Tuesday
Aug242004
Death Penalty Is Not a Deterrent
Tuesday, August 24, 2004 at 03:54PM
No Mercy: If the Death Penalty Is Supposed to Be a Deterrent, Executing
a Rehabilitated Man Will Serve as a Deterrent to Redemption
"On August 26, Texas is scheduled to execute James Allridge III for the 1985 murder of 21-year-old Brian Clendennen, who died from two gunshots fired in the course of the botched robbery of a Fort Worth-area convenience store. At his trial, Tarrant Co. prosecutors argued that Allridge, then 21, killed Clendennen on Feb. 4, 1985, while on a 'crime spree' with his 23-year-old brother, Ronald."In 1987, after finding James Allridge guilty of Clendennen's murder, his trial jurors were faced with choosing a punishment: life in prison with a possibility of parole (after 20 years), or a death sentence. Allridge had no prior criminal record, but the jurors were not instructed to consider his past, or his troubled relationship with his brother Ronald. Instead, their determination would be based solely on their answers to the two "special questions" asked of Texas' capital-case jurors prior to 1990. First, they were asked, was the crime deliberate? And, second, did they believe 'beyond a reasonable doubt' that 'there is a probability' that Allridge would commit additional "acts of violence" in the future, making him a 'continuing threat' to society?" [more]
"On August 26, Texas is scheduled to execute James Allridge III for the 1985 murder of 21-year-old Brian Clendennen, who died from two gunshots fired in the course of the botched robbery of a Fort Worth-area convenience store. At his trial, Tarrant Co. prosecutors argued that Allridge, then 21, killed Clendennen on Feb. 4, 1985, while on a 'crime spree' with his 23-year-old brother, Ronald."In 1987, after finding James Allridge guilty of Clendennen's murder, his trial jurors were faced with choosing a punishment: life in prison with a possibility of parole (after 20 years), or a death sentence. Allridge had no prior criminal record, but the jurors were not instructed to consider his past, or his troubled relationship with his brother Ronald. Instead, their determination would be based solely on their answers to the two "special questions" asked of Texas' capital-case jurors prior to 1990. First, they were asked, was the crime deliberate? And, second, did they believe 'beyond a reasonable doubt' that 'there is a probability' that Allridge would commit additional "acts of violence" in the future, making him a 'continuing threat' to society?" [more]