Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NYT: U.S. Case Draws Vermont Into Debate on the Death Penalty

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-29-05 08:55 AM
Original message
NYT: U.S. Case Draws Vermont Into Debate on the Death Penalty
U.S. Case Draws Vermont Into Debate on the Death Penalty
By KATIE ZEZIMA
Published: May 29, 2005


BURLINGTON, Vt., May 24 - For years, Vermonters have watched the death penalty debate unfold far from this reputedly left-leaning state, which has not executed anyone in nearly a half-century and abolished the death penalty in 1987.

But the issue hit home earlier this month, when jury selection began here in the federal capital murder trial of Donald Fell after years of legal wrangling about the death penalty's application in the case....

***

According to the indictment, Mr. Fell and an accomplice, Robert Lee (who later committed suicide), drove (Terry) King's car 200 miles (from Rutland, Vermont) to Dutchess County in New York, where they beat her to death in the woods as she prayed.

The indictment said that Mr. Fell and Mr. Lee kidnapped Ms. King after killing Mr. Fell's mother, Debra, and a man named Charles Conway in Debra Fell's apartment in Rutland....

***

Because the case involved the crossing of state lines, the federal authorities claimed jurisdiction. In October 2001, the United States attorney's office here reached an agreement to spare Mr. Fell the death penalty, but the United States attorney general at the time, John Ashcroft, rejected the deal months later....


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/29/national/29death.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DrDebug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-29-05 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
1. Rule by fear
If you cannot rule by reason, rule by fear. I guess it has become the practice nowadays.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-29-05 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. The "consent of the governed" is more easily obtained by coercion ...
... and when "informed consent" is abolished. In other words, keep 'em ignorant and scared.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC