« The Worst Thing About Being Pro-Choice | Main | The Gregory Eclipse »
February 19, 2006
It's Never Their Fault
Joseph Smith cried to the judge last week when a Florida jury voted 10-2 for him to receive the death penalty. He was convicted of raping and murdering 11-year-old Carlie Brucia in 2004. He was caught on a car wash video surveillance camera grabbing Carlie as she walked home from a friend's house. Sentencing will be on March 15.
Smith told [Judge] Owens he had been a heroin addict since he was 19 and had unsuccessfully tried to quit several times. He said his wife had kicked him out of their home in January 2004 and he had lost his job when in the hours before abducting Carlie he tried to overdose.
"I just wanted to die that day," he said. But, he said, "I take responsibility of my crimes."
He wanted to die that day, but instead took the life of a young girl after brutally raping her. He says he takes responsibility for his crimes. But the responsibility obviously ends when his own life is endangered. He says he wants to live for the sake of his own family. How contrived is that?
I have no sympathy for this man. When I think about what this child had to endure before her life was taken away truly sickens me. Where does responsibility for one's actions begin and where does it end?
He had a drug problem and claimed he had difficulty in kicking the habit. He said his drug problems prompted his wife to kick him out of the house.
Carlie was not to blame for Smith's problems, but Carlie ended up as the sacrificial lamb.
I know people who have had drug problems. One of them is now dead due to an overdose. But no one I know ever killed anyone else because of drug problems. And if they had, I would say the same thing.
Many in our society seem more concerned with the feelings of those who commit the crimes than those who are the victims of crime. Personal responsibility is going the way of the horse and carriage. It's no longer fashionable to say, "I did it," but to say, "The [insert excuse here] made me do it."
Opponents of the death penalty are convinced that by utilizing death as punishment, society loses part of its humanity. However, I believe that once you take the life of someone else and the reason can't be attributed to a bonafide accident or self-defense, then you have forfeited your own humanity.
Why should we show mercy to people like Smith when he himself was incapable of the same mercy?
Posted by Pam at February 19, 2006 12:55 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.lifelikepundits.com/cgi-bin/mt3/mt-tb.cgi/2153
Comments
Uh, Pam, once again, ignoring the facts. The fact is, he did take responsibility for his actions, and he didn't say the drugs made him do it. Twist all you want.
On another point, there are two other reasons we oppose the death penalty. First, it is inevitable innocents are killed. Second, it goes against the fundamental idea of living in a free civil society, joined by choice. Who would enter into that deal and volunteer the possibility of being put to death as a consequence?
Posted by: paul at February 19, 2006 07:05 PM
What the man did was inhuman and despicable. There is no "excuse" and he is required to pay the ultimate penalty for such an evil crime. He destroyed innocence twice - first when he raped he and second when he killed her.
Fry him!
Posted by: Gayle Miller at February 20, 2006 10:06 AM
If she lost innocense after the rape, then how did the murder destroy innocense twice? If she was still innocent after the rape, then the rape didn't destroy her innocense the first time, did it?
Isn't it enough he raped a young girl, terrifying her beyond anything I can comprehend, then killed her? Why do you feel it is necessary to bring mulitple destructions of innocence into it? Kinda lessens the legitimate pain she did suffer.
But go ahead, you guys just keep on twisting and exaggerating facts.
Posted by: paul at February 20, 2006 07:17 PM
Paul, the facts are that this man raped and killed another human being. She died in pain and terror and humiliation.
I oppose the death penalty also because it is fallable and you can't give back a life once it's taken. But there isn't much doubt in this case and if it was one of my daughters, I'd kill him myself.
And would it be any kinder to this man to leave him addicted to a drug he can't get and in prison for the next 50 years waiting for him to die?
Posted by: IaintBacchus at February 22, 2006 11:47 AM
While I oppose allowing the state the power to kill criminals, if sitting on a jury I'd have a hard time convicting a parent killing the rapist of his child.
Posted by: paul at February 22, 2006 03:01 PM