Posts Tagged ‘Murder’

CNN, you ought to be ashamed of yourselves!

There was a time that CNN lived up to its name as a “Cable News Network”.  These days, it seems it’s anything but the news.  It’s opinion and even then, poorly formed and ignorant opinion.  (I’ll discuss the pit bull, Chris Cuomo, another time!)

As I often do during the day, I’m reading through CNN.com/US and there’s an article about gun control.  The author, Jeff Yang, suggests that an answer to the “epidemic” of gun violence is to make owners of guns get insurance.  The article is stupid enough on its own but simply the fact that CNN would publish it is amazing!

Let’s walk through a few counter-thoughts for a moment:

  1. Requiring doctors to have insurance doesn’t stop malpractice from happening.  It only provides a means for the survivors or victims’ families to carry on, at least financially.  The patient is still injured, suffering, or dead.
  2. Requiring drivers to have insurance hasn’t stopped car accidents from happening.  It only provides a means for financial recovering in the wake of a crash.  The damage is still done, injuries still happened, and in some cases, the dead are still dead.

There is no case I can think of where requiring insurance has prevented a potentially negative event from occurring.  In fact, “requiring” insurance is not always enforced even in cases (such as driving) until or unless an event occurs that brings it to light.  The fallacy of those who think like Mr Yang is the thought process that believes a law will prevent something from happening.  Obviously Not!  Even with all of the thousands of laws on the books today–if not millions–crimes and law violations occur on a regular basis.

Insurance may cause a law-abiding citizen to reconsider gun ownership if the cost of that insurance is too great.  For the criminal, die hard, or mentally ill?  Not necessarily.  And even if a person has insurance for a legally obtained firearm, there is no guarantee that in the heat of the moment, someone will not end up dead.

CNN’s Andre Spicer has an equally ineffective idea:  Let’s convince retailers that selling guns isn’t in their best commercial interest!  Great!  So that takes care of Walmart and introduces more shops that are “gun free” like Starbucks.  It doesn’t get guns off of the streets.  It also does nothing to stop a destructive person from walking into an elementary school with a gun and killing people.  How much more gun-free can you get than an elementary school???

Well, those signs in the windows or at the curbs that says “Gun-Free Zone” were REALLY effective, weren’t they!?!?!?!!!

The only answer to gun violence in this country–or anywhere in the world–is a complete revocation of any rights regarding gun ownership with full surrender, then confiscation, and then extreme punishment for anyone found to own a gun.  At that point, there would almost have to be immediate incarceration on a felony charge with the possibility of life in prison or the death penalty before things would change significantly.

I don’t advocate any of this, by the way!  I don’t advocate anything mentioned up to this point!!!

HOWEVER, I do agree that doing nothing is not the right answer, but there needs to be an unemotional, logical, reasoned out approach, hammered out by liberals and conservatives, and then simply implemented.  Doing SOMETHING and doing the RIGHT THING are not one and the same though.  A change may mean that the Constitution is amended–it has been before and likely will be again.  Not an easy path or a likely one at that.  But if and when it does occur, be prepared to either live by the new rules or to move into the criminal class when you don’t.

And be prepared in that day to live with a lot of other changes that will leave the United States of America less great, less free, and less united!


Read Full Post »

anyone’s guess.


A terrible scene of murder and mayhem.  I was nine-years-old at the time Charles Manson and his followers brutally killled Wojciech Frykowski, Jay Sebring, Abigail Folger, and Sharon Tate.  On the following day, they would kill Leno and Rosemary LaBianca.  Tried and convicted, Manson and his followers were imprisoned.  Among them is Patricia Krenwinkel.

Based on the accounts of the murder and her own statements, there is little doubt as to the role this now-63-year-old had in the murderous events.  Up for parole, she expressed remorse and indicated that the young woman from 1969 is not who she is now in 2011.  She had changed.

The parole board and family members of the victims were unmoved and her parole was denied.  “This is a crime children grow up hearing about,” said parole commissioner Susan Melanson. She said they had received 80 letters from around the world advocating Krenwinkel’s continued incarceration. “These crimes remain relevant.”

I understand her point.  But I don’t understand why her view on relevancy of the crime 40-plus years later is a valid judicial reason to deny parole.

What the parole board seems to be saying is that a criminal of less relevance could be paroled.  They are indicating that remorse, contrition, rehabilitation, and time mean nothing in the scheme of things. 

Imagine a lesson for children today to hear that someone went to prison for doing something horrible, learned their lesson, rehabilitated, was contrite, and was returned to society as a better person.

But no, that’s not the lesson here.  It is not reality.

Because mercy cannot be shown to Patricia, it is really the families and the board members who are imprisoned.  It seems Patricia has already found some release from her crime.





