peteoo

I could go on but you get the idea.... (Friday Jul 11 | post #188)

"Death eligible defendants in Baltimore City and Prince George’s County are significantly less likely to be sentenced to death while those in Baltimore County are significantly more likely to be sentenced to death." (Friday Jul 11 | post #187)

"From an initial pool of approximately 6,000 homicides, these two criteria produced a universe of 1,311 death eligible cases." "Out of these 1,311 death eligible cases, state’s attorneys filed a formal notification to seek the death penalty in 353 (27%). Although 353 notifications to seek death were filed, 140 (40%) were withdrawn by the state’s attorneys either unilaterally or (most often) with a plea by the defendant. A death notification was retained or “stuck” in 213 (60%) cases. Out of these 213 cases where a death notification was filed and retained, 180 (84%) were advanced to a penalty trial." "From 180 penalty trials, a death sentence was obtained in 76 cases (42%)." "The conditional probability of a death sentence given that a case was death 15 For each case reviewed, the number of panel attorneys ranged from 5 to 10. 18 eligible was .058 (76/1,311), the conditional probability of a death sentence given that a death notification has been filed and “sticks” was .357." (Friday Jul 11 | post #186)

You don't need to read the whole thing. http://www.newsdes k.umd.edu/pdf/fina lrep.pdf First paragraph: "There have been suggestions in the past that the imposition of the death penalty in Maryland has been influenced by factors such as race and the particular legal jurisdiction where the homicide occurred. Critics have pointed to the racial composition of Maryland’s death row as evidence that there is racial disparity in the operation of the death penalty in the state. For example, in December of 2002 all thirteen men on Maryland’s death row were sentenced to death for killing whites and in eight of these thirteen (62%) the offender was black.1 In fact, since 1978, when the state’s new death penalty statute took effect, there have been no fewer than four investigations into the administration of the death penalty in Maryland, with at least some emphasis on the issues of racial disparity and arbitrariness (geographic disparity)." You can skim and peruse it and figure out exactly what I'm saying. By the way...the guards know this because they live it...not because of what they read in a report. I'm not excusing it. I am analyzing it. "In 1996...“[t]he high percentage of African-American prisoners under sentence of death and the low percentage of prisoners under sentence of death whose victims were African-American remains a cause for concern”.5 The basis of this conclusion was the finding that of the seventeen condemned persons then on Maryland’s death row, fourteen (82%) were African American and the victims of the homicides included sixteen whites and 6 African-Americans. " (Friday Jul 11 | post #185)

Jen, When you dig deeper into Paternoster's study on the death penalty and its application, you'll find that the likelihood of bringing capital murder charges is extremely small, in almost all counties in Maryland, with the exception of Baltimore county. You are arguing that no one should be taking the law into their own hands. The lawyers and state's attorney's in almost all counties flagrantly ignore the law and do not (typically) bring capital murder charges when they should. I'm saying that I agree, no one should be above the law, and decide to invoke their own sense of justice. That includes the state's attorney's who seldom bring capital murder charges to bear even when it is very clear that they have the evidence necessary to do so. I suspect if a guard did strangle White, perhaps his/her frustration with the lack blind application of justice is a possible cause. The only reason that Paternoster's report holds water when you look at the headlines of it (2/3 of death penalty population is black and death penalty more likely to be applied when victim is white), is because capital murder charges are not brought to bear when their is a high incidence of black on black crimes. Its all in Paternoster's report. You have to look beyond the headlines. I suspect many would believe that Findley and his family would never get justice because capital murder charges would never be filed. White should have gotten justice. In all likelihood he wouldn't though, because there are people in high positions of authority who refuse to enforce the laws we have on the books. (Friday Jul 11 | post #184)

My point is that our flawed system typically does excuse murder...without the due process you suggest needs to be applied. (Wednesday Jul 9 | post #170)

Jen, Here are three questions. How many black on black murders, where charges were brought, have occurred in PG county since Paternoster's (et al) report was released? How many of those cases were death penalty eligible? How many of those cases went to court as capital murder trials? http://www.nacdl.o rg/sl_docs.nsf/a1b f9dda2190416485256 6d50069b69c/ad8aef 64afa238c085256cad 0058f1fe?OpenDocum ent (Wednesday Jul 9 | post #168)

http://www.deathpe naltyinfo.org/arti cle.php?scid=2 &did=107 I wonder if these folks on the board of directors would have suggested that the penalty should or shoudn't have been applied to Mr. White in this case. (Wednesday Jul 9 | post #167)

