Town Square

Post a New Topic

SAFE CA Act

Original post made by Alice Schaffer Smith on Aug 31, 2011

Save CA is a way to reduce cost and save taxpayers' money.

SAFE CA Act press conference to replace the
death penalty with permanent imprisonment (very well organized by ACLU-NC
staffer Ana Zamora) and recorded by Allen Asch, a Sacramento attorney and uploaded the raw video of the event. You can see the full press conference in 2 parts in the YouTube playlist at

Web Link
See also
Web Link

and

Web Link

Comments (92)

Posted by WWJD, a resident of College Terrace
on Aug 31, 2011 at 5:56 pm

Well, WWJD?


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Aug 31, 2011 at 5:56 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

What we need to do first is eliminate the barratry in death penalty appeals. I suggest we emulate Texas in this. Two years and then the oxygen deprivation chamber. In the mean time, stop such crap as a full heart-lung replacement for someone on death row. Will we occasionally execute an innocent person? Likely, but is it better to let thousands of guilty free to resume their apparently condoned depredations? Anyway, death row inmates have little difficulty continuing their life of crime from inside. Tell you what - Keep executions and let all the dopers go free.


Posted by Disgusted with walter, a resident of Greenmeadow
on Aug 31, 2011 at 7:26 pm

I hope the next innocent person that is mistakenly executed is walter himself. Walters callous pronouncements regarding human life and the due process of law is disgusting. Not surprised though given his previous, well documented comments about women and minorities. He is a real republican.


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Aug 31, 2011 at 9:26 pm

Those on death row should have been executed long ago. However, since the bleeding hearts want to keep them alive, at great cost, then the funds will come from the state general fund. This means that public education is being deprived of funds in order to keep these scumbags alive. Too bad, our students deserve better.


Posted by Disgusted with walter, a resident of Greenmeadow
on Aug 31, 2011 at 9:38 pm

So, susan do your also have no problem with occasionally executing an innocent person? How about if it was your son? The solution to the problem? Abolish the death penalty.


Posted by -hundred and one, a resident of Southgate
on Aug 31, 2011 at 9:40 pm

Kill one to scare hundred


Posted by Agree with Walter, a resident of Meadow Park
on Sep 1, 2011 at 7:45 am

Agree with Walter. The "cost savings" of CaSAVE is because it would stop the endless appeals ..

I used to agree, life in prison was better than execution. But, I have come to severely distrust our system to actually keep bad guys in jail. Too many have gotten out and repeated their crimes against innocents.

I actually don't have a problem with a very rare innocent person being executed. I think it is so very rare as to be virtually never. It is sad..but all the innocents killed by released inmates far outweigh the innocents executed. There is always a price to every choice.


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 1, 2011 at 8:03 am

"The "cost savings" of CaSAVE is because it would stop the endless appeals .."
Exactly--get rid of the death penalty and there will be no need for these endless appeals

"I used to agree, life in prison was better than execution. But, I have come to severely distrust our system to actually keep bad guys in jail. Too many have gotten out and repeated their crimes against innocents."
How does someone who is sentenced to life in prison without parole get out? What is the actual data on people getting out and repeating the crime again?

"I actually don't have a problem with a very rare innocent person being executed."
I find this statement a bit shocking. Some people actually think it is okay to execute an innocent person. As others have asked, what if the innocent person was your wife/son/daughter/husband etc? Scary that people think it is okay to kill innocent people--how does that make you different than the criminal you are in favor of executing?
Read link below:
Web Link

Get rid of the death penalty, get rid of expensive appeals, get rid of innocents being executed. Very simple.




Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 1, 2011 at 12:32 pm

My cousin was a California prison guard for over 25 years. He told me that the most dangerous prisoners to control are the lifers without parole - they have nothing to lose, other than to face the death penalty. Ironically, the death row prisioners are easier to control, because they think their sentence might be converted to life without parole...then they become very dangerous to control, if there is no death penalty.

Prisoners, of all stripes, are constantly filing appeals that clog of the courts and cost huge amounts of money. It is a prison industry.

The answer is to immediately execute those on death row, and to limit the appeals from the other prisioners. If a lifer attackes a guard, it will place him on death row...and a very fast execution.

Lifers don't need to escape, in to murder innocent people...they kill prison guards and other prisoners on a regular basis.


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 1, 2011 at 12:39 pm

"The answer is to immediately execute those on death row"
So the solution is to become like the dictatorships that we detest and deplore--execute people without proper due process?

"they kill prison guards and other prisoners on a regular basis"
shall we stick to facts and not fantasy.

Web Link
" But that simply is not the case. Over the past three decades 13 prison guards have been killed throughout the state, compared with 63 officers in the LAPD-an organization with half the members of the CCPOA's 14,000 who serve as guards. "

Based on Susan's statements I would have expected 100's of guards to have been killed.
BTW, the prison guards union is a major contributor the problems with our state's prison.

I also doubt that Susan has a cousin that is a prison guard


Posted by WWJD, a resident of College Terrace
on Sep 1, 2011 at 12:48 pm

Susan's anecdotal claims bring up a reality - prisons ARE a business, well manipulated by the prison industrial complex, with the guard unions as co-conspirators. But that gets off the subject.

WWJD?

One thinks He would likely follow the legal path afforded by our constitution and our laws. Immediate execution without constitutionally mandated appeals process?

Makes one think of those judges in PA that sent innocent kids off to the private jails being run by the judge's political contributors.

the Big Guy Above understands the infallibility of Man. Or "of a man." I'll let the philosophers and/or persons of faith edit that last part.

If Susan had her way, they'd give a defendant a bullet immediately after the first guilty verdict.

Then what?

"A former Pennsylvania judge who rendered guilty verdicts in exchange for over $1 million in kickbacks from a for-profit youth rehabilitation center will spend up to 28 years in prison.."

