Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "Trump Races to Kill Lisa Montgomery In First Federal Execution of a Woman in Almost 70 Years" video.

This execution is clearly unconstitutional. Every execution should be, but even under our horrible precedent, this is unconstitutional. She cannot appreciate why this is happening, or even what is happening. The people seeking the death penalty are the criminals.
38
So Trump is closer to Jeffrey Epstein than we thought. What happened to Lisa is no big deal.
28
God, this hit me.
10
@robbinpapalucas4620 How does this change anything? You cannot stop these crimes by executing the perpetrators. They are insane.
6
@garymorris1856 Ah, okay. Then you won't look at the actual case, which holds that you cannot EXECUTE an insane person consistent with the Eighth Amendment. It is unconstitutional to do so. That is entirely separate from the person's conviction for the crime, which stands.
5
@garymorris1856 What part of she is insane right now don't you get? People sentenced to death who cannot be executed because they became psychotic while awaiting execution and were judged to be legally insane have been treated for mental illness in order to execute them. It has been a subject of debate among psychiatrists whether it is ethical to participate in treating such inmates, when executing them is the ultimate goal of the treatment, with doctors on both sides of the issue. You never heard of this? This has NOTHING to do with the conviction. Nothing at all. I'm truly sorry if this reasoning is too tough for you. I simply wonder why.
4
@garymorris1856 Specifically, because she is incapable of appreciating the nature of the penalty she is about to face, due to a combination of severe psychosis and neurological deficiencies. She is thus "insane" within the meaning of Ford v. Wainwright. Why? What did you think?
3
@garymorris1856 You think someone else is stupid? Seriously?
3
@garymorris1856 You've never known anyone who was brilliant in their young adulthood and suffered from incipient dementia and paranoid delusions sixteen years later? Lucky you.
3
@garymorris1856 OTOH, based on feelings, I always identify with the victim, never the perpetrator. I can picture this happening to me, I can't picture me doing it. Nothing to do with the law or ethics.
3
@josefbriffa5346 And now Barr will be presiding over this execution. He sees no contradiction.
3
He wants to execute her because she is a white woman, as a cover for all the people he really wants to kill. Everyone else is "easier" to execute politically.
2
@garymorris1856 The fact is that it is unconstitutional to execute an insane person, even if they were sane when they committed a capital crime, and were sane when they stood trial for that crime, and were sane when the conviction and sentence were pronounced.
2
@garymorris1856 I guess to some people timelines don't exist, and Supreme Court precedent doesn't exist, and principled stands don't matter. Have it your way. "Liking it" has nothing to do with it. Kant, not Hume. American politics and its primitivism leave me indifferent very quickly.
2
@unitedstatesirie7431 The Bible is not part of the Bill of Rights. But anyway, "Thou Shalt Not Kill" is a good principle. Notice, no footnotes.
1
William Wertz The issue is whether a person who is legally insane right now can be executed while she is insane. The Supreme Court said no, it violates the Eighth Amendment. No one is saying not to punish her, or to give her a new trial. That's off the table now.
1
@garymorris1856 Tell me. Is it drugs? What is it? I'm sorry. I can't figure this out anymore. I wouldn't want to be in the same room as you anymore than I would with her. What happened to people's reasoning faculties? Where did they go? What if you need for someone else to be rational? Then what? What do you do when nobody is? Aren't YOU worried?
1
@garymorris1856 I answered your question and cited an actual Supreme Court case, when you thought I couldn't. Is that why you're so angry? I'll bet.
1
@garymorris1856 This has nothing to do with sympathy or passion. Have you ever heard of Kant?
1
@garymorris1856 The facts of what this woman did 16 years ago have no bearing on whether she is legally sane at this time, and thus can be legally executed under the Eighth Amendment. No one is petitioning to attack her conviction.
1
@gillian123ist Check it yourself. Public record.
1
@patriciabrenner9216 No one is discussing her sanity at the time of the crime. The only issue is whether she is sane at the time of execution. Why does this elude you? I have no special "sympathy" for this perpetrator. It is about principles, not feelings. It is unconstitutional to execute someone who cannot appreciate what is happening now due to mental disease or defect.
1
@truthseeker7612 The real irony is that they are in the grip of their passions, and they think it's me who opposes this execution based on misplaced feelings, rather than the law. Our Eighth Amendment standard is really low already, and they want it lowered further. It's truly sad. We were still sentencing people to death for things they did as juveniles into this century. This was illegal almost everywhere else on the planet.
1