It is so easy to ruin your life.

[Dr. Cheese]

I guess we're different in that respect. If my very best friend in the world called and told me he had just molested a child, my response would be something like, "Now, who is this again?" Clearly, we never would have been friends in the first place if I had known he had those tendencies.

IMO, friendship is only worthwhile if it is there when things are really bad. It is easy to like the perfect person. That said, everybody has their breaking point, if the person has done something that you simply cannot stomach, you do have right to turn away. Once again, that is something a person should think about before making a terrible decision, you can lose friends and respect along with your freedom.

 

[Bigjohn]

No, she merely planned on taking what wasn't hers and getting away with it.
And when she was caught, she snuffed out an innocent human life in an attempt to hide her guilt.
I don't see a mistake or overreaction here.
I see a piece of crap disguised as a human who got caught.

Is this thread a put-on?
Is it some kind of emperors-new-clothes test to probe the limits of human weakness, herd mentality and willingness to suspend perception, thought and judgement?

Prosecutor: Woman killed co-worker after fight - US news

This story struck me. Assuming suspect is guilty, I know she didn't plan on being a murderer, but now she has ended someone else's life and ruined her own. Acting in anger or rage almost never turns out well.

 

[Munjibunga]

No, she merely planned on taking what wasn't hers and getting away with it.
And when she was caught, she snuffed out an innocent human life in an attempt to hide her guilt.
I don't see a mistake or overreaction here.
I see a piece of crap disguised as a human who got caught.

Is this thread a put-on?
Is it some kind of emperors-new-clothes test to probe the limits of human weakness, herd mentality and willingness to suspend perception, thought and judgement?

No, but what do you really think?

 

[Eric Perry]

And for you Perry...

<<<and see no reason to spend taxpayers' money keeping her housed, clothed and fed>>>

It is proven over and over again, it costs much more to the taxpayer to put someone to death, than it does to house them in prison for life. I did a long research paper on this topic.

... only reason it costs so much to execute someone is the infinite appeals, and feel-goodery of society. A firing squad of 5 guys, earning some salary plus the cost of bullets = under a thousand bucks, tops. Voila - lots of money saved for the taxpayer.

Exactly. In my perfect little world, when guilt to such horrific and macabre crimes is clear and unquestionable, there would be no appeals. There would be no free room and board in a cell for a year waiting for your day in court. There would be no drawn out courtroom drama. You would be terminated. Immediately. The victim had no "limbo period" or options to appeal *her* death sentence before she was brutally murdered. Why should the monster get any such options?

All of the OT guys that have been here for any length of time know my stance on violent crimes. I think we are FAR too lenient on these criminals. I am 100% for the death penalty and 100% against endless appeals and sitting on death row for years upon years. If someone knowingly commits a violent crime, and they are guilty beyond all doubt, I think they should be killed. Immediately. A society of hardworking and innocent people should not foot the bill for these animals while so many good people go hungry every night.

Here's my take: Don't wanna get arrested? Don' wanna go to jail? Don't wanna potentially get executed for your actions? Don't be a criminal. I know it sounds too simple, but it's mostly true. When I wake up every morning, I can almost guarantee 100% that I will not be arrested, jailed, or face the death penalty (shy of wrongful arrest). Know why? I'm not a criminal. Never have been. Other than a few traffic citations there is a whole bunch of *nothing* on my "rap sheet".

 

[DwaynieAD]

Exactly. In my perfect little world, when guilt to such horrific and macabre crimes is clear and unquestionable, there would be no appeals. There would be no free room and board in a cell for a year waiting for your day in court. There would be no drawn out courtroom drama. You would be terminated. Immediately. The victim had no "limbo period" or options to appeal *her* death sentence before she was brutally murdered. Why should the monster get any such options?

All of the OT guys that have been or for any length of time no my stance on violent crimes. I think we are FAR too lenient on these criminals. I am 100% for the death penalty and 100% against endless appeals and sitting on death row for years upon years. If someone knowingly commits a violent crime, and they are guilty beyond all doubt, I think they should be killed. Immediately. A society of hardworking and innocent people should not foot the bill for these animals while so many good people go hungry every night.

