#Death Penalty Information Center

[cheerfullycatholic]

On January 25, 2024, Alabama executed Kenneth Smith using nitrogen hypoxia, a first in American history. Though state attorneys had assured courts that the method would cause “unconsciousness in seconds,” witnesses reported that Mr. Smith appeared awake for several minutes after the nitrogen gas began. They observed that he “shook and writhed” for at least two minutes before breathing heavily for another few minutes. “This was the fifth execution that I’ve witnessed in Alabama, and I have never seen such a violent reaction to an execution,” said media witness Lee Hedgepeth. Mr. Smith was pronounced dead 32 minutes after the gas began to flow. Mr. Smith would not have been sentenced to death today. His jury voted 11-1 in favor of a life sentence, but the judge overrode the recommendation and imposed a death sentence in a practice now outlawed nationwide. Mr. Smith also survived a botched lethal injection attempt in November 2022 in which Alabama officials strapped him to the gurney for four hours and inserted needles into his muscles. He was one of the few people in history to face execution twice, and experienced severe PTSD symptoms leading up to his second execution date. The Supreme Court denied a stay of execution and certiorari review to Mr. Smith over the dissents of Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson. “Having failed to kill Smith on its first attempt, Alabama has selected him as its ‘guinea pig’ to test a method of execution never attempted before,” wrote Justice Sotomayor. Justice Kagan, joined by Justice Jackson, emphasized the risk of Mr. Smith choking on his own vomit as he was deprived of oxygen. Prison officials did not allow Mr. Smith to eat in the ten hours before the execution or drink in the four hours before. Medical experts had also raised the risk of nitrogen hypoxia putting a prisoner into a vegetative state or harming staff and advisors in the execution chamber if the gas leaked. “With deep sadness, but commitment to the Eighth Amendment’s protection against cruel and unusual punishment, I respectfully dissent,” Justice Sotomayor wrote. “The world is watching.” “Tonight Alabama causes humanity to take a step backwards,” Mr. Smith said in his last words. “I’m leaving with love, peace, and light.” He signed “I love you” to his family after the gas mask was put on.

#tw death #tw torture #death penalty #anti death penalty #death penalty information center #alabama #kenny smith #kenneth smith

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is expected to sign a bill on Friday allowing juries to recommend the death penalty in capital cases on an 8-4 vote, a move spurred by the less-than-unanimous vote that led to the Parkland school shooter being sentenced to life in prison.

The state's Republican-led House of Representatives approved the measure with an 80-30 vote on Thursday, following the Republican-controlled state Senate's approval in March.

If the Republican Governor signs the bill into law, Florida prosecutors trying capital felony cases would need to convince only two-thirds of the 12-member jury that someone who is convicted deserves the death penalty, rather than a unanimous decision by a jury.

The change only affects the penalty phase of capital trials. It would have no effect on the requirement for a jury's unanimous vote to convict a defendant.

DeSantis has pushed for the legislation since October when he said he was "very disappointed" after a jury could not come to a unanimous decision on giving a death sentence to Nikolas Cruz, who killed 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland in 2018.

Three jurors voted to spare Cruz, and by default his sentence was life in prison without the possibility of parole, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

If the bill becomes law, Florida would join Alabama as the only states where a unanimous jury decision is not required, the center noted.

Tony Montalto, whose daughter Gina was killed in the Parkland shooting, has been pushing for Florida lawmakers to change the jury requirement.

"Because of the jury's incorrect decision ... the victims, my beautiful daughter, her 13 classmates and her three teachers did not get the justice that they deserve," Montalto said during an interview on WPLG, an ABC affiliate in South Florida, in March.

DeSantis, widely thought to be weighing a 2024 presidential campaign, has accelerated efforts to build his national profile, especially around crime and justice issues. In February, he traveled to New York, Chicago and Philadelphia to speak to law enforcement groups on criminal justice matters.

Legal and ethical questions have swirled around capital punishment in the United States in recent years as states have found it difficult to procure drugs to carry out the death penalty through lethal injections. Several executions have been botched in recent years.

In 2017, Florida passed a law that required death penalties to be imposed only after a unanimous recommendation by a jury.

The law came after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down an earlier state law, saying it unconstitutionally let judges determine the facts that would lead to a death sentence, rather than juries.

#us politics #news #reuters #capital punishment #2023 #Florida #gov. ron desantis #death penalty #florida house of representatives #capital felony cases #lethal injection #Nikolas Cruz #marjory stoneman douglas high school shooting #parkland shooting #mass shootings #mass shooters #gun violence #Death Penalty Information Center #Tony Montalto #Gina Montalto #WPLG #criminal justice system

[thelastharbinger]

Did not have the U.S. government holding hearings on previously classified information and lying making confirmations under oath that they are in possession of alien bodies and ufos in order to distract from the fact that covid-19 is still the leading cause of death in children, the cost of living is astronomical, cop city is well underway despite Atlanta residents overwhelmingly crying out against it, we are experiencing the hottest & deadliest temperatures on record, the state of Florida trying to rewrite history to say that slavery was just a mutually beneficial unpaid internship, trans lives and rights are under attack, anti drag laws, FLINT MICHIGAN STILL DOES NOT HAVE CLEAN DRINKING WATER, anti-discrimination laws being reversed, Supreme Court ruling against affirmative action, Roe v. Wade undone, universal free school lunches are on the ballot, ongoing mass shootings, climate change, big pharma killing off people by withholding live saving drugs at ungodly market prices, the erasure of separation of church and state, AI surveillance being implemented to detect fare evasion for increasingly costly public transport services, the rise of fascim, proud boys showing up with military grade weapons at libraries and day care centers, the permitted attempted coup of the capital, labor union strikes happening all over the country, people dying of heat in Texas because evil landlords want to cut off cooling over an unpaid $51 utility bill, train derailments causing toxic waste spills, corruption within the highest court in the land, homelessness rates the highest its ever been, migrants and asylum seekers being kicked out of temporary housing, the cost of food, book bans, Miranda Rights no longer being stated, mayors deciding to no longer publicly disclose how many people are dying pre-trial in detention facilities, federal minimum wage still $7.25, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, oil pipeline constructions on native lands, something like 30-50% of the nation's drinking water contaminated with forever chemicals, the rich remaining untaxed, biden going back on his campaign promises to forgive all student debt, still no free universal healthcare, ICE deportations increasing under biden admin, the u.s. yet maintaining colonies, teens and women getting jail time for miscarriages and abortions, 100 companies globally responsible for 70 or 80-something percent of all CO2 emissions, we are living in a police state, diseases resurfacing after years with no cases due to rising temps, death penalty, public services being defunded to increase military and police spending budgets, and abusers suing victims for defamation cases in court so that they legally cannot talk about it, and setting a dangerous precedent in the process in my 2023 bingo card but here we god damn are.

#2023 is a goddamn JOKE #aliens #us government #us govt #aliens and ufos #2023 bingo #land temp in spain was 140 degrees 2 days ago. owners r gonna have to start buying shoes for their pups out of obligation bc paws on fire. #i hate it here so bad #like can the aliens fix racism?

[offender42085]

Post 1146

Brett D Pelham, Florida inmate G40742, born 2002, incarceration intake October 2020 at age 18, scheduled for release February 2034

Homicide-Negligent Vehicular Manslaughter

In January 2020, Brett Pelham pleaded guilty to two counts for the crash that killed Jill Mandeville, 33, in Cape Coral in 2018. Pelham, then 16, was skipping school, driving 86 mph through a residential community and ran a stop sign before striking Mandeville's car, killing her instantly.

