|
|
execute woman - starving & abusing 9-year-old
By Jetackuu 2014-09-18 11:42:31
Thanks Zah: now we found out that she wasn't even qualified for the death penalty according to the law, but some other sick people (this time judges) refused to follow the law.
Way to go justice
How was she not qualified for the death penalty? Especially in Texas?
Edit: Nevermind, I see your quibble.
He didn't read.
Quote: In Texas, there has to be an underlying felony or second crime committed for a defendant to be charged with capital murder. Before 2011, those underlying crimes were murder, kidnapping, burglary, robbery, obstruction or terroristic threat. But in 2011, lawmakers added the killing of a child under the age of 10 to those underlying crimes.
Just flappin' his gums rat-tat-tatting across the keyboard.
I did read, she was convicted before that law changed, she would have to be retried for that law to apply.
By Blazed1979 2014-09-18 11:42:43
See my previous point for a quick background on why I think it is. To address your question specifically; because said individuals who cannot be deterred by threat of death are an absolute menace to everyone around them.
If you believe prison time is appropriate, then one could argue you are willingly putting the guards and other prison inmates at risk of being murdered by having such people alive and well, anywhere on the face of this earth.
By Jetackuu 2014-09-18 11:43:08
Asura.Refreshazure said: »Don't get me wrong: the *** is a waste of oxygen, I know plenty just the same, but as a civilized society we shouldn't be in the business of murder, they're caught and can't harm society anymore, there's no excuse or justification for killing them.
ya it wrong to kill in civilized society and it may cost more but i still think we need to look past that and kill her, child mutilation/murder needs a death sentenced she needs to be in the ground and you cant let that kind of murder go or there may be some one who will mimic her and go "i can get way with it o only get only get life".
Any way back to are back to are regular scheduled drone attacks on muslims So you're looking past the points that matter in favor of your sick and twisted delusions of justice?
Some of you are just bloodthirsty, it's quite disgusting, and I bet every one of you would be in favor of public executions, and go watch. You'll gun someone down looking for help on a porch in the middle of the night because you're a coward afraid of what they "might" do, but call us bloodthirsty for wanting to see a *** terrible human being executed for heinous crimes.
What the actual ***. I'd gun somebody down who I think for all intents and purpose is trying to break in, high and trying to do me harm, you're damn straight I will.
You are bloodthirsty as that's what keeps being posted here.
How do you consolidate those two positions?
You kill a thief or intruder but spare the murderer?
You assume that the intruder is a thief, but most likely they're there to do harm to you, most thieves don't break into a known occupied home, home invasions are dangerous and often result in losing life or limb. Self defence is absolute, and about the only time I can think for actually killing somebody on purpose and being fine with it, but I'm sure if we dig, I can find a few other rare instances.
But there's no justice in executions, nothing is being protected, nothing is saved. Well you can't say for certain that the intruder is coming to harm you, but you can say for certain that a murderer killed. So
I can only conclude that you support killing as a preventive measure. Thus you should agree with the death penalty when necessary seeing as it not only a preventive measure but also a deterrent.
I don't have to, but the potential threat is definitely there.
You cannot say for certain that a convicted murderer has killed, posted a link to that earlier.
The death penalty isn't a preventative measure or a deterrent to anything, and no I support the use of lethal force when there's something to protect, there's nothing being protected in this or other capital execution cases. I don't disagree that there are innocent people behind bars or on death row. But that is a flaw in the judicial system.
And Death penalty is most definitely a preventative measure, as is jail time, the lack of which would lead to anarchy and chaos. Death sentences being available are just more potent a deterrent than prison sentences.
Pretty sure that it's been proven that it's not a deterrent to violent crime, but I don't feel like backing that up, so I'll just disagree.
Well, if that is true, it begs the question: If the threat of death isn't enough of a deterrence to stop people from killing others, shouldn't said people be eliminated? Aren't they even a greater threat to society?
No, as you're talking about the entire population at that point.