Over the weekend, CNN sat down with the mother of one of his victims, a young man who was so distraught by his unjust incarceration that he committed suicide.

"It's justice in the sense that he is going to pay for what we've been dealing with for the last eight years," Sandy Fonzo, the boy's mother, told the network. "True justice, I don't think there could ever be. He'll never live the sentence that I live."" Web Link

Real world.

Stick with the Constitution.

It's worked pretty well for awhile.


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 1, 2011 at 12:53 pm

svatoid,

Yes, my cousin was a real life CA prison guard. However I should correct one statement: I should have said "they kill AND ATTACK prison guards and other prisoners on a regular basis"

My cousin was seriously attacked several times and, except for one case, they were lifers. He has some very nasty scars on his body, and was in hospital for five days, once.

You simply don't know what you are talking about, svatoid. Prison guards are always nervous, and their wives (in a limited case their husbands) are always worrying about their safe return every day on the job.

"Proper due process" should be a jury verdict and a review, if necessary, within 6 months. This is hardly a dictatorship, and it is more lenient than our Founding Fathers saw as justice.


Posted by WWJD, a resident of College Terrace
on Sep 1, 2011 at 12:53 pm

Savtoid - nice link.

That ties together the rise of our prisons with the decline of our schools quite nicely.

Sadly.

Wallis is right about one thing - put the dopers into rehab, build the economy back so everyone can get a job. Amazing what a paycheck does for our country.


Posted by WWJD, a resident of College Terrace
on Sep 1, 2011 at 12:57 pm

"Proper due process" is a constitutionally mandated process, not the purview of reactionary bloggers or posters.

re: the death penalty, or has been referred to elsewhere as state-sanctioned murder

There's ~192 countries on this planet. Take a look at a list of those that practice state-sanctioned murder, and those who don't.

<insert reference here to "the company you keep">


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 1, 2011 at 12:58 pm

"You simply don't know what you are talking about, svatoid. Prison guards are always nervous, and their wives (in a limited case their husbands) are always worrying about their safe return every day on the job."
And you do?? no one is forcing a prison guard to work as a prison guard. There are plenty less stressful jobs that he can work at if it such a nerve racking experience for your mythical cousin. Read my link--the prison guards and their union are responsible for thr ruinous condition of our state.

Read WWJD's posts regarding abuse in the justice system.

""Proper due process" should be a jury verdict and a review, if necessary, within 6 months. This is hardly a dictatorship, and it is more lenient than our Founding Fathers saw as justice.'
So you are already singing a different tune? A little while ago you wer ein favor of mass executions immediately. Look at the West Memphis 3. DUe process is what separates our country from the dictatorships , whose activities you seem to endorse.
Our founding fathers said nothing about the death penalty, BTW.


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 1, 2011 at 1:10 pm

"no one is forcing a prison guard to work as a prison guard"

Of course not, but if they do, their pay and benefits should reflect their risks. Their union protects them, and yes, it costs a ton. If you ,svatoid, would like a lesson in reality, then sign up for prison guard job.


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 1, 2011 at 1:27 pm

"Of course not, but if they do, their pay and benefits should reflect their risks."
They cannot have it both ways--if they want to whine about the work, then take another job. Otherwise they are pulling in a pretty penny:

Web Link
"Prison guards in California enjoy an annual salary of $73,428 with only a high school education, and with overtime they can surpass the income of California judges, police and even the state attorney."

and
Web Link
"Some 2,400 rank-and-file correctional officers' pay exceeded $100,000 in 2005, compared with 557 the year before, a San Diego Union-Tribune analysis of payroll figures shows."


" Their union protects them, and yes, it costs a ton. "
They make more than police officers who engage in much more dangerous work. Prison guards have everyone in a nice controlled environment. Police do not know what they will be up against. In fact we have to waste so much money on prison guards that we cannot properly fund our education system. But the prison guard's union do not care--it is all about them and their supposed dangerous, stressful jobs.

"If you ,svatoid, would like a lesson in reality, then sign up for prison guard job."
I think we know the reality of what is wrong with our prison system. And we know the reality f some people wanting to throw the constitution and rights of due process out the window by saying we should immediately execute all of our death row inmates















Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 1, 2011 at 1:56 pm

savtoid,

[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Prison guards, except on the towers, are unarmed, and they are completely at the mercy of the prisoners. The prisoners control the inside, not the guards!


Posted by WWJD, a resident of College Terrace
on Sep 1, 2011 at 2:06 pm

I'm a pro union guy. But even I know that the prison guard union is way outta control, costs, politically, and part of the prison industrial complex that is killing our state.

Svatoid hit the nail on the head - that money is directly cutting the funds available for education - the one thing we all agree that helps keep kids moving forward on a positive path for our state.


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 1, 2011 at 2:13 pm

Well said, WWJD.

Really the guards are at the mercy of the prisoners???? When did that happen? If that is the case why are we paying the guards so much money? I thought the prisoners were behind bars and in cells, while the guards were in charge (true they mingle unarmed at times in areas were the prisoners are), but to claim that they are "completely at the mercy of the prisoners" is ridiculous.

Don't you think it is ridiculous that prison guards make more than our military personnel, who are actually defending our country and more than teachers.
There is definitely something wrong here and part of the problem is the prison guard's union and their outrageous salaries and claims of stress


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 1, 2011 at 2:45 pm

Cushy armchair prognosticators, with no experience, even indirectly through close relatives, claim to know something about the 'inside'. You don't, period. Doris Lessing claimed to know how good the Soviet Union was, too...she later admitted how wrong she was, and that she was a useful idiot (good for her, in the end!).

Oh, btw, the Constitution does not prevent executions. It allows them. Many of them were done after our Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution. Abraham Lincoln sanctioned many of them. FDR used the rope against foreign agents and common criminal killers. Nothing new...except that current bleeding hearts are trying to rewirte the Constitution.

