Like I said, I was not being snarky and if you don't want to answer this question because you think I am, I understand. Things don't always come through plain text in the way they are intended. I am just genuinely curious when I ask what the point was, because I just don't understand what you were saying by mentioning him, especially since he was sentenced to death. I'm pretty open to anyone who has an opinion on this or any other case that I have worked/know the facts in and admire your stance, as a 12 year volunteer for the IP, that you could not vote for death unless absolutely sure. I'm just not seeing the connection and am trying to understand your side and way of thinking that would bring him up. Like I said, if you don't want to answer, I understand. Just curious because, once again, as a 12 year IP volunteer, things in these cases are not always as they seem, so I am open to seeing all sides.
ETA: Unless the point was, that you didn't realize, since he is still alive that he was sentenced to death until I posted that and you were pointing out that if he of all people didn't get death... That I understand, if that is what you meant, but I don't want to assume either.
