A Tale of Two Death Row Inmates
Two articles were published on Sunday profiling two very different death row inmates. One story presents a compelling case for the continued use of the death penalty while the other makes an equally compelling case for its abolition. I encourage you to read them both.
The first story is told by Debra Saunders of the San Francisco Chronicle. It's the story of Clarence Ray Allen, a man who ordered the brutal execution of three witnesses while he was already serving a life sentence with no possibility of parole for the murder of another witness. Allen is still on death row.
The second story is told by Lise Olsen of the Houston Chronicle. It's the story of Ruben Cantu, an 18 year old special ed student who was executed by the state of Texas in 1993. Cantu steadfastly maintained his innocence until the day he died, and it now appears that he was telling the truth. There was never any physical evidence against Cantu, just the word of his 15 year old co-defendant and an eye-witness who had been shown Cantu's photograph three times by police before identifying him. The co-defendant has since admitted that Cantu was not at the scene of the crime, and the eye-witness has recanted his testimony.
The first story does indeed present a compelling case for the death penalty, but it's worth pointing out that it is not quite the paradigmatic case that Saunders thinks it is. While it's apparently true that Allen ordered the deaths of three witnesses when he was already serving a life term, he did so immediately after his conviction and with the goal of clearing the way for a successful appeal. So had he been sentenced to death in the first instance, there's no reason to think things would have turned out any differently. He still would have wanted to appeal his conviction, so his motive would be undiminished (indeed it probably would have been stronger). The notion that certain criminals need to be killed for the protection of society (as opposed to locked away forever) is somewhat dubious, even in this extreme instance. Unless you are willing to deny death row inmates the right to appeal--which no one is willing to do--they will inevitably live for quite some time in prison (and therefore be potentially dangerous).
But Allen does represent the perfect example of someone who "deserves" to die. The reason a solid majority of people in this country support the death penalty is because of cases like this one, where the person is so irredeemably awful that it offends people's intuitive sense of justice that he be allowed to live. Opponents of the death penalty have long argued that it is "wrong" for the state to execute its own citizens, that this amounts to state-sponsored murder and is morally unjustifiable. I respect this position; it's principled and it has merit. But there are a lot of reasonable people who will never be convinced by this argument, and I don't blame them. You cannot fault someone for concluding, for example, that Clarence Ray Allen deserves to die. To reach such a conclusion is not a sign of lazy moral reasoning, and death penalty opponents would be well-advised to stop insisting that it is.
It is not morally indefensible to execute people like Clarence Ray Allen. The problem is that human beings are fallible and so are the institutions they create. The tragic proof of this undeniable reality is the story of Ruben Cantu. Because our system of justice is administered by fallible human beings, it is and will always be prone to error. It is simply not possible to design a system that is capable of sorting the guilty from the innocent with perfect accuracy. We, as human beings, lack that sort of omniscience. That means, occasionally, people like Ruben Cantu will fall through the cracks. It's hard to imagine a greater injustice than the state-sponsored execution of an innocent person.
So that brings us to the heart of the problem. We cannot design a system that sufficiently punishes people like Clarence Ray Allen without inflicting extreme injustice on people like Ruben Cantu. We have to choose. I, for one, find it hard to imagine that, by any reasonable moral calculus, Clarence Ray Allen "deserves" to die more than Ruben Cantu "deserves" to live.
I choose Ruben.
The first story is told by Debra Saunders of the San Francisco Chronicle. It's the story of Clarence Ray Allen, a man who ordered the brutal execution of three witnesses while he was already serving a life sentence with no possibility of parole for the murder of another witness. Allen is still on death row.
The second story is told by Lise Olsen of the Houston Chronicle. It's the story of Ruben Cantu, an 18 year old special ed student who was executed by the state of Texas in 1993. Cantu steadfastly maintained his innocence until the day he died, and it now appears that he was telling the truth. There was never any physical evidence against Cantu, just the word of his 15 year old co-defendant and an eye-witness who had been shown Cantu's photograph three times by police before identifying him. The co-defendant has since admitted that Cantu was not at the scene of the crime, and the eye-witness has recanted his testimony.
The first story does indeed present a compelling case for the death penalty, but it's worth pointing out that it is not quite the paradigmatic case that Saunders thinks it is. While it's apparently true that Allen ordered the deaths of three witnesses when he was already serving a life term, he did so immediately after his conviction and with the goal of clearing the way for a successful appeal. So had he been sentenced to death in the first instance, there's no reason to think things would have turned out any differently. He still would have wanted to appeal his conviction, so his motive would be undiminished (indeed it probably would have been stronger). The notion that certain criminals need to be killed for the protection of society (as opposed to locked away forever) is somewhat dubious, even in this extreme instance. Unless you are willing to deny death row inmates the right to appeal--which no one is willing to do--they will inevitably live for quite some time in prison (and therefore be potentially dangerous).
But Allen does represent the perfect example of someone who "deserves" to die. The reason a solid majority of people in this country support the death penalty is because of cases like this one, where the person is so irredeemably awful that it offends people's intuitive sense of justice that he be allowed to live. Opponents of the death penalty have long argued that it is "wrong" for the state to execute its own citizens, that this amounts to state-sponsored murder and is morally unjustifiable. I respect this position; it's principled and it has merit. But there are a lot of reasonable people who will never be convinced by this argument, and I don't blame them. You cannot fault someone for concluding, for example, that Clarence Ray Allen deserves to die. To reach such a conclusion is not a sign of lazy moral reasoning, and death penalty opponents would be well-advised to stop insisting that it is.
It is not morally indefensible to execute people like Clarence Ray Allen. The problem is that human beings are fallible and so are the institutions they create. The tragic proof of this undeniable reality is the story of Ruben Cantu. Because our system of justice is administered by fallible human beings, it is and will always be prone to error. It is simply not possible to design a system that is capable of sorting the guilty from the innocent with perfect accuracy. We, as human beings, lack that sort of omniscience. That means, occasionally, people like Ruben Cantu will fall through the cracks. It's hard to imagine a greater injustice than the state-sponsored execution of an innocent person.
So that brings us to the heart of the problem. We cannot design a system that sufficiently punishes people like Clarence Ray Allen without inflicting extreme injustice on people like Ruben Cantu. We have to choose. I, for one, find it hard to imagine that, by any reasonable moral calculus, Clarence Ray Allen "deserves" to die more than Ruben Cantu "deserves" to live.
I choose Ruben.
posted by A.L. at 11:33 PM
12 Comments:
The ocassional - though never, even in the case of Cantu, proven - case of the state sponsored execution of an innocent person is certainly an injustice. It is not, however, neccessarily the greatest injustice. If the state executes "x" number of Allen's for every mis-executed Cantu, I would want to know how many x's we were getting. I think a democratic society may justifiably choose a sufficiently high number of proper Allen executions if the number of Cantu executions is low. So our "reasonable moral calculus" must take into account how many Allens and how many Cantus. If the number of Allens is high enough and Cantus is low enough, why not choose Allen. I would.
Oh but if the Cantu case were the only case...
During the 1990s, in the scarlet red state of Virginia that likes the death penalty almost as much as it likes its guns and rifles (in spite of recent Tim Kaine victory as governor that gives the Commonwealth some hope), the case of Roger Keith Coleman is equally riveting.
The long and short of the Coleman case is that to his grave, Coleman professed he was innocent. And DNA currently lying around a laboratory in California could prove he was wrongfully executed.
Hopefully, once Kaine is sworn in as governor in January, he will immediately order for the DNA to be tested.
And the good Lord willing, the DNA will prove Coleman was indeed innocent; and then it's Katie bar the door, the movement will have a martyr; and it will be asked for quotes; and the quotes will be picked up by national media; and then; and then...
Coleman’s last words moments before the state of Virginia put him to death May 20, 1992 were,
"An innocent man is going to be murdered tonight. When my innocence is proven, I hope Americans will realize the injustice of the death penalty as all other civilized countries have."
One hundred and eighteen out of the 1,000 poor souls who've been executed were exonerated due to DNA.
That's a little over 1 out of 10.
Yep, the system in not broken. Just keep filling up the gas chamber tanks and keep the death row machines rolling!
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/living/columnists/leonard_pitts/12961715.htm
http://howlinglatina.blogspot.com/2005/09/innocent-man-is-going-to-be-murdered.html
"If the state executes "x" number of Allen's for every mis-executed Cantu, I would want to know how many x's we were getting. I think a democratic society may justifiably choose a sufficiently high number of proper Allen executions if the number of Cantu executions is low."