Clean out death row by executing them.


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 1, 2011 at 2:57 pm

[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

"Oh, btw, the Constitution does not prevent executions. It allows them. Many of them were done after our Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution. Abraham Lincoln sanctioned many of them. FDR used the rope against foreign agents and common criminal killers. Nothing new...except that current bleeding hearts are trying to rewrite the Constitution."
Susan has a clear lack of knowledge when it comes to our Constitution. The issue of capital punishment is a state decision. Many states ban it. There is nothing in the constitution that mandates capital punishment.
But as WWJD pointed out, look at the countries that have capital punishment

"Clean out death row by executing them."
So much for Susan's previous suggestion of a trial and a review in 6 months. She shows her true colors and intent by saying we should summarily execute everyone on death row, regardless of our laws and due process.
We should become like the countries we decry because of their violation sof individual's rights.


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 1, 2011 at 3:14 pm

"So much for Susan's previous suggestion of a trial and a review in 6 months."

Not at all. The vast majority of the convicted now on death row, in CA, have been there longer than 6 months. In case you don't care to know the truth, CA DOES allow the death penalty!

Execute then now...and save a ton of money.


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 1, 2011 at 3:28 pm

"Not at all. The vast majority of the convicted now on death row, in CA, have been there longer than 6 months."
But, Susan, you are repeating over and over that you want to immediately execute EVERYONE on death row

"In case you don't care to know the truth, CA DOES allow the death penalty!"
I never said they did not. It is obvious given the topic of this thread!!!!

'Execute then now...and save a ton of money."
And become like the human right violating countries we want to change. You seem to have a very strange blood lust. So if an innocent person is executed, as per your demands, can we charge you then with murder?


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 1, 2011 at 3:44 pm

Have there been any new additions to CA's death row in the last six months? If so, allow them to use up their time allotment (to six months), then execute them.

It is not a blood lust, at all. It is simple justice, completely allowed by the US Constitution. Kill the killers, save a ton of money, then move on to supporting public education with that money.


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 1, 2011 at 3:52 pm

"Have there been any new additions to CA's death row in the last six months? If so, allow them to use up their time allotment (to six months), then execute them."
That is not how our system works. Maybe in the dictatorships, whose actions you seem to want to copy, things work that way. You cannot set up an arbitrary appeals process and then summarily execute everyone. Sorry, Susan--not what our country stands for.

"It is not a blood lust, at all. It is simple justice, completely allowed by the US Constitution. Kill the killers, save a ton of money, then move on to supporting public education with that money."
It is blood lust. I though christian justice was to turn the other cheek. There are issues with the way capital punishment is handed down--you can read about that elsewhere. There are other problems regarding it.
Check out the countries that do have capital punishment:
Web Link
"2010 - The following 23 countries carried out executions in 2010: Bahrain (1), Bangladesh (9+), Belarus (2), Botswana (1), China (2000+), Egypt (4), Equatorial Guinea (4), Iran (252+), Iraq (1+), Japan (2), Libya (18+), Malaysia (1+), North Korea (60+), Palestinian Authority (5), Saudi Arabia (27+), Singapore (1+), Somalia (8+), Sudan (6+), Syria (17+), Taiwan (4), USA (46+), Vietnam (1+), Yemen (53+)."

Quite the company we are keeping--North Korea, Iran, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria etc.
Not something to be proud of. How come the rest of the civilized world manages to deal with murderers without resorting to capital punishment??

"Kill the killers, save a ton of money, then move on to supporting public education with that money."
Are you saying that if we follow your plan, we can then put the prison guard's union in their place and use the money we are wasting on them for education?


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 1, 2011 at 4:05 pm

"Are you saying that if we follow your plan, we can then put the prison guard's union in their place and use the money we are wasting on them for education?"

It would help, because it would give the guards an arrow in their quivver. The prisoners would realize that there are serious consequences to their behavior. At that point, yes, the guards' union can be told, "we have your back", and a serious negotiation can go forward. However, the immediate savings would come from emptying death row, along with all the absurd appeals that are helping to drain our general fund dry.

Capital punishment is completely legal. It is time to do it, and save a ton of money. Probably 10-20 killers can be killed per week (many more, if we go to a firing squad model)...that will empty out death row in short order.


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 1, 2011 at 4:12 pm

"Probably 10-20 killers can be killed per week (many more, if we go to a firing squad model)...that will empty out death row in short order."
Boy, Sharon/Susan, you definitely have a real blood lust. Mass executions, firing squads. To hell with due process and the rule of law. Let's become like North Korea and Saudi Arabia. You know in California they used to execute people for kidnapping and robbery and other things:
Web Link

The last executions solely for crimes other than homicide:
Criminal assault Rudolph Wright January 11, 1962 California
Conspiracy to Commit Murder Five unnamed Yuki men July 21, 1863 California[61]
Kidnapping Billy Monk November 21, 1960 California

Boy, think how quickly we could empty out the prisons. The up side, we could finally tell the prison guard's union to stick their batons......


Posted by WWJD, a resident of College Terrace
on Sep 1, 2011 at 4:24 pm

Susan:

"Oh, btw, the Constitution does not prevent executions."

How blatant a misrepresentation can you make?

We were referring to giving a fair hearing and right of appeal as allowed by the Constitution, not your merry little fantasy of killing defendants after the first verdict.

State sanctioned murder is allowed in some states and has been ruled constitutional, much the same way as in Libya, Iran, China, North Korea, etc...

But I'll go back a bit: WWJD?




Posted by jailsucks, a resident of Southgate
on Sep 1, 2011 at 4:28 pm

what is wwjd?


