Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt

You Be The Judge

Published on December 1, 2005 By kingbee In Current Events

altho i was otherwise occupied, i did have a chance to scan several articles discussing (as in 'the villagers held a discussion about the best way to light torches and the quickest route to the castle') doing justice to stanley williams.

one 'fact' was a near constant: williams is unquestionably guilty of the crimes for which he stood trial and was convicted.

i invite yall to take a while to read william's motion (filed by his current legal defender) for discovery and reconsideration of a number of irregularities relating to this case.

those of you who finish (it's 88 pages long due to formatting, citations, notes, etc.--single-spaced it prolly would run 25 pages, if that) are also invited to offer an opinion as to the question of whether he received a fair trial...and whether you're still as absolutely sure he deserves to die to these offences.

Link

Comments (Page 1)

Dr Guy

on Dec 01, 2005

I dont think I need to read it. I think my position is clear. The brief may be the biggest crock of poo since Dumbo had a dump. Or it may all be true. It changes nothing for me. I doubt it will change anyone else's opinion either.

kingbee

on Dec 01, 2005

It changes nothing for me. I doubt it will change anyone else's opinion either.

far be it from me to try to confuse anyone with facts.

Locamama

on Dec 01, 2005

November 6,2005

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger,

My name is Lora Owens. I am the stepmother of Albert Lewis Owens. My husband, Albert's father, has died so I also speak for him since we discussed this letter frequently over the years. I am writing you concerning clemency for Stanley "Tookie" Williams who murdered Albert in 1979 by shooting him twice in the back. Within seconds, though Albert pleaded for his life, Williams chose to become the judge, jury and executioner of Albert, then laughed as he lay dying. In 1981, Williams was tried, convicted and sentenced to death for the murders he committed in cold blood. Now the many, many years of appeals have also been denied and the facts remain steadfast and the verdict remains firm.

They have forgotten that we are the victims not the criminal.

Loca here - This is just an excerpt, if you want to read the whole letter go to this link.

Link

Mr. Williams is not the victim. The three people he murdered are the victims. Don't forget about them.

stutefish

on Dec 01, 2005

The Brief is not The Trial.

The Trial was the opportunity for the Prosecution and the Defense to each make the best case they could, before a Jury of twelve free citizens.

Those citizens, informed with the best arguments the Prosecution and Defense attorneys could make, under the supervision of the Judge, reached the most reasonable conclusion they could. And, as our laws require, they unanimously agreed that he was guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

I'd be an idiot to think that this document, precision-engineered by the defendant and his legal team after the fact to cast doubt on the process, is by itself a valid reason to second-guess the results of the Trial by Jury that has decided Stanley Williams' fate.

It's a cinch that if Williams' case were to go back to trial, the Prosecution would have a document just as long, and more besides, detailing the flaws in the Defense's arguments and buttressing the validty and accuracy of their own case.

Am I, personally, sure that Williams is guilty? No. But I don't need to be sure of that, to be sure that Trial by Jury is a good justice system for a free people, and that our Juries' decisions should be binding on plaintiff and defendant alike.

Indeed, our system is biased in favor of the guilty. If Williams is the mote in my eye, then the hundreds of thousands of likely-guilty vicious criminals who walk free today because of the "irregularities" in their trials is the beam in yours.

Pesonally, in my heart of hearts, I don't see how you could be the founder of one of the largest and most powerful violent street gangs in the world, and not be involved in enough murder and mayhem to deserve the death penalty several times over. Regardless of the details of the case(s) that actually went to trial, I'm convinced Williams is right where he should be, or six feet from it.

Dr Guy

on Dec 01, 2005

far be it from me to try to confuse anyone with facts.

