once again

the death penalty would be too nice for this bitch:

Pregnant Woman Accused of Killing Toddler

ROCHESTER HILLS, Mich. (AP) - A pregnant woman was charged with killing her boyfriend's toddler daughter by scalding her in what prosecutors say was 147-degree water, then ignoring her suffering for several hours.

Letitia Ann Johnson, 27, of Orion Township was charged Wednesday with second-degree murder in the death of 22-month-old Jasmine Phillips. She was ordered held without bond.

Johnson gave the girl a bath Saturday night in scalding water, then put her to bed, according to her statements to police. Johnson was aware Jasmine was in pain, according to prosecutors.

Louie D. Phillips, 26, found his daughter Sunday morning and called 911, police said. She was pronounced dead at a hospital. The medical examiner ruled the death a homicide caused by dehydration from extensive third-degree burns.


``There were third-degree burns over 40 percent of her body. And for 15 to 16 hours, she did not receive treatment except some Vaseline and powder,'' said prosecutor John Taylor.


Johnson has six children, three by Phillips. They are in state custody.
_____________________________________________

You know...I am aware that one of the reasons that people oppose the DP is because of the possibility of wrongly convicting some one.

Except, I don't see it in this case. There are some people that good skin and organs are simply a freakin waste on. She ought to be dropped in a boiling vat.


Maybe this makes me so sick because I just spent an hour out in the snow with my youngest. Yeah, it's been a hectic few weeks, with all the Christmas excitement. But never, even in a moment of blinding fury, can I imagine doing something like this to a child. It makes me want to be violently ill.

Make it a long, slow & very, very painful death! And even that is too good for her. What she did to a helpless child makes me sick. I hope she NEVER gets to see her own children again. [img]graemlins/cry.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/thumbs_down.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/gulp.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/grrr.gif[/img]

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sluggo:
Make it a long, slow & very, very painful death! And even that is too good for her. What she did to a helpless child makes me sick. I hope she NEVER gets to see her own children again. [img]graemlins/cry.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/thumbs_down.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/gulp.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/grrr.gif[/img]

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The crime that this woman is alleged to have committed is indeed heinous but I'm curious as to how this jibes with your observance of the ten commandments? You seem to be advocating killing when it is very explicitly forbidden that anyone kill anyone else. I don't think "Thou shall not kill" leaves a lot of wiggle room.

Pina - For Christ's sake, I did not say I am perfect nor did I claim to be always right!

I was expressing how I feel about something and, the last I heard, it was not a crime to have an opinion or feelings.

Here's another OPINION for you. I THINK you have too much time on your hands and it could be put to much better use. MHO!!!!! [img]mad.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/sure.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/wonder.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/grrr.gif[/img]

Well as long as it's just an opinion calling for her death in direct contravention of the ten commandments you say you live your life by, then I guess you get a free pass from god?

You know it's funny, and George Carlin bases some of his bits around his very point, but the catholic church actually used to hold people responsible for thier thoughts about sinning. Now I don't hold the catholics up as a shining example but I do agree that intent has some bearing and as you've been known to wish horrible acts on others as retribution for thier horrible acts I have to conclude that you may not be acting in the "spirit of the law" with respect to the commandments.

I will be the first to say , I advocate te "an eye for an eye" policy when dealing with criminals.

As for "alleged"...for god's sake the bitch admitted she did it. Let's cut the crappy devils advocate shit for once.

Gank her on the spot. No point in wasting space or oxygen on her.
No reason for someone like that to be allowed to continue living.

Assuming the article is accurate, I believe that she is guilty.

Our whole punishment system breaks down around people capable of acts such as this. She knowingly inflicted pain on a child to the point of death.

Punishment is generally thought of as either retributive or rehabilitative. Retribution would call for her painful death, but that makes those who impose the penalty share the same moral ground as she. Rehabilitation may or may not be possible. Would it make the other, living victims (those who loved the child) feel better about the whole situation if she were given the death penalty, or would that compound their misery? [img]frown.gif[/img]

Quote:

---

Originally posted by jdf:
I will be the first to say , I advocate te "an eye for an eye" policy when dealing with criminals.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That's fine for you but then you're not the one claiming membership amongst the anointed "moral ones" who follow the ten commandments and by implication excluding all those who do not as amoral ones.

Quote:

---

As for "alleged"...for god's sake the bitch admitted she did it. Let's cut the crappy devils advocate shit for once.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually the article does not say that she "admitted" anything. What it says is "according to her statements to police . . . according to prosecutors" which is not quite the same thing and considering the frequently innacurate nature of the news media compounded by the probable bias of the prosecutors very much open to interpretation. Perhaps we should quit the crappy assumption shit for once instead.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Aurora Leigh:
Assuming the article is accurate, I believe that she is guilty.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I tend to agree but there's always such a dearth of information in new articles that making an informed assessment is nigh onto impossible.

Quote:

---

Our whole punishment system breaks down around people capable of acts such as this.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually, I tend to think that our "punishment" system breaks down at the basic assumption level. More below.

Quote:

---

Punishment is generally thought of as either retributive or rehabilitative. Retribution would call for her painful death, but that makes those who impose the penalty share the same moral ground as she. Rehabilitation may or may not be possible. Would it make the other, living victims (those who loved the child) feel better about the whole situation if she were given the death penalty, or would that compound their misery?

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think there is at least one other option in the case of those who kill, and many more in the cases of those who commit lesser crimes. There is the dispassionate death option that could be chosen instead of the "eye for an eye" retribution motivated capital punishment.

Granted they still end up dead but the underlying assumptions about why they are dying are different and, IMO, make a profound difference in how we view the entire criminal justice system.

(Just as an aside I am currently re-examining my stance on the death penalty, in no small part due to Lew's postings on the subject, but still approach it from a social contract point of view.)