While Pelham's defense attorney, had asked for nine years in prison when Pelham pleaded guilty, at the sentencing hearing in July 2020 he asked for as little as six months in a juvenile rehabilitation center. The family of Jill Mandeville hoped for 25 years. 

The defense attorney also said the two charges, vehicular homicide and driving without a license causing death, amounted to double jeopardy. The judge amended the lesser charge to driving without a license, a 60-day misdemeanor. 

Pelham was sentenced to a 15-year sentence and the Mandeville family said that they were pleased with the term.

Co-workers, friends, ministers and relatives wrote 55 individual letters to the Judge, telling him just how important Jill was to them. With the help of Mother's Against Drunken Driving supporters, the family was successful in persuading the court to have all the letter read out loud into the court record.

The defense attorney had three people testify on Pelham's behalf, hoping to get the minimum penalty: a psychologist, a case worker in the juvenile justice system, and Jill Mandeville's mother's half-sister, Elizabeth "Jo" McNurlan, of Tampa.

McNurlan said she and Pelham had exchanged letters while he's been in jail. She said by giving Pelham a prison sentence, the world will have lost "a second person who doesn't deserve to be lost. "We can’t help Jill, but we can help Brett," she said.

Dr. Stephen Bloomfield testified that Pelham's brain wasn't done growing and adolescent brains aren't like adults.  The defense asked the judge to accept Bloomfield's findings.

"One of the biggest pieces of information that we can’t overstate is that Brett was 16 when this happened," he said. "He was a child. Since he was a child, he should not be sentenced as an adult to adult prison."  

On rebuttal, the prosecuting attorney told the judge that he shouldn't treat Pelham lightly. "You don’t get a pass because you are a juvenile for killing," the prosecuting attorney said. "The state wants you to send him to prison."

When the judge announced the sentence, Pelham's mother, Courtney Skipper, let out a sob, yelling "oh my, God, no" while leaping to her feet. She yelled "I love you, I love you so much," while pointing at Pelham before running from the courtroom. 

She soon returned to talk to Pelham, abruptly turning to leave and, looking at the family of Jill Mandeville, telling hem "You're all losers, too."

Pelham was the second teen sentenced in Jill Mandeville's death.

Morgan Skau of Cape Coral allowed Pelham to drive her father's truck, despite knowing Pelham did not have a driver's license.

With him in the truck, Skau was sentenced for her role in the crash to six months of probation, the Judge tellling her if he was allowed to give her jail time, he would have. 

4j

#inmate

[nordleuchten]

La Fayette's Opinion on Court Martials

Tl;dr: La Fayette was much opposed to court martials.

This was intended as a post about La Fayette’s opinions on the death penalty and the reform of penal law – however, I think it is worthwhile to have a look at his opinion on court martials and the different systems used by different nations (France, England, America and to some extend Poland)

Now, La Fayette expressed his opinion for the first time in a written document that we knew of in a letter to George Washington on January 13, 1778. Although that is his first time expressing such notions to Washington, by the points that he raises it is evident that he has held these believes for some time. The trigger for La Fayette writing this letter was the court martial of two of his subordinate officers:

At the same [General] Court held 6th instant Captain Flagg charged with “neglect of duty 1st in suffering the Marquis de la Fayette, when Major Genl of the day to come in the night to the center of his Picquet, without being stopped or challenged; 2nd for permitting his sentries to have fires in his sight” was tried and acquitted by the unanimous opinion of the court. The Commander in Chief approves the sentence.

At the same Court held 7th instant Captn Laird, charged with “Neglect of duty, in suffering the Major General of the day to surprize him at his picquet in the night”—was tried & found guilty and sentenced to be dismissed from the service. The Commander in Chief approves the sentence.

“General Orders, 13 January 1778,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/03-13-02-0180. [Original source: The Papers of George Washington, Revolutionary War Series, vol. 13, 26 December 1777 – 28 February 1778, ed. Edward G. Lengel. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2003, pp. 214–216.] (10/24/2023)

And here a screenshot from the notes beneath this letter to give some biographical information on the two men in question.

La Fayette wrote his letter the same day and described the situation as follows:

There were two gentlemen, same rank, same duty to perform, and same neglect of it who have been arrested the same day by me—as I went in the night around the piquets I found them in fault, and I gave an account of it the next day to your excellency—you answered that I was much in wrong not to have had them relieved and arrested immediately—I objected that it was then very late for such a changement, and that I did not know which was the rule in this army, but that the gentlemen should be arrested in that very moment—the last answer of your excellency has been, “they are to have a court martial, and you must give notice of it to the adjudant general”—therefore major nevill made two letters in order to arrest them, one for having been surprised in his post and the other, for the same cause and allowing his centrys to have fires which he could see in standing before the picquet. I give you my word of honor that there was not any exageration.

“To George Washington from Major General Lafayette, 13 January 1778,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/03-13-02-0186. [Original source: The Papers of George Washington, Revolutionary War Series, vol. 13, 26 December 1777 – 28 February 1778, ed. Edward G. Lengel. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2003, pp. 222–225.] (10/24/2023)

Beside his recalling of the situation, it can also be noticed that La Fayette was unfamiliar with the system of court-martials in America and used to different proceedings from his time in the French army.

Before we address La Fayette’s grievances with the court martial system in the Continental Army in general and with these cases in particular, here is his account of the proceedings in France:

(…) in france an officer is arrested by his superior, who gives notice of it to the commanding officer, and then he is punished enough in being deprived of going out of his room in time of peace, of doing his duty in time of war—no body knows of it but his comrades—when the fault is greater he is confined in a common room for prisonner officers and this is much more shamefull—notice of it is immediately given to the general officer who commands there—that goes too to the Kings minister who is to be reimplaced here by the commander in chief—in time of war it goes to the general in chief.

Soldiers are punished the same or next day by order of proper officers, and the right of punishing is proportionate to theyr ranks. but when Both officers and soldiers have done something which deserves A more severe punishement, when theyr honor, or theyr life, or theyr liberty for more than a very short time is concerned, then a court martial meets, and the sentence is known—how will you let an unhappy soldier be confined several weeks, with men who are to be hanged, with spies, with the most horrid sort of people, and in the same time be lost for the duty, when they deserve only some lashes—then almost no proportion in the punishements.

Now, his first problem were the punishments – or better; lack thereof. You recall that Captain Ebenezer Flagg was acquitted:

now I See in the orders the less guilty punished in a manner, much too severe indeed, and dismised from the service (it is among all the delicate minds deprived of his honor) when he was only to be severely reprimanded, and kept for some time under arrest—but it can be attributed to a very severe discipline.

This acquittal was not only bothersome for La Fayette because Captain David Laird, who committed a less serious crime in La Fayette’s eyes, was so harshly punished. Part of the problem laid also in his perception of a gentleman’s word of honour:

what must I think of the same court when they unanimously acquit (it is to say that my accusation is not trüe) the officer who joins to the same fault, entirely the same, this of allowing his centrys to have fire in his own sight—for in every service being surprised or being found in the middle of his picquet without any challenging or stopping centry, as major nevil riding before me found him, is entirely the same thing—and mjor nevil riding before me when I was busy to make a centry pull off his fire, can swear that such was the case with that officer—he can do more than swearing, for he can give his word of honor—and I think that idea honor is the same in every country but the prejugées are not the same thing—for giving publickly the best of such a dispute (for here it becomes a trial for both parties) to an officer of the last military stage against one of the first, schould be looked on as an affront to the rank, and acquitting a man whom one other man accuses, looked upon as an affront to the person—it is the same in poland for count de pulaski was much affronted of the decision of a court martial entirely acquitting Colonel molens—however as I know the english costoms I am nothing else but surprised to see such a partiality in a court martial.

