LanceOregon
Moderator
Notorious Charles Manson follower and convicted murderer Susan Atkins recently appealed to the state of California for mercy. For those of you who do not know about her, she was a member of the infamous Charles Manson family, and committed horrific murders using knives at his command.
She has been serving a life sentence since 1971, a total of 37 years now. She is the longest serving female prisoner in the California Penal System.
However, she is now 60 years old, and dying from brain cancer. Well over $1 Million dollars in medical bills have been spent by the state of California to keep her alive so far this year. In addition, since she has to now be in a medical hospital, it is costing the state over $25,000 a month to have armed guards and adequate security at the hospital she is at.
Her circulatory system is failing, and she has had to have one of her legs amputated. So she can no longer walk. The cancer has done significant damage to her brain at this point, and she is now also paralyzed on one side. So she cannot even sit up in bed on her own or even feed herself. She even has great difficulty simply talking now.
She has expressed remorse many times during the past two decades for the murders she committed, and people have reported that she is now a born-again Christian who strongly believes in God. All she is asking for at this point is simple humanitarian mercy, to allow her to die as a free woman, and be able to see the outside world again before she passes away.
However, all of California's state officials have strongly rejected her application for mercy. Not only all officials within the prison system, but even governor Schwarzenegger has said that she must serve out her life sentence in prison.
Is this not being cruel to this woman? Would it not be right to show her some tender and compassionate human mercy at this point?
One thing that state officials have all pointed out in denying Susan Atkins mercy are statements by her admitting that it was she who murdered the pregnant movie star Sharon Tate, then the wife of film director Roman Polanski. And she freely admitted that as she held Sharon Tate down, that Tate begged Atkins to show mercy to her unborn 8 month old fetus still inside her, and spare her life.
Atkins has said that her response to Tate was: " I have no mercy for you." She then proceeded to stab Tate with a large knife 16 times, including many stab wounds going into her swollen pregnant abdomen.
Does her past action thus mean that showing Atkins no mercy now, is thus the right and moral thing to do?? Is this the best way for justice to now be served to her??
If nothing else, in some ways, this matter has become most ironic in nature.
Here is a recent photo of her:
And here is a news story about this with more details:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/15/release.denied/index.html
.
She has been serving a life sentence since 1971, a total of 37 years now. She is the longest serving female prisoner in the California Penal System.
However, she is now 60 years old, and dying from brain cancer. Well over $1 Million dollars in medical bills have been spent by the state of California to keep her alive so far this year. In addition, since she has to now be in a medical hospital, it is costing the state over $25,000 a month to have armed guards and adequate security at the hospital she is at.
Her circulatory system is failing, and she has had to have one of her legs amputated. So she can no longer walk. The cancer has done significant damage to her brain at this point, and she is now also paralyzed on one side. So she cannot even sit up in bed on her own or even feed herself. She even has great difficulty simply talking now.
She has expressed remorse many times during the past two decades for the murders she committed, and people have reported that she is now a born-again Christian who strongly believes in God. All she is asking for at this point is simple humanitarian mercy, to allow her to die as a free woman, and be able to see the outside world again before she passes away.
However, all of California's state officials have strongly rejected her application for mercy. Not only all officials within the prison system, but even governor Schwarzenegger has said that she must serve out her life sentence in prison.
Is this not being cruel to this woman? Would it not be right to show her some tender and compassionate human mercy at this point?
One thing that state officials have all pointed out in denying Susan Atkins mercy are statements by her admitting that it was she who murdered the pregnant movie star Sharon Tate, then the wife of film director Roman Polanski. And she freely admitted that as she held Sharon Tate down, that Tate begged Atkins to show mercy to her unborn 8 month old fetus still inside her, and spare her life.
Atkins has said that her response to Tate was: " I have no mercy for you." She then proceeded to stab Tate with a large knife 16 times, including many stab wounds going into her swollen pregnant abdomen.
Does her past action thus mean that showing Atkins no mercy now, is thus the right and moral thing to do?? Is this the best way for justice to now be served to her??
If nothing else, in some ways, this matter has become most ironic in nature.
Here is a recent photo of her:
And here is a news story about this with more details:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/15/release.denied/index.html
.
why should a moral dilemma consider only what we do with a convicted murderer? Why shouldn't that moral dilemma consider the victim?