I never understood this sort of calculus. It compares qualitatively different things. Let's assume for the sake of argument that killing someone like Allen results in a "good" (e.g., it provides closure to victims families, etc.) Is that "good" even on the same plain as the "bad" that results for executing an innocent person. I find it very hard to believe that any amount of "Allen" executions would ever make up for even one "Cantu" execution.
And does the phrase "but for the grace of God" mean anything to people who acknowledge that innocents are executed but support the death penalty anyway? Have they no ability to imagine themselves in such a situation? I have a feeling the equation would come out a little differently if that person found himself wrongfully convicted and sentenced to die.
Deserves death? I daresay he does. Many that live deserve to die, but many that die deserve to live. Can you offer life to them as a reward? Then do not be too hasty to deal out death as a punishment?
- JRR Tolkein (paraphrased)
Some random comments:
1. regarding Allen--there is a difference between the fact that he was initially sentenced to life rather than death--as long as he is alive, he has the motivation to retaliate against and eliminate witnesses since he always has the hope of a new trial or some other reduction in sentence (a mistake in the saunders article is that allen was serving a life sentence with possibility of parole when he ordered these murders). Obviously, his execution eliminates his threat to the remaining witnesses. This is an example of why the Supreme Court spent many years leaving open the question of whether a state could make the death penalty mandatory for life prisoners who murder again.While the court ultimately declared a mandatory law unconstitutional, Allen's case does not fit any of the reasons why a life prisoner's case might be sufficiently mitigated to justify a sentence less than death.
2. there is no evidence of any executed defendant being exonerated by DNA--in fact, since 1973, there has been no proof that any innocent person has been executed. Obviously,any system based on less than absolute certainty, has the potential for mistakes. This is no secret and yet 38 states have enacted death penalty statutes despite that risk. While there have been examples of innocent people who have been sentenced to death, those claims have been exaggerated--the actual percentage between .05% and 1.6% of the 7000+ death sentences imposed since 1973. If your position is to oppose the death penalty if there is any possibility of mistake, then that is a principled position. However, the majority of the country has chosen to take that slight risk.
I'm opposed to the death penalty. However, Ray Allen had my cousin Brian murdered while he worked at Fran's Market, so named for his mother. The two cases are very very different. Ray Allen is the embodiment of evil and an example that the death penalty, if used should be incrediably rare. Ruben Cantu's case and several of in places like Texas point out how incrediably flawed the process is in many states. I don't advocate the Ray Allen should die but I won't be at the prison picketing for his life. I won't shed a single tear for him and maybe Brian's sister Patricia, the only surviving member of the family can have her first night without fear in three decades.
I like the moral conviction that Anonymous shows in the post above. He will allow someone to be put to death as long as he doesn’t have to get his hands dirty in the process. He’s against the practice until it gets close enough to involve a family member. “I’m against the death penalty but kill the bastard anyhow. Just do it without me.”
I dare say this is the way most American’s feel about this issue. American’s are quick to scream about injustice, but quicker to rush to judgment. This issue has no shades of grey. One cannot condone it in one instance and excuse it in the name of moral justice in another.
I support the death penalty. I have so all my adult life. However, with that said, I am starting to wavier on that belief.
It is indeed true that our system of justice is built on the back of very fallible men. Until a few years ago, I was comfortable with the idea that there were probably a few innocent people being wrongly convicted just as long as we got the vast majority of the bad guys. After all, we can only know so much.
But now, with the advent of DNA testing and much more sophisticated investigated techniques, the burden of proof must be raised to a higher level than before. Let science convict the criminal and not the minds of human beings.
Now, one can argue that test results still need to be interpreted by the same human beings as before. I agree. However, science does not leave much room for such interpretations and guidelines must be established in cases where there is room for doubt.
Until such time that science can be used to take the “subjective” factor out of our judicial system, we should probably give all people the benefit of the doubt. But instead of a death penalty, we should have a penal system that actual deters criminal activity. Make murder a life sentence without the possibility of parole and put them in a prison that is a real punishment instead of a home away from home. At least give the impression that punishment for your crime is indeed a punishment. Until that happens, I feel the American people will continue to take the easiest way out.
