General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHolder to Boston: #%^* you.
We run a civilized city here: only 33% of Bostonians want the imprisoned Bomber Brother to be killed for his crime.
You'd think Holder would respect the wishes of the very people that were the target of the attack, right? But, no, gotta kill. Probably afraid of the mean things Fox "News" would say otherwise.
Feh. I'm in a really foul mood tonight.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
quinnox
(20,600 posts)He is barely a notch above Ashcroft. That Obama has such loyalty to this asshole is a sad reflection of his policies.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)Attacking medical marijuana? giving Wall Street a free pass? Keeping Governor Siegelman in jail? Do tell.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)a state with a Republican legislature.
Or one of the DOMA plaintiffs.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)
JustAnotherGen
(31,780 posts)Won the internet with this! 
11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)This is definitely one of the latter. Well done!
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)on behalf of the people they are trying to disinfranchise. Hder is a hero to Texas Democrats.
nikto
(3,284 posts)Uh...He looks good in a suit.
He...um...likes little puppies and kittens, I'm pretty sure.
He's got a cool mustache, in an era when many mustaches fail.
He looks great in a suit. Really, he does.
Hey, this stuff counts!
Scuba
(53,475 posts)
Laelth
(32,017 posts)And the Supreme Court put an end to that by gutting the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
On every other issue of which I am aware, Holder has been a Republican Attorney General. If I wanted a Republican Attorney General, I would have voted for McCain or Romney.
-Laelth
cali
(114,904 posts)
Laelth
(32,017 posts)Nice to see you.
-Laelth
KeepItReal
(7,769 posts)No criminal prosecutions just fines...most of which end up being tax deductible for the financial institutions
warrant46
(2,205 posts)gLibDem
(130 posts)
DragonBorn
(175 posts)He's one of the worst attorney generals we've had in recent memory.
Operation Fast and Furious
Targeting of dispensaries
The partnering with the Sinaloa Cartel
HSBC bank financial settlements for laundering drug and terrorist money
That's just what I remember off the top of my head....
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)1000words
(7,051 posts)You'll feel better.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Because he's under those extremely harsh SAMs (which I consider unConstitutuional, but I'm not Holder. Feh.), we really haven't heard from his defense attorneys - we've only heard one side.
I covered enough court cases in my day to know that a case isn't always exactly what law enforcement tells you.
That said, he could be guilty. I just see some holes no one has answered.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)Disgusting decision.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)I am against the death penalty, without exception. The younger the defendant, the even worse it is.
I don't think I've ever seen anything that makes me "sick to my soul." Strange thing to ask.
How does it make your soul feel?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)but this is one candlelight vigil I'll be skipping.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)including that poor family?
Liberal_Dog
(11,075 posts)I am not exactly sure what you have to do with Mr. Pitt. 
MH1
(17,573 posts)according to an article I read.
Personally, I'm categorically anti death penalty. But I don't get too twisted up over a case like this. Unfortunately it's accepted practice in the country generally (even if not in Boston). There doesn't seem too much doubt of guilt in this case, and it truly was a heinous crime. I wouldn't pick the DP if it were up to me, but if we're ever going to use it, this is the kind of case where it should apply.
And if I were basing my decision on a vote of people's feelings on it (which I wouldn't be since I'm categorically against it), I would be more interested in the victims' families' opinions than Boston at large.
DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)Is that going to be on the table? I have nothing but empathy for a family that has lost a loved one, but they probably aren't the most objective people to be deciding public policy. Vengeance should not be an aspect of our penal system.
MH1
(17,573 posts)I wouldn't be taking a poll if it were up to me.
I was responding to the point the OP attempts to make that this is against the wishes of most Bostonians. Personally I don't think it should be up to a poll of anyone.
That said, I'm not going to shed many tears for this bomber. I'm against the DP because of what it does to society, and the potential for innocents to be killed by the state. I don't think the latter is an issue here, and unfortunately the former's ship has already sailed long ago.