Posted by WWJD, a resident of College Terrace
on Sep 1, 2011 at 4:43 pm

Web Link

"...(often abbreviated to WWJD) became popular in the United States in the 1990s and as a personal motto for adherents of Evangelical Christianity who used the phrase as a reminder of their belief in a moral imperative to act in a manner that would demonstrate the love of Jesus through the actions of the adherents."

What was that last part?

"that would demonstrate the love of Jesus through the actions of the adherents"

Where were we on the state-sanctioned murder discussion?


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 1, 2011 at 5:38 pm

Jesus has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion of state execution. We still have a separation of church and state in this country.

Convicted killers, killed by the state is NOT murder! It is state-sponsored justice. Murder is the unjustified killing of a victim who has not been convicted by the courts.


Posted by Outside Observer, a resident of another community
on Sep 1, 2011 at 5:52 pm

There seems to be one thing here all agree with. Irrespective of the Death Penalty, almost everyone makes some comment acknowledging that our "Criminal Justice System" is broken.

Until we fix it, everything else is a moot point.


Posted by WWJD, a resident of College Terrace
on Sep 1, 2011 at 6:06 pm

So your answer to WWJD is: "Jesus has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion of state execution."

The Catholic Church begs to differ.

Others of faith do, as well.

You live with a different code. I celebrate that you do, and you can.

Just not the state sanctioned murder part.


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 1, 2011 at 6:40 pm

"The Catholic Church begs to differ."

Why should I care about that? This is not a theocracy!


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 1, 2011 at 9:58 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

1: name one instance when I put down women or minorities,svatoid.
2: If we demand perfection in justice, then close all the jails. NO ONE can guarantee that every jailing is correct, but we play the odds and apologize to those wronged. Even a day unjustly jailed is too much.
A candidate for public office in Los Angeles once proposed that everybody convicted of first degree murder be executed. When asked if he was proposing 10,000 executions a year he backed down, but I asked why not, criminals kill that many.
One year after conviction is enough time for all reasonable appeals. Perhaps we could transfer all our death row prisoners to Texas?


Posted by Outside Observer, a resident of another community
on Sep 2, 2011 at 12:38 am

Texas would be a start. At least it would cost less to house them in Texas than in California.

Like many other aspects of government, our "Criminal Justice System" has been so corrupted, it's best to farm the whole thing out.

I wonder if Singapore would contract for it?.... Ok, I know, Singapore is a "nanny state", well are we really any different now? Joe Simitian has done more than enough to put us right up there with Singapore, and I'm actually disappointed in Joe whenever I step on someone's chewing gum on the sidewalk.

All joking aside, at least Singapore recognises there is a segment of society that acts like animals, and can only be controlled when treated like animals.

If liberals would just pull their heads out of the sand long enough to see that one point, society would be much better off.


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 2, 2011 at 6:59 am

Walter--you are confused. I made no mention of you with regard to women and minorities on this thread. I just mentioned that you came across as cold and uncaring.

You also state:
"2: If we demand perfection in justice, then close all the jails. NO ONE can guarantee that every jailing is correct, but we play the odds and apologize to those wronged. Even a day unjustly jailed is too much."
We are not talking about jailing in general. We are talking about the death penalty. You stated that you had no problem executing an occasional innocent person. How do you apologize to the wronged person in that instance??


Posted by Faith much?, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Sep 2, 2011 at 11:16 am

observer

Texas doesn't want them, the miracle state has a $27 billion budget hole, even after using the stimulus money last year to try to cover it. They don't want any more executions than they have, they're broke, though that might give us a repeat of a born-again governor mocking a born-again christian on the way to dying Web Link

walter

get your basic facts correct. CA had 1,900 murders in 2009, not 10,000.

How do you apologize to an innocent person you just killed?

Barbarians want to use barbarian tactics on barbarians.

One can easily sort out those of greater faith on this forum.


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 2, 2011 at 11:46 am

Aside from the benefits of the death penalty that I have already discussed, another is that DAs can use it as a tool to gain confessions without going to trial (thus saving much public money). The deal is: "Plead to murder 1 or manslaughter, and we won't seek the death penalty". Powerful tool.

There currently over 600 killers on CA death row. Execute them, in batches, now! Then shut down death row, per se (saving even more money). If all killers are executed with 6 months of their conviction, they won't stack up. If it turns out that an innocent is executed, then the state should make a financial settlement with his/her heirs.


Posted by Faith much?, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Sep 2, 2011 at 12:09 pm

"Execute them, in batches, now! .... If all killers are executed with 6 months of their conviction, they won't stack up. If it turns out that an innocent is executed, then the state should make a financial settlement with his/her heirs."

Given all the ones above who point out constitutionally protected rights of appeal and Susan's frivolous dismissal of the great American Constitution, one must reconsider one of her points.

She is indeed a "cushy armchair prognosticator, with no experience"

With the law.

Or morality, let alone faith.

"If it turns out that an innocent is executed" Good Lord help us all.

Your daughter, Susan, sorry about that, here's a hundred grand for our mistake in murdering her when she ran out of her 6 months. Turns out whe may have been innocent after all.

Use it to buy an extra turkey on Thanksgiving for what's left of your family, that will make it all better, won't it?

Your own son or daughter murdered by the state - whoops!


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 2, 2011 at 12:22 pm

"Aside from the benefits of the death penalty that I have already discussed, another is that DAs can use it as a tool to gain confessions without going to trial (thus saving much public money). The deal is: "Plead to murder 1 or manslaughter, and we won't seek the death penalty". Powerful tool."

There are no benefits to the death penalty
Susan/Sharon is a little confused about California law. First you can only seek the death penalty if there are "special circumstances". Susan, you can look those up. Doubt that most DAs would engage in such behavior anyway.


"There currently over 600 killers on CA death row. Execute them, in batches, now!"
Sounds like something one would hear in Saudi Arabia or Libya or North Korea. What a complete and total disregard for human rights and due process.

" If it turns out that an innocent is executed, then the state should make a financial settlement with his/her heirs."
If an innocent is executed, then it is a case of murder. You would then be put on death row and executed.

[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 2, 2011 at 12:32 pm

But they murdered at least one innocent person. Make it right by executing them, and quickly. Then move on...and save a ton of public money.

An extension of my very rational approach is to make all appeals, beyond the first one, liable to the attorneys involved: All court costs will be taken from their personal income, if they are not successful (loser pays). This includes public defenders and pro bono private lawyers.


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 2, 2011 at 12:35 pm

"An extension of my very rational approach is to make all appeals, beyond the first one, liable to the attorneys involved: All court costs will be taken from their personal income, if they are not successful (loser pays). This includes public defenders and pro bono private lawyers."
That is not how our judicial system works--maybe in places like China and North Korea. But isn't their lack of human rights one of the things we protest against as a country. Susan, would have us become like the worst dictatorship in the world.


Posted by Faith much?, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Sep 2, 2011 at 12:45 pm

[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

"But they murdered at least one innocent person. Make it right by executing them, and quickly. " You can't say that with certainty - even you admit it with your claim of compensation for innocent victims of state murder. Let's put you again in that position:

Susan, when they "accidentally" murder your child after her 6 month appeal limit is up, and they compensate you as a parent of an innocently murdered family member, what will you do with the money?

Take a class on law and constitutionally protected rights?


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 2, 2011 at 12:48 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

Life without frequently becomes life with, then after the crime has been forgotten, time served. Even those in prison have continued their lives of crime. With the new open communication rights, prisoners have little trouble passing along instructions. What do you tell the innocent victim of a killer let lose on the public? Sorry, here's a turkey? Whoops, not even a turkey. 45% of those on death row are there on their second conviction for murder. The average remission of the death sentence is based on some minor defect in the trial, one unlikely to change the verdict. Rose Bird was famous for scotching the death penalty both because a jury was given too much leeway and not enough leeway; whatever it took.


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 2, 2011 at 1:07 pm

The loser pays is already the law in CA torts system (and England, btw). No need to go the N. Korea for it. Just extend it to the criminal system of appeals, beyond the first appeal. Writs of various stripes should not come for free, endlessly.

For those trying to use the "state murdered my child" argument, well the state sanctions the murder of millions of innocents every year (it is called abortion); it also retains the right to draft young men into military service, against their will, and send them into battle (resulting in many deaths).

While the bleeding hearts are endlessly bleeding on this blog about the rights of killers, we are wasting so much money that could be used for public education, and other good causes.


Posted by Faith much?, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Sep 2, 2011 at 1:10 pm

"What do you tell the innocent victim of a killer let lose on the public? "

Ridiculous argument. How many killers set lose that were in for the death penalty?

So many you can't list them?


Posted by Faith much?, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Sep 2, 2011 at 1:17 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 2, 2011 at 1:26 pm

"The loser pays is already the law in CA torts system (and England, btw). No need to go the N. Korea for it"
Apples and oranges. Civil law vs criminal law. WE are civilized society and now Susan wants to turn us into Saudi arabia/North Korea when it come sto human rights. Why does Susan hate the USA and what it stands for??

"For those trying to use the "state murdered my child" argument, well the state sanctions the murder of millions of innocents every year (it is called abortion);"
Again, apples and oranges. Life begins at birth--ask the government--your birth certificate state the day you were born. Anyway, we do not need to follow Susan's lead and digress into unrelated issues.

" it also retains the right to draft young men into military service, against their will, and send them into battle (resulting in many deaths)."
What does this have to do with the discussion of the death penalty? Absolutely nothing.

"While the bleeding hearts are endlessly bleeding on this blog about the rights of killers, we are wasting so much money that could be used for public education, and other good causes."
We could have that money now for education, while maintaining prisoner rights, by standing up and if needed breaking the prison guard's union. They are sucking money from our treasury for their cushy jobs and luxurious lifestyles. They have an easy job in a controlled environment, tons of unneeed overtime, short hours, long vacations and guns to shoot prisoners with!! They are making more than teachers--some of them do not even have a high school diploma!!!


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 2, 2011 at 3:46 pm

It is difficult to understand the selective moralism employed by the bleeding hearts on this blog. They want to spend a ton of precious state funds defending killers (some of them multiple killers), yet they dismiss the slaughter of the innocents by tossing off lines like "life begins at birth" (which is complete nonsense, from a scientific perspective).

Then they ignore the realities of prison life by the innocent guards that need to deal with it on a daily basis. I am not aware of many other jobs where a "no hostage" clause is built into the contract. For the naive, this means that if guards are taken hostage, there will be no negotiation on their behalf...the state is allowed to ignore their lives and send in armed assault troops, immediately.

I prefer to kill the killers, and protect the innocent, save money and restore a little bit of faith back into the criminal justice system (justice delayed is justice denied), unlike my critics.


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 2, 2011 at 5:04 pm

There appears to be a lot of Rose Bird shadows on this blog. Remember what happened to her, at the behest of the California voters?

Texas can get through the appeals process much faster than CA. California should be able to beat Texas. We need to kill these killers, empty death row, save precious public money and make justice quick, not endlessly delayed. This would instill new confidence in our justice system.

Still no real understanding of what is going on inside the prisons by my critics. They clearly have no clue; worse, they don't care. Guess what, the guards' union is not going away, and it is paid according to the risks that they take. Anybody can apply for these guard jobs, if they have a relatively clean record. This includes teachers and my critics. It would be fun to read their accounts after about two years in the joint!


Posted by Faith much?, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Sep 2, 2011 at 5:25 pm

[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

"We need to kill these killers, empty death row, save precious public money and make justice quick, not endlessly delayed."