We read that La Fayette was not alone in his perception here and that other foreign officers, in this case Kazimierz Pułaski, were of the same opinion. His comment on the “english costoms” will be of some important later on.

But beside the critic he mentioned specifically in context of this affair, there were still more general points of criticism that La Fayette had – there were three points in total:

how is it possible to carry a gentleman before a parcel of dreadful judges at the same place where an officer of the same rank has been just now cashiered, for a trifling neglect of his duty, for, I suppose, speaking to his next neighbour in a maneuvre, for going into a house to speack to a pretty girl, when the army is on his march and thousand other things—how is it possible to bring to the certainty of being cashiered, or dishonored, a young lad, who has made a considerable fault because he had a light head, a too great vivacity, when that young man would be perhaps in some years the best officer of the army, if he had been friendly reprimanded and arrested for some time, without any dishonor. the law is alwaïs severe, and bring with it an eternal Shamefull mark—when the judges are partial as in this occasion, it is much worse, because they have the same inconveniences as law itself. in court martials men are judged by theyr inferiors—how (mutilated) to discipline I do’nt want to say—the publication exposes men to (mutilated) despised by the least soldier—when men have been before a court martial they schould be or acquitted or dismissed—what do you think can be produced by the half conndemnation of a general officer—what necessity for all the soldiers, all the officers, to know that general maxwell has been prevented from doing [h]is duty by his being drunk. Where is the man who will not laugh at him if he is told by him you are a drunkard and is it right to ridicule a man repectable by his rank, because he drank two or three gills of rum. there are my reasons against court martials, when there is not some considerable fault to punish—according to my affair I am sorry in seeing the less guilty being the only one punished however, I shall send to court martials but for such a crimes, that there will be for the judges no way of indulgence and partiality. With the most tender respect I am Your excellency’s the most obedient servant

While La Fayette sounded almost a bit rebellious in his last sentence, it was not that he was entirely against court martials, he simply wanted them reserved for more serious offenses.

your excellency will certainly approuve my not arresting any officer for being brought before a court martial, for any neglect of duty, but when they will be robbers, or cowards, or when they will assassinate, in all when the[y] will deserve being cashiered or put to death.

The American system of court martials was molded after the English system and La Fayette was not quite happy with that either. Again, in the same letter to Washington from January 13, 1778 he wrote:

give me leave, to tell your excellency how I am adverse to court martials—I know it is the english costom, and I believe it is a very bad one—it comes from theyr love of lawers, speakers, and of that black apparate of sentences, and judgements—but such is not the american temper, and I think this new army must pick up the good institutions, and leave the bad ones where ever they may be (…)

Since I picked the letter so much apart, I will put a full and continuous version beneath the cut. :-)

Washington was not the only person, nor this the only incident where La Fayette expressed his displeasure about court martials. He wrote in a letter to Henry Laurens in his official position as President of Congress on March 20, 1778:

There as been a court martial for desertion which I din’t approuve of, but as among other men I have found sentenc’d of death, I beg from Congress to be empowered to relieve the man.

Idzerda Stanley J. et al., editors, Lafayette in the Age of the American Revolution: Selected Letters and Papers, 1776–1790, Volume 1, December 7, 1776–March 30, 1778, Cornell University Press, 1977, p. 365.

Despite being against court martials, La Fayette was naturally involved in a number of trials one way or another. He for example took part in two famous court martial cases, the cases of Charles Lee and Major John André. In Lee’s proceedings, La Fayette was a witness and wrote to Henry Laurens on July 6, 1778:

You have heard good deal, I dare say, of the court against Gal. Lee. I am very unwillingly an evidence in it but am happy enough as to have nothing material to say. This Gal. Lee is very much prejudic’d in favor of his english nation. If he is condemn’d, certainly he must be guilty of some thing very ugly.

Idzerda Stanley J. et al., editors, Lafayette in the Age of the American Revolution: Selected Letters and Papers, 1776–1790, Volume 3, April 27, 1780–March 29, 1781, Cornell University Press, 1980, p. 99.

Even in this short abstract La Fayette clearly states his opinion of General Charles Lee. It was not a very high opinion. He thought that Lee had acted badly during the battle, that he was prejudice, and that Washington was in the right when giving him a dressing down. Still, La Fayette was not in favour of the court martial and much resented being a part of it. We can see that his aversion for court martials, was not based on personal sympathies. He rejected these proceedings no matter the circumstances or the person accused.

Another great, but more complex, matter was the court martial of John André. La Fayette sat from September 29 to September 30, 1780 on the court martial of John André and was therefore among the men who found him guilty. He wrote to the Vicomte de Noailles (the husband of his sister-in-law) about his role in the proceeding on October 3, 1780.

But what has truly afflicted me is the necessity of hanging the adjutant general of the British army, a charming man who conducted himself throughout, and died, like a hero. This severity was necessary; the enemy acted very stupidly on this occasion, and since they lost that unfortunate man, the soul of their army, they have not written one letter that had common sense. Andre was executed yesterday. General Clinton’s anger does not frighten us, but this man's death, although inevitable in my opinion, left me with a feeling of sadness and respect for his character. I truly suffered in condemning him; but he was an officer under disguised clothing and name, passing within our posts with papers full of intelligence for the enemy, and he himself did not hesitate to recognize himself as a spy.

Idzerda Stanley J. et al., editors, Lafayette in the Age of the American Revolution: Selected Letters and Papers, 1776–1790, Volume 3, April 27, 1780–March 29, 1781, Cornell University Press, 1980, p. 182.

La Fayette’s aversion to court martials meets here his personal sympathy and respect for John André and his opinions (although they were still very much developing at this point in time) about the death penalty.

Out of the recorded 3315 court martials recorded in the continental army during the War of American Independence, La Fayette was involved in a number of them. We dissected the cases of Flagg, Laird, Lee and André. A forage master under his command was tried on February 19, 1778:

At a General Court-Martial whereof Col. Cortlandt was President (Feby 19th 1778) Mr Edward Bennett Forage-Master in the Marquis La Fayette’s division tried for repeated neglect of duty in suffering the horses of the division to remain three days without Forage when there was Forage in the General Forage yard, and all the divisions in the Army drew, for neglecting to draw hay when to be got and for trusting to others what he should himself perform by which many horses in the division have perished and the whole of the teams rendered unfit for duty. (…) The Court are therefore unanimously of opinion that Mr Bennett has been neglectful of his duty in not getting forage for the horses of the division to which he belongs when it could have been procured whereby many of them have perished for the want of it, being a breach of Article 5th Section 18th of the Articles of War and they do sentence him to be dismissed from his employment in the forage department.

“General Orders, 24 February 1778,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/03-13-02-0555. [Original source: The Papers of George Washington, Revolutionary War Series, vol. 13, 26 December 1777 – 28 February 1778, ed. Edward G. Lengel. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2003, pp. 652–653.] (10/24/2023)

He also ordered the court martial of Lieutenant William Mills on September 15, 1780:

At a division General court martial the 15th instant by order of Major General Marquis de la Fayette, Colonel Swift President Lieutenant William Mills of Colonel Gematt’s regiment of Light Infantry was tried for “Disobedience of Orders” and unanimously acquitted.

