Man May Have Been Sentenced to Death Because He is Gay

[Weatherman2020]

This is absolutely deplorable. What sort of country is this and what do we want it to be? We have the best criminal justice system in the world , but any system is only as good as the people who administer this. Why did the judge not address this during trial, and who is his appeal noy being heard? Read the whole article before passing judgement.

6 Civil Rights Groups Urge Eighth Circuit to Accept Appeal of Man Who May Have Been Sentenced to Death Because He is Gay

Selected Excerpts

Six civil rights organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota, Lambda Legal, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, National Center for Lesbian Rights, and National LGBT Bar Association, filed an amici brief today urging the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to hear the appeal of Charles Rhines, a gay man on death row in South Dakota.

According to the filing, new evidence “suggests that at least some members of the jury accepted the notion that life in prison without parole would be fun for a gay person – so much so that they felt it was necessary to impose the death penalty instead. In other words, significant evidence suggests that the jury may have sentenced Mr. Rhines to death based not on the facts of his case, but because he is gay.”

What horseshit! Life in prison fun? !!! And the sex would most likely be rape. Do these fucking morons that a gay man enjoys being raped any more than someone else?

Furthermore:

During jury deliberations, the jury sent a note to the judge that indicated that Mr. Rhines’s status as a gay man had become a focal point for deliberations. The note asked whether, if sentenced to life without parole, Mr. Rhines would “be allowed to mix with the general inmate population,” be able to “brag about his crime to other inmates, especially new and/or young men,” enjoy “conjugal visits” and asked other questions about Mr. Rhines’s access to other men while in prison. (Application at p. 6.)

And consider :

At trial, the jury heard through witnesses presented by the state that Mr. Rhines was gay and had relationships with other men. They were asked to choose between life in prison without parole and the death penalty for a murder committed when an employee surprised Mr. Rhines in the course of a commercial burglary. During their deliberations, the jury sent a note to the judge indicating that deliberations had become infected with anti-gay stereotypes and prejudices. (Application at p. 6.)

The judge did not address these questions and failed to head off the anti-gay bias that the questions revealed. The same day, about eight hours later, the jury voted to sentence Mr. Rhines to death. (Application at pp. 5-6.)

This says it all:

As Chief Justice Roberts has explained, the core premise of our criminal justice system is that “[o]ur law punishes people for what they do, not who they are.” (Buck v. Davis) Bias based on a characteristic that cannot be changed, such as race or sexual orientation, goes against this foundational principle. Allowing bias to play any role in sentencing is especially alarming when the bias may have made the difference between life and death.

All murderers should be executed.

Problem solved.

That you

This is absolutely deplorable. What sort of country is this and what do we want it to be? We have the best criminal justice system in the world , but any system is only as good as the people who administer this. Why did the judge not address this during trial, and who is his appeal noy being heard? Read the whole article before passing judgement.

6 Civil Rights Groups Urge Eighth Circuit to Accept Appeal of Man Who May Have Been Sentenced to Death Because He is Gay

Selected Excerpts

Six civil rights organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota, Lambda Legal, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, National Center for Lesbian Rights, and National LGBT Bar Association, filed an amici brief today urging the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to hear the appeal of Charles Rhines, a gay man on death row in South Dakota.

According to the filing, new evidence “suggests that at least some members of the jury accepted the notion that life in prison without parole would be fun for a gay person – so much so that they felt it was necessary to impose the death penalty instead. In other words, significant evidence suggests that the jury may have sentenced Mr. Rhines to death based not on the facts of his case, but because he is gay.”

What horseshit! Life in prison fun? !!! And the sex would most likely be rape. Do these fucking morons that a gay man enjoys being raped any more than someone else?

Furthermore:

During jury deliberations, the jury sent a note to the judge that indicated that Mr. Rhines’s status as a gay man had become a focal point for deliberations. The note asked whether, if sentenced to life without parole, Mr. Rhines would “be allowed to mix with the general inmate population,” be able to “brag about his crime to other inmates, especially new and/or young men,” enjoy “conjugal visits” and asked other questions about Mr. Rhines’s access to other men while in prison. (Application at p. 6.)

