Should Susan Atkins Go Free; She is Dying

why wasnt she given the death penalty?

0 Replies

shewolfnm wrote:

why wasnt she given the death penalty?

it was illegal at the time.

0 Replies

I don't know if they should or shouldn't let her go, but really, how much difference is it going to make to anyone whether she spends 38 years in prison, or 37 and a half? Or whatever it is. She's been punished. And letting her go a few months early to go die is not going to take away the punishment that she's already suffered. And leaving her in there for another few months while she's dying isn't going to make her punishment any more or less fair.

0 Replies

Our jail systems are not about reform, nor are they a shining example of it like I think most people would want to think.

She is who she is. Being in jail eighty thousand years will not change that.
But dying is not a right. I agree.. I think it was Chai who said, " then let her family in"

They are the ones who are suffering, not her.
Give them closer contact with her. Longer visitation ....etc.
But I dont think she should be let out either.

but.. damn.. why she is still alive is beyond me.

0 Replies

kickycan wrote:

I don't know if they should or shouldn't let her go, but really, how much difference is it going to make to anyone whether she spends 38 years in prison, or 37 and a half? Or whatever it is. She's been punished. And letting her go a few months early to go die is not going to take away the punishment that she's already suffered. And leaving her in there for another few months while she's dying isn't going to make her punishment any more or less fair.

Principles matter. It is not about this woman, and a few months, it is about justice and doing what we say we are going to do. So long as a few months don't matter to you then you should be fully on board with her spending them where she is supposed to spend them.

0 Replies

hawkeye10 wrote:

shewolfnm wrote:
why wasnt she given the death penalty?

it was illegal at the time.

It wasn't expressly illegal at the time. She was given the death penalty in 1971, but in 1972 the liberal California Supreme Court declared the law violated the State's constitution, so her death sentence was commuted to life in prison.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

It wasn't expressly illegal at the time. She was given the death penalty in 1971, but in 1972 the liberal California Supreme Court declared the law violated the State's constitution, so her death sentence was commuted to life in prison.

a supreme court ruling that a law violates the constitution = illegal to me, but OK....I can agree with you

0 Replies

I was going to say something similar to what kicky said, and chickened out because I didn't want to spark a discussion about rehabilitation vs punishment - its been done to the same unsatisfying conclusion a few times.

0 Replies

Legally, what kind of precedent would this set?

If someone while in prison becomes terminally ill, the rest of their sentence should be voided?

People with, let's say AIDS, literally get a get out of jail free card?

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

hawkeye10 wrote:
shewolfnm wrote:
why wasnt she given the death penalty?

it was illegal at the time.

It wasn't expressly illegal at the time. She was given the death penalty in 1971, but in 1972 the liberal California Supreme Court declared the law violated the State's constitution, so her death sentence was commuted to life in prison.

Exactly as it should be, imo. She would have been executed years ago if not for this. I can't put a number of years to that, but she's been allowed to live for much longer than her original sentence would have deemed appropriate. Her family has been able to visit her and not have to live with the agony of what would have come with her execution. She's dying a natural death in a setting that was determined suitable for someone who committed a crime of the nature she committed.

I don't understand the leniency plea. Is it because she's a woman? That doesn't wash with me. Men die in prison from natural causes every day. How many of them get to go home and be tended to by their families as their end days approach?

0 Replies

This debate strikes me as parallel to the Karla Fay Tucker debate, for those who don't remember she was the Texas death row inmate for whom some called for her death sentence to be commuted to life in prison because she claimed to have found God. The arguments for and against are almost exactly the same. She was killed, on schedule.

0 Replies

here in Texas, someone can be released from parole, probation, or sometimes jail sentences ( unsure if it is federal prison or local lock ups..) for life threatening diseases/illnesses. cancer, aids.. you name it. It happens.

Not ALL who have these things are released, but it is.. ehh.. well known (?) that those with diseases can be released early.

0 Replies

I believe, in a general way, in rehablitating prisoners. But, not the ones sufficiently dangerous to be sentenced to life without parole. These are ones that should never be allowed to walk free at all.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

littlek wrote:
Plus, I think her prison sentence is extra-ordinary for her crime.

I wonder if you actually know the nature of her crimes. She took a leading role in the murders of Sharon Tate, Jay Sebring, Abigail Folger and Wojciech Frykowski (and was an accessory to the murder of Steven Parent). She was also a participant in the murder of Gary Hinman. These murders took place between July 25 and August 8, 1969.