I guess what I'm saying is, yeah it's an unfortunate decision, but not the worst thing that happened in the world today. And with that I'm out of here; more worthwhile things to concern myself with.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)And, No 5 of the non-statuatory aggravating factors gave me pause.
It's said, "Shows Lack of Remorse."
Correct me here, but didn't Dzhokhar Tsarnaev plead "not guilty?" As such, he is currently saying he did NOT commit the crime for which he is accused; therefore, how can he feel remorse for something he didn't do?
Which brings me to the second point: reporters, social media, the average citizens have pretty much convicted this guy. When I was reporting on crime, the suspect was, well, a suspect until he either entered a plea or was found guilty by a jury of his peers. All I see on my Twitter feed regarding this issue is how he should be bombed or burned or shot - not a word about the fact that he's not actually been found guilty, yet.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)No one has much access to him because of the SAMs. He's also probably pretty medicated, so that would dull his empathy.
(Those SAMs are horrid, btw. I find them highly unConstitutional. This defendant might as well be in Gitmo).
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Pleading "not guilty" is proof that one lacks remorse.
I hope not!
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)I'm literally scratching my head at that one.
gLibDem
(130 posts)I mean if you've done nothing wrong you've got nothing to hide? Right?
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)No, pleading the fifth does NOT mean you're guilty.
Damn, I wish we still taught civics in school. I know you "get it," by your question.
gLibDem
(130 posts)Civics died years ago. It went so quietly nobody noticed. We probably should have.
I'm ashamed of my generation. We let the country, and the world, got to hell in a hand basket.
What's a hand basket, anyway?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Manny is getting more and more entertaining by the day.
I just can't wait for him to take President Obama or Holder to task for saying "Good Morning"!
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)is endemic on Boston-area Intertubes.
HangOnKids
(4,291 posts)
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Will and Manny are one in the same?
That explains a lot.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Do you
A) Support the death penalty
B) Support the death penalty in this particular instance
C) You're just showing support for Holder's decision because he works for Obama
This isn't a gotcha question, and I'm not trying to be combative in this case (I admit we clashed on another thread). I just would really like to understand your and geek tragedy's position because it's difficult to tell.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)oppose the suggestion that public opinion polling should drive prosecutorial decisions.
gLibDem
(130 posts)I don't support the death penalty in this case.
I don't support Holder's position because he works for President Obama.
Any questions?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I do not support the death penalty ... not even in this case ... but it's not my call, regardless of whom is the President. And the penalty for a crime should never, ever be based on polling ... as a Black man, that knows history, I know that this country applied that particular sentencing scheme far to often.
Desert805
(392 posts)Cue the "is this real life?" Kid.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Ok...
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)the city of Boston is though. People pounding nails through their own palms.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Oh the irony!
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Or must it always be about the DUer?
Did someone train you to post that way?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)it's about spinning a rather predictable prosecutorial decision into "zomg Holder hates Boston so much he's gonna piss on the grass at Fenway."
As if Holder should consider opinion polls in Boston when making such decisions.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)The issue is the propriety of seeking the death penalty at all, and specifically when the people who lived through the attack are against it.
The issue is also the feds using their jurisdiction to get death in a state that bans it.
Your last line is a good example of addressing the issue. The rest is the typical DUer-focused distraction.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)That is the entire point of the criminal justice system. If 90% of the local public were to favor the death penalty! would that make the decision any more proper?
Is Holder telling the local community to go fuck itself every time the DoJ goes against local opinion?
morningfog
(18,115 posts)No, his decision would not be more proper, but it would at least be in line with the affected community. I think anytime Holder recommends and seeks death in any state where the death penalty has been banned, he is saying fuck you to that state.
It has taken decades of activism to get death penalty statutes off the books. When a state has been successful and joined the civilized world, it is particularly abhorrent for the DOJ to step in and seek to kill.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)I don't think federal law and policy should vary state to state.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)but prosecutors get to ask that question. When the juror says they are anti-DP, the prosecutor will use a challenge and get rid of the jury. The pool will be winnowed down to those who are not anti-DP.