“General Orders, 18 September 1780,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/03-28-02-0160. [Original source: The Papers of George Washington, Revolutionary War Series, vol. 28, 28 August–27 October 1780, ed. William M. Ferraro and Jeffrey L. Zvengrowski. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2020, pp. 222–223.] (10/24/2023)

He further ordered a court martial for Captain Wilkin on September 12, 1781:

At a General Court Martial assembled at Williamsburgh September 12th 1781 by order of Major General the Marquis de la Fayette Colonel Vose President—Captain Wilkin of Colonel Stewarts Battalion of the Pennsylvania line, charged by Col Stewart with riotous behavior in his tent at an unseasonable hour of the Night; with disobedience of orders in not desisting when ordered so to do by the field Officer of the day through the Adjutt Captain Vanhorn and for using language and conduct subversive of good order and Discipline, was tried and acquited.

The Commander in Chief approves the Opinion of the Court. Captain Wilkin is released from his Arrest.

“General Orders, 25 September 1781,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/99-01-02-07015. [This is an Early Access document from The Papers of George Washington. It is not an authoritative final version.] (10/24/2023)

La Fayette also was asked by General Wayne to approve a verdict by a court martial ordered by Wayne himself. The soldier in question, James Grant, was from Virginia and La Fayette was popular with the Virginias and Wayne not. Wayne wrote on August 10, 1781, the day after Grant’s trial:

Inclosed is the proceedings of a Genl. Court Martial. Was it held on a soldier belonging to the Pennsa. Line I should not have the least difficulty or a moments hesitation in Confirming it because if this Culprit should pass with Impunity-it may open a door to worse [occurrences?]. But as it is a private of the Virginia Line I beg leave to commit it to your Decission.

Idzerda Stanley J. et al., editors, Lafayette in the Age of the American Revolution: Selected Letters and Papers, 1776–1790, Volume 4, April 1, 1781–December 23, 1781, Cornell University Press, 1981, pp. 309-311.

Grant was found guilty of shooting Captain Abraham Kirkpatrick whom he allegedly found in bed with his wife.

This list is by no means intended to be conclusive, there were probably many more cases La Fayette was involved in, these were just the ones I could present after a relatively quick search. This is more meant to give you a felling for La Fayette’s behavior in such situations.

Marquis de La Fayette to George Washington, January 13, 1778:

dear general I Schall make use in this particular instance of the liberty you gave me of telling freely every idea of mine which could strike me as not being useless to a better order of things. There were two gentlemen, same rank, same duty to perform, and same neglect of it who have been arrested the same day by me—as I went in the night around the piquets I found them in fault, and I gave an account of it the next day to your excellency—you answered that I was much in wrong not to have had them relieved and arrested immediately—I objected that it was then very late for such a changement, and that I did not know which was the rule in this army, but that the gentlemen should be arrested in that very moment—the last answer of your excellency has been, “they are to have a court martial, and you must give notice of it to the adjudant general”—therefore major nevill made two letters in order to arrest them, one for having been surprised in his post and the other, for the same cause and allowing his centrys to have fires which he could see in standing before the picquet. I give you my word of honor that there was not any exageration.

now I See in the orders the less guilty punished in a manner, much too severe indeed, and dismised from the service (it is among all the delicate minds deprived of his honor) when he was only to be severely reprimanded, and kept for some time under arrest—but it can be attributed to a very severe discipline.

what must I think of the same court when they unanimously acquit (it is to say that my accusation is not trüe) the officer who joins to the same fault, entirely the same, this of allowing his centrys to have fire in his own sight—for in every service being surprised or being found in the middle of his picquet without any challenging or stopping centry, as major nevil riding before me found him, is entirely the same thing—and mjor nevil riding before me when I was busy to make a centry pull off his fire, can swear that such was the case with that officer—he can do more than swearing, for he can give his word of honor—and I think that idea honor is the same in every country but the prejugées are not the same thing—for giving publickly the best of such a dispute (for here it becomes a trial for both parties) to an officer of the last military stage against one of the first, schould be looked on as an affront to the rank, and acquitting a man whom one other man accuses, looked upon as an affront to the person—it is the same in poland for count de pulaski was much affronted of the decision of a court martial entirely acquitting Colonel molens—however as I know the english costoms I am nothing else but surprised to see such a partiality in a court martial.

your excellency will certainly approuve my not arresting any officer for being brought before a court martial, for any neglect of duty, but when they will be robbers, or cowards, or when they will assassinate, in all when the[y] will deserve being cashiered or put to death.

give me leave, to tell your excellency how I am adverse to court martials—I know it is the english costom, and I believe it is a very bad one—it comes from theyr love of lawers, speakers, and of that black apparate of sentences, and judgements—but such is not the american temper, and I think this new army must pick up the good institutions, and leave the bad ones where ever they may be—in france an officer is arrested by his superior, who gives notice of it to the commanding officer, and then he is punished enough in being deprived of going out of his room in time of peace, of doing his duty in time of war—no body knows of it but his comrades—when the fault is greater he is confined in a common room for prisonner officers and this is much more shamefull—notice of it is immediately given to the general officer who commands there—that goes too to the Kings minister who is to be reimplaced here by the commander in chief—in time of war it goes to the general in chief.

Soldiers are punished the same or next day by order of proper officers, and the right of punishing is proportionate to theyr ranks.

but when Both officers and soldiers have done something which deserves A more severe punishement, when theyr honor, or theyr life, or theyr liberty for more than a very short time is concerned, then a court martial meets, and the sentence is known—how will you let an unhappy soldier be confined several weeks, with men who are to be hanged, with spies, with the most horrid sort of people, and in the same time be lost for the duty, when they deserve only some lashes—then almost no proportion in the punishements.

how is it possible to carry a gentleman before a parcel of dreadful judges at the same place where an officer of the same rank has been just now cashiered, for a trifling neglect of his duty, for, I suppose, speaking to his next neighbour in a maneuvre, for going into a house to speack to a pretty girl, when the army is on his march and thousand other things—how is it possible to bring to the certainty of being cashiered, or dishonored, a young lad, who has made a considerable fault because he had a light head, a too great vivacity, when that young man would be perhaps in some years the best officer of the army, if he had been friendly reprimanded and arrested for some time, without any dishonor.

the law is alwaïs severe, and bring with it an eternal Shamefull mark—when the judges are partial as in this occasion, it is much worse, because they have the same inconveniences as law itself.

in court martials men are judged by theyr inferiors—how ⟨mutilated⟩ to discipline I do’nt want to say—the publication exposes men to ⟨mutilated⟩ despised by the least soldier—when men have been before a court martial they schould be or acquitted or dismissed—what do you think can be produced by the half conndemnation of a general officer—what necessity for all the soldiers, all the officers, to know that general maxwell has been prevented from doing [h]is duty by his being drunk. Where is the man who will not laugh at him if he is told by him you are a drunkard and is it right to ridicule a man repectable by his rank, because he drank two or three gills of rum. there are my reasons against court martials, when there is not some considerable fault to punish—according to my affair I am sorry in seeing the less guilty being the only one punished however, I shall send to court martials but for such a crimes, that there will be for the judges no way of indulgence and partiality. With the most tender respect I am Your excellency’s the most obedient servant

The mquis de lafayette

“To George Washington from Major General Lafayette, 13 January 1778,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/03-13-02-0186. [Original source: The Papers of George Washington, Revolutionary War Series, vol. 13, 26 December 1777 – 28 February 1778, ed. Edward G. Lengel. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2003, pp. 222–225.] (10/24/2023)

#marquis de lafayette #la fayette #french history #american history #american revolution #history #letter #founders online #george washington #henry laurens #anthiny wayne #1778 #1780 #1781 #charles lee #thomas conway #john andré

[vergess]

Hi, in one post you mention that punishment for rape that is equal or worse to that for murder leads to rapists murdering their victims because the punishment can't get worse anyway, and that this is the reason the US stopped the death penalty for rape. I found that really interesting, do you have the source/something where I could read more about it?

