-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Murderer of Yingying Zhang convicted on all counts, potentially the first death penalty in Illinois since the abolition of capital punishment
- Thread starter Hierophant
- Start date
I also think the fact that these cases are so emotionally challenging means that we should be even more serious about maintaining consistent principles. If these cases were already easy to adjudicate then we wouldn't really need them.
A pretty specific US Era phenomenon as well, Canada is way less progressive than Europe in this particular issue (Criminal sentencing, and correctional systems), considering the Harper government had a bill and brought about consecutive life sentences that can in theory leads to LWOP, though this only applies to multiple killers and is applied very sparingly.
However, even here, earlier this year, when the Quebec Mosque shooter (who killed 6 people in a spree) were sentenced to Life with parole after 40 years (meaning he could apply for parole when he's in his 60s), most Canadians seemed OK with that, and I haven't heard significant complains.
Well not only is he a monster but he's also extremely boastful and not very thorough, so the blatant admission from him, his attorneys, and the blood everywhere was enough
Yep. We live in an amoral universe where bad and unfair things happen for reasons that outrage the intellect. It can be appealing to think that justice is this neat and tidy thing where we can find out who's guilty and punish them to fix their crime, but that's a simplistic view. Inflicting suffering and death doesn't correct anything. It certainly doesn't have a reliable deterrent effect on future would-be criminals. It just makes some people feel better.
That's right. Any serious inquiry into criminal justice and the history of punishment would suggest cruelty doesn't fix crime. Rehabilitation is our best bet by far.
Last edited:
If our justice system want to have to moral high-ground to prosecute crimes, then I think it is important to maintain consistent principles, as you said, especially important in the most heinous scenarios, however remote the possibility of rehabilitation it is for some individuals. It's the mindset that's important.
Honestly, after watching When They See Us, they should lock this fucker up for the rest of his life in solitary confinement. Death is too merciful for this monster. Let him rot in solitary forever.
Life without parole is a bad sentence. It shouldn't exist. But I can stand life without parole because it means that everyone who ends up in that bucket remains alive. For the cases where there are wrongful convictions, but also for the possibility that we can shift the conversation to what you've identified, that these life without parole sentences are just as inhumane and unacceptable as capital punishment.
There will be some criminals who get locked up and whose prison sentences aren't going to be one bit different between LWOP and LWP. They will be locked up until the end. Whether or not they have the ability to seek parole after several decades in jail isn't going to matter, they'll be in there until the end of their life. But in the case where parole is at least eventually an option, it means that they remain in jail because they're being monitored and still need to be there, not just because that was the decision that 12 people made 45 years ago.
The death penalty is more expensive than life in prison. Let him rot and be forgotten, let him spend the rest of his life doing menial labor behind bars. Lethal injection would just be a waste of tax dollars.
Fuck the feds for this one. Petite policy? What the fuck is that? Never heard of it! The feds brought him up on kidnapping so they could bootstrap the case in federal court where the death penalty was in play. Then they used a superseding indictment to bring him up on federal murder charges.
Normally the feds let the state prosecute a murder trial but they were so hungry for vengeance on this one that they'll fuck all that off to make sure this guy gets the needle. They did the same thing with Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Commit a capital crime in a way that a AUSA doesn't like? They'll bring you up into the federal system to make sure they kill you.
Normally the feds let the state prosecute a murder trial but they were so hungry for vengeance on this one that they'll fuck all that off to make sure this guy gets the needle. They did the same thing with Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Commit a capital crime in a way that a AUSA doesn't like? They'll bring you up into the federal system to make sure they kill you.
As much as calls for someone's death might feel cathartic, the death penalty is wrong. It shouldn't be used. This is not the middle ages.
I heard if they kill him real good their daughter will come back to life!
I heard if they kill him real good their daughter will come back to life!
No lies detected. It's what us set apart from monsters like this guy.
For those who say let him rot or solitary confinement....is that gonna really happen?
Or is he gonna be able to watch some TV here and there after years pass by... read some good books here and there..get to go outside and get some sun... get to look up into the sky........get to speak to guards who are bored and passing by his cell to give him stuff... etc.
Or is he gonna be able to watch some TV here and there after years pass by... read some good books here and there..get to go outside and get some sun... get to look up into the sky........get to speak to guards who are bored and passing by his cell to give him stuff... etc.
By killing him they will never get the chance to get the remains however.
I'm sort of ok with the verdict if this gets the murderer to disclose the whereabouts of her remains.
Categorically against capital punishment.
People might think it's just because of this specific case, but all it does is saying you're fine with the death penalty. There is no line between here.
Convicted spend years if not decades on death row they get much of that anyway
More, actually. Most inmates continually appeal which is also a huge drain in legal feed. In THIS case it looks cut and dry, but unfortunately we are in 'merica where what sends you to death row is lack of legal resources as opposed to a robust and fair trial and sentence.