Read Full Post »

LATEST:  http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/12/arkansas.anchor.slain/index.html

Justice has been partly served to the man responsible for the brutal assault and murder of Anne Pressly.   Now that Curtis Lavelle Vance has been convicted, there should be no debate as to whether he is guilty or not.  That debate occurred in the jury room with convincing and unquestionable evidence.  Those present with more information and knowledge of the case than you or I made the decision.  From what I know, it was the right decision.

Now comes sentencing.  It can be life in prison or the death sentence.  Neither will bring back Anne.  Neither will erase the trauma from the hearts and minds of the friends and family members—or even those present in court—who had to deal with the grisly details of this barbaric crime.

The death sentence comes all too quietly and peacefully for a man like Vance.  Look at John Allen Muhammad for example.  Quietly he falls asleep and is gone.  Far from the wrenching nightmare Anne suffered, being awoken from a sound sleep to be attacked in such a heinous way.  Should Vance be allowed to slumber into eternity?

In prison, it’s possible he would live out his life in constant guilt and remembrance of what he did.  Then again, prisons have their own justice system.  His days could be equally numbered.

Let’s see how justice is fully served.





Read Full Post »


Are you looking for up-to-the-minute information about the trial?  You won’t find it because media is not allowed into the courtroom and tweeting “ist verboten”.  However, that doesn’t stop an good reporter from stepping out of the courtroom from time to time to tweet.

Get near-time Twitter updates from Fox News’ Jill Monier right here:


or from Little Rock’s KATV News (Where Anne worked) here:


Read Full Post »

According to a news post on CBS News, Curtis Lavelle Vance said that he used a wooden-handled garden tool to beat Anne Pressly to death after she woke up and found him in her room.  His trial is set to begin today.  At question is whether the “confession” was obtained from Vance improperly.

Improperly?  OK, so we have the presumption of innocence until proven guilty but the article gives every reason to believe that the statement was made freely and that the person responsible for this terrible crime has been caught and will be held responsible for it.

The better question is whether a person who could commit this crime and in this manner is mentally fit to stand trial.  I’m not suggesting that he should be let off, but certainly, his level of reason and sanity is questionable.

The trial is expected to run a week which means by this time next week, perhaps we’ll have some better answers.  The evidence will be out and a verdict should be reached by then.  Let’s wait and see.







Read Full Post »

…is due to stand trial for her brutal murder later this year.  The new court date is November 2, 2009—delayed from the previous date of September 9th.  The judge has warned that there will be no further delays.  His promise that the trial will finish in a week smacks of prejudgment in the trial which could cause problems later… sounds like grounds for a mistrial before it starts.

Judge Piazza:  Be smart and handle this in a professional manner.  If he’s guilty and gets off because you said the wrong thing to the media, it will be “shame on you!”

As always, I’ll provide more as I find it!!!




Read Full Post »

Sanctity of Life means just that… all human life is sacred and only God has the right to take that life.  With this position, I mean the life of the unborn, the life of the aged and infirm, AND the life of those who take the lives of others.  That would include those who perform abortions, participate in euthanasia, executioners, and those in the criminal element who would deprive others of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  The life of Dr George Tiller was no more or no less sacred than the life of any other human being on the planet.  The right to claim his life did not belong Scott Roeder or any other radical anti-abortionist.

I am pro-life.  I am sorrowed at the heinous way in which Mr Roeder struck out at the doctor and resent the potential black eye he has caused those of us who are truly pro-life.  Mr Roeder does not represent me or anyone else I know who claims to be pro-life.

TillerFor whatever good this man feels he has done, the work of the abortion industry will continue and other doctors will fill the shoes of Dr Tiller.  The pro-choice supporters will sadly make a poster child of this murderer, using his radicalism in an attempt to expose the hypocrisy of our legitimate position on life.  Again, Mr Roeder does not speak for or represent those of us who respect all human life.

It is important for both sides to respect the supporters of these opposing views.  We can respect each other even though we may not respect or appreciate the positions we take on the issue.  I am equally troubled at a late-term abortion and the loss of the innocent life of the unborn.  But killing one medical professional is not the answer to this problem.  What Mr Roeder has perhaps not stopped to consider is that had Dr Tiller lived, he may have one day become a strong champion for the pro-life camp.  For example, where is Norma McCorvey these days?  The former “Jane Roe” is now on the front lines of the pro-life fight.

Take note:  Human life is sacred and no-one knows what God may do with that life for His purposes.  Therefore, no-one other than God has the right to exercise that power of life and death.  While some would try to usurp that authority—Dr Tiller and Mr Roeder among others—they are wrong.  And their lives are no less sacred.






George Tiller:   “I chose to become an abortion doctor because abortion is the single greatest issue of civil rights and personal freedom for women.”

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »