Should death row inmates be allowed to have web pages and pen pal postings?

[cboy4]

Reaching out from death row

By Tim Reiterman, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
July 15, 2008

SAN FRANCISCO -- -- From the forbidding, steely confines of San Quentin Prison's death row, scores of California's most notorious convicts have been reaching out to the free world via the Internet.

Scott Peterson's Web page features smiling photos of himself with his wife Laci, whom he was found guilty of murdering and dumping into San Francisco Bay while she was pregnant with their unborn son. It also links viewers to his family's support site, where Peterson has a recent blog posting on his "wrongful conviction."

Mustachioed Randy Kraft, condemned Orange County slayer of 16 young men, is looking for pen pals. So is convicted Northern California serial killer Charles Ng, who describes himself as shy and offers to sell his wildlife drawings.

Tattooed and muscled Richard Allen Davis, whose abduction and murder of 12-year-old Polly Klaas helped trigger California's "three strikes" law, is not selling his hobby crafts but wants correspondents.

"I dug my grave -- now I must lay in it," he says of his life.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-deathrow15-2008jul15,0,1646459.story

I don't think this is right ... While I'm opposed to the death penalty, I think it's cruel that some of these monsters are allowed to post. I guess I disagree with the ACLU on this.

[izquierdista]

1. I'm against the death penalty

However, people that commit crimes so horrible that they are incompatible with society DO need to be removed from it. There are several islands in the Aleutians where they could be sent that would insure that they could never make their way back to civilization. And while they are there, they can live in whatever manner they like, without the society they injured ever having to provide them anything.

[Withywindle]

2. Yes.

I'm NOT opposed to the death penalty in all cases, and Kraft and Davis are poster children for cases where I'm just fine with it.

But they're still human beings and should be allowed to communicate and tell their stories until their number comes up. We can learn from what they have to say.

[cboy4]

9. Why should they be allowed to communicate and tell

their stories?

They're in prison. You lose your rights when you're convicted.

And frankly, one of the reasons I feel I can be opposed to the death penalty is I can argue rotting in prison is a greater punishment than death.

Now we're letting them set up prison versions of My Space pages? :wtf:

[LiberalFighter]

37. And at least they have a chance of getting out if later found innocent.

Maybe these prisoners should be given the choice once they are convicted and sentenced that their option is they can have a MySpace page if they agree to be immediately executed. Otherwise no.

[Jack_DeLeon]

16. their victims cant...

so why should they.

[bluedeminredstate]

3. I wouldn't want them able to access info

on their victims or their victims' families. I can think of a lot of other reasons why the internet would be scary in the hands of criminals, like easy communication with other criminals and security issues for the families to name a couple.

I think Scott Peterson doesn't deserve computer privileges. Doesn't his prison have a library and a TV? That seems more than accomodating considering why he's sitting there in the first place.

[csziggy]

4. I voted other because they might still have a right to free speech

But I really don't think they should be allowed to have web sites without supervision.

I once read a really interesting science fiction story about a man sentenced to life for a brutal rape. He was allowed to communicate by what today is called email (I think the story was published in the early 80s) but only with one person. At first he was the same domineering obnoxious person he had been when he committed his crime. But as time passed and he got to "know" his correspondent, he became more interested in her as a person and started caring for her feelings. Eventually he finds out that his email pal is the woman he raped.

[bluestateguy]

5. That MoFo Charles Ng is still alive?

I remember his killing spree in California when I was a kid.

Why has he not been put down yet?

And don't even get me started on Richard Allen Davis, who should be killed and grounded up into a woodchipper and fed to livestock.

[Skittles]

14. what exactly do you have against livestock?

:o

[Speck Tater]

6. Why sure. The next Charles Manson should be able to go right on comanding his troops from death row.

(That's satire, for those of you who are satirically impaired.)

[krispos42]

7. No

No communication. No code words. No passing secret messages. No ordering hits or drugs or cigarettes. No sick worship of criminals by the outside world. No recruiting gang members or helpers.

They want a page, they can write a letter to their lawyer and he or she can set it up!

[MrSlayer]

8. No, it shouldn't even be a question because they should be dead already.

The longest anyone should be on death row is one day.

[MonkeyFunk]

10. Yeah

who needs judicial review or appeals? Just fry the motherfuckers. Even the innocent ones must done SOMETHING wrong.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

17. Couldn't agree more! n/t

[PeaceNikki]

29. Of course! Our system is infallible! Why even wait a day?

Fry them up in front of the jury as soon as they are sentenced!

[Bucky]

11. It's disgusting, but legally it's no different from writing a book. It's a 1st amendment right

And certainly, legally speaking, a death row inmate and a prisoner serving a fixed time are not legally distinguishable. Plenty of prisoners have published their words from behind bars. It's one of those things you can tell a free country by. In 99% of the cases it'll be words by sick people who have nothing to say worth reading. But the right to free speech isn't a conditional right.

You won't catch me reading something by a murderer, though.

[dems_rightnow]

25. It's NOT a 1st amendment right

That gives them the right to speak or write freely. It does not give them the right to internet access. Nor does it give them the right to do whatever they want once on the internet. They can be restricted by their keepers in whatever way they wish.

[tburnsten]

39. If they want to publish something

they can write themself a book in prison and try to get it published AFTER they are released, not communicate with their wolves outside the prison system. You may not read something by a murderer, but how about his soldiers who are still out there? There are plenty of gang leaders in prison who carry on day to day life as if nothing ever happened, the only change for them is the quality of food and the dress.

[Mojambo]

12. Some should, but the right is not absolute. IMHO. n/t

[alphafemale]

13. They should absolutely not have free access to the internet

Responding to questions through a third party that has internet access is probably OK though.

[Jack_DeLeon]

15. Felons have most of their other rights restricted, I dont see why the first shouldnt...

the people they killed no longer have any rights because they are dead, so why should these guys be allowed to continue to do so.

They already cant vote, cant legally own guns, why shouldnt their first amendment rights be restricted aswell.

[jmowreader]

18. I think it should be REQUIRED, and here's why...

Maybe we could use all these things--their books, webpages, whatever--to figure out some way to get to these psychopaths early, before they get the chance to either kill a handful of people or get elected president.

[cboy4]

19. I don't think these "psychopaths" are going online to confess

and discuss why they behave the way they did.

You have one person who killed 11 people, including two baby boys (Charles Ng), blasting the justice system, while going on to advertise for sale his wildlife drawings. :wtf:

You tell me how that helps anyone.

[jmowreader]

20. You have to read into them...

Does anyone have the URL for Ng's website? I bet we could, if we read hard enough, find some small snippet to suggest what turned him into what he is.

[cboy4]

21. I don't think there's a notorious serial killer around that

psychiatrists and other experts don't know all about .. from their childhood, to whether they were abused, to whether they were on drugs, to whether they had emotional problems, etc.

There's a book written about practically every notorious serial killer .. with lots of information disclosed.

Not to mention a lot about a killer's background comes out during the trial, primarily when defense attorneys attempt to save their clients from the death penalty during the sentencing hearing.

I don't believe for a second allowing prisoners to have My Space-type pages will help stop brutal killers intent on terrorizing society.

[Mike Daniels]

33. I think prior research has shown why most psychopaths do what they do.

I fail to see that allowing someone access to the internet to post their feelings is going to give any more general insight beyond what's already known.

Besides, I'd think the warning signs would have long been visible from any such individual well before they actually start to go down their sick twisted path.

[pnorman]

22. I've been a "card-carrying member" of ACLU for many years, although not personally active.

I very rarely disagree with their positions, but IF the ACLU supports this idea, this would be one instance.

Wrongful convictions, whether through judicial incompetence or malice, is something that should deeply concern us all, PARTICULARLY here at DU. Accordingly, I support giving each and every one on Death Row, as much legal protection as possible. But a website merely allows the prisoner to spin to his hearts content. Think of Karl Rove on Death Row -- or you know who!

A person is innocent until "proven guilty" (ie: convicted). After that, the "burden of proof" is reversed. A civil libertarian can live with that; he merely has to fight HARDER to right any injustice.

pnorman

[Zavulon]

23. I can't begin to understand why anyone would vote 'yes' on this.

I just can't.

[midnight]

24. Because sometimes our Justice system is not JUST!!!!

[LeftishBrit]

26. I'm against the death penalty...

For the rest: I think that people who have committed certain types of serious crime should not have general internet posting rights, because they can abuse it to harm others. There's a certain type of rather unstable individual who can become fascinated with a violent criminal, and be drawn into something very damaging. Also criminals could use the internet to continue to run their gang from a prison cell, and instigate verious crimes. Even outside of the 'death row' scenario, people who are in prison for internet scams should not have free access to internet posting IMO.

However, I think that they should be able to use e-mail to communicate with their lawyer and conduct a legal defense. There should be ways of making that possible, without enabling them to communicate with all and sundry.

[graywarrior]

27. Just because I don't want them killed doesn't mean they shouldn't pay for they crime

They are reomoved from society for a reason.

[madrchsod]

28. why do they deserve internet acess?

they deserve nothing but paper and pencil.

[Lint Head]

30. I live next to someone that is an educator. They used to give

adult education classes to death row inmates. Why would someone that is going to die need adult education? :dem:

[PeaceNikki]

31. Perhaps they aren't all guilty of the crimes of which they're accused?

:shrug:

[dysfunctional press]

34. education for educations sake- some people have a desire to learn.

nt

[reflection]

36. We're all going to die. n/t

[Mike Daniels]

32. Not only no, but hell no.

These people shouldn't be allowed to have any contact with the outside world beyond relatives and their lawyers.

I'd be in favor of replacing the death penalty with life w/out parole. The only condition beyond that is that in exchange for their life they give up any contact with anyone outside of the prison world beyond relatives and lawyers. Let all communication with said relatives and lawyers be limited to personal contact, phone or mail.

Let the murdering scum experience some sense of the separation of personal contact that their victim's families have felt.

[dysfunctional press]

35. yes, of course they should.

they're still human beings.

maybe some people would be well served by a viewing of 'the green mile'.

and people who oppose the death penalty only because life in prison is a worse punishment might want to consider seeking out psychological psychiatric counseling. imho.

[cboy4]

40. What a joke.

:eyes:

[tburnsten]

38. They are in prison, not on vacation.

Should not have posting rights, all I can think of is someone like charles manson keeping a page and using it to communicate orders to his little freak buddies. And gang leaders already keep tabs on things in the outside world and continue to give orders, allowing them internet access only makes it easier for them. I think the prison system should be as low-budget as possible, no frills for the people inside. Library, maybe some optional classes, a place to exercise, not an internet cafe.