By Blazed1979 2014-09-18 11:45:36
Asura.Refreshazure said: »Don't get me wrong: the *** is a waste of oxygen, I know plenty just the same, but as a civilized society we shouldn't be in the business of murder, they're caught and can't harm society anymore, there's no excuse or justification for killing them.
ya it wrong to kill in civilized society and it may cost more but i still think we need to look past that and kill her, child mutilation/murder needs a death sentenced she needs to be in the ground and you cant let that kind of murder go or there may be some one who will mimic her and go "i can get way with it o only get only get life".
Any way back to are back to are regular scheduled drone attacks on muslims So you're looking past the points that matter in favor of your sick and twisted delusions of justice?
Some of you are just bloodthirsty, it's quite disgusting, and I bet every one of you would be in favor of public executions, and go watch. You'll gun someone down looking for help on a porch in the middle of the night because you're a coward afraid of what they "might" do, but call us bloodthirsty for wanting to see a *** terrible human being executed for heinous crimes.
What the actual ***. I'd gun somebody down who I think for all intents and purpose is trying to break in, high and trying to do me harm, you're damn straight I will.
You are bloodthirsty as that's what keeps being posted here.
How do you consolidate those two positions?
You kill a thief or intruder but spare the murderer?
You assume that the intruder is a thief, but most likely they're there to do harm to you, most thieves don't break into a known occupied home, home invasions are dangerous and often result in losing life or limb. Self defence is absolute, and about the only time I can think for actually killing somebody on purpose and being fine with it, but I'm sure if we dig, I can find a few other rare instances.
But there's no justice in executions, nothing is being protected, nothing is saved. Well you can't say for certain that the intruder is coming to harm you, but you can say for certain that a murderer killed. So
I can only conclude that you support killing as a preventive measure. Thus you should agree with the death penalty when necessary seeing as it not only a preventive measure but also a deterrent.
I don't have to, but the potential threat is definitely there.
You cannot say for certain that a convicted murderer has killed, posted a link to that earlier.
The death penalty isn't a preventative measure or a deterrent to anything, and no I support the use of lethal force when there's something to protect, there's nothing being protected in this or other capital execution cases. I don't disagree that there are innocent people behind bars or on death row. But that is a flaw in the judicial system.
And Death penalty is most definitely a preventative measure, as is jail time, the lack of which would lead to anarchy and chaos. Death sentences being available are just more potent a deterrent than prison sentences.
Pretty sure that it's been proven that it's not a deterrent to violent crime, but I don't feel like backing that up, so I'll just disagree.
Well, if that is true, it begs the question: If the threat of death isn't enough of a deterrence to stop people from killing others, shouldn't said people be eliminated? Aren't they even a greater threat to society?
No, as you're talking about the entire population at that point. I don't know if I misunderstood "entire society" but are you implying all of society have murderous tenancies?
By Jetackuu 2014-09-18 11:45:48
See my previous point for a quick background on why I think it is. To address your question specifically; because said individuals who cannot be deterred by threat of death are an absolute menace to everyone around them.
If you believe prison time is appropriate, then one could argue you are willingly putting the guards and other prison inmates at risk of being murdered by having such people alive and well, anywhere on the face of this earth. One could argue that rather stupidly.
 Lakshmi.Flavin
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2014-09-18 11:46:36
To The anti-death penalty people: No one is saying you should like it or enjoy it. That doesn't mean it should not be used when necessary because you can't stomach it. It's never necassary.
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 10394
By Lakshmi.Sparthosx 2014-09-18 11:47:04
I'm not calling the death penalty a deterrent either, you ain't gonna stop people from killing if they want to kill. What I will say is these people are a waste of resources who have broken their contract with society and face no ability to return to society ever again.
I'm all for helping non-violent offenders return to society and get the resources they need to fix themselves and become productive members of society but a murderer? rapist? torturer? Nope, you can go get Nuremberg'd.
 Bahamut.Kara
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3544
By Bahamut.Kara 2014-09-18 11:47:13
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »Here's my problem Jet.
Why not use non-lethal force on those thieves and home invaders then? If the goal is self-defense. Why should we have the ability to dispense summary justice but the legal system with the consent of the people can't?
Why the need for guns if 'murdering' is such a hangup?
Self defense isn't murder, and lethal force against the potential threat is more likely to keep you and your family alive. Just like executions and police kills, when you kill someone under self defense it is designated a homicide on the death certificate.
By Blazed1979 2014-09-18 11:47:32
See my previous point for a quick background on why I think it is. To address your question specifically; because said individuals who cannot be deterred by threat of death are an absolute menace to everyone around them.
If you believe prison time is appropriate, then one could argue you are willingly putting the guards and other prison inmates at risk of being murdered by having such people alive and well, anywhere on the face of this earth. One could argue that rather stupidly.
On the contrary - if someone is put on death row or a life sentence, what have they got to loose?
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 4307
By Asura.Ackeronll 2014-09-18 11:48:26
Ok so after checking those links. For MD just the case where the Death Penalty is an option costs 3 mil.
Quote: The greatest costs associated with the death penalty occur prior to and during trial, not in post-conviction proceedings. So the huge cost everyone is getting is due to extra crap done during the trial. Meaning if you don't pick the death penalty on a case where it is an option you just wasted 2 million tax dollars(in the state of MD)!
Therefor people who vote not guilty at death penalty cases are ***!
By Jetackuu 2014-09-18 11:50:18
Asura.Refreshazure said: »Don't get me wrong: the *** is a waste of oxygen, I know plenty just the same, but as a civilized society we shouldn't be in the business of murder, they're caught and can't harm society anymore, there's no excuse or justification for killing them.
ya it wrong to kill in civilized society and it may cost more but i still think we need to look past that and kill her, child mutilation/murder needs a death sentenced she needs to be in the ground and you cant let that kind of murder go or there may be some one who will mimic her and go "i can get way with it o only get only get life".
Any way back to are back to are regular scheduled drone attacks on muslims So you're looking past the points that matter in favor of your sick and twisted delusions of justice?
Some of you are just bloodthirsty, it's quite disgusting, and I bet every one of you would be in favor of public executions, and go watch. You'll gun someone down looking for help on a porch in the middle of the night because you're a coward afraid of what they "might" do, but call us bloodthirsty for wanting to see a *** terrible human being executed for heinous crimes.
What the actual ***. I'd gun somebody down who I think for all intents and purpose is trying to break in, high and trying to do me harm, you're damn straight I will.
You are bloodthirsty as that's what keeps being posted here.
How do you consolidate those two positions?
You kill a thief or intruder but spare the murderer?
You assume that the intruder is a thief, but most likely they're there to do harm to you, most thieves don't break into a known occupied home, home invasions are dangerous and often result in losing life or limb. Self defence is absolute, and about the only time I can think for actually killing somebody on purpose and being fine with it, but I'm sure if we dig, I can find a few other rare instances.
But there's no justice in executions, nothing is being protected, nothing is saved. Well you can't say for certain that the intruder is coming to harm you, but you can say for certain that a murderer killed. So
I can only conclude that you support killing as a preventive measure. Thus you should agree with the death penalty when necessary seeing as it not only a preventive measure but also a deterrent.
I don't have to, but the potential threat is definitely there.
You cannot say for certain that a convicted murderer has killed, posted a link to that earlier.
The death penalty isn't a preventative measure or a deterrent to anything, and no I support the use of lethal force when there's something to protect, there's nothing being protected in this or other capital execution cases. I don't disagree that there are innocent people behind bars or on death row. But that is a flaw in the judicial system.
And Death penalty is most definitely a preventative measure, as is jail time, the lack of which would lead to anarchy and chaos. Death sentences being available are just more potent a deterrent than prison sentences.
Pretty sure that it's been proven that it's not a deterrent to violent crime, but I don't feel like backing that up, so I'll just disagree.
Well, if that is true, it begs the question: If the threat of death isn't enough of a deterrence to stop people from killing others, shouldn't said people be eliminated? Aren't they even a greater threat to society?
No, as you're talking about the entire population at that point. I don't know if I misunderstood "entire society" but are you implying all of society have murderous tenancies? Everyone is capable of murder, nowhere did I say that "the death sentence is not a deterrent for these individuals here" I was talking about it not being a deterrent for society as a whole.
Most people don't needlessly kill because they find it wrong to do, others will kill for crimes of passion (revenge, etc), others will do it for gain, out of the two instances it's either they don't care about the penalties of getting caught or they they think they won't get caught. It usually takes a lot to drive somebody to take the life of another unwarranted.
