Did anyone mourn Andrew Cunanan's death?

[babylonsister]

Killed before he saw jail. What would the benefit have been to incarcerate him?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Cunanan

Andrew Phillip Cunanan (August 31, 1969 – July 23, 1997) was an American spree murderer who murdered five people, including fashion designer Gianni Versace, in a cross-country journey during a three-month period in 1997, ending with Cunanan's suicide, at the age of 27. On June 12, 1997, Cunanan became the 449th fugitive to be listed by the FBI on the FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list, and became the first person from San Diego to be placed on that list.

snip//

Murders

The first murder was that of his friend Jeffrey Trail, a former US Naval Officer and propane salesman on April 27, 1997, in Minneapolis, Minnesota. <2> The next victim was architect David Madson, who was found on the east shore of Rush Lake near Rush City, MN after the Minnesota Corrections Association Fishing Tournament on April 29, 1997 with gunshot wounds to the head. Police recognized a connection, as Trail's body had been found in Madson's Minneapolis loft apartment.

Cunanan next drove to Chicago and killed prominent real-estate developer Lee Miglin, 72, on May 4, 1997. Five days later Cunanan, who escaped with Miglin's car, found his fourth victim in Pennsville, New Jersey, at the Finn's Point National Cemetery, killing caretaker William Reese, 45, on May 9, 1997. Cunanan apparently killed him for his pickup truck, while leaving Miglin's car behind. Following this murder, the first of a non-acquaintance, the FBI added him to its Ten Most Wanted list.

While the manhunt focused on Reese's truck, Cunanan hid in plain sight in Miami Beach, Florida, for months between his fourth and fifth murders. He went out mostly to gay nightclubs, and made little attempt to disguise his appearance. He even used his own name to pawn a stolen item, knowing that police routinely check pawn shop records for stolen merchandise. Finally, Cunanan murdered fashion designer Gianni Versace, who was killed on July 15, 1997.

Eight days later, on July 23, 1997, Cunanan committed suicide by gunshot in the upstairs bedroom aboard a Miami houseboat apparently to avoid capture by the police, who finally discovered Reese's stolen truck nearby and obtained tips from neighbors that someone resembling Cunanan was living in the houseboat.

The gun used by Cunanan for some of the murders was a Taurus semi-automatic pistol in .40 S&W caliber, which had been left behind in California by first victim Jeff Trail when he relocated to the Midwest.<2>

[Solon]

1. What's the point of this post, I oppose the death penalty because we cannot undo death...

when mistakes(and/or setups) are made. The Death Penalty is generally applied arbitrarily and usually due to circumstances related to the race of the defendant and/or his or her economic standing in our society. What is with this bullshit appeal to emotion when it should have nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with punishment in our criminal justice system?

Do we really want a return to mob mentality? Where lynchings(all justified, of course) and public hangings, burnings, etc. for a variety of offenses were normal?

[babylonsister]

3. Do you mourn him? Was he 'eligible' to die because of what he did?

I'm not talking about a mob mentality, I'm talking about a bad man who didn't give a shit about who he killed. Should he have been sent to jail instead?

[Occam Bandage]

4. "Should he have been sent to jail instead?"

Yes. In jail, he would be incapable of causing further harm to society.

[provis99]

13. bullshit. He could have continued to kill people in prison

Happens all the time. People serving life without parole already have nothing to lose, thats why they continue to commit horrible crimes within prison itself.

[Occam Bandage]

15. If he appeared to be a threat to other prisoners,

then he could be transferred to a higher-security wing or facility. Incidences of failures of the prison system call for prison reform, not for expansion of the death penalty.

[Solon]

5. Why would I mourn someone I do not know?

You are asking for an emotional response, and I'm not going to give one. The fact of the matter is that I would prefer our system of punishment to be reasonable in the sense that, when mistakes are made, they may not be totally reversible, but those who are victims of a miscarriage of justice have the ability to get some compensation for that mistake. What many supporters of the death penalty forget is that not everyone sitting on death row is actually guilty of the crimes they were convicted for.

[babylonsister]

8. Mistakes??

I think we're on the same wavelength, but different waves. I ONLY think the DP works if a person is charged and convicted "beyond a reasonable doubt".

[Lex]

9. There have been many exonerated from death row who were there

and convicted 'beyond a reasonable doubt.'

One here in NC just released who was on death row for 13 years before DNA cleared him.

[babylonsister]

19. I 'get' that; I live in TX, which is why I wrote that.

There have been far too many convicted and killed when they weren't guilty. That's why I emphasized 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.

