TexasCHLforum.com

Even here in liberal Austin, the Berkeley CA of TX, they got this right . I was worried about sentencing being here in Austin, but the jury correctly and appropriately sentenced this cop killer to death. Sad to see an officer die over a shoplifter or any other crime, but that does show how anything and everything is NOT routine and you never know. The first link is actualy footage of the officers last moment taking the suspect down. RIP Brother

http://www.statesman.com/videos/news/ja ... on/vCRQCr/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Now put this cop kiiler down

For the past two weeks, Brandon Daniel has been called a calculating, remorseless killer by the state, and a brilliant, depression-wracked computer scientist by his lawyers.
After more than eight hours of deliberations, a Travis County jury weighing his fate sided with the prosecution late Friday and decided the former 26-year-old software engineer should die for the killing of Austin police officer Jaime Padron

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/crim ... l-m/nd3rG/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

On those rare occasions the prosecutor gets the voir dire right. I think thye selected from over 300 people. Now if they could only get some of these intoxication manslaughter cases correct...

Great job!

I hope it gives Officer Padron's family some closure and they can put the stress of trial behind and be allowed to grieve in peace.

Redneck_Buddha wrote:On those rare occasions the prosecutor gets the voir dire right. I think thye selected from over 300 people. Now if they could only get some of these intoxication manslaughter cases correct...

I hear that... The outcomes for those manslaughter cases are unreal.

I am pleased at the outcome, but I have to be a realist. He will be at Polunski on death row many years before and if he ever makes it to Huntsville the last ride. I have a friend killed on April 28, 1982 while serving a warrant. His killer is still on death row.

puma guy wrote:I am pleased at the outcome, but I have to be a realist. He will be at Polunski on death row many years before and if he ever makes it to Huntsville the last ride. I have a friend killed on April 28, 1982 while serving a warrant. His killer is still on death row.

1982? Unacceptable. I am hoping he does the right thing and does it himself.

texanjoker wrote:

puma guy wrote:I am pleased at the outcome, but I have to be a realist. He will be at Polunski on death row many years before and if he ever makes it to Huntsville the last ride. I have a friend killed on April 28, 1982 while serving a warrant. His killer is still on death row.

1982? Unacceptable. I am hoping he does the right thing and does it himself.

He is one of the longest on death row in Texas. He committed the murder the same year that we was paroled from a Minnesota prison.

texanjoker wrote:I was worried about sentencing being here in Austin, but the jury correctly and appropriately sentenced this cop killer to death.

Yeah but interestingly it took them 8 times longer to decide the penalty than it did to convict him iirc.

TomsTXCHL wrote:

texanjoker wrote:I was worried about sentencing being here in Austin, but the jury correctly and appropriately sentenced this cop killer to death.

Yeah but interestingly it took them 8 times longer to decide the penalty than it did to convict him iirc.

That is to be expected. Determining the fate of a man's life should be taken seriously and with much deliberation.

It shouldn't matter that the guy he killed was a cop: he should still get the death penalty.

VMI77 wrote:It shouldn't matter that the guy he killed was a cop: he should still get the death penalty.

VMI77 wrote:It shouldn't matter that the guy he killed was a cop: he should still get the death penalty.

I'll agree when:
1) It costs less to put someone to death than it does to keep them in prison for life. Life in prison is a much harsher penalty. As it's cheaper, we should use it.
2) We stop executing the very small number of people who are legally and factually innocent in order to prosecute a much larger number of very bad guys. I can't support a system that gets it wrong from time to time. If you can, let me know what the acceptable number of innocent people is.

cb1000rider wrote: 1) It costs less to put someone to death than it does to keep them in prison for life. Life in prison is a much harsher penalty. As it's cheaper, we should use it.

Can you please explain how it is cheaper to keep someone alive for their natural life, rather than killing them? I do understand that the drug is fairly expensive and there are price tags attached to the court system, and last I remember seeing it could cost up to $30,000 a year (depending on state and level of security) per person to let em rot. Is the drug and the process that expensive to execute 1 person (let them rot at $30,000 x 50 years = $1,500,000)?

teraph wrote: Can you please explain how it is cheaper to keep someone alive for their natural life, rather than killing them? I do understand that the drug is fairly expensive and there are price tags attached to the court system, and last I remember seeing it could cost up to $30,000 a year (depending on state and level of security) per person to let em rot. Is the drug and the process that expensive to execute 1 person (let them rot at $30,000 x 50 years = $1,500,000)?

1.5M is about right for 50 years. I'm not even going to bring up the current issue on lethal injection drugs.

Death is cheaper if we started doing it cheaper - allowing less appeals and maybe re-using a rope. As is, we allow them to appeal for decades, we house them in specialty units that require more man power and are at a much higher cost than the $30k/year you mention. The costs of prosecution are drastically increased also.. Most death penalty candidates are poor, so we're often paying for 4 lawyers - two prosecution, two defense. We're paying for both sides of the decades long appeal process, etc.

Here's a pretty good run down with both sides: http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.ans ... nID=001000" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

cb1000rider wrote:

VMI77 wrote:It shouldn't matter that the guy he killed was a cop: he should still get the death penalty.

I'll agree when:
1) It costs less to put someone to death than it does to keep them in prison for life. Life in prison is a much harsher penalty. As it's cheaper, we should use it.
2) We stop executing the very small number of people who are legally and factually innocent in order to prosecute a much larger number of very bad guys. I can't support a system that gets it wrong from time to time. If you can, let me know what the acceptable number of innocent people is.

If this is true, how come nearly every inmate exhausts every single appeal available to them. Death row inmates fight hard to keep that "harsher" sentence working for them.