I was somewhat mistaken. Although that IS in precedent now, the original judicial declaration was based on proportionality NOT victim endangerment!

Rather, the justification of "removing a protective incentive to keep the victim alive" comes up later, in Kennedy v Louisiana

by in effect making the punishment for child rape and murder equivalent, a State that punishes child rape by death may remove a strong incentive for the rapist not to kill the victim

Further reading about death, murder, and rape rates:

On the flaws of the death sentence:

Statistics backing the claim that the death penalty increases murder rates generally:

Further evidence that the death penalty for rape is used nearly exclusively to target marginalized men, NOT to protect rape victims in general:

Of course, victims and families are harmed psychologically by executions anyway, especially if they knew their rapist prior to the assault. Even in cases where the perpetrator was an unknown, heaping death upon disaster for the many years that an execution trial takes? Tends to trigger suicidal breakdowns in the very victims the penalty is supposed to "give closure" to

#Asks #Answered asks #perpetualmotionperson #death penalty #Rape #Child rape

[foreverlogical]

NEW YORK (AP) — The National Rifle Association and its former longtime leader were found liable Friday in a lawsuit centered on the organization’s lavish spending.

The New York jury found that Wayne LaPierre, who was the NRA’s CEO for three decades, misspent millions of dollars of the group’s money on pricey perks, and it ordered him to repay the group $4,351,231. Jurors also found that the NRA omitted or misrepresented information in its tax filings and violated New York law by failing to adopt a whistleblower policy.

LaPierre, 74, sat stone-faced in the front row of the courtroom as the verdict was read aloud. The jury actually found him liable for $5.4 million, but it determined he’d already paid back a little over a million.

The verdict is a win for New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat who campaigned on investigating the NRA’s not-for-profit status. It is the latest blow to the powerful group, which in recent years has been beset by financial troubles and dwindling membership. LaPierre, its longtime face, announced his resignation on the eve of the trial.

NRA general counsel John Frazer and retired finance chief Wilson Phillips were also defendants in the case. Phillips was ordered to pay $2 million in damages to the NRA. Frazer, meanwhile, was found to have violated his duties, but was not ordered to pay any money.

The penalties paid by LaPierre and Phillips will go back to the NRA, which was portrayed in the case both as a defendant that lacked internal controls to prevent misspending and as a victim of that same misconduct.

James also wants the three men to be banned from serving in leadership positions at any charitable organizations that conduct business in New York. A judge will decide that question during the next phase of the state Supreme Court trial.

Another former NRA executive turned whistleblower, Joshua Powell, settled with the state last month, agreeing to testify at the trial, pay the NRA $100,000 and forgo further involvement with nonprofits.

James sued the NRA and its executives in 2020 under her authority to investigate not-for-profits registered in the state.

She originally sought to have the entire organization dissolved, but Manhattan Judge Joel M. Cohen ruled in 2022 that the allegations did not warrant a “corporate death penalty.”

The trial, which began last month, cast a spotlight on the leadership, organizational culture and finances of the powerful lobbying group, which was founded more than 150 years ago in New York City to promote rifle skills and grew into a political juggernaut that influenced federal law and presidential elections.

Before he stepped down, LaPierre, had led the NRA’s day-to-day operations since 1991, acting as its face and becoming one of the country’s most influential figures in shaping gun policy.

During the trial, state lawyers argued that he dodged financial disclosure requirements while treating the NRA as his personal piggy bank, liberally dipping into its coffers for African safaris and other questionable expenditures.

His lawyer cast the trial as a political witch hunt by James.

LaPierre billed the NRA more than $11 million for private jet flights and spent more than $500,000 on eight trips to the Bahamas over a three-year span, state lawyers said.

He also authorized $135 million in NRA contracts for a vendor whose owners showered him with free trips to the Bahamas, Greece, Dubai and India, as well as access to a 108-foot (33-meter) yacht.

LaPierre claimed he hadn’t realized the travel tickets, hotel stays, meals, yacht access and other luxury perks counted as gifts, and that the private jet flights were necessary for his safety.

But he conceded that he had wrongly expensed private flights for his family and accepted vacations from vendors doing business with the NRA without disclosing them.

Among those who testified at the trial was Oliver North, a one-time NRA president and former National Security Council military aide best known for his central role in the Iran-Contra scandal of the 1980s. North, who resigned from the NRA in 2019, said he was pushed out after raising allegations of financial irregularities.

After reporting a $36 million deficit in 2018 fueled largely by misspending, the NRA cut back on longstanding programs that had been core to its mission, including training and education, recreational shooting and law enforcement initiatives. In 2021, it filed for bankruptcy and sought to incorporate in Texas instead of New York, but a judge rejected the move, saying it was an attempt to duck James’ lawsuit.

Despite its recent woes, the NRA remains a political force. Republican presidential hopefuls flocked to its annual convention last year and former President Donald Trump spoke at an NRA event earlier this month — his eighth speech to the association, it said.

#nra #wayne lapierre #gun control #mass shooting #assault weapon ban

[ausetkmt]

A Florida judge is considering whether authorities should add hate crime charges against two of three men who allegedly chased a Black man into an alley and killed him.

Authorities found a 39-year-old Black man shot to death behind a dumpster at 6:45 a.m. on Tuesday, May 2 in Jacksonville, Florida. Two days later, police announced they’d arrested Ryan Christopher Nichols, 19, Daniel James DeGuardia, 18, and Holden Emery Dodson, 21, according to First Coast News.

Circuit Court Judge Kim Sadler said DeGuardia and Dodson’s charges could be upgraded to a hate crime.

“I’m not the state, it’s up to them, of course, what charges they bring,” Sadler told First Coast News. “But it was just a bunch of white guys chasing a Black guy and I didn’t see any reason for it.”

A hate crime charge would mean harsher penalties, according to Florida law. For instance, a second-degree felony would be upgraded to a first-degree felony.

The identity of the deceased Black man has not been released.

What happened?

Surveillance footage of the are showed a Jeep Grand Cherokee arriving near 100 North Julia Street and parking around 2:25 a.m. Three white men exit the vehicle and begin walking. Twenty minutes later, the Black victim is seen being chased by the men as he flees behind a dumpster. Moments later, the three white men return to the jeep and speed off.

Another video near a 7-Eleven revealed the license plate of the vehicle. Authorites tracked it to alleged accomplice DeGuardia’s mother’s home. DeGuardia allegedly reported his 9mm Glock as lost that night.

According to First Coast News, authorities also reported a 36-year-old Black woman had been shot and killed. Her body was found in a vehicle in the area of Boulevard and West 22nd Street. The Sheriff’s Office doesn’t believe the two homicides are related.