Then there's cases such as these where the individuals are just *** in the head, as we don't have a psych profile to go on, we can't say for sure what they were thinking, looks like control issues, some remorse. Considering how long it was going on though: it was probably safe to assume that they didn't care about the potential penalties, as they had plenty of opportunity to stop, and no real gain.
By Demoncard 2014-09-18 11:51:09
Bismarck.Bloodrose said: »How about the post before it that actually stated I erred on that part I've consistently quoted your first post for quite some time. I don't know what other post you're referring to, or why being wrong on the internet is causing you so much distress.
Take a pill of your choosing to help you relax, but be sure it isn't a cyanide pill.
Server: Excalibur
Game: FFXIV
Posts: 6427
By Grumpy Cat 2014-09-18 11:53:11
Whatever happened to the good old fashioned "eye for an eye" days?
She should have been beaten with a golf club, starved until she was at half the weight of a healthy person her age, bound with extension cords and then right before she died funnel a couple gallons of chicken soup down her throat.
[+]
By Jetackuu 2014-09-18 11:54:37
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »I'm not calling the death penalty a deterrent either, you ain't gonna stop people from killing if they want to kill. What I will say is these people are a waste of resources who have broken their contract with society and face no ability to return to society ever again.
I'm all for helping non-violent offenders return to society and get the resources they need to fix themselves and become productive members of society but a murderer? rapist? torturer? Nope, you can go get Nuremberg'd. Prison is for people who don't belong in society, I don't agree with putting people who are supposed to be rehabilitated in with those who are there for life.
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »Here's my problem Jet.
Why not use non-lethal force on those thieves and home invaders then? If the goal is self-defense. Why should we have the ability to dispense summary justice but the legal system with the consent of the people can't?
Why the need for guns if 'murdering' is such a hangup?
Self defense isn't murder, and lethal force against the potential threat is more likely to keep you and your family alive. Just like executions and police kills, when you kill someone under self defense it is designated a homicide on the death certificate.
I dropped that line earlier as I couldn't find any source for it, so do you have one, in this case let's go for texas?
On the contrary - if someone is put on death row or a life sentence, what have they got to loose?
A lot, depends on the person. But as stated earlier: violence can come from any inmate, but we could talk about the poor structure of the prisons all month.
Ok so after checking those links. For MD just the case where the Death Penalty is an option costs 3 mil.
Quote: The greatest costs associated with the death penalty occur prior to and during trial, not in post-conviction proceedings. So the huge cost everyone is getting is due to extra crap done during the trial. Meaning if you don't pick the death penalty on a case where it is an option you just wasted 2 million tax dollars(in the state of MD)!
Therefor people who vote not guilty at death penalty cases are ***! or more like because they don't find that the evidence is sufficient for it, or they don't feel justified in taking a life for no reason.
By Jetackuu 2014-09-18 11:55:04
Whatever happened to the good old fashioned "eye for an eye" days?
She should have been beaten with a golf club, starved until she was at half the weight of a healthy person her age, bound with extension cords and then right before she died funnel a couple gallons of chicken soup down her throat. There was nothing good about those old days.
Bismarck.Ramyrez
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 4746
By Bismarck.Ramyrez 2014-09-18 11:55:35
Whatever happened to the good old fashioned "eye for an eye" days?
She should have been beaten with a golf club, starved until she was at half the weight of a healthy person her age, bound with extension cords and then right before she died funnel a couple gallons of chicken soup down her throat. There was nothing good about those old days.
Obviously not to you; you'd be lacking hands.
[+]
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 4307
By Asura.Ackeronll 2014-09-18 11:55:55
Whatever happened to the good old fashioned "eye for an eye" days?
She should have been beaten with a golf club, starved until she was at half the weight of a healthy person her age, bound with extension cords and then right before she died funnel a couple gallons of chicken soup down her throat.
I miss the good ol' days. This generation seems to be all about feeling and politrickal correctness.
By Jetackuu 2014-09-18 11:56:09
Whatever happened to the good old fashioned "eye for an eye" days?
She should have been beaten with a golf club, starved until she was at half the weight of a healthy person her age, bound with extension cords and then right before she died funnel a couple gallons of chicken soup down her throat. There was nothing good about those old days.