“Kill them all and let God sort them out." Dominic Guzman
DJ,
I'm the anonymous write to whom you refer. You didn't read what I wrote or you can't read. I didn't say "execute Ray Allen" I said that I won't shed a single tear for him" He had my cousin's head blown off. The only surviving member of Bryon's family, Patricia, has lived in fear of Ray Allen for over 20 years since he's proven he can arrange murders from inside California's prisons. My preference is that he spend his life in prison without the conjugal "rights" he enjoyed or anyother privledges. There is a huge difference between stating that I won't mourn him and calling for his execution. I'm not calling for his execution. You claim that I "will allow someone to be put to death as long as (I don't) have to get (my) hands dirty in the process." I don't see that in anything I wrote. I said I wasn't going to be picketing for his life. I can't, I'm in Iraq. How do you get from my post, that American's are quick to scream about injustic but quicker to rush to judgment? Ray Allen has Bryon mudered 25 years ago; this didn't come up yesterday. Finally, in the Ray Allen case, your DNA benchmark wouldn't have added anything. He planned and arranged the murders while he was in prison. His DNA was a long way away from Fran's Market in Sanger, CA. As far as morale convictions. I've been in the military for 26 years, please come and joint me for the Holidays in Iraq where I've been watching events in California's penal system from afar.
A macabre flight of fancy…
On January 2, 2006, condemned inmate Clarence Ray Allen had yet another massive coronary; heroic measures being taken to save his life so he could be justly executed.
I, Frank Gonzalez, the duly sworn Chief Executioner of San Quentin, sat in the warden’s office that afternoon feeling remorse, realizing that I may not have the opportunity to execute Mr. Allen in the death chamber, using my trusty, sawed-off, Mossberg 935 12 gauge magnum autoloading shotgun. As with Tookie Williams, a review panel appointed by Governor Schwarzenegger had determined that lethal injection was much too merciful for a depraved monster like Clarence Ray Allen, and that the method of execution chosen for him would be lethal shotgunning. I would administer the sentence, using four blasts from the Mossberg, timed one minute apart, in respectful memory of the four victims he ordered murdered.
“Don’t worry, he should recover from his unfortunate heart attack, the physician in charge performed a quadruple bypass,” said the warden.
“Yes warden, but after that Tookie Williams affair a month ago – ”
“How many times do I have to say this Frank – you executed Stanley Tookie Williams on orders of the state of California and Governor Schwarzenegger. Just because you spoke to him before you blew his head off is no reason to castigate yourself.”
“Before that incident, I never violated prison procedure once in my thirty five years of employment at San Quentin, my record was perfect.”
“And it still is, no one, not even Governor Schwarzenegger, held against you what you said to Tookie, in righteous anger I might add, before you blew his head off.”
“But – ”
“No buts,” said the warden, “To the matter at hand, if condemned inmate Allen survives, will you, following the directives of the review panel, slaughter him mercilessly with a sawed-off shotgun?”
“Yes sir, you only have to show me the death warrant; I am the Chief Executioner of San Quentin,” I answered with firm resolve.
“Very good,” said the warden.
Condemned inmate Allen recovered, due to the devoted care of San Quentin physicians. As his health improved over the following week, I was pleased to learn that I would indeed have the opportunity to execute him by shotgunning on January 17, 2006.
The welcome day arrived, and Clarence Ray Allen was prepared for his well-deserved execution. Half-blind, nearly deaf but not one bit remorseful, the condemned prisoner was ushered into the hall via his wheelchair.
“Do you think that bloodthirsty old geek can walk to the green room in the shape he’s in?” I asked.
“Sure, he’s virtually knocking on Hell’s door,” said the warden with a smile, “The doc says his heart’s like a hammer now, with no need to worry about the stress of his execution inducing another heart attack beforehand. His physician also his him on anticoagulants, so there’s no chance of a stroke disrupting the execution either.”
“Excellent,” I replied. He handed me hearing protection earmuffs and the shotgun, again loaded with four hotloaded, brass cased 00 buckshot shells, one for each of his victims. Walking into the green room, I took my seat and placed the sawed-off Mossberg in my lap.
Yelling at the top of his lungs into Allen’s nearly deaf right ear, the warden pronounced the death sentence to him in the hall. The condemned was ordered to rise from his wheelchair for the final walk to the death chamber and his self-inflicted rendezvous with destiny.
Guards lined the path; a half-blind Allen stumbling down the hall, followed by the warden. One smirking guard put a leg out, tripping Clarence, who landed on the floor with a thud.
“That’s enough of that Lieutenant Jones,” said the chuckling warden, looking to the officer.
“Sorry warden, my foot slipped.”