Anyone with information contact the Sheriff’s Office at [phone] or First Coast Crime Stoppers at [phone] (845-TIPS) to remain anonymous and be eligible for rewards. Or email [email protected] or [email protected].

Florida has a long history of hate crimes

The local Sheriff’s Office said that while the investigation is ongoing, there is “no information at this time” leading them to believe the attack was a hate crime. Notably, police officers around the nation are not obligated to report hate crimes to the FBI’s federal database.

Florida has a long history of hate crimes, however, in the form of racial terror lynchings.

At least 319 lynchings of Black people took place in Florida between 1877 and 1950, according to data from the Equal Justice Initiative. The state accounted for the 6th highest number of racial terror lynching during that period.

In Duval County, where Jacksonville resides, EJI documented eight lynchings during that period. One county over, in St. John’s County, where the three suspects all had previous addresses, one lynching reportedly took place.

In recent years, Florida has become a hot-bed of anti-Black sentiment through the passage of laws targeting Black history and limiting the political power of Black residents. The shooting adds to a deadly toll taking place around the country.

More Americans fell victim to gun violence in 2021 (48,830) than any previous year on record, according to Pew Research Center. Guns are also the leading cause of death for children and teens, Pew found.

#hate crimes #florida #florida travel warning #3 Florida white men kill Black man #judge says possible hate crime

[beardedmrbean]

ST. LOUIS — On the morning of her scheduled execution, Missouri Gov. Mike Parson denied clemency for Amber McLaughlin.

She will be the first openly transgender death row inmate executed by the state of Missouri and the first in the United States.

In a news release, the governor's Office confirmed they will carry out the sentence of McLaughlin as ordered by the Supreme Court of Missouri.

"McLaughlin’s conviction and sentence remains after multiple, thorough examinations of Missouri law. McLaughlin stalked, raped, and murdered Ms. Guenther. McLaughlin is a violent criminal," Parson said. "Ms. Guenther's family and loved ones deserve peace. The State of Missouri will carry out McLaughlin’s sentence according to the Court's order and deliver justice."

At 6 p.m. on Tuesday, McLaughlin is scheduled to die by lethal injection for the crime she committed 19 years ago.

According to the Anti-Execution Death Penalty Information Center, there is no known case of an openly transgender inmate being executed in the US before.

Statement from McLaughlin's attorney, Laurence Komp: 

“We are just profoundly disappointed. This was a case where the jury refused to impose death - so it was ideal for clemency to close that loophole and impose life.”

The crime

5 On Your Side searched through our archives, learning what happened on Nov. 20, 2003.                

The victim's neighbor said Beverly Guenther was in fear of her ex-partner for months.

According to the neighbor, we learned a police officer was walking Guenther from work to her car for a week.

But, the one time she stopped asking for an escort, the murder happened.       

Guenther was about to file another order of protection against McLaughlin the very next day when she was abducted from her job in Earth City.           

Her body was then found in south St. Louis.                

Guenther was raped and stabbed to death.

In the news release, Parson said, "McLaughlin terrorized Ms. Guenther for months prior, to the point where Ms. Guenther had an order of protection against McLaughlin after McLaughlin broke into her home. McLaughlin’s culpability in Ms. Guenther's murder has never been in question. Missouri courts have found no issue in the application of Missouri law to McLaughlin, and federal appellate courts have maintained as much."

The conviction

McLaughlin was charged with first-degree murder, rape and aggravated assault.

One of McLaughlin's attorneys, Laurence Komp, said while the jury convicted McLaughlin of the crime, they were deadlocked on a death sentence. 

That's when a St. Louis County judge set the ruling for the death sentence.

Missouri is one of two states across the country that allows a judge to do this.

#nunyas news

[gofancyninjaworld]

Could you imagine how it’d feel to get a life altering surgery without your consent and when you wake up your doctors are like “Yeah we’re nowhere near as good as that other guy though” about air

Heh, well, you've saved me starting a meta post.

This is indeed one of the follow ups for the wordy, but important bonus chapter. When body modification has been suggested, heroes have said, 'talk to my lawyer, motherfucker,' and the hapless executive being pressured to pressure them to accept has agreed -- he's trying to transfer elsewhere.

So, no question where heroes stand on forced 'improvements': no dice. They'll take on what works for them and that's that.

This is a nice, evil edge case. So Air has been shot clean through the throat and out his spine: a grevious injury indeed. Massive points to the helicopter crew for getting him to the nearest hospital alive!

While ideally you talk to a patient and get their informed consent before giving any drugs or doing any surgery, where the person is unable to give consent, there's a case for doing surgeries where not operating is unethical in that failing to intervene would result in death or major disability.

A lot of the surgery he needed was indeed life-saving. Repairing severed nerves: absolutely. Looks like that's the C4 vertebra: failing to repair that damage is to condemn Air to being a quadriplegic. It's beyond our technology to repair at the moment, but there's a lot of progress being made in nerve repair with artificial guides. One thing we've learned: time is of essence. There's a very narrow window in which severed nerves are willing to regenerate; after that, the inflammation and scarring that sets in actively prevents healing. The bone itself will need reconstruction: that may well take an artificial/bone mix to piece back together and have it be strong enough to work right away. Blood vessels? Absolutely need repairing. Fortunately, the largest blood vessels aren't center-line or he'd be dead. Damaged muscles? Very fiddly. Needs repair. Oesephagus? Yes, being able to swallow isn't really optional: if that can be repaired there and then, it should be.

Not optional: being able to breathe. HOWEVER, you don't need to be able to speak. A stoma would suffice perfectly well. That's where the life-altering surgery comes in. Rather than do the life-saving surgery, letting Air recover, and then discussing his options for larynx and trachea repair, the Hero Association has gone right ahead, called in some shady-ass 'doctors' and made decisions that they have no business making. And it looks like the extent of the visible prosthetics is far more than you could functionally justify.

I know that heroes are tough and heal incredibly quickly, but even so, damn... talk about an incredibly quick and excellent functional repair.

As the bonus chapter has shown, heroes have a keen sense of their humanity and know their way to legal representation. This is probably not going to go well for the Hero Association. Good. They have it coming.

It'll take the cost, the judicial censure, and the negative publicity -- maybe even criminal penalties -- for the board at the HA to get it through their heads that, yes, there's nothing wrong with body modification, but there's everything wrong with changing a person without their consent.

Ah well, that's not the only ethical thing the HA is getting wrong.

#OPM #meta #ethics #Air #Hero Association #if you haven't read the bonus comic 'Big Promotion' now's a good time to do so #when the wheels come off at the Hero Association you'll need it to understand why

[cheerfullycatholic]

In a July 31 Letter to the Editor, Demetrius Minor, the National Manager of Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty criticizes the Louisiana Pardon Board decision to decline review of clemency petitions filed by nearly every death-sentenced prisoner in Louisiana. The clemency applications were filed after Governor Edwards publicly announced that he opposed the death penalty. The petitions raise claims of intellectual disability, severe mental illness, racial injustice, and prosecutorial misconduct, among other longstanding, systemic problems with the application of the death penalty in Louisiana. Minor writes that “Governor John Bel Edwards must now take action to ensure that the door to redemption remains open.” In his letter, Minor discussed how his views about the death penalty evolved over time. “I grew up believing in the death penalty,” he said, “But over time, I began to question capital punishment as fundamentally at odds with the possibility of redemption and restoration. I also came to understand that being ‘pro-life’ means cherishing all life.” He attributes this change to his experience assisting in worship services for incarcerated people during his ministerial internship at the Pentecostals of Alexandria. “My eyes were opened to the profound yearning for redemption among the incarcerated people who joined us in praise and worship,” he said. Minor also addresses the life experiences of death-sentenced prisoners. “I have come to see that those on death row are not ‘the worst of the worst.’ Rather, they are the ‘least of these,’ those we as Christians are called upon to protect. They are people with intellectual disability, serious mental illnesses, and those who were too poor to afford zealous trial attorneys. Most are survivors of unspeakable childhood trauma.”