You don't think federal law and policy should vary state to state? Do you think the feds should go after marijuana users/distributors in states where it is legalized/decriminalized or quit going after them in other states?
I think there are certain areas where states' decisions should influence federal policy.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)The penalty for blowing up Bostonians shouldn't differ from blowing up Oklahomans under federal statutes.
I think allowing local political opinions to creep into prosecutorial decisions is Pandora's box. Should we not have federal hate crime prosecutions in states that refuse to enact hate crimes laws?
morningfog
(18,115 posts)This is all a little off point anyway. Controlled substances and hate crimes are statutory.
Seeking death is a discretionary decision by Holder. He didn't have to make it. It isn't required by statute. It wasn't required by statute for Tim McViegh either.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)sentencing. As I said, we don't want federal prosecutors trying to win local popularity contests.
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)It's not Citizens of Boston v Tsarnev, or Bombing Victims v Tsarnev.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)Most times actually a prosecutor will respect the wishes of the victim's family when it comes to the death penalty. If the family is very much against the death penalty, the prosecutor will usually not pursue it.
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)No clue at all. It is not arbitrary. It is not a coin toss. It is not decided on people's feelings. You figure it out.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)I can take more issues with it, if you'd like.
The fact is that most Bostonians are against the death penalty.
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)Because that is how the Federal death penalty is done.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Please link to the statute that says the death penalty must be sought if x criteria are met.
That would be helpful.
Thanks.
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)All I found was 18 U.S. CODE § 3592 - MITIGATING AND AGGRAVATING FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINING WHETHER A SENTENCE OF DEATH IS JUSTIFIED, which lists factors to consider, but I don't see a formula that determines whether or not killing should proceed.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)18 U.S.C.A. § 3593
§ 3593. Special hearing to determine whether a sentence of death is justified
Currentness
(a) Notice by the government.--If, in a case involving an offense described in section 3591, the attorney for the government believes that the circumstances of the offense are such that a sentence of death is justified under this chapter, the attorney shall, a reasonable time before the trial or before acceptance by the court of a plea of guilty, sign and file with the court, and serve on the defendant, a notice--
(1) stating that the government believes that the circumstances of the offense are such that, if the defendant is convicted, a sentence of death is justified under this chapter and that the government will seek the sentence of death; and
(2) setting forth the aggravating factor or factors that the government, if the defendant is convicted, proposes to prove as justifying a sentence of death.
The factors for which notice is provided under this subsection may include factors concerning the effect of the offense on the victim and the victim's family, and may include oral testimony, a victim impact statement that identifies the victim of the offense and the extent and scope of the injury and loss suffered by the victim and the victim's family, and any other relevant information. The court may permit the attorney for the government to amend the notice upon a showing of good cause.
Then it goes to the aggravating factors. It is purely discretionary whether Holder believes seeking the death penalty it justified. There is no crime that carries a mandatory minimum of death. Holder chose to seek death. He did not have to.
lpbk2713
(42,736 posts)And then others will be lining up to follow in the two bombers' footsteps.
Warpy
(111,141 posts)that said the DP has a long way to go to be applied in this case. Apparently a lot of lawyers have stepped up to defend the kid. I think they'd be hard pressed to find a jury in the city (or much of the rest of the state) that would vote for the DP.
It's a civilized city, albeit a tough one, and a lot of people probably see what I saw, a drifting kid whose only family was a nutcase elder brother bent on suicidal glory. Take the brother out of his life, he'd probably still be hanging around on Somerville street corners, doing some small time dope sales.
They'd have to figure out how to move the trial venue to Florida or Texas to be sure of getting the DP verdict they want.
DrewFlorida
(1,096 posts)Not because I think it should be abolished, rather because I feel it is used far too often and should be reserved for the most heinous crimes. I feel that this young terrorist fits the bill for capital punishment!
