Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am 1000% against the death penalty. People who represent defendants charged in death penalty cases feel that these victim impact statements are not at all fair. However, there are LAWS regarding that issue.
In 1982, the Final Report of the President's Task Force on Victims of Crime recommended that "judges allow for, and give appropriate weight to, input at sentencing from victims of violent crime." In 1992, the United States Attorney General released 24 recommendations to strengthen the criminal justice system's treatment of crime victims. The Attorney General endorsed the use of victim impact statements and stated that judges should "provide for hearing and considering the victims' perspective at sentencing and at any early release proceedings."
In 1991, the Supreme Court of the United States held that a victim impact statement in the form of testimony was allowed during the sentencing phase of a trial in Payne v. Tennessee 501 U.S.808
(1991). It ruled that the admission of such statements did not violate the Constitution and that the statements could be ruled as admissible in death penalty cases
You guys babbling on about how Victim Impact statements aren't fair do realize that they're not used during the trial phase but the sentencing phase, don't you? Similar to how the defendant's past record can't be used in the trial but is taken into account during sentencing. Or is that "unfair" too?
You guys babbling on about how Victim Impact statements aren't fair do realize that they're not used during the trial phase but the sentencing phase, don't you? Similar to how the defendant's past record can't be used in the trial but is taken into account during sentencing. Or is that "unfair" too?
You do realize, (or did you read any of the info already posted about the history of the death penalty) that the trial is bifurcated.....there is the first trial which determines guilt or not guilty, then if the jury verdict is guilty, they move on to the sentencing trial....in which aggravators and mitigators are presented to the jury. The SENTENCING portion of the trial is critical in terms of whether or not the jury recommends life or death. However, the judge makes the final decision regarding sentencing, taking into consideration the jury recommendation and the victim impact statements, etc. Victim impact statements are MEANT to influence and they do influence. Someone's emotional reaction to the death of a loved one is NOT the same as the convicted person's past criminal record, IMO. The criminal record shows a pattern of behavior.
You do realize, (or did you read any of the info already posted about the history of the death penalty) that the trial is bifurcated.....there is the first trial which determines guilt or not guilty, then if the jury verdict is guilty, they move on to the sentencing trial....in which aggravators and mitigators are presented to the jury. The SENTENCING portion of the trial is critical in terms of whether or not the jury recommends life or death. However, the judge makes the final decision regarding sentencing, taking into consideration the jury recommendation and the victim impact statements, etc. Victim impact statements are MEANT to influence and they do influence. Someone's emotional reaction to the death of a loved one is NOT the same as the convicted person's past criminal record, IMO. The criminal record shows a pattern of behavior.
Thank you for not getting what I posted. Did you hit your head this morning?
Hilter didn't personally gas every Jew, either. I fail to see what point you are trying to make.
I'm not going back to look so if I'm wrong what I'm going to say has been stated in general for years.
Many note that Manson should never be released because of "the way he killed those people". It should be noted that he never killed anyone. (that he was never convicted of killing anyone) To note that doesn't mean he should be released.
I'm not going back to look so if I'm wrong what I'm going to say has been stated in general for years.
Many note that Manson should never be released because of "the way he killed those people". It should be noted that he never killed anyone. (that he was never convicted of killing anyone) To note that doesn't mean he should be released.
Manson doesn't want released anyway.
I wouldn't want that animal on the street anyway.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