“Yeah, I’m sure it did.”
I observed the condemned rise to his knees and say to Jones in a slurred voice, “I forgive you for tripping me.”
“Who does he think he is, Jesus or something?” asked the coroner while other guards broke into laughter, a smile crossing my face.
“Get up you murderous old half-breed injun and die like a man!” the warden yelled as Allen struggled to his feet.
Allen steadied himself and stumbled into the deathhouse, taking a seat within. He stared at me, angry, with sullen eyes.
Guards strapped him down tightly, the officers walking from the death chamber when their chore was completed. Allen looked to the warden and asked in a slur, “Any word from the governor on my appeal?”
“What appeal might that be?” the warden yelled into his ear. Laughing, he turned and left the deathhouse while the condemned man stared at him in astonishment. The disgusted warden had tossed Allen’s latest appeal in the trash that afternoon, and, out of sheer spite, had faxed Governor Schwarzenegger a blank sheet of paper instead.
“Close the door to the green room so we can kill this evil old bastard,” said the assistant warden, leaving the condemned and I in the death chamber.
Rising from my chair, I put on my shooting glasses and hearing protection muffs, released the safety, and cocked the shotgun.
“You may proceed, executioner,” said the warden over the intercom, giving me a thumbs-up.
“Yes sir,” I replied with a smile.
Turning to Clarence Ray Allen, without hesitation I aimed at his legs and pulled the trigger, the blast of buckshot shredding his prison uniform and blowing off chunks of flesh from both legs. As a brass shell casing bounced off a wall, smoke filled the death chamber, an overhead exhaust fan automatically coming on.
“Hold for one minute,” said the warden.
I nodded; noting with dissatisfaction that Clarence Ray Allen hadn’t flinched, neither had the expression on his face changed. He looked at me with a cold angry stare as blood poured in torrents from his leg wounds. Turning to the warden, I put my hands up, not knowing what to say regarding Allen’s apparent insensitivity to pain.
“What’s wrong with that senile asshole – why isn’t he crying out?” asked Jones.
“Who knows, maybe his strokes killed off his nerves,” answered the uncaring warden, looking to his watch. “One minute has passed, proceed with the second shot, executioner.”
“Yes sir.” Taking a gut shot, I pulled the trigger, blasting open Allen’s abdomen, chunks of bowels and bile, laced with feces, splattering on my clothing, a shell casing flying past my head and clattering to the floor of the death chamber.
“Goddamnit!” I exclaimed in disgust, pulling off my shooting glasses and wiping away the foul debris.
Condemned inmate Allen continued to stare at me, not moving or speaking.
“Hold for one minute.”
I looked to the warden and nodded, replacing my shooting glasses.
“I’ll say one thing, Allen’s one tough son of a bitch,” said the assistant warden.
“That, or he’s dead from the ass both ways,” said a smirking Jones.
“Shoot away Gonzalez, blow off one of his arms like you did with Tookie,” said the warden, his voice coming over the intercom.
“Yes sir,” I answered, placing the muzzle near Allen’s left forearm. Looking the condemned in the eyes, I pulled the trigger. Another deafening blast came from the sawed-off Mossberg, the buckshot severing the arm, another casing bouncing off a thick glass window.
Allen sat there; apparently oblivious to the pain as more smoke filled the death chamber.
“Christ, that injun must be dead!” the warden exclaimed.
“No sir, he’s still breathing, this old bastard’s as tough as nails,” I answered, “Should I just blow his head off and be done with it?”
“No, hold for one minute, per the orders of the review board and Governor Schwarzenegger.”
“Yes sir,” I answered with a nod.
Allen continued to glare at me, not showing the slightest sign of pain or fear. His piercing stare unnerved me; that of an evil monster who couldn’t care less what was happening to him.
“Time’s up Frank, blow that bastard’s head off his shoulders!” the warden yelled over the intercom.
Nodding, I moved the muzzle to Allen’s neck and pulled the trigger, the final spent shell ejecting from the Mossberg. The blast severed his skull at the base, the eyes finally showing a response to the assault, becoming glazed over after his head bounced off the floor of the death chamber. Blood squirted like a fountain from the headless body, covering my right arm in gore.
“Son of a bitch, he didn’t even care,” I said to myself, looking to the blood still flowing from the torn arteries.
The door to the death chamber opened, the warden and coroner stepping in.