No, we don't need "quick" justice, as history has shown that lynch mobs do not offer justice. We NEED complete justice with the legal protections afforded by the Constitution of the United States of America. What do you have against the Constitution?

Costs? You save vastly more by ending the war on drugs. How many dopers in CA prisons? 400,000? Half a million? Death row convicts? far less than a thousand.


Posted by Disgusted with walter, a resident of Greenmeadow
on Sep 2, 2011 at 5:46 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 2, 2011 at 6:29 pm

All of my arguments are fully reasoned and rational. Bleeding hearts love to bleed, and are not so rational (Rose Bird redux).

Capital punishment if fully Constitutional. FDR employed it, as he saw fit, with only a few days between conviction and the rope (Web Link) .

Where is all this "unconstitutional" nonsense coming from? A quick review of the conviction, with a final decision...then reverse or execute. Very constitutional. Much more lenient than FDR, for example.

BTW, prison guards have pretty good records, probably better than teachers. If for exaple, they were accused of rape, like Bill Clinton was, they would have a very hard time getting the job. If they attended a blatantly racist church, like Barack Obama, it would be a big problem. The prison guards' union is not going away, and it will remain powerful, and well paid, because the citizens of CA do not want the scumbags terrorizing their neighborhoods, anymore. Three Strikes is costly, but very effective in reducing violent crime, because repeat offender are now behind bars.

BTW, my cousin tells me that he has never met a single prisoner who is in the main joint for drug use or possession. Trafficking yes, because it involves a lot of violence, but not individual use.




Posted by Faith much?, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Sep 2, 2011 at 6:48 pm

"Where is all this "unconstitutional" nonsense coming from? A quick review of the conviction, with a final decision."

She answers it in her very next sentence!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Geez, Susan, please go back AND READ THE posts this time!

No one ever said state sanctioned murder of convicts was unconstitutional, just your absurd statements a quick execution, foregoing due process and the constitutionally protected right of appeal. That, my dear, is patently unconstitutional.

We could get you through this a lot easier if you would just read other responses.


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 2, 2011 at 7:04 pm

A six month review, following conviction, is VERY generous! FDR only allowed a few days. Give me a break! The current crew on death row has been there, on average, more than a decade. Ridiculous!


Posted by Disgusted with walter, a resident of Greenmeadow
on Sep 2, 2011 at 7:34 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 3, 2011 at 6:26 am

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

The crux of the argument is, what is reasonable. Perhaps six months is unreasonably brief,but six years? If reasonable accounting for billable attorney hours were the law, I question whether any pleading exceeding a year would be reasonably justified. Perhaps even a procedure putting an appeal ahead of any other court business? Many appeals now are contests to waste time. If you are for justice, then how can you oppose expediting that justice?


Posted by Utilitarian Argument, a resident of Stanford
on Sep 3, 2011 at 8:43 am

I think the money-saving argument against capital punishment is a lame argument.

There is a possibility that a convicted murderer will cause another death after he's convicted and before he's executed. Either in prison or out of it, drunk or sober, intentionally or as an incidental result of dangerous behavior.

There is also a possibility that a person will be wrongly convicted of murder and the death penalty.

I would guess the first is about 1000 times more likely, though.

The utilitarian argument, I think, leans toward capital punishment.

Jesus would want to take a life to save many others. That much is clear. And he wouldn't say that we should decide on the right thing based on how much money we save.

But my fear is that, if capital punishment were expedited, there will be cut corners and conspiracies leading to improper executions.

You can never overestimate the corruption in government.



Posted by Faith much?, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Sep 3, 2011 at 9:04 am

"A six month review, following conviction, is VERY generous! "

"Generous"?!?!?!?!?!!??

Generosity is a beautiful thing (something deathers should consider, btw.)

But this isn't about Queen Susan/Sharon and her royal generosity.

It's about the LAW. It's about OUR protected freedoms from people like Susan who want a lynch mob. Expediting justice? Are you insane? To paraphrase: anyone willing to give up a little Justice for speed, deserves neither.

re FDR - thanks for bringing him up, I agree with you and history, he was one of America's greatest Presidents!

re: the law in FDR's time - a lot of things have changed since then, thank the Lord. Do you really want to go back to those times? If so, let me add - you must be white, because the "law" back then allowed a lot of nasty things to those that weren't.

Stay focused Susan. No more FDR, abortion, Rose Bird, etc..

[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 3, 2011 at 9:05 am

"BTW, my cousin tells me that he has never met a single prisoner who is in the main joint for drug use or possession. Trafficking yes, because it involves a lot of violence, but not individual use."

Here is proof that Susan/Sharon does not know what she is talking about and that she does not have a cousin who is a prison guard.
Web Link
"A recent Justice Policy Institute study states that California leads the nation in drug offender imprisonment with a rate of 115 per 100,000 (the national average is 44 per 100,000). "

BTW, I agree with others comments that the prison guard's union needs to be dealt with. They take money from our education system to pay for their easy jobs, cushy lifestyles, and hefty pensions


Posted by Faith much?, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Sep 3, 2011 at 9:07 am

"There is also a possibility ... I would guess....." You forgot the words, MAYBE, PERHAPS, SOMETIMES in your fantassies.

"Jesus would want to take a life to save many others. That much is clear."

Please share your knowledge that supports that claim.


Posted by Faith much?, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Sep 3, 2011 at 9:08 am

"A recent Justice Policy Institute study states that California leads the nation in drug offender imprisonment with a rate of 115 per 100,000 (the national average is 44 per 100,000). "

Wow.


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 3, 2011 at 10:00 am

" drug offender imprisonment "

There are zero (zippo) state prisoners in the joint for simple possession of a small amount of drugs for personal use, as a sole offense. They are there because of trafficking, sales, associated crimes, etc. Prisoners who have already committed crimes, and are arrested for parole violations, including simple possession (second strike) are in the joint, but simple possession is not the underlying cause.