Obviously not to you; you'd be lacking hands. Are you implying that I steal?
 Bismarck.Bloodrose
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 4322
By Bismarck.Bloodrose 2014-09-18 11:56:46
Some definitions, yo:
Homocide: The killing of human being by another human being
Murder: The unlawuful killing of a human being by another human being without justification or excuse
Quote: Although the term homicide is sometimes used synonymously with murder, homicide is broader in scope than murder. Murder is a form of criminal homicide; other forms of homicide might not constitute criminal acts. These homicides are regarded as justified or excusable. For example, individuals may, in a necessary act of Self-Defense, kill a person who threatens them with death or serious injury, or they may be commanded or authorized by law to kill a person who is a member of an enemy force or who has committed a serious crime. Typically, the circumstances surrounding a killing determine whether it is criminal. The intent of the killer usually determines whether a criminal homicide is classified as murder or Manslaughter and at what degree.
[+]
Bismarck.Ramyrez
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 4746
By Bismarck.Ramyrez 2014-09-18 11:57:21
Whatever happened to the good old fashioned "eye for an eye" days?
She should have been beaten with a golf club, starved until she was at half the weight of a healthy person her age, bound with extension cords and then right before she died funnel a couple gallons of chicken soup down her throat. There was nothing good about those old days.
Obviously not to you; you'd be lacking hands. Are you implying that I steal?
I am.
I know you don't see it as such, because you have made an excuse for yourself, because the term "intellectual property" means *** to you.
[+]
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3995
By Odin.Godofgods 2014-09-18 11:57:57
Whatever happened to the good old fashioned "eye for an eye" days?
She should have been beaten with a golf club, starved until she was at half the weight of a healthy person her age, bound with extension cords and then right before she died funnel a couple gallons of chicken soup down her throat. There was nothing good about those old days.
Obviously not to you; you'd be lacking hands. Are you implying that I steal?
Im stating it out right. You steal.
Your a 99 thf'
[+]
By Jetackuu 2014-09-18 11:58:43
Whatever happened to the good old fashioned "eye for an eye" days?
She should have been beaten with a golf club, starved until she was at half the weight of a healthy person her age, bound with extension cords and then right before she died funnel a couple gallons of chicken soup down her throat. There was nothing good about those old days.
Obviously not to you; you'd be lacking hands. Are you implying that I steal?
I am.
I know you don't see it as such, because you have made an excuse for yourself, because the term "intellectual property" means *** to you. Yeah: it's still not theft, even if I gave a ***about IP (which to an extent I do).
Theft means I deprived somebody of something, I do nothing of the sort.
By Jetackuu 2014-09-18 11:59:13
Whatever happened to the good old fashioned "eye for an eye" days?
She should have been beaten with a golf club, starved until she was at half the weight of a healthy person her age, bound with extension cords and then right before she died funnel a couple gallons of chicken soup down her throat. There was nothing good about those old days.
Obviously not to you; you'd be lacking hands. Are you implying that I steal?
Im stating it out right. You steal.
You're a 99 thf' ftfy, a bad one at that, although I did just make the rse dagger.
Bismarck.Ramyrez
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 4746
By Bismarck.Ramyrez 2014-09-18 11:59:46
Whatever happened to the good old fashioned "eye for an eye" days?
She should have been beaten with a golf club, starved until she was at half the weight of a healthy person her age, bound with extension cords and then right before she died funnel a couple gallons of chicken soup down her throat. There was nothing good about those old days.
Obviously not to you; you'd be lacking hands. Are you implying that I steal?
I am.
I know you don't see it as such, because you have made an excuse for yourself, because the term "intellectual property" means *** to you. Yeah: it's still not theft, even if I gave a ***about IP (which to an extent I do).
Theft means I deprived somebody of something, I do nothing of the sort.
Mmmhmm.
Whatever you say.
[+]
By Jetackuu 2014-09-18 12:00:15
Whatever happened to the good old fashioned "eye for an eye" days?
She should have been beaten with a golf club, starved until she was at half the weight of a healthy person her age, bound with extension cords and then right before she died funnel a couple gallons of chicken soup down her throat. There was nothing good about those old days.
