Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

fascinating

He was being sarcastic. He really thinks it's the guns that kill people.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Are we all doomed?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

He was being sarcastic. He really thinks it's the guns that kill people.

Not to make things too complex, but if A causes B, then the absence of B must indicate the absence of A. Everyone here took the LSAT. If the latter is false, the former can't be true.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Not to make things too complex, but if A causes B, then the absence of B must indicate the absence of A. Everyone here took the LSAT. If the latter is false, the former can't be true.

Sometimes, you know, guns don't kill people, swords do.

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Not to make things too complex, but if A causes B, then the absence of B must indicate the absence of A. Everyone here took the LSAT. If the latter is false, the former can't be true.

I know I'm wonking. I don't fucking care.

I seem to recall this one "paralegal."

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

I know I'm wonking. I don't fucking care.

I seem to recall this one "paralegal."

Not on the PB, if memory serves.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

I know I'm wonking. I don't fucking care.

I think you'll all find that I'm mainly correct when I speak for the board in declaring your wonking endearing.

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Adder

I think you'll all find that I'm mainly correct when I speak for the board in declaring your wonking endearing.

Now I'm fixin' to blush....

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

Now I'm fixin' to blush....

Easy, there. Don't tax the ticker.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Netanyahu:

Chicken Little or Wag the Dog?

Discuss.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Easy, there. Don't tax the ticker.

You know Wonk. He wants to tax everything.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Georgia was going to execute a woman last night, and didn't because of issues with the drugs. I just read this description of the crimes that got her on death row:

Gissendaner was convicted of murder in the death of her husband, Douglas Gissendaner. They had a troubled relationship and divorced and remarried. At the time of her husband’s death, Gissendaner was a 28-year-old mother of three children, 12, seven and five years old. And Gregory Owen was her on-again, off-again lover.

Rather than divorcing her husband again, Gissendaner repeatedly pushed Owen to kill him, prosecutors said. Acting on her instructions, Owen ambushed her husband while she went out with friends, and forced him to drive to a remote area. Then he marched him into the woods and stabbed him multiple times, prosecutors said.

Owen and Gissendaner then met up and set fire to the dead man’s car in an attempted cover-up. Both initially denied involvement, but Owen eventually confessed and testified against his former girlfriend.

Prosecutors decided to seek the death penalty against her instead of him? WTF?

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Georgia was going to execute a woman last night, and didn't because of issues with the drugs. I just read this description of the crimes that got her on death row:



Prosecutors decided to seek the death penalty against her instead of him? WTF?

One of our local prosecutors had a policy of not conditioning waiver of the death penalty as part of a plea bargain, because it’s way too coercive for the state to say, “Plead guilty or we’ll do our level best to kill you.” Of course, you can say that the DP is inherently coercive no matter what and you wouldn’t be wrong, but jurisdictions that offer pleas in death cases in exchange for favorable testimony and a guilty plea are really ramping up the immorality.

ETA: I had a friend who worked as a social worker slash investigator for death penalty appeals in Georgia, and what I learned from him is that some machinery of death is more in need of tinkering than others.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

One of our local prosecutors had a policy of not conditioning waiver of the death penalty as part of a plea bargain, because it’s way too coercive for the state to say, “Plead guilty or we’ll do our level best to kill you.” Of course, you can say that the DP is inherently coercive no matter what and you wouldn’t be wrong, but jurisdictions that offer pleas in death cases in exchange for favorable testimony and a guilty plea are really ramping up the immorality.

I suspect that his plea deal was not limited to "plead guilty or...", but also required that he give testimony against his co-defendant. In that context, the death penalty (I won't say "DP" here because some people get confused) is extremely coercive... but it only represents an extreme.

I still think that the defendant's counsel in the case asserting that leniency-for-testimony deals were unlawful as providing consideration for testimony had it right. They would have gutted the prosecutorial system, but they had it right.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Georgia was going to execute a woman last night, and didn't because of issues with the drugs. I just read this description of the crimes that got her on death row:



Prosecutors decided to seek the death penalty against her instead of him? WTF?

Two potential reasons. First, he plead guilty and testified against her (unknown if she was offered a similar option). Two, based on your post, she urged the boyfriend to commit the murder, over an extended period of time, which suggests a type of planning and premeditation that I could see weighing heavily on the decision to seek the death penalty.