Jury in Ct. ponders death or life!

Navy1960

Senior Member
Sep 4, 2008
5,821
1,322
48
Arizona
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — A Connecticut jury has begun deliberating whether a man convicted in a deadly home invasion should get the death penalty or life in prison.

FILE - This undated inmate file photo released in February 2010 by the Connecticut Department of Correction shows Steven Hayes, accused of severely beating Dr. William Petit, Jr., and killing his wife and two daughters during a home invasion in Cheshire, Conn., July 23, 2007. Hayes' attorneys are challenging a judge's decision to replace a regular juror with an alternate to determine his sentence. A hearing will be held Wednesday, Nov. 3, 2010, in New Haven, Conn., on the motion. The jury is expected to begin deliberations Friday on whether Hayes should get the death sentence or life in prison. (AP Photo/Connecticut Department of Correction, File)


.The jury began weighing Steven Hayes' fate Friday morning. Hayes was convicted last month of killing a Cheshire woman and her two daughters in 2007.

Hayes' attorney told the jury Thursday a life sentence would actually be harsher than death, because his client is so haunted by the crime and isolated in prison
Jury starts deliberating in home invasion case | ajc.com

In some cases such as this one this man deserves nothing less than what he gave to his victims.
 
"In some cases such as this one this man deserves nothing less than what he gave to his victims."

According to the article that you provided a link to:

"Prosecutors said the crime cries out for the death penalty, because Hayes and his co-defendant... tormented the family for seven hours before they were killed"

Should the killer be put to death humanely via lethal injection, or should he be tormented for seven hours before being executed?
 
Last edited:
I'd like to see the latter; but we don't do that in this country.

How is CT about enforcement of the DP? Will the guy sit on death row for the next 20 years until the U.N. forces us to abolish it completely?
 
"In some cases such as this one this man deserves nothing less than what he gave to his victims."

According to the article that you provided a link to:

"Prosecutors said the crime cries out for the death penalty, because Hayes and his co-defendant... tormented the family for seven hours before they were killed"

Should the killer be put to death humanely via lethal injection, or should he be tormented for seven hours before being executed?

Given the reality of the situation we all know that this man would most likely never see the inside of an execution chamber and if so will take 20 years of appeals in order for him to arrive there. The short answer to your question is yes, I would love to see nothing better than to have this man suffer the same fate he brought on a small child , her mother and her sister.
 
Let them rot in prison for the rest of their life, it will be worse than death, plus save the tax payers a lot of money.
 
The capital justice system in the United States is broken and has been so for awhile now. If we are to have a system that has a basis of doling out punishment based on the damage someone committed, whether it be physically or psychologically then what we have is actually a revenge system instead of a justice system.
 
Give him the death penalty and show his execution live on tv. What a great reality show that would be.
 
The capital justice system in the United States is broken and has been so for awhile now. If we are to have a system that has a basis of doling out punishment based on the damage someone committed, whether it be physically or psychologically then what we have is actually a revenge system instead of a justice system.

I watched this story the other day about a guy in Texas. It was OBVIOUS that the man did not commit the crime, they even had scientific proof he didn't commit the crime, and they took the word of his ex wife. He was put to the death, because the governor didn't want to seem weak before an election. Total bullshit!
 
I watched this story the other day about a guy in Texas. It was OBVIOUS that the man did not commit the crime, they even had scientific proof he didn't commit the crime, and they took the word of his ex wife. He was put to the death, because the governor didn't want to seem weak before an election. Total bullshit!

Ah yes, I remember reading about that. I had to write a paper on the death penalty last semester, any sort of doubts I had about getting rid of the system were erased after the research I did.
 
I have zero sympathy for this man if proven he committed the crime and in this case it's obvious he has. However, that said, it's prudent that we do make sure that once we decide to carry them out, that we are 100% sure they are the ones who committed the crime. Justice should be whatever the family says it is.
 
I have zero sympathy for this man if proven he committed the crime and in this case it's obvious he has. However, that said, it's prudent that we do make sure that once we decide to carry them out, that we are 100% sure they are the ones who committed the crime. Justice should be whatever the family says it is.

Wrong. I'm going to have to disagree with you here Navy. What you're proposing is not a justice system but a revenge system.

Here's the thing, people can think they are 100% sure that someone committed a crime, but that isn't always the case.

Also, for those of you who are proposing that we allow victim families to decide the punishment or that the person should be tortured, I ask you to read the Constitution that some of you always harp on that our lawmakers should follow.

Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Eighth Amendment (Amendment VIII) to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights which prohibits the federal government from imposing excessive bail, excessive fines or cruel and unusual punishments.
 

Forum List

Back
Top