#christian #christianity #demetrius minor #louisiana #death penalty #anti death penalty #death penalty information center

[lastweeksshirttonight]

Guess who's back

Lee is back, tell a friend.

I know I let this project sit fallow for the last few weeks, but I'm gonna kick it back in gear - especially now that we don't have any new LWTs to pick apart every week.

Last Lee Tonight (wherein Lee is still alive, he promises) Season One, Episode Five

(original air date: 6/8/2014) Major topics covered: Net Neutrality, the spelling bee, European elections

"Is there anyone into both anti-Zionist conspiracy theories AND smooth jazz?"

Welcome back from our mini-break! When we last left off, Last Week Tonight was still trying to figure out how, exactly, to structure its show, now that it's determined longer-form dissections of issues can and will work as stand-alone viral bits. This episode is, at least in some respects, where things start gelling into the format we know and love - and gives us our first really big viral bit from the show. I think this, more than the episode on the death penalty, is where LWT really starts to take shape.

Our episode is a rare start where John does not slap his desk a lot, but instead bobs around like a weird bird while everyone claps. It is delightful and important for you to know this, and he should do this more often. (Did you know that one of my main character traits is 'strong opinions about objectively useless shit'? SURPRISE IT IS)

The episode kicks off discussing a surge of far-right victories in European elections. Good to know people were worried about this getting out of hand in 2014. John makes it very clear this is a bad sign - "when Europe goes far right, they go far right through Belgium" is an amazing joke - and showcases multiple far-right Nazi groups that now have seats in their countries' governments. I hate how numb to a lot of this shit I am now because of the US' slow descent into fascism, but this was a startling warning sign at the time.

In contrast, Ukraine elected a chocolate baron as their president, and John takes the opportunity to sing badly and "whimsically". My heart.

Next is an update on Afghanistan, and a new plan for pulling out of the country by the end of 2014. Or the end of 2015. They've been just about to leave Afghanistan for a long time, and John has some further updates on plans going into 2016 and 2017.

These first bits before the "And Now This" feel a lot more like the modern introductory sections of Last Week Tonight. Everything aside from the brief Afghanistan update is centered around one singular theme (European elections), goes on for about 6 minutes (leaving plenty of time for the main topics), and goes into at least slight depth about the news (unlike earlier, extremely brief tossed-off news updates that expected at least a modicum of familiarity with current events). Things are starting to come together everyone!

Our first "And Now This" is about Jay Carney resigning from being White House Press Secretary, which they frame his resignation speech declaring his respect and love for the job with clips of him getting irritated, bemused, and drained by the idiocy of the press pool he dealt with. I honestly completely forgot this guy existed but all the memories of those Obama-era press conferences came back hard to me while watching this clip.

The first main story starts with the Internet, and John going on an extremely long tangent about buying coyote urine before bringing us to the actual topic - Net Neutrality.

This episode had a massive social impact when it aired in 2014. I remember this being such a huge deal, it seemed like every news organization was covering John's show and, through that coverage, informing the public about why net neutrality would be an absolute disaster for the US. Looking at this now, it also was a huge turning point in the marketing of the show - I've mentioned multiple times for previous episodes that the YouTube clips pulled from each episode so far make absolutely no sense, sometimes chopping up bits and not showing full context (like with the GM recalls), sometimes having shorter and longer versions of the same thing (like with the climate debate and the Bill Nye cameo). This episode marks the first time I can share the entirety of the episode's main bit with you as a YouTube video. It is absolutely wild to think that most audience's main way of interacting with this show, through longform YouTube bits, was not a thing at the start.

While the YouTube channel continues to have some smaller fragments of LWT episodes from this point on (usually the smaller intro bits or episode enders divorced from the main topic), and episode 7 inexplicably doesn't have video of its main topic at all (oh boy, that'll make my write up fun), by episode 8, the main subject of every episode has its own longform YouTube clip.

Here's the net neutrality clip for your viewing pleasure:

John opens the clip noting that discussions of net neutrality are boring as shit, saying he'd rather watch Caillou with his niece than listen to them. That's one of the most casually damning insults I've ever heard, because Caillou is fucking terrible. But net neutrality, I think as we all know now, is extremely important to the function of the internet as we know it.

I said I won't go deeply through each bit on a technical level, and this clip is very technical. It shows really well how LWT, at its best, really breaks down a complex issue and makes it easy to understand - and easy to get incensed about. Helps that cable companies get shit on CONSTANTLY in this one. I am still ready to destroy Spectrum over my early year internet fuckery.

I wish I remembered what I put in that FCC comment website, lol.

The episode shifts to another Other Countries' Presidents of the United States, which focuses on Tony Abbott of Australia, a religiously anti-immigrant shitheel who was an immigrant to Australia himself. It's always projection with these idiots. He's got a cavalcade of bad thoughts and ideas, a lot of which feel like they were pulled directly from a Thick of It episode. "I've given you the response you deserve", Jesus H. Tapdancing Christ.

He also looks a bit like a Paul Scheer character. I can't unsee it.

The last segment of the episode focuses on the Scripps National Spelling Bee. I made it to the regional tournament for this godawful stress-inducing nightmare in middle school, and I'm pretty sure the only reason I got that far is because my dad promised to buy me the Game Boy Advance game 'Ed Edd n Eddy: Jawbreakers' if I made it to state. I did not make it, and my dad felt so bad about it that he still bought me the game. I loved that game far more than I ever loved the goddamn spelling bee.

As an expert on this subject, "the Hunger Games of the mind" is a super accurate assessment and I related very very hard to the girl who said she was going to get every horror movie ever upon losing. I did much the same, except with Ed Edd n Eddy. (I was fucking obsessed with that show.)

I have to note that John also says "pop that pussy" in this clip. This is of interest to me and my gremlin followers.

Also Jesus Christ, Chris Cuomo, go to a fucking fight club or something to get out that Mortal Kombat-ass rage. My God, you absolute lunatic.

Random notes:

Lee obviously focuses on important things corner: plum tie, light blue shirt, dark gray jacket, holy shit it is too early for me to be this flustered. A LOOK. 10/10 no notes

Weird items from the Last Week Tonight YouTube page: a video of a singular joke from the Net Neutrality clip. I am not entirely sure what they were going for here - did they think one joke might go more viral than an entire 15 minute clip? Did they make this as a lead-in on a long-lost corporate website? Did they predict TikTok? I have so many questions.

A couple of years after the Spelling Bee bit, in 2016, John sent his congratulations to Scripps for their 90 year anniversary and some encouragement to participants. This is worth watching because a) all-ages/family-friendly John content is generally adorable and this is no exception, and b) John is smoking hot in it. Not even including the 'imo' there, he just IS. 11/10. 12/10 even. Ranking scale destroyed.

