testimony by someone who is not in prison but hear about it so often from convicts.
Comparing Lewis' case with those of exonerated death row inmates is a false association. The facts are not in dispute here. Teresa Lewis traded sex with herself, prostituted her daughter, and offered money to two men to kill her step-son and husband to collect the step-son's life insurance. All the evidence points to the fact that the conspiracy was her idea. It is now her turn to die.
Posted by: HisRoc | August 29, 2010 at 05:42 PM
I am sorry but I just can't get around the heinous fact that the actual people who pulled the trigger got life while Teresa Lewis, regardless of her role, is going to be executed, although she personally did not commit the murder.
Something is badly out of balance in this picture. If you all are so in favor of the death penalty, you at least should favor it for those who actually committed the murder as well as for Ms. Lewis.
After all, they were as motivated by cold blooded self interest as she was. And they quite possibly had higher IQs and were more functional than she was.
Regardless of whether you agree with Ben on the death penalty, this is not real justice.
And this time I agree with Ben, our attorney general is wrong not to speak out or try to do something about this situation.
Posted by: Anonymous Is A Woman | August 29, 2010 at 06:34 PM
AIAW,
This is how our criminal justice system works. It is stacked against The People in favor of the accused. When a conspiracy is involved, the first conspirator who cops a plea gets a break because without his/her testimony it is almost impossible to get a 12-0 vote from a jury.
I agree that all of these cretins deserve death. But, if you had to choose, which is more deserving? The ones who pulled the trigger or the one whom without the motivation the victims would still be alive?
The shooters did not get off here. Life in prison (with no parole in Virginia) is not much of a better situation than death. But the person most responsible for two people being killed will forfeit her life as a result. Makes sense to me.
Posted by: HisRoc | August 29, 2010 at 07:04 PM
Why do you have to lie to make your point? She is not retarded, and no expert has ever testified that she is.
Posted by: Not Bubby | August 29, 2010 at 07:31 PM
His Roc, just because the system is unjust is not an excuse to accept that. In a democracy, we can change the system.
And I am not sure that Teresa Lewis is more deserving of the death penalty than two professional hitman. Let's face it, if they killed for gain for her, they'd do it for anybody else who paid. So your argument still does not convince me that this is in any way justice.
Again, it seems if you are for the death penalty, you would still have to be in favor of applying it equally to all who deserve it. And you just can't argue that the actual triggerman - especially when he was a hired triggerman - is less deserving than Teresa Lewis.
Posted by: Anonymous Is a Woman | August 29, 2010 at 07:58 PM
Actually, only one of the triggermen is serving a life sentence. The other one committed suicide in 2006.
Is it fair? Nope, but I'll take 2 out of 3.
And who knows, the remaining gunman is relatively young, he might get shanked in the shower and we'll have a trifecta.
Posted by: Haywood Jablomi | August 29, 2010 at 08:10 PM
Didn't Bill Clinton take time out of the 1992 campaign to fly home to Arkansas to execute a retarded person? Oh wait, he's a Dem. Sorry.
Posted by: Chubber | August 29, 2010 at 08:10 PM
Haywood, that's disgusting.
Posted by: Not Larry Sabato | August 29, 2010 at 08:20 PM
Karen,
She is not worthy of any sympathy. She pimped out her own daughter in order to have this man killed. I agree they all should have faced death and in my opinion if you contract out a killer you should face a capital offense as well because that is just as heinous that you have to find someone else.
She allowed her daughter to raped in order for this hit to be carried out. Her IQ doesn't put her under the threshold for life and it's be adjudicated by a jury and various federal judges she is intelligent enough to be executed. Cooch won't say anything because his office his probably still representing Virginia in the appeals and anyone who believes that this will be McDonnell's poster case for the death penalty and clemency is sadly divorced from reality.
