Death Penalty Recommended for Man Accused of Setting CA fire

[Nark]

Link

Anyone else think we should set this retard on fire?

[reality check]

You've got to be f'in kidding me right?

What is it with Americans and killing people? Societies are supposed to PROgress, not REgress. Maybe the memo got lost in the mail?

[Nark]

You sir need to live up to your moniker.

This man was convicted of setting 20 fires, of which, they destroyed many homes (read lives) and destroyed actual lives. Five of them. One-Two-Three-Four- Five.

Ahh, believing in capital punishment is obviously regression of decent society.

[Flybabe]

Nark - heard lots of stories from my coworkers about the Esperanza fire. This guy needs to be nailed. The people that live in SoCal know full well what happens with fire during the Santa Ana's.

Murder? No... don't know if that would fly, but certainly manslaughter. I would have to agree that he is mentally competent as well (of course, I'm no shrink).

I think we're going to see more and more prosecution for human-caused fires, especially in CDF world. Good on 'em, too..

[Just another canuck]

Nobody deserves to die... just my opinion.

I also think that life imprisonment is a punishment far worse than death.

[767]

Capital punishment should be equal punishment. In this case, he set fire. Therefore, he should be set on fire.

[rigpiggy]

Just to be a sh@tdisturber, my wife and I have a loud argument, money, kids, etc...... A nosey neighbour calls 911, the police slide off the road and kill themselves, should I be charged with "Murder"?

[Nark]

Just to be a sh@tdisturber, my wife and I have a loud argument, money, kids, etc...... A nosey neighbour calls 911, the police slide off the road and kill themselves, should I be charged with "Murder"?

Nope.


But say you and your drunk wife are at the shooting range; you being a crappy shot hit the metal stand, the bullet ricochet's and kills your wife. You should be charged with negligent homicide.

This douche bag getting charged with first degree murder is acceptable under the Model Penal Code, and the California Penal Code. Otherwise the judge would not have have allowed the charge during the Grand Jury proceedings.

[MUSKEG]

No one deserves to die. OK, I'll buy that, now what about the person that did die. We live in a violent society where the value of human life is sliding down a very slippery slope. Animals are very tolerant towards their own species but killing a rogue is common in many species. We have been brainwashed into believing that even incarceration is mean and of no value. The perp has little value until he/she can prove they can coexist within an exceptable framework. If you look around, that framework is as liberal as can be. Some still choose to go outside that. Society now values Pets and trees as much as life itself, OK then live by natures rules. Oh you don't like that either. Why am I not surprised. Maybe if they could prove that 86 dogs, 3 snakes, 2 turtles and 4 cats died in the fires they would have more success in putting this guy away.

[Driving Rain]

Two S2's air tankers collided over a Mendocino CA. fire in 2001. Both pilots were killed. The fire was started by a clandestine meth lab. The perp was booked for investigation of felony unlawfully causing a fire. The charges were later upgraded to murder but they were plea- bargained down before trial. Sorry I can't find out what happened after that.


http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/ag-forst/2 ... 16645.html

[Just another canuck]

Maybe if they could prove that 86 dogs, 3 snakes, 2 turtles and 4 cats died in the fires they would have more success in putting this guy away.

Oh no.... poor puppies. If he hurt any dogs, then yes, he should be burned. I don't care about the cats though.

[habit]

Too bad for this pyro he does not live in Canada, he would be out in 5 years on parole and considered rehabilitated, Much to the delight of the bleeding hearts that infest this site.

A LIFE FOR A LIFE, why not?

[Just another canuck]

A LIFE FOR A LIFE, why not?

Because it is wrong. Let's say someone murders someone close to you and he gets executed. Will said murderers death really make you feel and better? I highly doubt it. You may think so right now, but as you watch those needles penetrate the skin of living human being and their life diminishes, I would bet feelings of remorse and regret would instantly flood the hearts of most honest and moral people.

Have you all seen "Dead Man Walking" with Sean Penn? Watch it.

[Nark]

Just because we don't share your belief's doesn't make us immoral or dishonest.

And yes, I have witnessed just how precious life can be.






Dead Man Walking is a movie. Plain and simple.

