Tuesday, November 29

Minors, the Death Penalty and Abortion

The Supreme Court decided earlier this year that it is not right to execute a minor, even if they commit murder. It's pretty sad that the case that came before the Supreme Court was one of a minor who committed the murder did it as a minor because he knew he would "Get away with it." The jury that heard the case and his interpretation of the law, decided to send him to death row. Perhaps it was the details of the case:

In early September 1993, Simmons then 17, discussed with his friends, Charlie Benjamin (age 15) and John Tessmer (age 16), the possibility of committing a burglary and murdering someone. On several occasions, Simmons described the manner in which he planned to commit the crime: he would find someone to burglarize, tie the victim up, and ultimately push the victim off a bridge. Simmons assured his friends that their status as juveniles would allow them to "get away with it."

Simmons and Benjamin walked Mrs. Crook to the railroad trestle. There, Simmons bound her hands and feet together, hog-tie fashion, with the electrical cable and covered Mrs. Crook’s face completely with duct tape. Simmons then pushed her off the railroad trestle into the river below. At the time she fell, Mrs. Crook was alive and conscious. - Missouri Death Row

The whole purpose of the crime was to commit murder. I am not saying that he got away with it. I just don't see the point of not sending this person to death and instead keeping him locked up for the rest of his life with no chance of parole. That sounds a hell of a lot crueler than putting him to death. Now Justice Kennedy reason's that a juvenile's "deficiencies" have a greater chance of being reformed, so they should not be executed. But what's the point, since he'll never get out of jail anyway. In general, the Supreme Court reasoned that Minors are not full responsible for their actions, including murder.

Fair enough.

Which brings us to a case the Supreme Court has decided to hear concerning a New Hampshire Law that requires minor girls to notify at least one parent of their intent to have an abortion. Pro-abortion rights groups are against parental notification. I think the parents should not only be notified but probably should be forced to attend too. Personally I think the law should stand. Minors that need to get an abortion have problems that need to be addressed. If for some reason the problem is a male relative, then that problem needs to be addressed too. If for some reason daddy is the reason she's pregnant, then that it not a reason to not notify parents, that's a reason to notify the police.

I would be shocked to see the Supreme Court reason that it's acceptable for a minor to be fully accountable on their own to have an abortion. That wouldn't make sense.

I do not think the medical exemption will kill this law either:

"In an emergency, a woman needs to go to the hospital, not a courthouse," - Jennifer Dalven, ACLU Lawyer

I am not sure what kind of emergency the ACLU is thinking of that requires an immediate abortion. I thought that doctors first try to save the patient and the baby inside. Only once there is an examination would they realize that the baby needs to be removed to save the mother. Of course the emergency could be that the minor just realized that she's pregnant. I would think that it's the person's responsibility to get themselves to medical care, and then the medical staff's responsibility to determine the problem and suggest possible treatment, including abortion if needed. What if mom and dad brought her to the hospital. How hard is it to tell them?

The ACLU also failes to make a distinction between a woman and a girl. Does the ACLU suggest not telling the parents that their child is in the Hospital? What if this 'emergency' will result in the child being in the hospital for days. What about the bill? Is the ACLU going to require parents to pay for operations not knowing what operation was done? Why has the ACLU been silent on other laws affecting minor rights? Is the ACLU really suggesting that it's acceptable for a 16 year old girl to get an abortion without parental consent but is still five years too young to buy a beer, even with parental consent?

Ms. Dalven, please elaborate!

5-4 Supreme Court Abolishes Juvenile Executions - Washington Post
Court weighs girls' access to abortion - Christian Science Monitor

Previous post:

Do we really want to Force Liberals to have more children? The Abortion Issue. - FFI

2 comments:

The_Bos'un said...

Fred,
I am a conservative, right leaning, retired military guy. I was also a private investigator for a while after retirement working for criminal defense attorneys.
Our criminal justice system is criminal and is not necessarily justice. I know a lot of horror stories about the justice system. There are innocent folks charged and convicted every day. Hey, look how the prosecutor has been hounding Rush Limbaugh. 27 months later, he (prosecutor) admitted in court he has no criminal info, now he wants a court ordered waiver to talk with the doctors (more fishing). The case was built on proecutorial ambitions and his own biased beliefs.

I do not support the death penalty because of a minuet chance a person is innocent; you cannot take back a lethal injection or electric chair zap charge. Living in an 8 x 10 for the rest of ones life should be about all we do. That is also justice. Otherwise, I am 100% right leaning conservative.

You have a great blog here and I will be returning. Have a good day. R/ Bosun

Fred Fry said...

I agree that the justice system needs serious repair.

As for the death penalty, I am all in favor of getting rid of the bad apples. However, I just want to be sure we are putting the right ones away.