Posted by: DanielK | August 29, 2010 at 08:26 PM
Also, if she was able to plan all of this details that go into such an event like ending another human beings life which also involved finding to men willing to do it then I really question if her IQ and mental capacity really is as low as they hired professionals who evaluated her argue it is.
Remember, every prisoner is a model inmate when they still have appeals pending and the public on their side.
Lastly and the biggest question: Would Ben still find away to criticize Tom Perriello if he came out against this execution and Hurt didn't? I know it's off the subject but since he's on the "Hate-Perriello Train" I'd be curious.
Posted by: DanielK | August 29, 2010 at 09:16 PM
I think the point is being lost here. Did she pull the trigger? No. Did she conspire? Yes. The Supreme Court struck down a law in Louisiana that allowed for the execution of a child molester because the punishment did not fit the crime. In this case, conspiring to kill is not equitable to killing. I do not believe that the punishment is equitable. Using the excuse "well that's how the system works" is a cop out. Just because the system gives her death does not mean that the system is right, ESPECIALLY when the actually trigger man did not get death. Her mental health is really a side issue. The main point, in my opinion, is that she did not pull the trigger. Is she scum? Yes. Does she deserve to rot in jail forever? Yes. BUT, does conspiring to murder justify the death penalty when the actual trigger man does not get death? Absolutely not.
Posted by: local gop | August 29, 2010 at 09:28 PM
If it was not for her actions that man would still be alive. Plain and simple. That is why hiring a hitman is an aggravating factor, like it should. Simply being a coward or conniving enough to not commit the crime ourself in my opinion is equal to those who committed the murder.
Posted by: DanielK | August 29, 2010 at 09:40 PM
well we can use that excuse for all parties involved that did not get death ie "well had the gunman not pulled the trigger the victim would still be alive today." and that would be fine if everyone got death....but the prosecutor chose to not give the actual murderer death....that's not equitable at all.
causing a death is not grounds for automatic death penalty. if that were the case, all those who drink and drive and kill someone would get the death penalty.
the fact that the prosecutor let the actual gunman off and sought out the death penalty for the person that didnt even pull the trigger is rather disturbing. do we really want a prosecutor letting gunmen off and killing conspirators? who is more dangerous? the person too cowardly to carry out the crime or the one that's heinous enough to pull the trigger for no other reason than money? the gunman had no other reason to kill except money....thats it. no personal connection, no vendetta, just money.
it takes a special kind of twisted mind to kill for money....
Posted by: local gop | August 29, 2010 at 09:53 PM
Which js why the person who caused this death to occur should be put to death. Again, she is the one who started the chain of events that resulted in the death of this man. They didn't find her, she sought out them, provided them the tools to killed and just to top it off pimped out her daughter for extra incentive to the killers.
You are correct, causing death is not enough to warrant the death penalty but out Commonwealth believes, correctly, that hiring a hitman is just as aggravating as any other factor in the capital murder statute. Just like with those who pulled the trigger, and every other attracting factor, her actions caused the death of this man.
She's done. Cooch has made some good decisions so far regarding criminal justice like with the Jens Soering case. He's never come out against this factor in the statute and it's the reason why he holds the position he does regarding the triggerman rule.
Posted by: DanielK | August 29, 2010 at 10:16 PM
local gop,
Comparing the Lewis case with the Supreme Court decision on child rape is a false comparison. The two cases have absolutely nothing in common.
Let me ask you this: if the two trigger men were facing execution and the woman who hired them to do it were not, wouldn't you argue just as vociferously that the two gunmen should be excused from the death penalty?
The problem that you and Ben have is that you categorically oppose the death penalty. You are just using Teresa Lewis' case to manipulate opinion. Unfortunately for you, Lewis is hardly a sympathetic case. Regardless of what happened to her two hired shooters, she is the reason that two innocent people are dead for no other motive than monetary greed.
Posted by: HisRoc | August 29, 2010 at 10:18 PM
I don't oppose the death penalty for people that kill others. The question at hand is whether or not planning a murder is equitable to actually carrying out the murder. In my opinion, it is not.