And consider :

At trial, the jury heard through witnesses presented by the state that Mr. Rhines was gay and had relationships with other men. They were asked to choose between life in prison without parole and the death penalty for a murder committed when an employee surprised Mr. Rhines in the course of a commercial burglary. During their deliberations, the jury sent a note to the judge indicating that deliberations had become infected with anti-gay stereotypes and prejudices. (Application at p. 6.)

The judge did not address these questions and failed to head off the anti-gay bias that the questions revealed. The same day, about eight hours later, the jury voted to sentence Mr. Rhines to death. (Application at pp. 5-6.)

This says it all:

As Chief Justice Roberts has explained, the core premise of our criminal justice system is that “[o]ur law punishes people for what they do, not who they are.” (Buck v. Davis) Bias based on a characteristic that cannot be changed, such as race or sexual orientation, goes against this foundational principle. Allowing bias to play any role in sentencing is especially alarming when the bias may have made the difference between life and death.

All murderers should be executed.

Problem solved.

Thank you for that brilliant and thoughtful commentary on a difficult and complex subject . Clearly you a deep understanding and appreciation of the criminal justice system, and are a strong advocate for human rights as well. May the Gods and Goddesses smile upon you. Please continue your commitment to the high level of intellectual discourse on the USMB

Complex issue?

Was murder committed, Yes/No
Yes- Execution
No- No execution

Only a true Leftard thinks it’s a complex issue.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

This is bullshit, even by TheRegressivePervert standards.

This subhuman piece of shit is not on death row because he's a faggot, not that this would not, in itself be good cause for it.

He's on death row because he committed an extraordinarily brutal murder. Anyone who commits a crime such as his deserves to be put to death. Period.

 

[justinacolmena]

Fudgepacker gets the needle.

I think I know what you are talking about. In a certain sense, it's like some guy is sitting on a public toilet shooting himself up with heroin, and there is a dead body in the next stall to explain.

 

[Tilly]

So Rhines was a victim of jury prejudice according to his champions. What about the prejudice against Donnivan Schaeffer, just some kid opening a donut shop when he was stabbed in the abdomen and back, then pleaded for his life as Rhines plunged the knife into his skull and killed him. He deserves to die not be the pet of social engineers with law degrees.

PP wouldn’t be interested in alleged jury prejudice unless the perp was gay.

As usual, you're making shit up.

I am?
OK, point me to a thread of yours in which you are getting your diaper in a wad about potential jury prejudice where the perp in question is not gay, but straight.
TIA

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

So Rhines was a victim of jury prejudice according to his champions. What about the prejudice against Donnivan Schaeffer, just some kid opening a donut shop when he was stabbed in the abdomen and back, then pleaded for his life as Rhines plunged the knife into his skull and killed him. He deserves to die not be the pet of social engineers with law degrees.

PP wouldn’t be interested in alleged jury prejudice unless the perp was gay.

As usual, you're making shit up.

I am?
OK, point me to a thread of yours in which you are getting your diaper in a wad about potential jury prejudice where the perp in question is not gay, but straight.
TIA

Congratulations!! You are crowned the queen of logical fallacies. Two right here!!

1. That is known as a red herring fallacy because it's intended to divert attention away from the issue at hand- which you can't deal with- and direct it towards "other forms" of jury prejudice.

2. It is an appeal to hypocrisy fallacy because your implying that I'm a hypocrite for not addressing other forms of jury prejudice . Try to learn this word:

tu quoque (To kwok we )(Latin for "you, too" or "you, also") or the appeal to hypocrisy, is a logical fallacy that attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position; it attempts to show that a criticism or objection applies equally to the person making it. This dismisses someone's point of view based on criticism of the person's inconsistency and not the position presented whereas a person's inconsistency should not discredit the position. Thus, it is a form of the ad hominem argument. To clarify, although the person being attacked might indeed be acting inconsistently or hypocritically, this does not invalidate their argument."

Have a blessed day.

 

[Tilly]

So Rhines was a victim of jury prejudice according to his champions. What about the prejudice against Donnivan Schaeffer, just some kid opening a donut shop when he was stabbed in the abdomen and back, then pleaded for his life as Rhines plunged the knife into his skull and killed him. He deserves to die not be the pet of social engineers with law degrees.