“Good job Gonzalez, you executed Allen in the fashion he deserved,” said the warden, taking my blood-covered hand in his. Turning to the coroner, he asked, “He’s dead, right?”
“No shit, Frank turned him into Gaines burgers,” answered the coroner.
“You’d better get cleaned up; Christ, you look worse than when you slaughtered Tookie,” said the warden.
“Yeah,” I replied, “I’ll tell you one thing boss, Allen was so damn mean, I’ll bet we could’ve poured molten lead down his throat and he would’ve smiled at us, and shit out Brenneke slugs.”
“I don’t doubt it,” said the warden, looking to justly executed corpse of Clarence Ray Allen. “You two, get that hunk of shit out of here and clean out the deathhouse,” he added, looking to a pair of trustees.
“Yes warden,” they answered, charged with returning the green room to its usual immaculate appearance.
Later, the remains of Clarence Ray Allen were dumped outside the prison walls, his blood covered, mangled carcass feeding stray dogs, ravens, and condors, with ants later nourishing themselves with the tasty marrow of his bleached bones.
There is a HUGE difference between convicted and guilty!
Your opinions and "quotes" are just that "quotes" from other articles...did you even think to look at the other side?
Can We Trust This Death Sentence?
(1) Case depends on the testimony of unreliable informant witnesses. The chief witnesses against Allen at trial were admitted participants in the crimes that he was charged with. The prosecutor secured their testimony by giving them benefits, including the promise that they would not be charged with these very same murders. These witnesses had obvious reasons to lie, shifting blame and responsibility to Allen in order to protect themselves. At different times since the trial, each of these witnesses has admitted that they lied at trial.
(2) Race is a factor in this case. Allen is Native American. All of the victims are white. This case was tried in a rural, predominantly white county. According to a recent study published in the Santa Clara Law Review, racial and geographic factors such as these inappropriately affect who is sentenced to death in California.
(3) Allen had an ineffective, poorly qualified lawyer. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said in their opinion denying Allen relief, “Trial counsel admits he did nothing to prepare for the penalty phase until after the guilty verdicts were rendered, and even then, in what little time was available, he failed sufficiently to investigate and adequately present available mitigating evidence.” The 9th Circuit stated that it is “overwhelmingly plain” that trial counsel’s performance “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.”
(4) Other serious mistakes were made. The 9th Circuit found a series of “errors committed by the trial court, prosecutor, and defense counsel” in this case. For example, the judge gave the jury the wrong instructions on the law, stating “If you conclude that the aggravating evidence outweighs the mitigating evidence, you shall return a death sentence.” This misled the jury, wrongly mandated that the jury return a death sentence without regard to their personal views. The 9th Circuit also found that the prosecutor committed misconduct several times in closing argument at both the guilt and the penalty phases. In addition, the jury should have considered only 3 aggravating factors, but mistakenly considered 11 aggravating factors. On this issue, the 9th Circuit stated in its denial of relief, “No one disputes that the trial court erred.”
(5) How can we execute Allen while the Justice Commission investigates these issues? The California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice has been established to study exactly these kinds of mistakes. The Justice Commission must report its recommendations to the Governor and Legislature by Dec. 31, 2007. No one should be executed while the Justice Commission is conducting this in-depth study.
Death Penalty Focus
870 Market St. Ste.859 San Francisco, CA 94102 –
415-243-0143
There is MORE too if you actually cared enough to hear the truth. There is a lot more to consider when someone’s LIFE is on the line.
I sure wouldn't wish this on you or any of YOUR family members why would you (uneducated on this subject fully) want this for my family.
In a pig's ass he's a "Native American".
He's a "half-breed" at best, and has been described in other articles as a "white supremacist", whatever the hell that is.
You can't have it both ways pal.
I don't care if he's part Eskimo, Finnish Laplander and one-sixth Borg; he's still a damn murderer who deserves to die for his crimes, age and frailty notwithstanding.
Facts are, his son implicated him in the first murder; and the hit man that he hired fingered him a being complicit in the other three.
As with Tookie, this bastard should fry slowly for his myriad atrocities, instead of simply putting him to sleep.
RAy Allen didn't embrace being an Native American until some guy with muddled thinking decided that the white Ray Allen would be better served trumpeting his partial Choctaw heritage. No one in Fresno who know him, "knew" that he was alledgely a Native American. He was as Anglo as everyone else.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home