Obviously not to you; you'd be lacking hands. Are you implying that I steal?
I am.
I know you don't see it as such, because you have made an excuse for yourself, because the term "intellectual property" means *** to you. Yeah: it's still not theft, even if I gave a ***about IP (which to an extent I do).
Theft means I deprived somebody of something, I do nothing of the sort.
Mmmhmm.
Whatever you say. Sarcasm aside, you're catching on.
Lakshmi.Flavin
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2014-09-18 12:01:49
I really never thought I'd see the day where Ramy is trying to dole out biblical type justice!
Bismarck.Ramyrez
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 4746
By Bismarck.Ramyrez 2014-09-18 12:01:57
Whatever happened to the good old fashioned "eye for an eye" days?
She should have been beaten with a golf club, starved until she was at half the weight of a healthy person her age, bound with extension cords and then right before she died funnel a couple gallons of chicken soup down her throat. There was nothing good about those old days.
Obviously not to you; you'd be lacking hands. Are you implying that I steal?
I am.
I know you don't see it as such, because you have made an excuse for yourself, because the term "intellectual property" means *** to you. Yeah: it's still not theft, even if I gave a ***about IP (which to an extent I do).
Theft means I deprived somebody of something, I do nothing of the sort.
Mmmhmm.
Whatever you say. Sarcasm aside, you're catching on.
What's the point in arguing with you?
You've got an excuse for everything.
Edit: Also, "Sarcasm aside"? It was 100% sarcasm.
Bismarck.Bloodrose
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 4322
By Bismarck.Bloodrose 2014-09-18 12:03:22
If you benefit from the intellectual property of another person, group, business, corporation, or other legal entity, without their express permission, or knowledge, that falls under the definition of theft, as you are depriving them of their business and livelihood.
Bismarck.Ramyrez
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 4746
By Bismarck.Ramyrez 2014-09-18 12:04:09
I really never thought I'd see the day where Ramy is trying to dole out biblical type justice!
It's not biblical.
if I believed in God, I'd probably be a lot more against the Death Penalty.
Because, you know. Jesus said not to do that.
However, given I can't count on Beard Man in the Sky to actually condemn these sick *** to an eternity of fire and pain... (and hey, if they're sorry (and believe deeply in HIM), he'll even let them off the hook anyhow...)
So as it is, just put them down clean, throw them in an unmarked grave, and move on.
Bismarck.Ramyrez
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 4746
By Bismarck.Ramyrez 2014-09-18 12:04:40
Bismarck.Bloodrose said: »If you benefit from the intellectual property of another person, group, business, corporation, or other legal entity, without their express permission, or knowledge, that falls under the definition of theft, as you are depriving them of their business and livelihood.
But they're just corporations that don't need that money.
They're ripping him off trying to charge him.
He's got a right to whatever he wants.
Quote: Texas set to execute woman convicted of starving 9-year-old
(Reuters) - A woman convicted of the 2004 starving death of a 9-year-old boy is scheduled to die on Wednesday by lethal injection at a Texas state prison, authorities said.
Lisa Ann Coleman, 38, would be the second woman executed in the United States this year and the 15th since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976.
Coleman is scheduled to be put to death after 6 p.m. Central Time (7 p.m. EDT) at the state's death chamber in Huntsville. She would also be the 517th prisoner put to death in Texas, the most of any state since 1976.
Investigators were called to Coleman's house in July 2004, where they found Davontae Williams dead with a disfigured ear, swollen hands and ligature marks on his wrists and ankles, according to court records.
An autopsy determined that Williams, son of Coleman's long-time girlfriend, Marcella Williams, had died from malnutrition and pneumonia and weighed just 35 pounds, court records said.
He had been beaten with a golf club and bound by an extension cord, investigators found. His body also showed signs of having been treated with over-the-counter medications, ointments, creams and bandages, court records said.
There was evidence that suggested he was fed chicken noodle soup and Pedialyte before he died, but a doctor testified that the food he received was "inadequate ... too late, and possibly too much," court records said.
Coleman was convicted of capital murder by a jury in 2006 and sentenced to death. Williams also was convicted of capital murder. Williams was sentenced to life in prison and is eligible for parole in 30 years, according to prison records.
source
|
|