PP wouldn’t be interested in alleged jury prejudice unless the perp was gay.

As usual, you're making shit up.

I am?
OK, point me to a thread of yours in which you are getting your diaper in a wad about potential jury prejudice where the perp in question is not gay, but straight.
TIA

Congratulations!! You are crowned the queen of logical fallacies. Two right here!!

1. That is known as a red herring fallacy because it's intended to divert attention away from the issue at hand- which you can't deal with- and direct it towards "other forms" of jury prejudice.

2. It is an appeal to hypocrisy fallacy because your implying that I'm a hypocrite for not addressing other forms of jury prejudice . Try to learn this word:

tu quoque (To kwok we )(Latin for "you, too" or "you, also") or the appeal to hypocrisy, is a logical fallacy that attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position; it attempts to show that a criticism or objection applies equally to the person making it. This dismisses someone's point of view based on criticism of the person's inconsistency and not the position presented whereas a person's inconsistency should not discredit the position. Thus, it is a form of the ad hominem argument. To clarify, although the person being attacked might indeed be acting inconsistently or hypocritically, this does not invalidate their argument."

Have a blessed day.

So you’ve got nothing, just like I said. Thanks PeePee

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

So Rhines was a victim of jury prejudice according to his champions. What about the prejudice against Donnivan Schaeffer, just some kid opening a donut shop when he was stabbed in the abdomen and back, then pleaded for his life as Rhines plunged the knife into his skull and killed him. He deserves to die not be the pet of social engineers with law degrees.

PP wouldn’t be interested in alleged jury prejudice unless the perp was gay.

As usual, you're making shit up.

I am?
OK, point me to a thread of yours in which you are getting your diaper in a wad about potential jury prejudice where the perp in question is not gay, but straight.
TIA

Congratulations!! You are crowned the queen of logical fallacies. Two right here!!

1. That is known as a red herring fallacy because it's intended to divert attention away from the issue at hand- which you can't deal with- and direct it towards "other forms" of jury prejudice.

2. It is an appeal to hypocrisy fallacy because your implying that I'm a hypocrite for not addressing other forms of jury prejudice . Try to learn this word:

tu quoque (To kwok we )(Latin for "you, too" or "you, also") or the appeal to hypocrisy, is a logical fallacy that attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position; it attempts to show that a criticism or objection applies equally to the person making it. This dismisses someone's point of view based on criticism of the person's inconsistency and not the position presented whereas a person's inconsistency should not discredit the position. Thus, it is a form of the ad hominem argument. To clarify, although the person being attacked might indeed be acting inconsistently or hypocritically, this does not invalidate their argument."

Have a blessed day.

So you’ve got nothing, just like I said. Thanks PeePee

And you have no understanding of how pathetic it is to continually fall back on logical fallacies instead of actually dealing with the topic.

 

[Tilly]

PP wouldn’t be interested in alleged jury prejudice unless the perp was gay.

As usual, you're making shit up.

I am?
OK, point me to a thread of yours in which you are getting your diaper in a wad about potential jury prejudice where the perp in question is not gay, but straight.
TIA

Congratulations!! You are crowned the queen of logical fallacies. Two right here!!

1. That is known as a red herring fallacy because it's intended to divert attention away from the issue at hand- which you can't deal with- and direct it towards "other forms" of jury prejudice.

2. It is an appeal to hypocrisy fallacy because your implying that I'm a hypocrite for not addressing other forms of jury prejudice . Try to learn this word:

tu quoque (To kwok we )(Latin for "you, too" or "you, also") or the appeal to hypocrisy, is a logical fallacy that attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position; it attempts to show that a criticism or objection applies equally to the person making it. This dismisses someone's point of view based on criticism of the person's inconsistency and not the position presented whereas a person's inconsistency should not discredit the position. Thus, it is a form of the ad hominem argument. To clarify, although the person being attacked might indeed be acting inconsistently or hypocritically, this does not invalidate their argument."

Have a blessed day.

So you’ve got nothing, just like I said. Thanks PeePee

And you have no understanding of how pathetic it is to continually fall back on logical fallacies instead of actually dealing with the topic.

Actually I’m right on topic, but you are derailing your own thread, AGAIN.
Lol.