Very, very true, but at least they have that lethal injection looming.
I suppose I was talking more in a 'He should be given the death penalty and not sit on Death Row for 25 years, but get sentenced and head immediately to the chamber.'
Life sentence:
A U.S. District Court jury in Peoria, Illinois found Brendt Christensen, 29, guilty last month of all charges in the murder of Yingying Zhang, a 26-year-old student at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
On Thursday, the same jury of five women and seven men told the judge that they were unable to unanimously decide between life in prison or the death penalty. Christensen was then sentenced to life imprisonment by default.
Christensen looked down with his eyes closed, smiled and sighed when U.S. District Judge James Shadid read the decision. Christensen's mother was hugged by a member of his legal team in the courtroom. Christensen hugged and thanked his lawyers.
While the state of Illinois has outlawed capital punishment, it is an option in federal cases tried under U.S. kidnapping laws.
Yep.
People in here openly calling for torture (solitary confinement) acting like they are moraly superior to people for the death penalty.
So fucked up.
?
the dude was caught on tape saying he brought her to his apartment and held her there against her will
how is that not kidnapping
Just FYI, solitary confinement, aside from being cruel, is generally ineffective too.
There is a weird amount of bloodlust for Era. Prison for life, end of story.
Illinois state has kidnapping laws like every other state in the union. The feds dove in with kidnapping (which they're only supposed to do if it crosses state lines) because they've overbroadened their reach. Use the Internet commissioning the wrong crime? Congratulations, you too can be dragged into the federal system and eligible for the death penalty!
And that's why they do it. The only reason to do this is in federal court is because they can go for death in a state where the death penalty has been abolished and it's disgusting.
It sounds extremely effective if the goal is to make the inmate suffer.
what is your basis for saying "only if it crosses state lines?"
I'm assuming they have statutory authority based on federal law WRT kidnapping, based on what you've written. Does the gloss/limitation you're referencing exist as a textual matter, or is it just a preference on your part?
Death penalty is wrong, no exceptions.
Solitary confinement is torture, torture is wrong, no exceptions.
remember, those people are exceptions, they are rare, and do not, in any shape or form, are a justification for keeping death penalty or torture within your justice system.
If you do not agree, you are a backward caveman, fell free to add me to your ignore list, im ok with it, because you may have to face that embarrassing truth about yourself again in the future if you do not.
Solitary confinement is torture, torture is wrong, no exceptions.
remember, those people are exceptions, they are rare, and do not, in any shape or form, are a justification for keeping death penalty or torture within your justice system.
If you do not agree, you are a backward caveman, fell free to add me to your ignore list, im ok with it, because you may have to face that embarrassing truth about yourself again in the future if you do not.
There's a number of factors in play. The first is the DOJ (typically) applies something called the "Petite Policy" which was constructed in the wake of Petite v. United States. Typically the feds consider justice to be served by a state prosecution unless there's some really damn good reason not to.
Typically when you have a federal crime, for the feds to have jurisdiction you need it to be constitutional. Article 3 Section 2 limits the federal courts in general as to what they can prosecute. For a federal crime, this typically means you have the United States as the wronged party. So for instance, you can have bank robbery as a state crime but for bank robbery to be a federal crime the US needs to be wronged in some way, so if the US insures the bank in some way, boom, US has been wronged, federal laws have jurisdiction, DOJ can prosecute if they want. Like an ATM in a national park or something.
This crime was (physically) completely committed inside the state of Illinois. Both lived in Illinois. Christensen abducted Zhang from an Illinois campus. He never took her over state lines. He held her at an Illinois apartment. By all rights it should have been prosecuted inside Illinois. Then the feds come in and go "hey, he searched the Internet while doing this crime completely inside Illinois, that's makes it a federal offense by our definition", and dragged him into federal court so they could basically try to kill him.
It's constitutional by the barest of margins (commerce clause yay!) and dirty pool. It's capital crime by prosecutorial discretion. The spirit of the law is that this guy should have been tried in state court by Illinois with death off the table. But when the populace demands blood, hey, gotta give them blood.
That's always what i think about, what if he's "a good prisoner" and then gets some leeway, t.v time and walks etc.
Piece of shit doesn't deserve a breath of fresh air.
I see. Thanks for the explanation, I was wondering what the article 1 justification was for the federal statute. Lol @ internet search.
So shame on everyone else's bloodthirst, but you're advocating for torture? K.
Folks, the UN has essentially called for an outright ban on solitary in all nations as it's both ineffective and is considered a form of torture. What the fuck is going on in this thread?
explain how solitary confinement is not torture, and how torture is acceptable in a civilised justice system then.
keep digging.
That's so stupid though. I didn't know even an internet search qualified as a connection to interstate commerce. I mean, I get why, but lol. What a toothless jurisdictional limitation.