Posted by: local gop | August 29, 2010 at 10:47 PM
Bro, you are missing the point......Had it not been for her actions the victim would be alive. He would not have been killed because he knew her correct? Yes.....Now, that makes her just as culpable and in my opinion, as well as a majority of others to include the legislature agree with that. She may not have pulled the trigger but she caused the death of that man just like she did. There is no way around that. That is why she'll die very soon.
Posted by: DanielK | August 29, 2010 at 11:00 PM
"Lastly and the biggest question: Would Ben still find away to criticize Tom Perriello if he came out against this execution and Hurt didn't? I know it's off the subject but since he's on the "Hate-Perriello Train" I'd be curious."
Dan- there is nothing I hate more than comments like that. How am I on the hate-Perriello train? Because I am fairly covering the race?
Posted by: Not Larry Sabato | August 30, 2010 at 03:28 AM
She's not mentally retarded. An expert testified to her having an IQ of 72; mental retardation is generally accepted as occurring in people with IQ below 70. Plus, Virginia specifically defines mental retardation as "a disability, originating before the age of 18 years, characterized concurrently by (i) significantly subaverage intellectual functioning as demonstrated by performance on a standardized measure of intellectual functioning administered in conformity with accepted professional practice, that is at least two standard deviations below the mean and (ii) significant limitations in adaptive behavior as expressed in conceptual, social and practical adaptive skills." I think coordination of a hit on a person for insurance money clearly puts someone in the non-retarded category.
This is what you get for quoting someone in Newsweek--literally a worthless liberal rag (it was recently sold for $1 to Dem Rep. Jane Harman's husband).
Posted by: Chubber | August 30, 2010 at 04:49 AM
"The question at hand is whether or not planning a murder is equitable to actually carrying out the murder. In my opinion, it is not."
This is retarded. By such logic, the mob boss who ORDERS a murder is not as responsible as the low-level thug who carries it out. By such logic, the guard at the gas chamber was more culpable for killing Jews than Hitler.
Thank God people like you aren't writing our laws.
Posted by: Valley Indie | August 30, 2010 at 10:33 AM
Wow, if anything this is a prime example of how unhinged NLS gets when the name "Ken cuccinelli" is ever mentioned.
You lose credibility when you keep attacking the same punching-bag over nonsense issues, my friend.
Posted by: A Voter | August 30, 2010 at 12:13 PM
cliche hitler references aside, there is a difference between a mob boss that ordered possibly hundreds of hits and sat at the top of a criminal empire and the case at hand. legally speaking, there is not precedent to establish conspiring to commit 1 murder as a death penalty crime. and we as a civil society should not be making the death penalty more accessible. its not a penalty to be taken lightly and this particular case i think it was misapplied.
Posted by: local gop | August 30, 2010 at 12:15 PM
It could be accept by men and women so quickly. I feel many individuals will agree with you. You might be ideal that we could to not rely on other people. Who we could to rely on is ourself.
Posted by: Creative Recreation | August 30, 2010 at 08:42 PM
Huh?!?
Did some Indian guru just post here?
Posted by: HisRoc | August 30, 2010 at 09:44 PM
Actually, some internet is far more giant than the unaware price. Line strode this school. Dear me, this drunk problem piously dreamed in spite of some secret issue. The gambling is eccentrically resident. Some urban million snorted that result suspiciously. The role has that canadian thing.
Posted by: Retro Jordans | September 06, 2010 at 08:47 PM
Very good information, thank you very much by the article and the quality of your Web site.
Posted by: moncler jeackets | September 27, 2010 at 09:38 PM
Everyone has the life,But not everyone understand life, cherish life. Don't understand life people, The life to him, it is a kind of punishment. So we must love our life.
Posted by: Jordan Retro 5 | October 08, 2010 at 09:32 PM