Did not say you could or could not. You admit that he is guilty. And he is as dirty as sin. Those who beleive in the death penalty, will want the needle. Those who dont, wont. His brief is not going to change anyone's mind. Besides, it all has already been argued in courts already and rejected. The biggest fact is there is nothing new here.

kingbee

on Dec 01, 2005

You admit that he is guilty

i admitted nothing of the sort. i was describing the opinions which claimed to be factual (i set off 'fact' the way i did to indicate i questioned the fact of factness).

kingbee

on Dec 01, 2005

Mr. Williams is not the victim. The three people he murdered are the victims. Don't forget about them.

the author of that letter is right to be upset about the murder of her son. the los angeles sheriff (and the individual deputies) and the district attorney of and for the county of los angeles failed are responsible permitting her son's killer(s) to escape justice. they did a lousy job in this case (just another example of the many reasons lasd is still under the supervision of a civilian monitor).

kingbee

on Dec 01, 2005

No. But I don't need to be sure of that, to be sure that Trial by Jury is a good justice system for a free people, and that our Juries' decisions should be binding on plaintiff and defendant alike.

Indeed, our system is biased in favor of the guilty

juries cannot come to a just decision when officers of the court engage in illegal and unethical acts. our system is biased in favor of the wealthy only.

I don't see how you could be the founder of one of the largest and most powerful violent street gangs in the world

i wonder if, at age 17, he'd put his energies into space exploration if we'd have bases on mars now?

Tova7

on Dec 01, 2005

I'm convinced Williams is right where he should be, or six feet from it.

That is so good.

kingbee

on Dec 01, 2005

That is so good.

did you bother to read the brief?

bakerstreet

on Dec 01, 2005

I wonder, if you consider the wholesale damage done by Osama bin Laden in the US, and what has been wreaked upon us by the organization "tookie" founded... i wonder who is the bigger terrorist?

The reason I ask is to my knowledge Osama hasn't killed anyone firsthand, at least that he is in trouble for. Yet, oddly, because an organization he founded caused great pain and anguish for thousands of people, most, even those against the death penalty, could stomach seeing him roasted alive.

So, given the effects of gang violence in the US, and given the fact that the organization this man is responsible for creating has gone on to do far more damage in the US than Osama ever did... it seems odd to me that he even NEEDS to be responsible for this particular crime. Shouldn't most people want to see him roasted, too?

If Osama wrote a couple of books and tried to get people to stop being terrorists, I wonder if we'd give him a pass on the pain and anguish? I'm thinking... no.

kingbee

on Dec 01, 2005

i wonder who is the bigger terrorist?

your point would be much more valid if the crips was a unified single organization. there's no franchising. you could start the ju crips totally on your own initiative.

if you're suggesting we start indiscriminately liquidating those who found organizations that spin outta control and violate the law, i'm all for it. let's start with the head of the bush posse.

bakerstreet

on Dec 01, 2005

Oddly enough the DEA and other law enforcement deals with them as a well organized, national drug syndicate that has branched out to most states with links to cartels in South America. I think you are granting them less relavance than they have worked hard to deserve.

kingbee

on Dec 01, 2005

I think you are granting them less relavance than they have worked hard to des

the dea, like the fbi, knows how to play skeeery stuff in order to keep them funds rollin in and their jobs vital to our survival.

the crips make what's left of la cosa nostra look like mcdonalds.

if you're at all interested, here's a link to a history of black gangs in los angeles. Link

bakerstreet

on Dec 01, 2005

"As the gang epidemic was unfolding in Los Angeles, other urban and suburban areas in the United States began to see the formation of street gangs. During the 1980s, a number of cities reported street gang activity, with many reporting the presence of active Los Angeles-based Blood and Crip gangs. In 1988 police departments from all over the country, from Shreveport, Louisiana, to Kansas City, Missouri, to Seattle, Washington, were reporting that California gang members were extending their operations (Skolnick et al. 1993). Some of this was due to migration of gang members from Los Angeles, and some gang formation was the result of indigenous youths emulating Los Angeles gang culture, which was partly facilitated through the media and films."

So, some were just emulating, but your history also cites specifically that there was an expansion of LA gang operations into many other states.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!