 

[bodecea]

This is absolutely deplorable. What sort of country is this and what do we want it to be? We have the best criminal justice system in the world , but any system is only as good as the people who administer this. Why did the judge not address this during trial, and who is his appeal noy being heard? Read the whole article before passing judgement.

6 Civil Rights Groups Urge Eighth Circuit to Accept Appeal of Man Who May Have Been Sentenced to Death Because He is Gay

Selected Excerpts

Six civil rights organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota, Lambda Legal, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, National Center for Lesbian Rights, and National LGBT Bar Association, filed an amici brief today urging the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to hear the appeal of Charles Rhines, a gay man on death row in South Dakota.

According to the filing, new evidence “suggests that at least some members of the jury accepted the notion that life in prison without parole would be fun for a gay person – so much so that they felt it was necessary to impose the death penalty instead. In other words, significant evidence suggests that the jury may have sentenced Mr. Rhines to death based not on the facts of his case, but because he is gay.”

What horseshit! Life in prison fun? !!! And the sex would most likely be rape. Do these fucking morons that a gay man enjoys being raped any more than someone else?

Furthermore:

During jury deliberations, the jury sent a note to the judge that indicated that Mr. Rhines’s status as a gay man had become a focal point for deliberations. The note asked whether, if sentenced to life without parole, Mr. Rhines would “be allowed to mix with the general inmate population,” be able to “brag about his crime to other inmates, especially new and/or young men,” enjoy “conjugal visits” and asked other questions about Mr. Rhines’s access to other men while in prison. (Application at p. 6.)

And consider :

At trial, the jury heard through witnesses presented by the state that Mr. Rhines was gay and had relationships with other men. They were asked to choose between life in prison without parole and the death penalty for a murder committed when an employee surprised Mr. Rhines in the course of a commercial burglary. During their deliberations, the jury sent a note to the judge indicating that deliberations had become infected with anti-gay stereotypes and prejudices. (Application at p. 6.)

The judge did not address these questions and failed to head off the anti-gay bias that the questions revealed. The same day, about eight hours later, the jury voted to sentence Mr. Rhines to death. (Application at pp. 5-6.)

This says it all:

As Chief Justice Roberts has explained, the core premise of our criminal justice system is that “[o]ur law punishes people for what they do, not who they are.” (Buck v. Davis) Bias based on a characteristic that cannot be changed, such as race or sexual orientation, goes against this foundational principle. Allowing bias to play any role in sentencing is especially alarming when the bias may have made the difference between life and death.

All murderers should be executed.

Problem solved.

Do you believe that abortion is murder?
Do you believe shooting someone in battle is murder?
Do you believe that a police officer shooting someone in the back as they flee is murder?

Just a few questions to begin to establish your parameters for "murder".

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Do you believe that abortion is murder?
Do you believe shooting someone in battle is murder?
Do you believe that a police officer shooting someone in the back as they flee is murder?

Just a few questions to begin to establish your parameters for "murder".

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Based on the elements of the crime the death penalty is appropriate.

 

[Tilly]

This is absolutely deplorable. What sort of country is this and what do we want it to be? We have the best criminal justice system in the world , but any system is only as good as the people who administer this. Why did the judge not address this during trial, and who is his appeal noy being heard? Read the whole article before passing judgement.

6 Civil Rights Groups Urge Eighth Circuit to Accept Appeal of Man Who May Have Been Sentenced to Death Because He is Gay

Selected Excerpts

Six civil rights organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota, Lambda Legal, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, National Center for Lesbian Rights, and National LGBT Bar Association, filed an amici brief today urging the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to hear the appeal of Charles Rhines, a gay man on death row in South Dakota.

According to the filing, new evidence “suggests that at least some members of the jury accepted the notion that life in prison without parole would be fun for a gay person – so much so that they felt it was necessary to impose the death penalty instead. In other words, significant evidence suggests that the jury may have sentenced Mr. Rhines to death based not on the facts of his case, but because he is gay.”

What horseshit! Life in prison fun? !!! And the sex would most likely be rape. Do these fucking morons that a gay man enjoys being raped any more than someone else?