I agree with what you say in principle. The challenge of course is that it is typically not applied, when it should be, according to the law. Justice is anything but blind. The death penalty is rarely sought, even though we have very clear laws defining when it 'can' or 'should' be sought. A really good question is "Would White have been charged with the death penalty?" http://www.deathpe naltyinfo.org/arti cle.php?did=1646 I'd be willing to bet that Ray Paternoster would say "asbolutely yes" if this crime had been committed in Baltimore County. I'd think he'd say 'maybe' if this crime was committed where it was. I think he'd say, probably not, if this crime was committed in either Howard or Montgomery county. Pay particular attention to what he says about geography playing a role. (Wednesday Jul 9 | post #166)

Actually yes. I came to the conclusion that I was not going to be able to overcome your prejudice, or that of many on here who are like minded. Have a good life. (May 17, 2008 | post #1278)

Are you (as well) suggesting that all kids who are homeschooled are deprived of social interaction with kids their age? I know parents who's kids go to private and pulbic school that are on a tight leash when not in school. How many people pitching a fit here come from large families or were homeschooled? I wholeheartedly agree that kids that don't get social interaction with other kids their age are less likely to be successful at social interaction than kids who get a healthy exposure. I can't imagine anything better than having a big family AND being exposed to lots of other kids around my age. I was lucky to have had that :) You seem to think the Duggar kids don't have friends? Do you? Do you know this or are you assuming it? Do you have a reference? (May 15, 2008 | post #1230)

How many hours of programming on the Duggars is available? 10-20 Maybe? I hardly think this snapshot of their lives is truly indicative of ALL things that go on in their lives. I know people that are truly happy most of the time. Very rarely do I see them unhappy. Some I don't ever see unhappy. I would guess that they are from time to time, but just because I never see it doesn't me it doesn't exist. My guess is that unhappiness is not a significant part of their lives based on what I see. This may be the same with the Duggars. I refuse to buy into the "they should be unhappy because I am" attitude, that I see from a number of folks on this boardIs this true? I took about 15 minutes perusing gothard's website. I think he acknowledges that there are unhappy times. I missed the "the beatings will continue until morale improves" reference. One of my father's famous lines is/was "noone said you had to like it." In other words..you have to deal with the task at hand regardless of how you might feel about it. My life as a child was well grounded in that reallity. I can well imagine that some of the kids don't want to do their chores from time to time. I imagine they might get a similar response...." you don't have to like it...but you do have to do it." I think there are many on this board who have suggestd as much. When you live in a big family, you have to do things that you might not otherwise want to do. THAT is realityI missed that. Do you have a reference? I'll need to think about that when you provide it. I find it difficult to imagine that a parent would not want to connect with their child to understand what is going on and what they are thinking. I can fully understand a parents (my own!)lack of desire to listen to any form of consistent bitching, whining, and moaning. The question is "what does that produce?" Leniency from the parent? Sometimes I flex but only if I see the sense in it. I refuse to flex based on the constancy of bitching. I could fully understand my parent's inability to deal with 1/2 an hour of bellyaching from me. I've said it before. You've got bigger fish to fry when you have that many kidsI see things as multiple shades of gray. You suggest the possbility is either end of the spectrum. I'll suggest that the vast majority of kids will wind up somewhere in the middle of those extremes with a distribution that looks like a bell curve. (May 15, 2008 | post #1227)

How much time have you spent with the Duggars? How can you possibly make the statements you are making? I think you are jumping to a number of conclusions. Let me jump to your question. I assume you mean 'how can they function on the same level as their peers when they are adults.' I come from a very large family. I'd say that my brothers and sisters have adapted very well to the world and register on the high end of the bell curve when it comes to achievement. I think we hit right smack dab in the middle of the "perceived as 'normal'" bell curve. I still know a lot of the other kids that I grew up with, who were also from large families. They've also done just fine. I think many who have posted here perceive what it must be like, based on their (limited) point of view. They come up with a negative assessment of the current conditions or future probabilities. I call that prejudice. COULD it be bad? Absolutely. Doesn't look that way to me though. (May 15, 2008 | post #1216)

Because they will be participating in providing for your future welfare at no cost to you today. Would you rather write a check to cover your portions of the county, state, and national debts since you have no kids to pass your portion on to? Choose carefully. What about social security benefits that will be paid by those who work while you move onto (assuming you're not aleady into it) retirement. I believe that most people receive more from social security than they put in. Another argument for taxing people to provide schooling and education is they will be the ones who ensure our prosperity as a country in international trade. Maybe you have a whole bunch of gold coins buried in your backyard and plunk them down at the grocery store. I use $ when I buy grapes that were grown in Chile. If you want the $ to be worth anyting in the international currency markets 20 years from now, we'll have to educate the little ones to keep the economy going. Last of all, I don't think you/we want idiots designing, manufacturing, servicing or flying our current or next generation of military infrastructure. Or the current one. I'll be happy to provide directions to your local military recruiting office if you think we haven't provided 'our' kids with a good enough education and you think they're not up to the task. :) (May 15, 2008 | post #1212)