Here's my take: Don't wanna get arrested? Don' wanna go to jail? Don't wanna potentially get executed for your actions? Don't be a criminal. I know it sounds too simple, but it's mostly true. When I wake up every morning, I can almost guarantee 100% that I will not be arrested, jailed, or face the death penalty (shy of wrongful arrest). Know why? I'm not a criminal. Never have been. Other than a few traffic citations there is a whole bunch of *nothing* on my "rap sheet".

tears of joy at this

 

[guy n. cognito]

Hilarious. Ya know, if I wanted to make some point about poor decision making and the effect it can have on someones life, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't pick a murderer whom beat her victim to death over a 20 minute time frame as an example.

 

[Absentia]

I can understand it's actually quite difficult to ruin your own life if you have a lick of common sense, this woman is trash, end of story.

 

[aborgman]

I'd have to agree with the "this wasn't easy".
Beating someone to death - taking 20 minutes to do so - that's not easy.
Marvin Gaye's father shooting him - that was "easy". Poor impulse control, and all you can say is "Oh god no!" after the fact.
But beating someone for 20 minutes - you have a few opportunities to stop and think.

Yep.

Note that here in Michigan this could likely qualify as a first degree murder case because the large amount of time required to do the deed can be considered premeditation.

We had a guy who choked his wife to death get 1st degree because in the 2-3 minutes it took to kill her he could have stopped, and that made it premeditated in the eyes of the law.

Case law is clear: manual strangulation can be used as evidence that the defendant had an opportunity to take a second look

 

[Horny Toad]

Exactly. In my perfect little world, when guilt to such horrific and macabre crimes is clear and unquestionable, there would be no appeals. There would be no free room and board in a cell for a year waiting for your day in court. There would be no drawn out courtroom drama. You would be terminated. Immediately. The victim had no "limbo period" or options to appeal *her* death sentence before she was brutally murdered. Why should the monster get any such options?

All of the OT guys that have been or for any length of time no my stance on violent crimes. I think we are FAR too lenient on these criminals. I am 100% for the death penalty and 100% against endless appeals and sitting on death row for years upon years. If someone knowingly commits a violent crime, and they are guilty beyond all doubt, I think they should be killed. Immediately. A society of hardworking and innocent people should not foot the bill for these animals while so many good people go hungry every night.

Here's my take: Don't wanna get arrested? Don' wanna go to jail? Don't wanna potentially get executed for your actions? Don't be a criminal. I know it sounds too simple, but it's mostly true. When I wake up every morning, I can almost guarantee 100% that I will not be arrested, jailed, or face the death penalty (shy of wrongful arrest). Know why? I'm not a criminal. Never have been. Other than a few traffic citations there is a whole bunch of *nothing* on my "rap sheet".

Respect.

 

[Eric Perry]

Exactly. In my perfect little world, when guilt to such horrific and macabre crimes is clear and unquestionable, there would be no appeals. There would be no free room and board in a cell for a year waiting for your day in court. There would be no drawn out courtroom drama. You would be terminated. Immediately. The victim had no "limbo period" or options to appeal *her* death sentence before she was brutally murdered. Why should the monster get any such options?

All of the OT guys that have been or for any length of time no my stance on violent crimes. I think we are FAR too lenient on these criminals. I am 100% for the death penalty and 100% against endless appeals and sitting on death row for years upon years. If someone knowingly commits a violent crime, and they are guilty beyond all doubt, I think they should be killed. Immediately. A society of hardworking and innocent people should not foot the bill for these animals while so many good people go hungry every night.

Here's my take: Don't wanna get arrested? Don' wanna go to jail? Don't wanna potentially get executed for your actions? Don't be a criminal. I know it sounds too simple, but it's mostly true. When I wake up every morning, I can almost guarantee 100% that I will not be arrested, jailed, or face the death penalty (shy of wrongful arrest). Know why? I'm not a criminal. Never have been. Other than a few traffic citations there is a whole bunch of *nothing* on my "rap sheet".