If you think I am wrong about this, provide a single name of a prisoner who is in CA state prison for simple possession of a limited amount of dope for personal use. My cousin says he has never met one.


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 3, 2011 at 10:19 am

"There are zero (zippo) state prisoners in the joint for simple possession of a small amount of drugs for personal use, as a sole offense."
One would think that Susan knows what she is talking about. But, alas:
Web Link

"The state of California could make substantial progress toward that goal simply by releasing the more than 28,000 persons imprisoned for violating the drug laws, including 10,000 doing time for simple drug possession and more than 1,500 doing time for marijuana offenses."


Susan may also want to look at this link

Web Link

I refer her to table 8, page 18
She can see the numbers herself.


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 3, 2011 at 10:24 am

Also, Susan:

Web Link
"Despite Prop 36's significant impact on reducing the prison population, there are still 9,000 people in a California prison for drug possession. Of these, 6,500 have never been convicted of a serious or violent offense. Yet they are each sentenced to 18 months to 3 years in state prison"

and regarding the parasites that are draining our budget:
"Every part of the state budget has suffered big cuts in the last few years ' with one perverse exception. The corrections budget, which increased from $4 billion in 2000 to over $9 billion in 2010, has escaped cutbacks entirely."


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 3, 2011 at 10:50 am

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 3, 2011 at 12:55 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 3, 2011 at 1:16 pm

"there are thousands of prisoners who are in prison for drug possession"

I just had a long phone call with my cousin. I explained the situaiton, and he laughed ("why do you bother doing that, the outside has no idea what the inside is about"). Specifically, I asked him about SOLE possession convicts. He said it is an urban myth...there are none. He said that plea bargains, related to long wrap sheets, can show as a possession charge, but it does not reflect why the convicts are really there. One last comment he made to me is: If you have a clean rap sheet, and call the cops to come arrest you for possession of a controlled substance, AND say that you want to do time in state prison, the system will laugh at you. You would get sent through all sorts of remediation programs, possibly county jail, etc., but NOT the big pen. It is very hard to get into state prison.


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 3, 2011 at 6:43 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

Susan aside, svatoid, can you point out any flaws in my recipe for expediting appeals?


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 4, 2011 at 7:20 am

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

Faith, Justice delayed is Justice Denied? I kinda think so. I believe the Constitution, as a whole, is for the speedy administration of justice. I see nothing wrong with bringing death penalty appeals to the front of the line. It is entirely constitutional. I further believe that the public, as well as the convict, is entitled to justice. I believe appeals should be based on substantive issues and that they should all be presented in a timely manner.
How about this: Four years and then either execute or freedom?
In engineering, perfection is the enemy of good enough.


Posted by right, a resident of Palo Verde
on Sep 4, 2011 at 8:01 am

why wait?execute now!!!!


Posted by Faith much?, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Sep 4, 2011 at 9:40 am

"Justice delayed is Justice Denied?" I missed which part of the Constitution that bumpersticker phrase came from, or from which Court interpretation.

"kinda...believe...I see nothing...I further believe...I believe...should...they should...in a timely manner...How about this..."

So many cavalier attitudes over the Law. Walter, you used every waffle word except "Golly, I *FEEL* in my HEART this should be..."

Lynch mob bloodlust.

* If your argument is cost, then quit having the state murder convicts, or go after the costs on the war on drugs or the bloated costs of prison guard unions.

* If your argument is safety, then list the names of anyone murdered by a con WHILE on death row (call Susan's phantom cousins.)

* If your argument is faith, please share passages from your Holy Book that identify where your deity says "kill 'em! kill them all!"

My Guy didn't say that to my knowledge. His message was peace, compassion for the poor and forgiveness. As asked by others above:

WWJD?


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 4, 2011 at 12:12 pm

This link shows how victims' families suffer by the delay in justice. This particular scumbag has yet to be executed after 30 years! The family is left to twist in the wind.


Web Link


Posted by Faith much?, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Sep 4, 2011 at 2:10 pm

Susan: glad you finally got it down to the one place you have left (the rest of your points - costs, guard safety, faith - being disproved.)

Victims families.

Again, that's why we have the law, not lynch-mobs.


Posted by Faith much?, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Sep 4, 2011 at 2:32 pm

In Susan and Walter's world, if this guy was on death row, they'd have murdered an innocent man before his innocence was proven:

Web Link

"New DNA results, combined with evidence that was improperly withheld by Williamson County prosecutors for more than two decades, indicates that an Austin-area man has spent 24 years in jail for a murder he did not commit, a court filing alleged Wednesday.

Michael Morton, now 57, was convicted in the brutal beating death of his wife, Christine Morton, and sentenced to life in prison in 1987.

But a recent court-ordered DNA test, conducted on a blood-stained bandanna over the objections of Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley, points instead to an unnamed California felon as the killer, according to court briefs filed by the Innocence Project of New York."

Why is the Texas execution policy important?

"Willingham was executed by lethal injection on Feb. 17, 2004. Yet the efforts to exonerate Willingham only intensified, and in 2005, the Texas Forensic Science Commission decided to re-examine the case. The commission hired a nationally known fire scientist, Craig Beyler, to evaluate the evidence, and in his report, he came down on the same side as the scientists who had evaluated the case prior to Willingham's execution: there was no credible scientific basis for the conclusion that arson had been committed.

Beyler was eventually scheduled to testify before the commission on Oct. 2, 2009. Two days before Beyler's appearance, however, Rick Perry put a stop to it.

Two years later, we're wondering if anyone wants to ask the presidential aspirant why."

What kind of God do these people pray to?


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 4, 2011 at 2:44 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

WWJD? Jesus on Golgotha forgave the thief, but let him die anyway.
A reasonable appeal process is mandated, but the process now is unreasonable baratry. Five years? Absolutely outrageous.