Furthermore:

During jury deliberations, the jury sent a note to the judge that indicated that Mr. Rhines’s status as a gay man had become a focal point for deliberations. The note asked whether, if sentenced to life without parole, Mr. Rhines would “be allowed to mix with the general inmate population,” be able to “brag about his crime to other inmates, especially new and/or young men,” enjoy “conjugal visits” and asked other questions about Mr. Rhines’s access to other men while in prison. (Application at p. 6.)

And consider :

At trial, the jury heard through witnesses presented by the state that Mr. Rhines was gay and had relationships with other men. They were asked to choose between life in prison without parole and the death penalty for a murder committed when an employee surprised Mr. Rhines in the course of a commercial burglary. During their deliberations, the jury sent a note to the judge indicating that deliberations had become infected with anti-gay stereotypes and prejudices. (Application at p. 6.)

The judge did not address these questions and failed to head off the anti-gay bias that the questions revealed. The same day, about eight hours later, the jury voted to sentence Mr. Rhines to death. (Application at pp. 5-6.)

This says it all:

As Chief Justice Roberts has explained, the core premise of our criminal justice system is that “[o]ur law punishes people for what they do, not who they are.” (Buck v. Davis) Bias based on a characteristic that cannot be changed, such as race or sexual orientation, goes against this foundational principle. Allowing bias to play any role in sentencing is especially alarming when the bias may have made the difference between life and death.

And in other news, pigs ‘may’ have flown past PeePee’s trailer this morning.
But I don’t think they did
But they ‘may’ have.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I guess all that matters in this day of retarded identity politics is that the fellow is gay.

Heaven forbid we show any compassion for the poor fellow who was murdered simply for showing up to work or his family who now lives with the pain of losing a loved one.

Welcome to regressive world, folks!

 

[miketx]

This is absolutely deplorable. What sort of country is this and what do we want it to be? We have the best criminal justice system in the world , but any system is only as good as the people who administer this. Why did the judge not address this during trial, and who is his appeal noy being heard? Read the whole article before passing judgement.

6 Civil Rights Groups Urge Eighth Circuit to Accept Appeal of Man Who May Have Been Sentenced to Death Because He is Gay

Selected Excerpts

Six civil rights organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota, Lambda Legal, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, National Center for Lesbian Rights, and National LGBT Bar Association, filed an amici brief today urging the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to hear the appeal of Charles Rhines, a gay man on death row in South Dakota.

According to the filing, new evidence “suggests that at least some members of the jury accepted the notion that life in prison without parole would be fun for a gay person – so much so that they felt it was necessary to impose the death penalty instead. In other words, significant evidence suggests that the jury may have sentenced Mr. Rhines to death based not on the facts of his case, but because he is gay.”

What horseshit! Life in prison fun? !!! And the sex would most likely be rape. Do these fucking morons that a gay man enjoys being raped any more than someone else?

Furthermore:

During jury deliberations, the jury sent a note to the judge that indicated that Mr. Rhines’s status as a gay man had become a focal point for deliberations. The note asked whether, if sentenced to life without parole, Mr. Rhines would “be allowed to mix with the general inmate population,” be able to “brag about his crime to other inmates, especially new and/or young men,” enjoy “conjugal visits” and asked other questions about Mr. Rhines’s access to other men while in prison. (Application at p. 6.)

And consider :

At trial, the jury heard through witnesses presented by the state that Mr. Rhines was gay and had relationships with other men. They were asked to choose between life in prison without parole and the death penalty for a murder committed when an employee surprised Mr. Rhines in the course of a commercial burglary. During their deliberations, the jury sent a note to the judge indicating that deliberations had become infected with anti-gay stereotypes and prejudices. (Application at p. 6.)

The judge did not address these questions and failed to head off the anti-gay bias that the questions revealed. The same day, about eight hours later, the jury voted to sentence Mr. Rhines to death. (Application at pp. 5-6.)

This says it all:

As Chief Justice Roberts has explained, the core premise of our criminal justice system is that “[o]ur law punishes people for what they do, not who they are.” (Buck v. Davis) Bias based on a characteristic that cannot be changed, such as race or sexual orientation, goes against this foundational principle. Allowing bias to play any role in sentencing is especially alarming when the bias may have made the difference between life and death.

Kill him.