Sorry for my typos. I just noticed them now. I wrote this on my i-Phone while taking my morning poo.

 

[Horny Toad]

Sorry for my typos. I just noticed them now. I wrote this on my i-Phone while taking my morning poo.

Who cares about typos. You obviously do your best thinking on the hopper.

 

[burk48237]

I don't feel sorry for the murderer. She did a terrible thing and she is going to pay, however, I believe basically decent people sometimes make terrible choices. I don't know if Norwood is decent or not, but her crime sounds like one bad decision after another, not something premeditated.

What really separates basically decent people who make "terrible choices" from basically evil people? Was that SS officer who herded Jews into death chambers a basically decent person who made a terrible choice or a basically evil person who yielded to evil desires? I suspect that SS officer like this women was a good kid, probably fun to hang around with in HS. I doubt he was playing final solution instead of doctor in elementary school.

I agree with scripture in that we are all born with a tendency to sin (basically evil) and voice to do good (basically decent- conscience). It is a series of choices that determines who or what we become. I suspect that this wasn't the first time Brandy stole, and it wasn't the first time she used violence to handle the situation.

Hard to see this as a decent person making a series of wrong decisions. Seems more like someone without a conscience.

To me this is what happens when we make a series of wrong decisions. After a while we can sear our conscious, and it starts IMO with a series of wrong decisions on little things. In other words the other voices in Brandy's head drowned out her conscious.

Brandy may have started out stealing candy or beer from a connivence store, and in her mind that became "not so bad". She may have threatened or used a minimal amount of violence before to avoid getting caught or to intimidate someone who knew she was stealing. Either way, every one of those acts served to drown out the effects of her conscious telling her this is bad or wrong. I can assure you this wasn't one bad decision.

 

[MakiSupaStar]

Sorry for my typos. I just noticed them now. I wrote this on my i-Phone while taking my morning poo.

I was going to give you a quote and a 'word', but now I'm just kind of with the visual.

 

[Eric Perry]

Who cares about typos. You obviously do your best thinking on the hopper.

I was going to give you a quote and a 'word', but now I'm just kind of with the visual.

I don't get it.

 

[MJ5150]

Don't be a criminal. I know it sounds too simple, but it's mostly true.

Works for me too.

-Mike

 

[MakiSupaStar]

I don't get it.

I agree with what you said 100%, but the visuals put off a stink that made me steer clear.

 

[Eric Perry]

Works for me too.

-Mike

Yup. Generally speaking, you know who argue that way of thinking? Criminals. Go figure, huh?

 

[Eric Perry]

I agree with what you said 100%, but the visuals put off a stink that made me steer clear.

LOL!

 

[macaroni tony]

EP, any other time I think you know I'd take exception to your post in these types of threads. But Norwood...I mean you may have a great name and all, but there's not much I can say for you today

 

[Dr. Cheese]

What really separates basically decent people who make "terrible choices" from basically evil people? Was that SS officer who herded Jews into death chambers a basically decent person who made a terrible choice or a basically evil person who yielded to evil desires? I suspect that SS officer like this women was a good kid, probably fun to hang around with in HS. I doubt he was playing final solution instead of doctor in elementary school.

I agree with scripture in that we are all born with a tendency to sin (basically evil) and voice to do good (basically decent- conscience). It is a series of choices that determines who or what we become. I suspect that this wasn't the first time Brandy stole, and it wasn't the first time she used violence to handle the situation.



To me this is what happens when we make a series of wrong decisions. After a while we can sear our conscious, and it starts IMO with a series of wrong decisions on little things. In other words the other voices in Brandy's head drowned out her conscious.

Brandy may have started out stealing candy or beer from a connivence store, and in her mind that became "not so bad". She may have threatened or used a minimal amount of violence before to avoid getting caught or to intimidate someone who knew she was stealing. Either way, every one of those acts served to drown out the effects of her conscious telling her this is bad or wrong. I can assure you this wasn't one bad decision.

You helped clarify what I wanted to say. One thing to remember is that the SS guy, like a lyncher, is doing something at least tacitly condoned by his society. That is a bit different from common crime.