[Widow]

Two S2's air tankers collided over a Mendocino CA. fire in 2001. Both pilots were killed. The fire was started by a clandestine meth lab. The perp was booked for investigation of felony unlawfully causing a fire. The charges were later upgraded to murder but they were plea- bargained down before trial. Sorry I can't find out what happened after that.


http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/ag-forst/2 ... 16645.html

National Briefing | West: California: 2 Acquitted Of Murder
Published: Saturday, March 29, 2003

Two men accused of setting a brush fire that led to the deaths of two air tanker pilots have been acquitted of murder charges in Ukiah. The pilots died while fighting a fire in Mendocino County in 2001 that started in a laboratory where the men, Richard Mortensen and Frank Brady, were making methamphetamine. A jury found Mr. Brady guilty of arson, manufacturing methamphetamine and conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine. It found Mr. Mortensen not guilty of arson, but guilty of the drug charges, his lawyer said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/29/us/na ... urder.html

[Just another canuck]

Just because we don't share your belief's doesn't make us immoral or dishonest.

And yes, I have witnessed just how precious life can be.






Dead Man Walking is a movie. Plain and simple.

I didn't say you were dishonest or immoral. If you aren't these things, I truly believe you and MOST people wouldn't feel the way they THOUGHT they would feel after their friend/spouse/etc. 's murderer was killed in front of an audience. Taking another life isn't going to bring your friend/spouse/etc. back.

And participating in or supporting the capital punishment of said individual could actually have adverse effects.

I'm not asking you to believe in what I believe, nor do I think any less of you for not doing so. And yes, I know Dead Man Walking is just a movie, but it can be quite moving and persuasive. You never actually said if you've seen it or not???

[habit]

A LIFE FOR A LIFE, why not?

Because it is wrong. Let's say someone murders someone close to you and he gets executed. Will said murderers death really make you feel and better? I highly doubt it. You may think so right now, but as you watch those needles penetrate the skin of living human being and their life diminishes, I would bet feelings of remorse and regret would instantly flood the hearts of most honest and moral people.

Have you all seen "Dead Man Walking" with Sean Penn? Watch it.

Murder is wrong,

If our system punished murders with actual life sentences, meaning the rest of said killers life, no parole etc... I would not be such an advocate of capital punishment, yet too many times killers serve 10 or 15 years and are free where is the justice?
Do you agree with Parole for murderers?
How about teen killers being considered young offenders protected by the system?
Why should my tax dollars pay to support this kind of scum?
an eye for an eye

The movie I have not seen but I will take your advice and have a look. Will not change my opinion however it is set as is.

[Driving Rain]

Widow your search skills are amazing.
I always wondered if the murder charges would stick.
I see now a jury in California did acquite them.
Thanks
DR

[Icebound]

...

And I always thought that pilots were un-emotional, logical, do-no-harm kind of thinkers.

The cost-benefit analysis of the death penalty has been done many times in many countries and the results come up the same:

... it does nothing to deter crime, so why bother with the extra cost ... Use the money to solve problems which actually MIGHT help reduce crime.

The Canadian and US homicide rates have been more or less parallel since the 1920's:

...fairly high in the late 20's
... falling during the 30s and early 40s
... a small spike after the war
... pretty low and flat in the fifties.
... generally rising during the 60s and early seventies to a peak around 1974
... then generally falling.
... There are a couple of peaks around 1980 and again in the early nineties; peaks which are smaller in Canada, but the general trend is similar and has been "down" in both countries.

Throughout, the US rate has remained somewere around 3 to 5 times the Canadian rate.

Somewhere in there Canada abolished the death penalty and it has made not one bit of difference when you compare the two trends.

By the way, "western" "democratic" European countries who abolished the death penalty have totally different trends than North America....

....Which leads to the point that local societal factors are way way more important in the determination of crime than are any particular "penalty" deterrants.

Besides the USA, Japan, and then India, you will be hard-pressed to find another "democratic", "civilized", "educated" country which executes its citizens.

"eye for an eye" is an outdated mantra of extremist religions; it is an emotional response, a desire for REVENGE, not justice.

Democratic "civilizations" were built on the idea of breaking such cycles of "violence begetting violence". Feel free to join in.

Or are you really more comfortable in company with the likes of Korea, Saudi Arabia, China, Iran, Viet Nam, etc?

====

As for the Esperanza fire, specifically.....

It is interesting to read some reports about the verdict:

"The juror said the panel initially had a hard time determining whether Oyler was guilty of setting the Esperanza fire until they began tying all the smaller blazes together. He said a series of lies told by Oyler about his whereabouts the night of the fire also swayed them."