[Lex]

22. but "beyond a reasonable doubt" is the standard used in all criminal trials

the same criminal trials that landed them on death row, even though they were innocent

[Solon]

10. But even those who are convicted "beyond a reasonable doubt" aren't all guilty...

Remember what happened in Illinois, almost a dozen people were exonerated after being convicted beyond a reasonable doubt. That isn't a high enough standard for applying the death penalty.

[babylonsister]

23. Nowadays, that includes DNA evidence, when it didn't before.

That's my line I'm drawing.

[Solon]

28. Even that isn't foolproof...

What about cases where there is no DNA evidence? What about cases, such as the botched FBI lab, where incompetence and outright corruption ended up convicting people, ON DNA EVIDENCE?

You can claim all you want, but there is one thing you are forgetting, no matter what happens during a criminal trial, somewhere along the line, human error is always a possibility, in addition to malfeasance. As such the death penalty shouldn't be applied at all, its simply too final, and permanent, a punishment, for humans beings to be entrusted with it, in any justice system.

[Occam Bandage]

12. "if a person is charged and convicted 'beyond a reasonable doubt.'"

So, basically, for every single criminal who have been convicted, since that is the standard of evidence required for conviction in criminal cases. All this post says is that you are not in favor of using the death penalty on people who have been acquitted. Er, great.

[babylonsister]

25. DNA. Ya gotta love it; that's my standard, and to me, that's

'beyond a reasonable doubt'. If there's a case that disputes that, let me know.

[Occam Bandage]

32. ...and, again, "beyond a reasonable doubt" is the standard of conviction.

Are you suggesting that you are not in favor of conviction if there is no DNA evidence? Or are you suggesting that you believe that people should be incarcerated even if the government cannot prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt?

[babylonsister]

38. Bottom line for me now, after not having DNA evidence for years.

If there's no evidence other than some sheriff from a small town that says whatever, and a lawyer who swears to it, DNA should be a requirement in cases that will prove guilt or innocence one way or the other.
If there's proof 'beyond a reasonable doubt', the guy/girl swears to it and there's DNA evidence to support that, and they are GUILTY, my blessing is there. Go for it, especially if the crime is really heinous.

[tkmorris]

29. Yes, he should have gone to jail

The purpose of incarceration in this case is to remove a threat to society. To protect the innocent from further harm. The role of the justice system should never be to exact vengeance, which is precisely what the death penalty is in all cases.

He took his own life instead. While I will not mourn him, I do not believe the state should have put him to death if instead they had arrested him.

[Lex]

2. We should use the death penalty on people who won't be mourned?

When did we start that standard? :shrug:

[babylonsister]

6. No, but the self-righteous people on DU annoy me at times.

There are some people who absolutely deserve the death penalty; this was one of them. So to claim all people should not be considered flies in the face of reason.

I will be the first to agree that people have died without proof and I think that's appalling and there's no place for that.
But someone who has done it, confessed to it, "it" being beyond heinous, makes me wonder.

It's a contentious topic, and always has been on DU. I'm lending my two cents.

[MonkeyFunk]

7. I agree there are people that appear not to deserve to live

but it's not for me to make that determination, and it's certainly shouldn't be up the government.

[Occam Bandage]

11. "There are some people who absolutely deserve the death penalty"

I would disagree with this assertion. I agree that some people are abominable. I agree that some people must be removed from society. I don't understand what additional benefit is gained by stopping their heart.

[provis99]

14. No additional benefit? How about satisfaction at destroying evil?

[Occam Bandage]

16. If that's what you're after, buy an XBox and smite evil all afternoon long.

[Solon]

18. Don't use moral arguments for or against the death penalty, they just muddle the issue...

The fact of the matter is that moral arguments are useless, what we should concern ourselves with is how to most efficiently and effectively we can remove dangerous individuals from society, while at the same time protecting everyone's right to not only fair trials, but also for everyone to have the ability to rectify their situation if they end up being wrongly convicted.

[bicentennial_baby]

17. It's self righteous to not support State sanctioned murder now?

Neato!

[babylonsister]

33. I didn't say that, so please don't.

I am convinced there are certain people who deserve not to be on this earth, given overwhelming evidence, when it's given. Call me 'cold', but I do believe there are crimes people do that are beyond the ken, and the DP is the answer. As long as the evidence is 'overwhelming', confessions, DNA, etc.

[Solon]

34. Confessions can be beaten out of suspects, DNA can be planted...

or the tests can be botched, etc. Are you willing to run that risk? Its happened before, it will happen again.

