- Joined
- Oct 30, 2005
- Messages
- 3,916
- Reaction score
- 16,009
There is always a chance that an accused person will be found not guilty or that there will be a hung jury. What you post here are the aggravating factors pointing to the death penalty, which have nothing to do with whether to seek consecutive life without parole with no appeals. All of these factors would have to be proved in court AFTER the guilt phase of the trial.When Bryan was first given the plea deal, quite a few posters here argued that it was for the best, since "there was a possibility he wouldn't get found guilty."
I knew there was no way this loser didn't leave a trail a mile long. IMO the judge and/or prosecutors dropped the ball on this.
In general, getting a mass killer off the street for life should be the goal. BK confessed. He can't petition for a new trial based on his innocence, as Scott Peterson is doing. Finding a man guilty in a trial and sentencing him to death just means the appeals will start and he'll continue to claim he's innocent. That means the survivors and families deal with the killer for decades.
The prosecution did the absolutely right thing for the people of Idaho (whom they represent), the survivors, and (whether they agree or not), the families. Let this monster in a human suit rot in prison for as many years as he manages to stay alive.
Edited to add: And the inmate's confession was not the result of back-room interrogation but after years of zealous representation and interaction with the court, and agreeing that his confession was voluntary and not coerced. So he can't come back and plead that he wasn't advised of his rights or abused.
Last edited: