Comments on: State Looks For Answers After Supreme Court Ruling In Nine Mile Road Murder

By: Brenda fuqua

Brenda fuqua — Sat, 23 Jan 2016 07:47:58 +0000

Really????! This guy totally butchered that woman and left her in the freezer like an afterthought. She was somebody’s mother, wife or child and they will be traumatized the rest of their life for what happened to her. He deserves the death penalty with no regrets. Prayers for her family and also for his, I’m sure they are devastated too.

By: Kathy

Kathy — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:24:34 +0000

He deserves the death penalty.

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:27:21 +0000

REGARDING:
“What, low IQ ? I don’t see other morons stabbing people to death so many times the M.E. shouldn’t even have been able to count.”

He is dumb but not mentally retarded (morally? Yes, mentally? No).
Under the idea that a person must understand the charges against him, the Supreme Court ruled that a person with a IQ below 70 is unable to know the difference between right and wrong and that punishing such a person would be wrong.

Later they decided executing a murderer with an IQ of 75 was too close to executing one with a 70 because IQ tests aren’t really that accurate. (We all have known people with IQs much below 70 who DO understand murder is wrong, but that is neither here nor there; the Supreme Court is never wrong even when it is.)

David for painless, nonpharmaceutical
95% nitrogen, 5% carbon dioxide mixtures

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:09:15 +0000

REGARDING:
“whether juries’ decisions about imposing death sentences should be unanimous, as is required for convictions. Among the 31 states that have capital punishment, Florida is one of only three states that do not require unanimous decisions regarding death sentences”

The Supremes have already ruled that the death penalty sentence need not be unanimous as long as a jury has more than 6 jurors.
Of course, they could always overrule themselves again.

The first time they ruled that the death penalty was unconstitutional, part of the reasoning behind it was the perceived capricious nature of sentencing based on the fact that two people who were convicted of the same crime could receive very different sentences.

The states responded by rewriting the laws to make conviction of certain crimes ALWAYS receive the death penalty, with no consideration of extenuating and aggravating circumstances.

So, even though they had previously required certainty in sentencing, they overruled themselves and required UNCERTAINTY with sentencing affected by those same aggravating and extenuating circumstances which judges and juries had previously used. Note that this makes the ability of the attornirs far more important because they have to sway juries with tales of how excusable or horrible the crime was.

David for no living murderers

By: chris in Molino

chris in Molino — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:47:29 +0000

I don’t understand at all. If you commit a crime so horrible that it’s possible to receive a death sentance at all, found guilty of said crime, where’s the rub ? There are not many circumstances to mitigate excusing a death sentance in a crime like Hursts. What, low IQ ? I don’t see other morons stabbing people to death so many times the M.E. shouldn’t even have been able to count.
It’s bad enough criminals know their more likely to die of old age than the needle anyway. I suppose things will only get worse just like everything else in our society. Things can only degrade so far before something gives way to total collapse. I feel horrible for the millennium generation.

By: Philip

Philip — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 08:49:23 +0000

It seems that the supreme court does not want the death penalty. But with Thomas and Scalia(the most American supreme court justices) voting for this ruling, maybe Florida needs to change the law making a majority jury the answer. These days with more freaks and weirdos a unamous jury will be hard to get.