Posted by Faith much?, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Sep 4, 2011 at 2:48 pm

"Five years? Absolutely outrageous."

Killing an innocent human being before s/he gets all his/her lawful appeals? Walter should redefine "absolutely outrageous."


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 4, 2011 at 4:35 pm

"Susan: glad you finally got it down to the one place you have left (the rest of your points - costs, guard safety, faith - being disproved.)"

Wrong, "Faith". None of my points have been disproved, not a single one.

BTW, why are you injecting religion into this discussion? I, for one, could care less what a religious mystic from two millenia ago thinks about anything.

This is a discussion about our laws and our views of secular justice. It is not about 'turn the other cheek'. Your religious myths should have no bearing on how we, as a society, deal with the scumbags.


Posted by Outside Observer, a resident of another community
on Sep 4, 2011 at 6:02 pm

@Faith Much,

Your example of Williamson County hit on one of the many problems with the criminal justice system, and something that must be fixed for everything from traffic tickets to capital offences.

A good starting place for criminal justice system workers, at all levels, is to hold them to a standard 10 times that of the common man.

In this case, the Williamson County prosecutors, and everyone involved with withholding evidence should be put to death.



Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 4, 2011 at 8:01 pm

Outside Observer,

You appear to have fallen into the defense attorney web. In case you don't know, they will throw all the stuff at the wall, and if it any of it sticks, even for a moment, they claim "innocent!".

In this particular case, there was a bandana that was found, away from the scene of the crime, that had the victim's blood and hair and another person's DNA (no mention of his blood). Was it her bandana that she wiped her nose bleed with, then tossed in away at the construction site, then it was picked up by the guy in question? Is there any forensic evidence of this guy's presence at the crime scene?

It is reported that there was another crime, with a similar m.o. Is there DNA evidence that it was the same guy? If there is such evidence, and it is not the same guy, then what is the connection? Or is this just more defense attorney baloney?

Hearsay evidence is not allowed, especially from a three year old, for obvious reasons.

This particular case proves nothing.


Posted by sorry, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 4, 2011 at 9:09 pm

It is so sorry that the final orders were done ,the dead can not be alive again.


Posted by Outside Observer, a resident of another community
on Sep 4, 2011 at 9:28 pm

@Susan,

Defense attorneys.... Wrong. In general they are more corrupt than prosecuting attorneys. In most cases, they know their client is guilty, but intentionally "game" the system to maximise their $$$ profit.

Centuries ago Shakespeare advised us on what to do with lawyers. His advise is just as valid now as it was then.




Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 5, 2011 at 7:08 am


From the case in question:

" Raley said Bradley fought to keep under wraps a sheriff's department interview with Morton's mother-in-law conducted days after the 1986 murder in which she said the couple's young son had witnessed the crime. She said her grandson, 3 years old at the time, told her that a man who was "not Daddy" killed his mother. Raley also questioned whether the trial judge at the time had ever seen the document."

This is classic hearsay 'evidence'. There was no reason to provide it to anyone, by the prosecutor, since it would not be allowed in court. Even if the three year old kid had been interviewed directly, the quesiton of credibility would be at play. Also, the possibility of influence on the kid by his grandma would be a problem.


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 5, 2011 at 1:08 pm

Walter:
"Susan aside, svatoid, can you point out any flaws in my recipe for expediting appeals?"

As someone else salso stated, as long as what you propose doe snot go against our Constitution.


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 5, 2011 at 1:46 pm

"as long as what you propose doe snot go against our Constitution."

There is nothing in our Constitution that prevents expedited executions. FDR, for example, did not violate the Constitution when he ordered executions three days after conviction.


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 5, 2011 at 1:58 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

You tell 'em, Suzie!


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 5, 2011 at 2:00 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

...and as for these lists of innocents executed, most of the names on these lists were of questionable innocence.


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 5, 2011 at 2:13 pm

"There is nothing in our Constitution that prevents expedited executions. FDR, for example, did not violate the Constitution when he ordered executions three days after conviction."
Except for the issue of due process. Susan likes to bring in the Constitution when it suits her needs.

"You tell 'em, Suzie!"
Surprised that Walter is supporting Susan?

"...and as for these lists of innocents executed, most of the names on these lists were of questionable innocence."
So not all, Walter? So that is okay? to kill an innocent? Isn't that murder?
Which ones do you find their innocence to be questionable? Based on waht? Your extensive investigation of the people? Or the fact that they are not aryan?

Not surprised that Walter and Susan are supporting actions that are carried out also by countries like North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Iran etc.


Posted by Susan, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 5, 2011 at 2:39 pm

Killing killers is definitely justice, and that IS a patriotic aspiration! People who oppose capital punishment can be patriotic, but they should not throw rocks in glass houses.

"Due process" is a matter of interpretaton. If one more conservative justice gets appointed to the Supreme Court, due process will look much different than you think it is, svatoid.


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Sep 5, 2011 at 5:17 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

Do Process? The "do" means relevant. All the relevant appeals factors can be processed in a year. Rarely, two years. It is odd to, then, call an execution lynching. Twenty years? Each of the endless appeals waiting patiently in line, the attorneys patiently waiting for the inevitable turn down, then submitting the next in an endless process.
After the first dozen appeals, the "grounds" for a real appeal border on the ludicrous.
[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Services, Dining and Shopping Downtown in Palo Alto
By Steve Levy | 16 comments | 2,053 views

Handmade truffle shop now open in downtown Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 2 comments | 1,696 views

It's the End of the World as We Know It: "Snowpiercer"
By Anita Felicelli | 1 comment | 1,385 views

What is the new couple's paradigm these days?
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,033 views

Why is doing nothing so difficult?
By Sally Torbey | 7 comments | 916 views