I would ask you all to guess who my favorite character on Ed Edd n Eddy was, but I am such a stereotype of a human being that if you guessed anyone other than Double D, you don't know me at all. Also this show is still hilarious as an adult, and I maybe got sidetracked watching a bunch of clips of it this morning.

#john oliver #last week tonight #last week tonight with john oliver #last lee tonight #ed edd n eddy #sorry for that tag people in the eene tag it makes sense in context #Youtube

[ghostys-originals]

y is it taking so goddamm long for death row to kill wolfgang?

"Death-sentenced prisoners in the U.S. typically spend more than a decade on death row prior to exoneration or execution. Some prisoners have been on death row for well over 20 years." [death penalty information center]

So yeah, he'd be due by now- but it could also be a few more years.

#pigskin #death mention

[reasoningdaily]

Alabama Plans to Resume Executions After Series of Botches; Oklahoma Execution Scheduled for Same Day | Death Penalty Information Center

[prythianfm]

in  the  center  of  prythian,  the  high  fae,  their  lesser  companions  and  mortal  stragglers  begin  their  descent  under  the  mountain.  a  sacred  place  which  has  provided  centuries  of  peace  now  assumes  the  countenances  of  a  decade  lost,  their  solemn  bearers  marred  by  countless  losses  throughout  time.  ten  years  is  but  a  blink  for  an  immortal  soul,  a  month  shadowing  the  end  of  the  war  a  mere  breath,  but  it  is  not  enough  to  heal  ;  evident  in  the  exchange  of  leery  stares,  hushed  whispers  and  the  occasional  lash  of  tongue  which  must  swiftly  be  swept  into  submission  —  blood  has  too  long  a  memory,  after  all.  but  they  are  wise  to  remember:  the  penalty  for  spilling  blood  beneath  the  mountain,  is  death.  not  all  fae  wish  to  see  their  rule  deposed  by  the  new  high  lords  and  ladies  and  the  mortal  queens,  surrendering  what  their  ancestors  forged  in  the  act  of  signing  a  treaty  in  which  will  undo  a  millennia  of  governing,  separating  the  fae  and  mortal  lands  for  good.  and  so  as  they  gather,  somewhere  within  the  war - wearied  masses,  a  glamoured  being  from  another  land  stalks  the  vastness  of  the  cavern,  sorely  uninvited.

𝐏𝐑𝐘𝐓𝐇𝐈𝐀𝐍𝐅𝐌  is  now  open  for  interactions  !  for  our  opening  setting  in  which  will  set  the  tone  for  our  first  chapter,  the  courts  are  arriving  under  the  mountain,  led  by  their  high  lords  and  ladies  into  neutral  territory  in  search  of  a  lasting  peace  in  the  form  of  a  new  treaty  in  which  will  separate  the  fae  and  mortal  lands  in  hopes  of  preventing  future  conflict.  but  as  they  convene  amongst  once  another,  some  watchful  and  untrusting,  a  hidden  creature  blends  into  the  horde  of  people,  awaiting  to  strike  when  the  time  is  right.  feel  free  to  drop  all  open  starters  in  the  respective  tag  (  prythian.start  )  as  well  as  toss  a  link  in  our  starter  channel  in  the  discord,  make  sure  you’re  following  everyone  on  the  blogroll  and  we  look  forward  to  writing  with  you  all  soon  !  we  are  also  requesting,  for  the  sake  of  uniformity,  if  possible,  everyone  uses  the  new  post  editor  (  trim  reblogs  ),  established  by  the  xkit  rewritten.  information  regarding  this  can  be  found  here.

#prythian.chapter #we open babes <3

[news4dzhozhar]

41st Execution Under Biden: President Pledged End Of Death Penalty But Has Made Little Progress On Issue

President Joe Biden’s promise to eliminate the death penalty at the federal level and work to end capital punishment in states seems to have gone dormant as the Department of Justice continues to press for the death penalty in certain cases and Biden—the first president to openly oppose the execution of prisoners—stays quiet on the issue as they continue in states.

Key Facts

Biden pledged to push for the death penalty’s elimination on the campaign trail in 2020 and did order a moratorium on carrying out federal death sentences, but since then his administration has been largely silent on the matter.

The nonpartisan Death Policy Information Center says there are 43 federal death row prisoners with sentences dating back as far as 1997, with the most recent death row inmate, Brandon Council of South Carolina, sentenced in 2019.

While no defendants have been sentenced to death since the start of the Biden administration, the Department of Justice has sought to uphold death sentences in previously prosecuted cases including those of church shooter Dylann Roof, Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and Rejon Taylor, sentenced in 2008 for killing a restaurant owner.

A federal jury in Pennsylvania earlier this month found Robert Bowers, convicted of killing 11 people at a Pittsburgh synagogue in 2018, eligible for the death penalty and is considering whether to recommend it, a process that could last several weeks, CNN reported.

Advocates have called on Biden to commute federal death penalties and abolish the capital punishment system, the New York Times reported, which would require Congress to pass legislation.

Earlier this month, Senators Ed Markey (D-MA) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), with Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), reintroduced the Federal Death Penalty Prohibition Act of 2023 that would stop judges from imposing federal death sentences and require re-sentencing of those currently on death row.

The White House in January told the Associated Press that "the DOJ makes decisions about prosecutions independently."

There have been no federal executions under the Biden administration, but 41 people have been put to death in seven states since he took office.

White House representatives did not immediately respond to request for comment Friday.

News Peg

Alabama executed its first prisoner in a year early Friday morning when convicted murderer James Barber, 64, died by lethal injection. Barber told NBC he had "no fear of death," but did worry about the lethal injection after Alabama was forced to stop three executions due to challenges finding a vein through which to administer lethal drugs. Barber’s attorneys appealed to the Supreme Court Thursday night to halt the execution, but the Court denied the request, with three liberal judges accusing Alabama of using Barber as a "guinea pig.” Barber was not a federal inmate.

Key Background

The death penalty in the United States dates back to the first establishment of the colonies. The Massachusetts Bay Colony held its first execution in 1630. The state of Massachusetts has since abolished the practice. Death sentences peaked in the mid 1990s, when more than 300 people were sentenced to death row per year, and have since sharply declined, the Death Penalty Information Center says. Lethal injection was first used in 1982, when Charles Brooks was given a lethal dose of sodium thiopental via an intravenous line in Texas. Between December 7, 1982 and the practice's 40th anniversary last year, the federal government has killed 1,377 prisoners using some version of the method, the nonprofit says. The Pew Research Center most recently in 2021 conducted a poll on how Americans feel about capital punishment—60% of U.S. adults favor the death penalty for people convicted of murder while 78% admit there is some risk that an innocent person will be put to death.

Tangent

There are 27 states that still allow the death penalty to be imposed in certain cases, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, three of which have governors who have imposed moratoriums on executing inmates—California, Pennsylvania and Oregon. Arizona and Ohio's governors have paused the death penalty while the state systems are reviewed. Arizona Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs said there will be no executions until there is "confidence that the state is not violating the law," and Ohio Republican Gov. Mike DeWine said the state will no longer use lethal injection, pausing execution until lawmakers choose a different method of capital punishment, per AP.

#jahar tsarnaev #dzhokhar tsarnaev #abolish the death penalty #abolish capital punishment #end capital punishment #end the death penalty #empty campaign promises #campaign promises #false promises #political lies