In other words, they convicted him pretty much on circumstantial evidence. Then the kicker:

"But even after seeing and hearing the evidence, and even after convicting Oyler of first-degree murder, the jury was hesitant to sentence him to death.

"I tell you there were more tears today than in any part of the trial," said the jury foreman, who declined to give his name. "People kept asking, 'What if? What if?' But when we looked at those pictures of the firemen again, that convinced us."

....

Talk about revenge.... we are not even really really really sure that we should convict him, but we are quite ready to KILL him....no, not because of his guilt (of which we are not really sure).... it is because there are pictures of dead bodies for which SOMEBODY has to pay...so why not him!!!

This is the ultimate scapegoating. We need somebody to blame for our own partial stupidity. We create communities where a similar result could have occurred had the fire started by an ill-timed accident just as easily as by design. A cigarette butt tossed out a car window, a Cessna 150 with a engine failure.

Sure he probably did it. Sure he probably should be "nailed". But death penalty? Is that logical?
...

[Just another canuck]

Thank you Icebound... I was waiting for someone to come in and back me up.

it is an emotional response, a desire for REVENGE, not justice.

Well put.

[habit]

All valid points,

Do you agree with parole for a murderer?
If a life sentence meant just that, life, then in my opinion for most criminals that is a far greater punishment than death.
my real issue is with the Canadian justice system who seem hesitant to punish criminals as harshly as they have treated their victims.

[Spokes]

A LIFE FOR A LIFE, why not?

What if you get the wrong guy. What if it was you, totally innocent, but for some reason implicated and convicted for a murder.

This has happened many times in Canada. It is only the lack of a death penalty that prevented the wrong person from being executed. You can go a long way to make up for wrongly imprisoning someone, but if they are dead- not so much.

Make punishment hard. Make jail time real tough. Remove TV's, computers, the vote, etc. But capital punishment goes to far (in my opinion)

[Topspin]

A LIFE FOR A LIFE, why not?

Because it is wrong. Let's say someone murders someone close to you and he gets executed. Will said murderers death really make you feel and better? I highly doubt it. You may think so right now, but as you watch those needles penetrate the skin of living human being and their life diminishes, I would bet feelings of remorse and regret would instantly flood the hearts of most honest and moral people.

Have you all seen "Dead Man Walking" with Sean Penn? Watch it.

I don't support the death penalty, however how about cases like Vince Li? This guy is never going to have a life, he is going to be in custody forever. His brain is going to be a chemical cocktail for the rest of his life.
In a case like this it's not so much the death penalty, but euthanizing a terminally sick animal. I'm not saying I think he should be killed, but the thought does take you to some weird places.

[Doc]

You just can't win this argument.
Nark.....the example you gave of shooting your drunk wife at the shooting range....no charge should be laid. You accept a certain level of risk by being there in the first place. If anybody is at fault, it would be the range for allowing for something like that to happen in the first place. Allowing a material that would not absorb the energy of a round.
1% of the American population is incarcerated at any one time. Think about that.....3.5 million folks are in jails in the States, right now. The American answer to any crime is "lock 'em up"...or in some States, kill them.
When New York State brought back the death penalty, the murder rate actually went UP.
There is now answer.

[Icebound]

..

All valid points,

Do you agree with parole for a murderer?
....

Every case is individual.

I saw a report somewhere that there are about 3000 ex-murderers roaming the streets of Canada as parolees. I can't get my hands on it right now. And yes, a number of them re-offend, but there is no big epidemic of homicide in Canada caused by parolee ex-murderers. Across ALL of Canada, in the last 5 years, there has been an average of about 4 homicides per year by parolees. (What I don't have is the number of unsolved cases that more or may not be attributed to parolees)

Sure the Canadian system should be tightened up in places. Perhaps greater use of the "dangerous offender" provision for repeat offenders.

But blanket denial of parole is not productive:

This report from New York:

http://www.pressrepublican.com/homepage ... 5137.html/

Division records show none of the 456 A1 felons released from 2004 through 2007 were returned to prison for a new crime, including the 440 murderers and attempted murderers in that group.

In fact, research shows that murderers are the best parole risk, when compared to other crimes. The re-offend way less frequently.

Again, just like abolition of the death penalty, parole should not be a political issue. Decisions about these must be made according to the complete history of fact, not based on a few isolated high-profile cases.... You are the guys who complain about the media over-hyping stuff....

..