The murders of the four people in Polanski's home (the so-called Sharon Tate murders) with the tragic coincidental murder of Steven Parent (Atkins did not directly participate in that murder, but was an accessory) were not just murders, they were brutal and sadistic murders. Forensic evidence showed that Atkins wrote the word "Pig" in blood on the door of the home--the blood was from Sharon Tate. Tate was eight months pregnant and pleaded for her life on that basis. Atkins initially agreed to act as a state's witness, and told the grand jury that she had stabbed Tate because, in Atkins' own words, she grew: " . . . sick of listening to her, pleading and begging, begging and pleading." Tate was stabbed sixteen times, and five of the wounds were in and of themselves sufficient to caused her death.

I have no sympathy for Atkins. Her behavior, in my opinion, shows her to be at least sociopathic, if not actually psychopathic.

My feelings about this are sort of a gut level, I'll try to explain in in words.....

You're right I don't know loads about the murders. I was (doing the math) about 6 months old at the time. Since then, I have learned bits and pieces. I'll agree without reserve that it was horrific.

I don't even know what she's dying of. But the thought of allowing anyone to die in prison after a long illness saddens me. Not to mention the expense to tax payers. Justice and precedence don't seem viable arguments to me. Just my opinion, here. As to precedence, if someone has been given 6 months or less to live, their families can pay for hospice, and there is little to no capacity for violence (debilitated state), and a guarded facility exists to treat the inmate - why not?

But, I guess if the prison hospital allows for the family to come in during the last of her life, I think she'd be good to stay in that situation.

0 Replies

how about this argument: each day spent knowing " I am never going to get out, I am going to die here" is part of the punishment. It is psychological, and it is valuable for society to maintain this.

0 Replies

littlek wrote:

I don't even know what she's dying of. But the thought of allowing anyone to die in prison after a long illness saddens me. Not to mention the expense to tax payers. Justice and precedence don't seem viable arguments to me. Just my opinion, here. As to precedence, if someone has been given 6 months or less to live, their families can pay for hospice, and there is little to no capacity for violence (debilitated state), and a guarded facility exists to treat the inmate - why not?

But, I guess if the prison hospital allows for the family to come in during the last of her life, I think she'd be good to stay in that situation.

The taxpayers will pay the same, regardless of whether she's in a prison or a hospital - actually, more if it's a hospital, I suspect.

Is dying a legitimate reason to let them off the hook? If so, why? Dying is part of life, as is a life sentence if you've been convicted of a murder. You die when you die, no matter where. Why should you feels sad because a convicted murderer is dying? Do you feel sad when someone... nay, everyone else is dying, too?

0 Replies

Hawkeye, you say that principles are the reason for not allowing any prisoner to be released early. I day that it is because of principles that we, as law-abiding citizens, should allow some clemency in very specific instances. Some of you have made sweeping statements that don't represent what I was trying to say.

Also, Karla Fay Tucker doesn't even come close to the argument here. Anyone can claim to have been born again in god. That would sure make me suspicious. Anyone can make that claim and it would be the epitome of sillyness and naivite to commute a sentence under those circumstances. "Big, fat, hairy deal," would most likely be my initial response.

Chai, the precedent has already been set. Here is a paragraph from a Georgia commision:

http://www.cviog.uga.edu/Projects/gainfo/conart4.htm

e) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Paragraph, the State Board of Pardons and Paroles shall have the authority to pardon any person convicted of a crime who is subsequently determined to be innocent of said crime or to issue a medical reprieve to an entirely incapacitated person suffering a progressively debilitating terminal illness or parole any person who is age 62 or older.

I didn't provide more links because I'm not trying to prove anything, only expressing my opinion, while respecting the opinions of the other posters on this thread.

Please don't generalize my statements. My opinion is limited to very specific conditions.

When I said part of this is the need for revenge, I was thinking of my own reactions to this horrendous crime. I was 23 when this happened and it made me literally sick. I wanted every last one of them to die. So the revenge I'm talking about is more about me than the rest of you. If I hear of a child molester, I have an almost visceral need for action, to put the criminal behind bars--with execution as the preferable form of punishment.

I do have serious doubts about the death sentence because of the possibility of mistakes. As we all know, mistakes have been made, all too frequently. But in cases where there is no doubt, execution, to me, makes moral as well as practical sense, but that is not what this thread is about.

0 Replies

littlek wrote:

I don't even know what she's dying of.

Brain tumor.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

frankly Charlotte I don't give a damn.
she will die in a hospital bed no matter what else occurs,
I don't think she needs handcuffs to die.

Yes.
I wonder Y she cares about being released
under these circumstances. I read that she can 't even sit up in bed.

WHAT GOOD wud a release DO her, if her BED is her prison ?

What is her point ?
Just to financially bleed her family ?

0 Replies

There is speculation the process of getting permision or denial will still be going on when she dies.

0 Replies

Should Susan Atkins Go Free; She is Dying

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know