Just a quick note:
A person doesn't have to sign in or thank or post to read here from day one. A person also doesn't have to use this forum as the only way to follow this (or any) case. Beyond that, how does being here from day one earn a person's opinion more validity or credibility than another person's opinion? Fellow posters may think the few posters with the nerve to question the majority are lacking in brain cells or contrary just for the sake of being contrary but, I don't think that is often the case.
People come from all walks of life and diverse backgrounds. People possess different philosophies towards life and crime/punishment, in general. Some people come from countries that no longer have the death penalty or reside in states that have abolished it. Some people find the posts on here that advocate what amounts to torture for JRH abhorrent and subhuman, IMO.
I have to ask, what good is a forum that serves only as an echo chamber of the same opinions expressed over and over using slightly different wording? If all opinions that differ, even slightly, from the majority, are shot down and immediately ridiculed - where is there room for constructive, civil debate?
That's all I feel the need to say. I apologize for going off topic.
AMEN . Thank you for posting.