I must add a disclaimer at this point, I'm originally from Boston and had many friends and relatives within a short distance of the explosions, so maybe I'm not the most impartial person to make that decision.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)But he A.) thinks this investigation was rushed into judgment and B.) hates the death penalty despite the fact he had family at the Marathon that day.
Two young people were tortured over days and killed by several teens/young adults in my own city and I wouldn't have wanted to serve on a DP jury for their trials, even though one of the victims grew up a hop, skip and a jump from me.
cali
(114,904 posts)look, you support capital punishment under certain circumstances, just like all the other people who support it.
I don't support it ever. ever. fucking ever. it disgusts the hell out of me to give the state that power.
you want to support the practice of state sponsored killing? Fine, but don't claim you're anti-dp.
DrewFlorida
(1,096 posts)Do you somehow think you are my moral superior because you "don't support it ever. ever. fucking ever.".
I can tell you one thing, your rude way of discussing the issue surely is not convincing me to look at it from a different point of view.
So let me get this straight, you are not necessarily against ending someone's life, you just don't want the government to have the decision making authority?
cali
(114,904 posts)like you do.
And no, I'm completely against killing. that's WHY I oppose the dp- and a hundred other subsidiary reasons.
I don't think I'm your "moral superior". I don't know you. And it sure as hell is your right to believe what you wish- just as it's mine.
I believe that the dp is barbaric and wrong on multiple levels, from the practical to the philosophical.
And honestly, one poster on DU shouldn't make you did in. think for yourself.
DrewFlorida
(1,096 posts)Your first post said that your position against DP was your disgust for giving that kind of power to the government.
This is exactly the problem with atempting to have intelligent discussion of an issue, too many people want to make every issue into "all or nothing" issues, black or white with no grey in between, no nuance, no area for discussion. The extremes on both sides say you have to be completely against the death penalty, or, completely for the death penalty. They say you have to be completely for abortion in all cases, or, completely against it in all cases. They say you have to be completely for gun control, or, completely against it. They say you have to be completely for market regulations, or, completely against it. They say you have to be completely in agreement with all of America's wars, or, completely against them.
This in a nut shell, is exactly what is wrong with political discourse, not only between republicans and Liberals, but also here on DU between Liberals and Liberals. The premise seems to be, if you don't agree with me on every aspect of every detail then your point of view is worthless.
cali
(114,904 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)tell you.
gLibDem
(130 posts)Sometimes the Administration does what it actually believes in.
former9thward
(31,936 posts)As recently as last week, Holder emphasized that his opposition to the death penalty is due in part to practical concerns — what he sees as failures in the legal system.
"The problem is that in too many places, lawyers who are defending poor people don't have adequate resources to do a good job," Holder said in an appearance at the University of Virginia last Thursday. "You end up with these miscarriages of justice."
"It's really one of the reasons why I am personally opposed to the death penalty," Holder added. "As good as our system is, it's ultimately a system that is filled with men and women who are well intentioned but who make mistakes. And as horrible as it is for somebody to be put in jail for crimes that they did not commit, it is obviously not as bad as a situation where somebody is executed for a crime that he or she did not commit."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/30/death-penalty-boston-bombing_n_4694296.html
gLibDem
(130 posts)TheMathieu
(456 posts)But sentences are not decided by polling the communities in which heinous crimes are committed.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)So what does that have to do with being the "first black AG?"
Never heard of this particular meme, myself.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)It goes something like this: In order to avoid right-wing accusations that they are showing >>gasp<< "LIBERAL" tendencies they have to crack down harder than any Republican would on laws pushed by Republicans that regulate morality amongst the poor like gambling and drugs.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)So what does that have to do with being the "first black AG?"
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)As if they aren't already.
They wrote up "Articles of Impeachment" for his refusal to make their fake "scandals" official.
BeyondGeography
(39,346 posts)Asinine.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)THAT is "asinine".
ESPECIALLY since it was exposed as yet another made up non-scandal.
DemocraticWing
(1,290 posts)I don't care what he did before, but the death penalty is nothing more than an additional death that we must all bear responsibility before. I pray that one day we have a justice system that enforces the mercy that most of us believes in. Life in prison, not murder, is the correct sentence for the accused man's crimes.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)following the Constitution's protections as outlined in amendments IV - VIII.
On a wholly different subject, I think if I had been in Boston and seen who did that crime, I would have made like Gregory Peck when confronting a rabid dog in a dusty street.
seaglass
(8,171 posts)citizens of MA are against the DP - no respect.
Blue_Adept
(6,393 posts)If he didn't put in for the death penalty, the rest of the country and republicans would look at him like he's weak on terror.
Yeah, I know.
As a MA resident myself all my life, I still find myself going back to the concept that the death penalty is appropriate for those that go outside the bounds of what society should be. But that's a classical view that I don't quite hold the same way as I did in my youth.
I do find myself largely aligned with most (but not all) of my fellow locals in that they don't want the death penalty, or at least aren't seeking it. It's been curious watching which local friends on Facebook are pleased by it, their connection to the event and their own leanings.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)I'm the Tennessee wife of a Massachusetts husband and we both knew this would happen while both knowing it shouldn't.
I, for one, would like to know his side of the story before we go storming off on his guilt. The SAMs has restricted him from telling it.
However, if he IS guilty, why kill him? Killing someone to show that killing is wrong is what? Hypocritical.
randome
(34,845 posts)
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
lapislzi
(5,762 posts)A DP sentence has to be unanimous. That might be hard to achieve in Massachusetts, which has no DP. I'm going to trust a jury on this one.
aikoaiko
(34,162 posts)If it started off as life in prison, then he could plea deal to life with parole.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)aikoaiko
(34,162 posts)But I bet it is with full disclosure.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Does he take his chances or just melt because the LE and media says he is?
soundsgreat
(125 posts)with a plea deal - shut up, forego your right to get a trial, and you can keep your life.
aikoaiko
(34,162 posts)He's got choices.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)
FSogol
(45,446 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I imagine it would be a rather bizarre country that predicates its judicial sentencing on polling data...
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)bullwinkle428
(20,628 posts)at all, considering the zeal with which she went after Aaron Swartz.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)This is true in the same way that the same was true on 9/11/01. The attack occurred at the World Trade Center in NY, and the Pentagon, but it was an attack on the United States, in total. In fact, an earlier version of the 9/11 plan included suicide plane attacks in other cities as well.
The Boston Bombers also planned to attack outside Boston. They also planned to attack Times Square.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/25/us/boston-attack/
The Boston Bombers were not trying to settle a score with the city of Boston, or the state of Massachusetts.
They were carrying out attacks on the United States. The marathon in Boston was convenient. They were not specifically targeting the citizens of Boston, they were targeting Americans who would be participating in the marathon.
Now, I'd rather see this guy spend the rest of his life in prison. But screaming about how Holder said FU to the city of Boston because he's not using polling data from Boston to make this decision is ridiculous.
Lost_Count
(555 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)He chose this. He chose barbarism rather than civility.
Lost_Count
(555 posts)Discretion allows him to choose the view that to not remove this guy from the gene pool is barbarous and a form of injustice.
It's a pretty easy rule to follow... Take other people's lives in a malicious manner with forethought and planning and your own life is forfeit. There's no coming back from that and there shouldn't be. There is no "making it better" or reform that can equal the lives and limbs lost.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)and an increasing number of the states. My opinion shared by the civilized world. My opinion to which all courts in the United States will eventually come to agree with.
Lost_Count
(555 posts)So majority rule is the standard for what's right now?
How interesting... Do go on...
morningfog
(18,115 posts)You are grasping at straws now. And your return here will be short lived.
Lost_Count
(555 posts)One, I'm confident, would be discarded the moment that 51% of the populace disagrees with you.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Move along when the crowd is right, stand alone when the crowd is wrong.
treestar
(82,383 posts)It always has.
uponit7771
(90,301 posts)... what the public in an area wanted?!?!?!
Come on manny, just be yourself k?
tia