[babylonsister]

35. DNA has never been involved before. OK, I have to run the risk that

there are some honorable cops who might actually swab someone's mouth, or take a semen sample, and hope the lab comes back with real results.
I cannot fault everyone and think they're all lying and the criminal isn't. So, lack of 'true facts' {and where do you find them when YOU don't trust anyone} leads you to believe EVERYONE should live out their life in jail. Gotcha.

[Solon]

37. DNA testing isn't perfect in itself, it evolved over 2 decades of experimentation...

some DNA tests only identify 1 person out of 10,000, others 1 person out of 6 billion, there's a large amount of difference here, and in many cases, both tests are admissible in court. And again, this also doesn't include cases where no DNA evidence is used or found, how should those cases be treated?

[babylonsister]

39. Sigh. I've pleaded my case. If you don't agree, that's okay. This is

how I feel. You aren't reading me though; I emphasized DNA and said 'only' when that's available and the DNA proves it. It's worked in favor of people on death row, also, but I guess you forgot about that. You're entitled to your opinion; so am I.

And I wasn't talking about cases w/o DNA, was I.

[Solon]

41. Perhaps not, but then again, you failed to present a reasonable case in any event...

again, the biggest problem is human error, DNA testing isn't some panacea of perfection in the criminal justice system, its a tool, nor more, no less. A very useful tool, but still just a tool. In addition, no matter how much you wish it weren't so, there are issues that arise, on all levels, with DNA testing, just like with other forensic investigations and evidence gathering. From chain of custody problems to lab techs making mistakes, it doesn't really matter, just screaming "DNA" and claiming it solves the problem is foolhardy.

DNA testing isn't perfect, and frankly I don't care what the exact odds are, even if the death penalty were practiced as YOU wish, innocent people will still be convicted and executed, its unavoidable.

[LeftyMom]

26. I don't trust a government that can't build a levee or mend a pothole to decide who lives and dies.

The bottom line is this: humans are fallible, even when they're all being honest, and as we all know murder prosecutions and investigations often are not fair and honest. To trust any person's life to twelve people too stupid to get out out of jury duty is pure insanity.

[babylonsister]

42. Wow. 'Too stupid to get out of jury duty'? is how you determine

your fellow citizens? I bow at your chutzpah. Call me stupid, but when they call, I go, and there's no getting out of it.

Then there's the rest of your comment, lots that I agree with.

[1]

20. nope...

dude was hateful and awful and mean.

dude killed innocent people.

dude died by his own hand.


i should feel sorry why?

[EV_Ares]

21. Did anyone mourn Andrew Cunanan? Those who knew him and loved him

I am sure did. To me he was a cold blooded killer, I did not know him and so I did not mourn him. I have no understanding of how or why he killed the way he did other than there was something evil inside of him. I think sometimes some people have this and something brings it out sooner or later. On the question of sentencing someone to death, that has always been hard. Beyond a Reasonable Doubt! How do you do that, we are humans so to me this is almost an impossibility and something only God can do. However, there are times when we have to do the best we can with what we have.

To me evil must be punished by death or it can arise again in some fashion.

[Democratic Lawyer]

24. I do not support state-sanctioned murder, period.

Sorry, but the State is "the People" so when the State puts someone to death, it is The People (you and me) killing another human being. A despicable human being, true. But a human being nonetheless.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

27. "No man is an island, entire of itself...

..any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee."

John Donne

[babylonsister]

30. Oy.

Yes, our society failed him, but should he still be alive to recognize that? Was it wrong to kill him when he could spend the rest of his life in jail?

In a perfect world, Donne's words might ring true. We're not there.

[lonestarnot]

36. Snort!

You got that right!

[1]

40. "Was it wrong to kill him" um... bud...

he killed himself...

[XRubicon]

43. human error

What error rate is acceptable to you? Say we have 99 cunanans and 1 innocent person- you for example. Are you willing to go to the electric chair as the one error to kill 99 cunanans? If you are not willing then I don't see how you can be for a system that clearly makes mistakes. Is it ok as long as you are not the error?

[1]

31. cool...

nice quote.

and when did andrew cunanan display any of these tendencies to any one of his victims that he brutatly murdered.

are you trying to be obtuse?

[MrSlayer]

44. Maybe, but who cares?

It's a shame someone didn't kill him sooner.

[China_cat]

45. PETA did.

PETA vice president, Dan Matthews, actually praised Cunanan for murdering Versace in Genre magazine, with the sick statement, "he finally got Versace to stop using furs"

http://www.karisable.com/skazcunaan.htm about 12 paragraphs down.

[Clark2008]

46. Killed?

He committed suicide. Yes, I suppose, technically, that's killing one's self, but it's hardly the same as the death penalty or being shot by police.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the point of the story????


:shrug: