Why You Should Care About Madison v. Alabama & What You Need To Know...
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 гру 2018
- Thanks for tuning in! Bonus morning video incoming…
Wanna support what we’re making? DeFrancoElite.com - Subscribe today!
------------
Latest PDS: • The UA-cam Rewind Pro...
Extra Bonus Video: • Video
------------
Follow Me On
------------
TWITTER: / phillyd
FACEBOOK: on. mqpRW7
INSTAGRAM: / phillydefranco
------------
Sources/Important Links:
------------
www.oyez.org/cases/2018/17-7505
www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/...
www.al.com/news/index.ssf/201...
heavy.com/news/2018/07/vernon...
www.cnn.com/2018/01/25/us/ala...
www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cer...
www.scotusblog.com/case-files/...
------------
Wanna send us stuff?
ATTN: Philip DeFranco - Rogue Rocket
4804 Laurel Canyon Blvd. Box - 760
Valley Village, CA 91607
------------
Wanna listen on the go?
-ITUNES: PDSPodcast.com
-SOUNDCLOUD: / thephilipdefrancoshow
________________________
Edited by: Julie Goldberg, James Girardier
Produced by: Amanda Morones, Dani Rosenberg
Art Director: Brian Borst
Writing/Research: Philip DeFranco, Brian Espinoza
------------
#DeFranco #SupremeCourt #DeathPenalty
------------
I’m in the “should have killed him years ago” camp. In states that still give the death penalty, maybe five years is an acceptable amount of time to give a counter case, but 20 plus years is absolutely ridiculous. Why would you keep inmates on Death Row long enough to suffer strokes and degenerative diseases to make them have a case against execution
Do you not think it's good that we have alot of scepticism when it comes to the state executing someone. It's what makes western democracies great, we're always sceptical about the state having power over life and death. It's what distinguishes us from countries where the state can kill someone in a blink of an eye with no consideration. It's not like they're not being punished, the mental torture of sitting awaiting your death with so much uncertainty is worse than a quick injection.
@@str8skeptic
A jury of his peers found him guilty of doing bad things. Either he will serve his prison sentence or be executed, that is how the system works. All this stalling and appealing is just to waste our time on a dead man walking.
"is how the system works" .... read this in front of a mirror please
It has to be this way in order to save those miss judged, today you are seeing in Phillips show a case of some one obviously stalling but the same system that is giving him some breath is the one saving those that did nothing wrong and are apealing their cases. John Oliver did a piece on this, i recommend you to watch it
Milo that is a good point in a few other cases but with this scumbag there is no doubt he shot an officer twice in the head for merely doing his job then his lady.
He got off WAY TOO EASY by any standards considering his disgusting crimes.
Justice is served by Punishment first and foremost, reform is a distant second.
He has forfeited his right to live in our already lenient society.
He deserves nothing less than to be tossed out like rancid trash and forgotten.
In my humble opinion, his current competency is not what the law should focus on, but rather his competency at the time of the crime; that he is incompetent now is saddening, but it does not negate the reality of the situation in which the crimes were committed. I agree with the State's assertion that, were it to be ruled that "not remembering" was a sign of incompetency we would suddenly have a slew of convicted criminals with memory problems; it would be a bad precedent to set, and I thus stand that the competency of a defendant should be based not on the status quo, but on their ability at the time of a crime's commission.
Joshua Kammert we should worry about if he would do this again, but I say, an eye for an eye
@@finncox6753 Eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
You wouldn't be killing the same man, mentally. What's to be gained from killing him, at this point?
Look I'd like to pretend I'm such a good person as to say that if that was my family he killed and he got dementia while in jail, that I'd be ok with letting him go. But I'm not, and so i agree with OP's assessment.
Slippery slope fallacy. You can't fake the effects of a stroke.
I think the decision depends on the reasoning for the death penalty. Not as far as the crime he committed, but as far as why do we impose the death penalty on criminals. If we're seeking some sort of justice or revenge, then sure. He should get the death penalty. But if the purpose of the death penalty is to end the life of a dangerous person for the safety of others, then I think his life should be spared considering that right now it doesn't seem like he's much of a danger to anyone at all.
@@dementare It just depends on your viewpoint of the purpose of the death penalty. Is it for the sake of revenge? Is it for the sake of justice and fairness, as in a life for a life? Is it for the sake of safety? I personally do not agree with the death penalty. If the police respond to an incident where someone is either actively severely harming or in a position to and has the intention to severely harm others, I would much rather the criminal die over the innocent. However, I simply do not believe that killing someone out of a pure desire for revenge is moral, no matter what they did. I do not believe that two wrongs make a right. Would I want to save a person who disregarded the value of human life? Sure. I don't agree with what they did, but I don't think that killing them makes it any better. If taking a life is such a terrible thing to do, then what constitutes the death penalty as moral or just? Where do we draw the line where taking a life crosses between good and bad? If someone killed my wife, child, sibling, or parents, I would absolutely be devastated and angry, and I would definitely want them in a place where they wouldn't be able to harm anyone else, but I would much rather them learn from their mistake if possible and be able to apologize. As far as the argument concerning money, 1) The difference between him living and dying is going to make no more than a one cent difference as far as the taxes we are paying that go towards his needs, and 2) If whether someone lives or dies depends on the money it costs us to keep them alive, then why do we not kill anyone and everyone with some form of mental retardation or other condition? I do understand your point and completely understand where you're coming from, but I just don't agree. I hope you read this comment and reply, as I would enjoy continuing this discussion.
A very similar case has already come up in recent history (there were only 11 years between the crime in 1981 and the execution in 1992). Ricky Ray Rector killed a man in a restaurant after an altercation over admittance, shot the negotiating officer in the back after agreeing to turn himself in, and *then* he shot himself in the head. He, however, failed to kill himself and instead essentially gave himself a lobotomy.
His mental state at the time of execution is most notable because he did not consume the pie he received as part of his last meal. When asked why he wasn't eating it, he said he was saving it for later [If you care, they did not dispose of the pie until after they were able to successfully execute him by lethal injection].
I'm sure people have debated over his execution, and there's plenty of material out there for further reading if you would like to do so. But if we would like to simplify this case down to precedent, it has happened before that a man was executed with no evident recollection of his crime due to an illness/injury he received after the crime had occurred.
Was this ethical or not? I'm not giving my two cents. But has this happened before? Yes. Was the prisoner executed? Yes.
Even if it is for punishment, I think leaving him the way he is now is worse than having him dead. If it is punishment and supposed to give help to the family there should be something they like about the fact that he’s incapacitated and pissing himself lmao. I personally don’t see why it’s a death penalty case, it’s more so just revenge of the courts on the man. But especially now I don’t see a reason to have him killed at all when having to live the rest of his life this way is probably worse than death.
@@dementare I just wanted to say that I really appreciate the logical argument that you've made in regards to the financial cost of life in jail vs death penalty. I've never really seen someone articulate the point you've made or anything similar beyond "it's expensive to keep them alive and in jail and their life is not worth the money" usually with a touch of "a court found them guilty of something unforgivable and now I don't see them as human."
I particularly like that your argument seems to be based on doing the best for the most number of people, and takes into account the cost of trying to do what sounds good vs what is good. It's a consequentialist argument, and I like that.
I still have a point of concern tho, and that is that there have historically been people that were found guilty in court, sentenced to death, and then later exonerated. Sometimes they weren't cleared until after they were executed. Based on the evidence presented, that does not at all seem to be the case in this particular instance, but I'm curious if you have a more general opinion?
For one, Madison was competent when he committed the crime and long after. Two, the law banning judges from overruling the jury’s recommendation was put into place over 20 years after he was sentenced to death. I believe he should still be put to death.
Blood for the blood gods.
@Lord Tippington, you're the sole voice of reason in this colosseum of a comment section.
Firing Squad??? :)
Then you should have punished him while he was competent. There's nothing to get out of the situation other than satisfaction of revenge, and even that requires you to ignore that this is a stroke victim, which has demonstrable damages you cannot fake, mind you, that has no idea why he's in a prison cell. I wouldn't take you seriously if you told me that was the same man capable of coldblooded murder. Also, does it matter where the punishment comes from? option 1) he gets crippled like he did. option 2) he gets euthanized via the penal system. option 3) you go up there and stab him, yourself. Which one's more "just"? Why?
The problem with this case is the amount of time that passed is what led to him developing these issues. He committed the crime in 1985, but didn't actually get found guilty until 1994. He was then on Death Row for over 20 years when he became "incompetent." At this point, he's been in prison for, I'm guessing, close to 30 years. The real 8th amendment violation is being confined for that long and not knowing whether you are going to be executed or not.
That being said, I think that a person should not be on death row for more than 10 years unless there are allegations of serious legal error or some possibility of exonerating evidence. Outside of something like that, a person sentenced to death should have their sentence executed more efficiently, otherwise every person will just appeal and push out their case until they are old enough that disease or natural diminishment will cause them to be incompetent.
@4K A person only gets a retrial if there was serious error in their case or some kind of prosecutorial misconduct. An appeal can happen if there is cause like mentioned above, but that won't happen in every case. The death penalty should be reserved for special circumstances.
(P.S. don't become a lawyer pls.)
@@microfoo88 I understand the principle of what you are saying and I have no qualms with it. I think the death penalty should be reserved for only the most heinous and indisputable cases and I have seen some of them. Cases involving the rape and murder of children, for instance, are ones where I feel the death penalty should be considered.
Or just come in to 21 century and get rid of capital punishment. USA has 7 times higher incanceration rate than other countries, so you guys obviously don't mind jailing people left and right...
@@ZealothPL Are you talking about the same 21st century where people are offended over everything, think their feelings are facts, feel an undeserved sense of entitlement, and have no thought of the consequences for their actions? Those are the very reasons we have such a high incarceration rate. What we need to do is fix the system, not simply throw it out. The thing about America is that it may not be perfect, but it is still a lot better than most of what is out there.
Even if he does get put to death, what does it matter now? If you wanted to execute him it should have been done 20 years ago. He sure was competent then. By the time this is argued about, thought about and decided on, the lawyers will only have come up with the next argument. How much of the taxpayers money has been wasted on this? How many family members have to watch this being dragged on and on and on.
I compleatly agree. They are dragging it out through the mud, the families and friends have suffered more than enough...
This is exactly the economic argument against the death penalty. Due to constant appeals and the cost of keeping inmates on death row etc, death sentences on average turn out more expensive than life in prison. You know, the idea the death penalty is a human rights violation aside.
One Qeustion: have ever of people on death row being found innocent 10, 20, 30 years later? If not google alil and you will find you answer.
@@jimmyp9105 Of course there have and I'm certainly not arguing that point. I have no doubts that there are ppl in jail right now due to the mere facts that DNA testing and collection techniques are so advanced now. But you have to admit that shooting someone in the back of the head and the back is quite different..
Mntdewmania yea no doubt, i have no sympathy for the man, but the right to appeal is afforded to all, skum and i good people. At the end of the day we really can't tell in a court of law with 100% certainty who is which. Seeing that evidence is alway coming proving someone innocent. But i reiterate tho he did what he did, we can't simply tske he right away, then it would be open to be dontle more and more. People say curtain thing are slippery slopes but in reality everything is a slippery slope.
i may sound harsh here, and keep in mind i'm not an american so we don't have an equivalent death penalty in new zealand, i've always thought it strange that they sentenced people to death, but then let that person live out their life in prison before the execution date.
the death penalty seems like it would be more effective and less strenuous on the state budget and tax payers if someone would be put to death like, a few months or year after the initial crime committed. that would in theory fix the whole "minds deteriorate with age so now he shouldnt be held accountable for his crime" bullshit these lawyers are spinning.
at the end of the day, hes a murderer. he took someones life and attempted to take another. there shouldnt be any sympathy for a man capable of something that cruel.
Yeah, but then you risk more innocent people being executed. How many innocent people would you kill to make sure you get the guilty ones?
Now I'm wondering, murder in defense of a nation-state is okay, just as long as another nation's military invades the first nation for this to qualify. If it were a civil-war, the cause is a high purpose like independence or reforming the government or society. If it were a senseless killing in peacetime, then it isn't okay. If the act of killing does not resonate with the majority of a society's viewpoints, then you are assumed to be in the wrong. If it resonates with society's viewpoints, like the lynchings of Blacks back in the 50s and 60s, then it's a political matter and not a humanitarian one.
Also, you're not even harsh at all my sweet little Kiwi Prince~
Love,
an American jackass.
p.s. Is it summer down there?
@@mac533 the solution to that is not having a death penalty though, not waiting until people are elderly...
There are a lot of exonerated people that were on death row. Google it. If this had been implemented a more innocent people would be dead. As it turns out a lot of the "evidence" and methods we use as evidence can be faulty. Also corruption runs deep.
I agree completely. Someone found guilty of mercilessly killing or harming another person(s) should be put to death within the week of sentencing to the death penalty. Your statement about the strain on our resources is absolutely true and one of the many reasons our prison systems are so broken.
The morning videos are a brilliant way to cover these kinds of longer running, more complex stories. Great stuff.
"hello hello welcome to your extra morning show.."
>looks at time
>dies inside
That’s the face I make when I die inside every night
This is why cases of death row shouldn't take decades to carry out. Please see my other comments in this thread before you judge my opinion. They are more detailed. I didn't want to write a book but some of the responses have been harsh.
How about innocent people only freed after decades on death row?
Remove the death penalty
I'm not saying it's right or wrong. I'm saying if they are going to do it don't take decades to carry out their ruling. This case wasn't in debate if he did it or not any way.
people take decades to prove they're innocent. if you kill them immediately, there is a MUCH higher chance of an innocent person being killed. this is why the death penalty doesn't work. we need to get rid of it.
Daniel Robinson They’re guilty of something so kill them all.
CarlosBudeeny And What Just keep them in prison for the rest of their life that’s a waste of space there is more guilty people then “innocent” people in prison. What they need to get rid of prison all together just put a bullet in their head and be done with it.
I absolutely love the early morning shows. I have something to watch as I get ready for work and the stories are always so interesting.
He knew what he was doing when he committed the crime, he should not get a pass because of unforeseen health complications after being imprisoned. Why is this an argument?
Because he arguably isn't the same person anymore. How is that NOT an argument?
it's the same Idea that if you could clone Hitler as he was but he no longer had his memory. Should you kill him?
It's a moral dilemma built upon the question of what makes a person.
@@doublepoints5257 that's a very good analogy.
@@doublepoints5257 That's not a moral dilemma, The original hitler that committed the bad deeds is guilty. Clone didn't commit the crimes so there is no reason to face justice.
Shaunburrs
Ur insane.
The death penalty should not take 20 years to enforce.
**should not be enforced** there fixed that sentence for you
@@D0J0Master So you're essentially defending some really depraved acts then. Some people cross the line way too far.
@@SerenityM54L2SAM5L5N1 Ah so lets prove a point in how depraved these acts are by killing a man. Doesn't added up on my moral compas
Mixed feelings on that one. On the one hand I do believe that some people are past the point of rehabilitation to the extent that they can ever be a functioning member of society. On the other, the statistic of innocent people that are put on death row only to be found innocent years later is much too high to rush the execution process.
@@artbystumps Exactly, personally I believe the best of people can do stupid things and the worst of people can do great things. Point is people can change and I believe no one should be put to death even if they themselves have caused a death
I think the real question is, how is a man sentenced to death in 1998 still alive 20 years later in 2018? To put that into perspective he's been on death row longer than I've been alive and I'm in college now
Tigerish Grain I think of you look into death row cases, you might be surprised to see that many stay on death row for decades
"In 2010, a death row inmate waited an average of 178 months (roughly 15 years) between sentencing and execution. Nearly a quarter of inmates on death row in the U.S. die of natural causes while awaiting execution."
I think it is because you can appeal to overturn the sentence. Plus, look at how often people are freed 10-20+ years after being sentenced because they were finally deemed innocent. This is why I cannot agree with death row. The time and money spent on these appeals could have gone elsewhere.
Short answer: Appeals (they take a VERY long time)
It's for good reason: you can kill a man at any time. Good luck unkilling him.
really great Phil. Love this commentary about a very interesting court case. Keep the serious journalism coming. Have been following your show for probably a decade now and love the path you've been on.
He was competent at the time of the crime, the trial, and the sentencing. He should fulfil his sentence.
Maybe he should not have been left on death row for the past 24 years.
I wonder if the police officer he killed could tell us what season it is?
Kitty Hurd I don't see how that is relevant here at all
@@ruben1151 just let it sync in for a bit.
Ruben same, don’t see the relevance
Don't worry, I understood you
@@toxicear5274 it's hard to think.
Here in lies the issue with the death penalty. Usually happens too late to be meaningful, but then so often it is found out later the now dead person was actually innocent. IMO I think we should just get rid of death penalty and do life w/o parole. Also costs less in most cases
And that's absolutely ludicrous that tee death penalty costs more, I would love to see an actual financial breakdown of life in prison VS the death penalty, it seems illogical to me that it costs more, how is it so?
Joshua Lemmon I remember doing a project on it a few years back. To put it simply most criminals to receive death penalty spend at least 15 years on death row. They go through more appeals and trials to try and confirm that the suspect is truly worthy of death penalty. Not to mention the actual sedative used to kill costs a lot of money. Maybe not always more expensive, but on average, yes death penalty costs more that life in prison
@@outinthegrapes Lot's of legal stuff and trials. Because as you might expect a swift death is harder to pass in court than life in prison.
He was competent when he committed the crime, the punishment should stand. Otherwise we're opening a big can of worms for everyone that's ever committed a crime to conveniently forget their crime and get away with it.
Slippery slope fallacy. You can't fake the effects of a stroke.
@@vanquish421 Ikr, I saw a comment earlier that said that he just gave himself the strokes. I almost had a stroke reading it
@@vanquish421 I'm not talking about a stroke, I'm talking about a bump on the head and sudden amnesia.
I agree with Justice Ginsberg. He was competent when he committed the crime so the defense's argument is totally useless.
Lovely2291 Respectfully, I have to disagree. Competency at the time of the crime doesn’t change that he is incompetent now, making him incapable of understanding why he’s being executed. This undermines the purpose of an execution. What good is it that the taxpayer funds an execution that involves a man who can’t even use the bathroom properly? It’s a waste of resources to execute him because at the end of the day, the man is practically gone anyway. Life in prison is a far more suitable sentence for his current state of mind. If the government truly felt he needed to be executed, he should’ve faced execution when he was competent, but as it stands, he didn’t.
There's no point in killing him now... After all these years
@12345 6 what about for getting that human waste out of the way
@@agoldfish4515 Just for clarification's sake, what exactly are you implying is a reason for executing Madison? A desire to see vengeance carried out against him? He deserves it? I am not trying to lead you on here, but I am just curious.
@Conor Kelly
Its less work to have someone clean up after him if hes that disabled and staying in a prison. hes also a killer who was pretty knowing of the punishment when he shot someone (before he had the stroke i think)
He didn't have those mental health issues when he murdered two people in Cold Blood. I don't think he deserves the luxury of taxpayers paying $50,000 a year for him to stay in prison.
Nixie Martian yet we sent a elderly Nazi home who killed more people and people were compassionate to him I don’t really care at this point if they kill him or not
Argument is not really valid. All of the costs incurred from a death sentence equal or exceed prison living expenses.
Education is important my friend...
I say bring back the rope it's much cheaper
michael polites two in the back of the head doesn’t cost much and it’ll make karma go full circle
(International Viewer Here) Lets see; a man who was at the time of the committed crime, killed a police officer, and attacked a mother, luckily the mother survived. He was found guilty of murder and some other charges, and got put to death penalty. Why should that change after once he has a stroke; he killed a person, and tried to kill a second one, got sentenced to death and now it's not going to be death due to a stroke? Doesn't that say to other people on death row that "Hey if you can get yourself a stroke/memory loss, you get to live!" granted the life is in prison, but you're not dead. This seems like an easy solution, follow through with his original punishment.
EDIT: On top of that, shouldn't the eight amendment only apply to those who had those conditions before the crime? Not after?
@@normaaliihminen722 I understand that each case should be looked at individually; but this case seems clear to me. A man who murdered a police officer and attempted to murder another person, who then got charged with death, is trying to not face death, due to a stroke that he had. We don't tell people who raped other people that they no longer have to go to prison, because as they were running away they ran into a wall and got memory loss. This person took the life of another person and that's unforgivable. I disagree with the Death Sentence, I think it is inhumane and cruel, but thats the American Government's choice to make, not mine.
@@Taka-ov4li Ill just tack this on to your statement "due to a stroke he had 20 years after he was first sentenced..."
the issue is the person who committed the crime, though the same in his physical body, is barely the same in his mental state. If tried individually, the physical Madison would be executed, and the mental version of Madison would live. The question is if you believe if Madison is competent or not, not whether or not he committed the crime. He committed the crime, but the sentencing now is unethical for his current state, almost a different person entirely.
AstralWisdom
That what jail is for.
What do you think that jail is for to keep all the black people that have a small amount of weed on them fed and warm? Because that's what jail does now and that's pretty dumb.
Jail is for bad bad people it should be for "Omg he has pot in 2018 that's crazy put him in jail"
To be clear having a little of any drug shouldn't be jail time for more the 3 months at most.
You kill people who are hittler level of murder, you kill the guy who shoots up places for no reason other then they are just twisted f***ers.
Those are the kind of people who need the death penalty.
Not some dumb ass who killed a cop let his ass rot in jail.
That gets rid of the problem you are now safe and that man can't hurt you.
And he gets to live out his life in the pursuit of happiness (behind bars)
Lol
@@jsmarty1 But again, doesn't that tell other people on death row that if you get yourself any form of memory loss, you can skip the death penalty, and in the end, we can only form our opinions on this, it's the courts decision.
Bryan Stevenson is a remarkable person. I choose to read his book "Just Mercy" for school and it was saddening and inspiring. He highlights the disparities of justice for minority groups in America and it has never made me feel more angry at our judicial system. I hope to meet him someday, heck, maybe I'll even get the opportunity to work for / with him. He works tirelessly to secure justice for victims of racism, sexism, and overall cruelty, I 11/10 recommend his book to every American so that we could all work to creating a just society where the law applies equally and fairly. Until then, keep up the good work Mr Stevenson
I thought the 8th amendment would only apply if the person is incompetent when they commit the crime, not after.
Sin Stalker
Maybe it could count if say...While you thrown in the jail and hurt in a way leading to a coma/incompatence...but IDK...
Trying to push your sentence out until you out-age it should not be a viable excuse to get out of punishment. Old age and decline in health should not be an excuse to avoid justice.
Zangeh yes it should be. I think the issue is that people think that "justice" is just punishing people. You won't punish a 5 year old the same as a 30 year old. Similarly, we shouldn't punish a guy that sits his pants and can barely talk. Let's face it: he is in jail, and he will never be able to harm anyone (like ever). So why are we killing him? Just to say we did it? To feel good about doing it? Because we aren't doing it to keep anyone safe. Everyone is already safe from this guy.
happened in the EmmitTill case...
lets not be ignorant.. it just doesnt happen for black folk??
or it could be just an act. innocent until proven guilty yada yada. already proven guilty.
proven guilty just not taken to death by that very jury. the judge override them because judge felt himself the Executioner... no you are the enforcer of what the people decided.. which was life in prison.
god bless your ignorance to thinking after digesting the video @@robknight9406
Rob Knight it could be an act. But I doubt the guy is so afraid of dying he would shit his pants for years on end just to get out of being executed. I imagine he'd rather enjoy his last days, and not have to keep up an act of a mentally disabled invalid for the rest of his days (imagine how bored YOU'D yget if you had to pretend to be bedridden 24/7)
The lawyer in this case, Bryan Stevenson, wrote an amazing book called Just Mercy- based on his time as a defense lawyer. Anyone looking for a fascinating look into the justice system, I highly recommend it. Couldn't put it down and it really affected how I think about these things.
What good comes from taking this man’s life? He’s not a risk to society anymore. If he doesn’t have the right to take a life then neither do we.
Lil Clout No, people need repercussions for their actions. Idealistically, I think people who’ve committed bad enough crimes should be shunned from society. Kick ‘em out of the community and let them find a new place or survive in the wild or something. Spread the word about them via internet so other communities can shun them if they so choose. However, that type of world is very far away (if that’s where we’re even headed) so for now, lock ‘em up in prison. But we don’t need to stoop to their level and become murderers. Imo, murder is only justified in self defense or the defense of another person.
I'm of the same mindset. If you are competent and clear during the time of the crime, then you should still carry out the punishment, even if the mental and physical conditions have changed since the initial sentencing.
Him not remembering the crime in no way means he didn't do it. At the time it occurred he wasn't declared mentally incompetent, he knew what he did and if he was put to death before he suffered the strokes it would be a non-issue.
Agree. The person that did it, technically died through strokes and brain damage. The individual in the cell is someone else.
This one was really good, and it wasn't misleading or anything, exactly the kind of content that makes me turn off my ad block and help when i can. Keep up this kind of stuff please!
I feel like they drug their feet executing his sentence (see what I did there?) and should now have his sentence downgraded to LIPWP. They should have carried out his sentence before it ever got to this point. I mean, it has been over 20 years, he has suffered strokes and developed dementia. They shouldn't have waited this long.
so then the state of Alabama gets the privilege of paying all the medical bills? Since he was already sentenced to death might as well go ahead and put him out of his misery. I think it took so long to actually execute him is probably due to the fact that this man has been fitting this sentence for years which as long as there are appeals they can not execute him.
for one thing, I'm against the death penalty in general, but if they were going to go through with the sentence, it should've happened long ago. If anything, it's unethical, cruel, and unusual to have waited this long, in which time, Madison has developed this state. He shouldn't be executed, whether for incompetency, or for initial crime in general, even if revenge would say he deserves it. Death and/or execution isn't justice.
Jessica Beatty
The wait is definitely the biggest problem.
@@jsmarty1 should have it like Texas if there are three eyewitnesses than you go to the head of the line for executions. I believe in the death sentence since having someone that stays in prison costs money when the inmate begins to have medical necessities as they grow older and develop dementia or age related health issues. Most prisoners with life sentences begin to go crazy and wish for death and then there is an argument of how can that not be considered cruel especially considering people that deserve Life sentences are surrounded by other violent inmates where they fear for their own lives. Using the 8th amendment in this case can send us into a spiral of arguments since the prison environment can be considered cruel and unusual.
So, because he became incompetent through the years of waiting on his day in court-he should get a pass? He murdered with his competence, no pass.
You talk as though he’s not in prison.
@@NinjaTyler he get to live every day, while that cop is dead 6 ft under. Also taxes payers money go to maintenance of inmates. Why should have to pay for some asshole basic necessary. I'm not religious, but there is one quote I believe in "eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth."
Yato Auditore Death Row is pay more expensive to the tax payer than a life sentence.
flipmaya so, he should get a reduced sentence (from death penalty to life without parole) because he has lost his mind? He was aware of his wrongdoings when he did them, he not only killed someone but also attempted to kill another. I worry about what effects this has on the future of these cases. A murderer gets life in jail over his original sentence of death because he became incompetent throughout his time in prison. Why should he be allowed to live while another is dead and the other was probably scarred for life.
@@ThaBeast123a that a false information being spread around
I think if he was sentenced to death at the time, he should meet the punishment, the 8th amendment doesn’t protect the man in this case because he was fully aware of what he was doing at the time.
Rafik Lababidi do the amendments really matter? Or do we perhaps consider that we are punishing a man that is sitting his pants and can't talk? Like really, why do we have our justice system? So we can feel good as we execute a mentally ill man (even if he was better before) or so we can keep society safe? Because if it's the latter, then the guy is 0 harm to anyone
Exactly. He made the decision to go get a gun and kill the officer and shoot the woman while he was perfectly fine. He didn't have any kind of pre-existing condition, like schizophrenia, so he should not get a pass.
Ruben you are looking at this very 1 dimensionally, the man knew exactly what he was doing when he did it, it’s not only about punishment but also justice for his victims.
Rafik Lababidi I have a degree in Criminology (sadly it's not very applicable at my current job but hey, atleast I know about crime and stuff). The question here is: why do we have the criminal justice system. So we have it to keep people safe, to make sure society works well and everyone is happy or do we have it to satisfy the bloodlust of the victims and anyone else that has it? Please don't misunderstand, I understand that victims want justice . The thing is, is our justice system about THAT kind of justice? Where we kill a guy that is guaranteed not a threat, and someone who doesn't even remember/understand what he did? Because let's face it, being in jail for life is pretty bad too. Is actually killing him going to really do that much? After 30+ years?
@@rafik5278
Are you aware what your last name means?
It's almost 7pm and I'm just now getting this notification... It didn't show up in my subscription feed either....
Well I generally dislike the death penalty, but that aside, if it was used the only reason I could see it being used is that so a particular member of society cannot commit an act as heinous as what got them the punishment. If Madison is guilty I think its sort of useless to sentence him to death now. If the doctors and his lawyers are to be believed he is in no condition to hurt anyone willingly. If he were to be killed now I would see it as retribution not justice. Also the eighth amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, what is killing a man who doesn't understand killed or even what is happening if not cruel? Obviously his crimes are reprehensible but could you even call Madison the same man he was during the crime?
So its ok if someone kills 1000 people as long as they are handicapped after... He did this over 20 years ago, he was caught pretty much red handed, there was no like "well some of his dna was at the crime scene, but we cant be 100% sure". He killed a cop, with 2 witnesses, and tried to kill said 2 witnesses. He did that back in like 1999 i think, i forget when Phil said, but 20 years ago... HEs still alive with a death sentence from 20 years ago, and finally got "ill". How is it justice that as long as you are old enough you can kill people for no reason, and by the time you are to actually get executed you are too old and ill to be.
Remember the death penalty is supposed to be for justice (protecting the population) not retribution (“getting” back at someone).
@@brandipityha9457
I don't know if it's worth trying to explain to you the position this person is taking sine you opened your response with the unbearably stupid strawman "So its ok if someone kills 1000 people as long as they are handicapped after...", but I'd like to see you try to refute the ACTUAL reason cited originally i.e. the utilitarian value of the death penalty, especially in this case.
@@brandipityha9457 it doesn't make the crime ok. But at that point where they are incompetent, it is cruel and unusual to execute them. The state of their being at the time of the person's execution is important. It's essentially killing someone with little mental capacity, which, if done by any of person or group other than the government, would be reprehensible, and would likely get life in prison, or, ironically, the death penalty
@@jsmarty1 He deserves the death penalty still because he received that sentence 20 fucking years ago. So you get the death penalty, just keep staving it off until you become too ill to be killed? How does that make sense. If you have problems before, then sure, but its not, its 20 YEARS after. He was in his right mind when he committed those acts, and imo, just because you arent perfectly healthy 20 years later doesnt mean you should get off.
I don't know. I mean, if he was a sane, healthy human when he committed the crime and when he was found guilty and sentenced for the crime, I see no reason the execution shouldn't go through. That also makes me wonder, could death row inmates use that now as a last resort? Do something to themselves to cause brain damage while in prison, actually causing brain damage and forcing them to be given life instead? Idk sets a dangerous precedent IMO.
I agree, and I think that's probably why the judges haven't decided yet. I disagree with the whole system, but with how the system works, having that is a loop hole I dont think the system wants them to have
Sane, healthy humans, don't commit violence murders like that...
Exactly. And Mental Trauma is a dangerous spectrum to use as a legal defense anyway. "Old Jack here has extremely bad PTSD from being beaten half to death when the other inmates found out he raped and murdered children. I propose that carrying out his execution as originally sentenced would be cruel and unusual punishment because being paraded down death row is likely to set off his PTSD." Nah, son. Anything that happens in prison is basically just part of your punishment.
But the whole reason that the death penalty exists is to defend the public from this person. He won't commit crimes again and is to no danger for anyone in the state he is now. The main reason of the justice system shouldn't be punishment it should be to protect the citizens. That's the whole reason we have a justice system, otherwise we could just go by eye for an eye tooth for a tooth like in the old days and everyone gets the same done to them as they did to others. That's not what death penalty or other penalties are supposed to do.
H M I agree. It’s fascinating. Definitely want to pay attention to this. I’m glad The PDS brought it up. I think the opinion of victims of this sort of case would be very valuable, since the entire point of this is having a punishment that fits the crime. Still, a precedent that could ultimately get murderers off death row, and promote self-harm or fraudulent diagnostic sounds scary, but laws aren’t built around loopholes that haven’t yet been exploited if that loophole seems far fetched.
I am torn. My grandmother is dealing with dementia now. She thinks she is only 50 and that i, a 35 year old woman, am a teenager. She thinks most of the family are former students. She's not who she was six months ago. Out of four children, nine grandchildren, and 13 great grandchildren, she remembers me, and nobody else unless we remind her. She thinks her eyes will get better. (They won't), she's convinced she's in a foreign country (different house, same small town) and she constantly says she's on a diet. We have to bend over backwards to get her to eat.
In many ways, she's already gone. She doesn't remember most of her life, she forgets that she and my grandfather were married 50 years before he passed.
Killing this man on death row won't bring closure to the family. He's already dying. Vascular dementia moves pretty quickly, and odds are he'll go on his own before the supreme Court manages to decide the issue.
He's already rotting. Why the expense to speed up the process? Why are we spending money and time on this? Just stay the execution and let him die in his cell. It's only a matter of time anyway, his functional abilities are dead. His body will follow.
Soon he'll forget how to swallow, get pneumonia, and die. It's just how it goes.
What's sad is that even if he was innocent he would still have to go through this.
I went through a similar situation as you and I cannot imagine someone like her going through that while not even knowing why they're being treated like garbage.
It's the only shred of sympathy I have for this man, but I don't think we should be okay with a system that allows this to happen
@@AntiSoraXVI Why would you feel sympathy for someone who shot someone in the back of the head
@Focux Exactly... context matters
I think it's worth the scotus to make a decision on the case though, regardless of this particular man's fate, just because it may come up with someone that isn't going to die a miserable death on their own. The question itself is worthy of debate.
I think he should rot in the cell because what hes suffering through right now is worse than a quick execution
+Philip DeFranco
I love these deep dives into our government/ legal system. Keep up the good work.
I don’t think his current status is relevant. He murdered an innocent man in cold blood. He knew what he was doing at the time, the fact that he has avoided paying his debt to this point is irrelevant. He should immediately be executed for his crime and society should know that this behavior will not be tolerated. You kill someone, we kill you back. End of story.
There's no point in killing him now...
There never really is any point to the death penalty in general, not in any absolute reason at least (a reason beyond other people’s satisfaction) (and some minor monetary gains, which is argue are insufficient compared to the times when someone innocent is executed) (note that I’m making a argument against the death pentaly in general...)
there's no point in keeping the pos alive
Yeah, let's show that murder is wrong by...murdering. That'll show em. It's just so sensical, I tell ya!
Question: What is the point of following the law if by doing so you're going to act like another bad guy?
I believe that since he was competent during the crime he committed, and was competent during his original sentencing, he should face the punishment he was ordered to face.
Indeed. IT's not like he's a different individual now. He's lost much of his faculties sure, but he still did it. And he wasn't disabled when he did it.
Nobody should be executed period
@@srensrensen7878 they should ,tax dollars should not be wasted on murders
@@thefirsttime7759 then you should be outraged over the current system where the cost of a trial to give someone the death penalty ends up exeding the cost of imprisoning them for life.
Terrible crime, really grey area. The guy has no memory of it (as far as the court can tell) but in that sense the guy did commit the crime and he has been arrested for it, so justice still took effect. I don't think the death penalty would suit his situation now that his mind has deteriorated, as he has become victim to time itself, and he now can't even go to the bathroom on his own. So punishing with death would not work as he doesn't pose an impending threat remaining alive, but I'd still think imprisonment is valid for the remainder of his life.
Much love for the extra videos Phill x
Let me preface this argument by saying that I am actually against the death penalty. There's too much that can go wrong when it comes to it. And I don't think it's our place to kill people. Imprison them, yes, but not kill.
But, in terms in this argument, I think that there's really no point in saying he's mentally incompetent now when he was completely competent at the time of his crime.
And honestly... 20 years? If you're really going to take 20 years to kill someone, you'd better also be investigating up, down, inside, and out to make sure that he's absolutely guilty. If you're not doing that you're wasting everyone's time. (This is another reason why I'm against the Death Penalty)
If this law passes, does it mean in future cases a death row prisoner could potentially take some drug or use external measures to make their brain function on a level deemed 'insane' by law so that their case could be waived?
How exactly does that help the death row prisoner if he or she is insane enough that their former self is long gone?
what a life.... Either I die or I can't remember I lived. I don't know which one would be worse for me.
Or just fake memory loss.
@@justinm2697 you cant fake memory loss because you would be checked by a physiologist you would go through various tests etc there are measures in place for things like this. The same thing happens if you plead insanity.
No they have to be deemed insane at the time of coming the crime hence why people plead insanity for crimes to get off of a death sentence
This man was sane and competent at the times when he committed the crimes so he should be held accountable for what he did. I dont think it matters what mental state hes in now. If he was sane and aware at the time of the crime it shouldnt matter what he is now.
Phil, this is a fantastic piece of journalism. If this is the future of your channel, I am very excited to see what comes next.
It doesn’t matter if his health deteriorated 30 years after his crime. When he committed it he was in his right mind and deserves the punishment.
Should people not be sent to prison of they're incompetent? If they can't remember committing a crime, should they be freed? No, that's ridiculous. The punishment should be carried out regardless of what the offender thinks or feels about why it's happening. He's in a sad state, but he committed the crimes and was competent in trial and sentencing.
Not remembering a crime means you should be let off the hook? That's the most ridiculous argument i've ever heard.
It really comes down to the question "At what point does being incompetent matter?" He was found competent at the time the crime was committed. He was found competent during the trial. He was found competent during sentencing. He's only now incompetent because it has taken so long to carry out the sentence. It doesn't change that at every step of the way, he was perfectly capable and deemed competent. If new evidence came to light that cleared him of the charges, that's different. This is not that. Carry out the sentence.
I love these videos going over court cases! So interesting!
Why would a stroke he had in jail effect his sentence in any way? He did the crime, and knew what he was doing at the time of the crime, so why would he have to be competent to be executed?
I think it's basically 'This murderer has dementia now. Should we still execute him even though he's like this now?'
The argument is that he may not remember the crime that he commited or is unable to comprehend the scale of it. Thus, he will not understand why he is being executed. By the court's eyes, this constitutes as cruel and unusual punishment. To put it in perspective, would you jail a mentally disabled person for trying to steal from a store if he is too disabled to understand that what he is doing is illegal? It will be considered cruel and unusual.(Something like that, my analogies suck). Just trying to explain, not share opinion.
@@Turtleman30 hm that analogy is pretty good considering how ridiculously confrontational some people get these days.
The issue is that the death sentence is supposed to be a punishment. A punishment is inefective if the punished don't know WHY they're being punished.
Nicholas Rojas the thing is its not comparable to someone who is already disabled when they did the crime. this man knew what he was doing and was completely able when he was sentenced. i dont see why not the punishment should go through. if the court makes a decision in favor of this man, it would create a loophole that inmates on death row may/will use. it would encourage self-harm to induce brain injury like this man have.
This case has cost my state way to much. He should have been taken out decades ago
sketchyssk8shop meth addiction and child rapists are costing your state more. And all you’d need to do to help is walk around your neighborhood taking out the trash, but yeah it’s probably easier to blame the mentally handicapped guy.
Cost more to execute. Execution is price gouged
@@foxwillis2676 who killed a police officier in cold blood and attempted to kill his girlfriend...
Your state isn't special. Death penalties cost way more than life in prison. If you care about state spending then you need to end death penalties.
@@Gikarin.Gamemaster 8 man firing squad is cheap. Average cost of a high powered bullet is just a few dollars. Add 7 blanks and you have a squad. I have never bought a blank round so I don't know the cost
*yes he is the same person but what is nerve wracking is the precedent this could set for cases in the future regarding the death sentence and disability*
I personally would not want to see someone die who doesn't know why they are going to be executed. Even without the knowledge that he is mentally ill you would know that he doesn't know by just watching how that person behaves. Wouldn't be like watching a killer die, but an innocent person
@@kevshorty I agree, I don't think it should be allowed and if this time it is i'm nervous it'll happen more in the future :/
All things aside, man, why would you even want to be alive. That sounds like a horrific state to exist in.
Itd be 1 thing to be at home and be in that situation, but i doubt theyd release him to be with family, if he has any, and to be taken care of more. Hed still be in a similar position.
@@brandipityha9457 I guess it'd depend on your home situation and how bad things really are. My Oma though, in her final two years had to repeatedly realize that her husband of 65+ years had passed away, and the rest of the time she was just constantly waiting for him to come home. Unless it was a really good day she didn't even recognize her own children so even with the families best efforts it was pretty tough. In my opinion there are very few things more worthy of the title 'cruel and unusual' than people fighting to elongate the life of someone living in this state of being
I do not understand why his current state is in consideration for his past crime. Your state of mind and illness should only be considered during the time of the crime; regardless of what happens to you after you committed it. It’s like forgiving a teenage boy for shooting up the school because he is “young and not fully developed.” No. He knew what he was doing at the time of the crime. He may not know now, but he did understand at one point.
What is the point of punishment? Because i feel like this is punishing a different person to who killed that man...
Were more looking at the punishment. Obviously they waitrd this long. So no wonder they appealed. He shouldve been executed awhile ago.
Homo Quantum Sapiens he was competent at the time of his trial and his verdict, therefore, regardless of what happens in the future, he should be punished with his original punishment.
Homo Quantum Sapiens okay, he committed a murder, but became disabled. Now he is no longer a murderer because he is disabled? So I could do whatever the fuck I want, but suffer an injury before receiving my punishment to avoid it. Instead of running or hiding, just sustain a significant enough injury and claim mental incompetence . No. That is wrong. The punishment was given to a man who murdered; a man who knew what he did at the time. Whatever happened after the crime should not be relevant unless he was found incompetent during the crime. Just because he is no longer completely competent after the crime doesn’t mean he should be “pardoned”. Though, I would never agree with a death penalty, I still think he should be severely punished.
This situation is only an issue because the US government has yet to reevaluate the way they implement capitol punishment in states that it is legal. Inmates often sit on deathrow for years, sometimes a decade or more. It's a failure on the part of the judicial system, having ignored any sort of reform involving the prison system as much as possible. The way capitol punishment is implemented and enforced is lazy and half-assed. The entire idea behind "no cruel or unusual punishments" is undermined by forcing your prisoner to needlessly sit in an isolated cell for X amount of years, after which they will be executed anyway.
If you are going to execute the person anyway, why house them for years, using up hundreds of thousands of tax dollars in order to do so? To taunt them? To punish them more? Aside from the fact that the only future promised to them is a cocktail of highly toxic chemicals shot into their veins while a crowd of select individuals watch as they convulse and die in an operating theater tucked away behind some prison morgue? Or in this case, wait until dementia and blindness sets in as they rot in jail to the point that they aren't even capable of recalling the reason as to why they were imprisoned in the first place, and then finally execute them, 33 years after the original crime was committed in 1985. A terribly cruel situation that could have been avoided if the US government would just grow a pair and fix the problem for once instead of ignoring it and kicking the can down the road so it can be someone else's problem.
I agree with you totally! But it is a state run decision as to how the prison systems are run in each state. Just a little knowledge nugget. Thank you for putting into words what I have been feeling all morning.
I partially agree with you.
As seemingly wasteful as it is, not rushing to the execution is a good thing. Consider how many people have been proven innocent in the later years of their incarceration.
You mean like how when America had a 6 month Max before death sentence was carried out? And people screamed and shouted that it was to short? So it was moved to 2 years... still screaming.. so the speedy punishment was completely removed and NOW everyone wants it turned back? SMFH will people make up their minds?
Because the rate of exoneration for death row inmates is far too high to rush to execution, unless you're cool with murdering innocent people, which is something the death sentence exists as a deterrent to(though not an effective one).
The point of that is that the judicial system makes it really easy to argue against the death penalty because of the severity of the punishment. They want to make sure that the morality conflict is kept to a minimum. If you were on death row, you would want your death day to be delayed as long as possible
Amazing piece of journalism! I love seeing these deep dive videos that are really relevant to current politics.
An Advil ad played before this excellent morning show. Well made and keep up the great work!
I think the question of identity is a really interesting one. I’m seeing a lot of comments saying something along the lines of “evil is evil” or “he did it, he deserves to be punished.” It seems like all those people want is justice for that officer and that woman (and understandably so), but what if the person who committed the crime no longer exists to be punished? Even if his physical self is the same, if he has no recollection of the crime (and thus possibly no recollection of feeling that kind of coldness or hatred or whatever evilness motivated his actions), who are we punishing, really? I don’t know how I feel about this case, but it raises some pretty interesting questions
@Unknown "If you can't remember the crime you committed, or the motives that led you to commit them, should you be punished?" "Oh so we should just have lobotomy centers instead of prisons?¿" That sounds more like "pseudo-logic" than anything I said
While i dont necessarily agree with the death penalty, i do feel like, in its current form, someone should be held to their state of mind during the crime, not many years after.
His incarceration looks like it already has broken this person down both mentally and physically, executing him will do him a favor.
Either way this man today is no longer the same person who committed the crime years ago, this is all what is left of him, just another dead man walking.
@Thot Waffle What was it that you read in my comment that would lead you to believe that I was defending this criminal, attempting to minuscule his actions or this story? Because I was not implying nor hinting at that. Sorry you took it the wrong way, next time i'll be more careful when choosing my words next time.
This is the closest I've ever seen the law come to tackling one of those really tough philosophy 101 questions. "What is a person/identity?" A lot of people say that a person *is* the collection of experiences and memories that led up to them being at this point in time. Without that a person is effectively already dead and whoever is in that body is someone else.
I'm interested in seeing how the courts hear this out.
He still committed the crime, they delayed the sentencing and he happened to have health issues to delay the punishment. This was intentional. Regardless, the crime cannot be undone. He is wasting taxpayer dollars sitting in a jail cell with special needs because of his health issues. If he is truly suffering in jail under his current conditions, just end his life on that basis. Why delay his life when he would be suffering in jail or a nursing home? A crime is a crime. Judgement will be sought after no matter how much time has passed. And to me, his health issues he has suffered in jail are partial to his karma he's received for delaying the death sentence in 2016.
It’s actually more expensive to enact the death penalty than it is to keep him alive, don’t take my word for it, look it up yourself
Also, there is an argument to whether or not he is even really the same person as when he commuted the crime, or just shares the same vessel
@@hermoise3751 That was my misconception. I always thought it was more expensive to house an inmate for life than to actually perform the death penalty. And I can see where that argument is coming from at it's core, however the issue I have with that argument is they kept delaying the sentencing and within that delayed period of time he just happens to have these strokes and turns out to be mentally ill. It's definitely an ethical dilemma for sure.
PachaDash “ Wasting tax payer dollars”
If we never sentenced him to death and let him rot in prison like the jury suggested we would’ve saved millions.
Executing someone cost more money under our system than life in prison.
It cost 4 more times in legal fees to execute someone than to just send them to life in prison.
Saying we need to save “ tax payer money” is a falsehood.
www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2014/05/01/considering-the-death-penalty-your-tax-dollars-at-work/amp/
@@hermoise3751 then we change the death penalty to an inexpensive bullet to the head
Flufferz626 Where did I say the lethal injection itself cost a lot of money?
The lethal injection can be done for a few hundred at most.
However, killing a human isn’t something we should take lightly. It should be a long legal battle.
My point was don’t use the excuse you are “wasting tax payers money” when it would’ve been cheaper if the judge followed the juries recommendation.
Honestly, the only reason someone should be executed is if they would cause sever harm to others in prison.
Clearly, this man isn’t going to harm anybody else. He can’t even shit properly and being locked in a prison for the rest of your life; not even knowing why you are there is a form of punishment worse than death.
Reminds me of that black mirror episode where they erase that woman’s memory and continue torturing her
White bear? Definitely.
That episode is so fucked up. I love black mirror though, definitely my personal favorite TV show of all time
This is really interesting and I kinda want to share with my AP Gov class, thanks Phil! 😎😎😎
If he was mentally competent at the time of the crime he should get punished accordingly (whether or not that punishment should be a death sentence is another conversation, but if he was already awaiting punishment you still punish him)
Exactly. Such has applied in the cases of larger crime, such as war crimes, even if someone was found who had done those things but was in his 80's-90's and no longer competent, they were still put to trial and punished for those crimes. I do not believe in the Death Penalty (I'm Canadian and we don't have it here...) but he did the crime and was competent at the time. He should be punished for the crime.
His memory loss and his incompetence doesn't mean he didn't do the crime. What about the people he victimized? People seem to have forgotten that people were shot and killed because of him. The law shouldn't be protecting the criminal, it should be punishing him in this case, regardless of his current mental state
Personally, I think back to when my grandparents got dementia, specifically my grandmother. She became a drastically different person. She couldn’t remember my aunt died, she forgot who me and my dad was. It was absolutely awful.
Personally, I think killing him now would be a violation of the 8th amendment. Yes, he’s the same person who killed a cop. That was an evil thing he did. No doubt about that.
But if he can’t remember the crime, we can’t kill him. In the case of somebody who is deemed “insane,” we wouldn’t shell out the death penalty for that reason. You cannot hold somebody accountable if they are incapable of knowing what they’re being held accountable for.
Don’t give him the death penalty. Let him live the rest of his days in jail. He’ll die soon in there. Besides, he’ll have only slightly less freedom then he would have in a nursing home or hospice, which is where he’d be if he wasn’t in jail.
And to those who want him to die for his crimes....trust me. Dying of dementia in a nursing home is one of the worst ways I can think of to go. He’s getting his reckoning, just not by the state’s hand.
His reckoning is at the cost of those assigned to help this killer, and he isn't cognizant enough to know that this is a punishment. I would rather quit or request to be transferred than change this guy's bedpan.
MaybenotNASA maybe difficult, and annoying for those who care for him yes. Having a grandparent currently battling with Alzheimer’s, myself; it is bad for my family, 1000x worse for her.
It’s kindof a lose, lose. I agree that he should be put to death. The law changed 20 years after his conviction and he was competent to stand trial and sentencing. Boom, death. But either way, he’s getting punished. Don’t you worry about that!
Phil please cover Cyntoia Brown's case! PLEASE
Thanks for this video. I prefer (heavily) when Phil hosts - I really don't want to check out vids with anyone else hosting, here on this channel, to be honest.
I don't believe in the death penalty, but his lawyer's argument here is awful. Insanity pleas are meant for people that didn't know any better at the time of the incident, not about not knowing any better decades later when your sentencing happens. I think the courts have to reject the appeal to prevent a precedent of something that is so hard to determine. Ultimately I think the law is the law and it needs to be enforced otherwise people will abuse it.
That's ridiculous though, that's like saying ''Well, being gay was once illegal so anyone who was gay when it was illegal should be punished now because the law needs to be enforced otherwise people will abuse it''. It's very easy to tell when someone is faking insanity and when someone has genuine Alzheimer's and can't even so much as use a toilet. Things change, perceptions change and yet the controversy surrounding the Death Penalty is still going on. We never have to talk about that in my country because we got rid of it 100 years ago. That doesn't mean we have a great justice system, it fucking sucks, but at least we don't have these problems. I get that a police officer was killed and that has to be justified in the eyes of the state, but seriously, ain't no one going to get any sense of justice out of this if he is executed.
Abuse it by becoming old and or permanently mentally ill in jail? I'm sure inmates are deviously planning their Parkinson's right now
@@comrade-notacommie-jenjen9229 I agree that our justice system sucks, it targets minorities at all levels. I don't agree with the death penalty, I would rather have life sentences, it isn't like someone is going to break out anymore. I do think the logic is flawed though in their lawyer's logic. You can't compare this with someone being gay or someone doing a now legal drug. Murder is murder is murder, his condition now doesn't change or affect what he did back then.
is it worth keeping him alive? the quality of life seems pretty low at the point where his mental state is at imo
I believe that competency should be derived WHEN they committed the crime. Because then EVERY inmate would "act" unfit/incompetent every time the death penalty / life sentences are doled out.
It does bring a question of "does the person understand why they are begin executed, WHEN they are being executed," but considering the long time from when a person is sentenced, on death row, and finally are executed, this can easily be over-ruled and the execution "cancelled." This would be a huge waste, and would draw out executions needlessly, for small chance of actually going through due to mental decline possibilities, especially for older perpetrators.
This kind of morning video may be more time consuming for you but this was way better than the previous couple. We subscrive to hear you and your views, not parroted research from elsewhere in an emotionless voice with dramatic music or a middle of the 10 o'clock news from mainstream tv segment about old news. This was interesting, informative and thought provoking. Much better imo! Love ya face :)
Theseus’ Ship Paradox - if parts of me change over time, am I the same? The paradox is only resolved when you separate Form and Function. Usually our Form (body, physical self) changes over time such that there are clear points where we are not the same ( age, injury etc). But our Function (continuity of sense of self, purpose and relations) is much harder to change, which is why we deem it ok to hold someone accountable to previous actions.
If his mental state severely suppresses or damages the continuity of his sense of self, then you”re fundamentally punishing a different person. If its amnesia, as a minor example, then you’d be punishing someone who is trying to rebuild a sense of self, while reconciling abject punishment, thus the purpose of punishment isn’t fulfilled. However, in this case, his own mind has become more a cage then any jail cell ever could be.
To execute him, in this state, only serves to complete filed paperwork while absconding the spirit of the law.
However, given his state, execution could now be seen as an act of mercy.
Numb you fail to realize that some acts are static, and your fluidity theory is partially true, and partially wrong. For example, if one were to have a kid, does the fluidity of the self change the explicit fact that they made the choice to have a child. Some actions have static effect, in this case, the death of someone. No matter how much fluidity you attribute to ones self, the act is a static amongst an individuals life.
If the point is to have justice for what the man has done would a more appropriate line of action not be to have him live out his remaining time in a cell? Though personally I believe he should be transferred to a long term medical wing but a cell is a cell. Though that may be because I am from a country who believes in rehabilitation over vengeance. Giving him the death penalty now will just release him from years of mental turmoil until he loses all ability to understand the world around him.
It is irrelevant. Lets say 97%-100% or whichever percent of atoms were replaced in the body due to the natural processes of biology. This and your arguments do NOT change the fact that this individual murdered a cop & attempted to murder his ex-girlfriend as she tried to shield her kid from him.
It is IRRELEVANT if he is a different person now.
I do not think the death penalty should be used, but whatever punishment is deemed appropriate, he should recieve.
My thoughts on the death penalty:
It should be used only for cases beyond ANY doubt not for cases beyond a reasonable doubt. The difference would be, for example:
There is multiple video evidence at different angles of a murderer who kills infants, admits to the crime, and says he should have killed more. This is a case where it is beyond any doubt.
To give a blanket follow up, what should be done depends on the underlying theory of justice, and maybe more specifically, can vengeance bring about justice?
My only point in bringing up Theseus’ Ship Paradox is that, we usually ignore Form changes as it is continuity of self which we ride on the enact justice, but what do we do when Form changes destroy that continuity?
If ones theory of justice can see acts of vengeance as a form of justice, then it should follow that the punishment due is set by (at least in part by) the party in grief. If this is the case, then the state of the guilty, in and of itself, is irrelevant as satisfying justice boils down to fundamentally appeasing someone’s sense of vengeance. If the guilty is insane, in a coma, etc., then a division opens between justice and vengeance, as they do not share the same purpose, even though they may share the same outcome.
Punishment is meant to effect people, which is why insanity, coma, etc., are reasons to have a stay of execution, they aren’t affected by it, thus enacting the punishment due by law, has no purpose for justice. Vengeance is left unsatisfied, it isn’t dependant on the state of the guilty, only the state of the party in grief. Vengeance still wants to act.
Justice is tempered by the changes in continuity of self, because its reliant on the effect to the guilty. vengeance is not.
What this man did, still happened, those grieved are still wounded, but the man who did it is already dead.
@@flamingmuffin666 continuity cannot change past actions
If he's as bad as they claim then he wouldn't even understand that he was being executed. He has become mentally challenged and basically already requires assisted living. Though it would be "just" to execute him, it doesn't seem like it would be much of a punishment when the person being killed doesn't understand what's happening at all
Corrupted Archangel but it’s also not “just” to let a person literally live out there days in their own poop....i find that more cruel when it could have been avoided by him or the courts multiple times through the decade.
I agree with this to some extent. Yes, it does seem pointless to execute an old man who doesn't understand the punishment due to their mental illness. However, in this case, there should definitely be some sort of punishment. Even if cannot remember that he committed the crimes, he still performed them, and letting him go without some form of punishment would be a slap in the face to the victims in this case.
OK Garrus, who cares man, he should be dead like the officer he out down for nothing. Whether he understands or not I'm sick of paying for him eating and assisted living when he did nothing for society but cause trauma and sadness and anguish. Be gone with him.
Honestly like these more than the PDS
I agree with you for the most part but very interesting topic!
Thnx for the vid
Have a good day everyone! Good Luck on your exams!
Fernando Garcia - Thanks brother
Thanks. I want to die.
Thank you! I really needed this!
Thx brother
Thank you!
This is my first time being so early to a video and man does it feel good. Just love how I clicked as fast as I could and there is already 28 comments. Good job guys
Lol I was about to fall asleep and the BAM philly video so i had to stay up and watch it!
Literally me
Great story, thanks for covering
The fact that it has taken this long to carry out the sentence means the system already failed. So... it doesn't matter.
It's really cold in canada
So cold!
Yes here in Canada it is so cold i keep my heater running at max but my room still freezes over.
I can't handle Northern winters. I was stuck on a load in Canada not far from the border, took a shower in the truck stop, and the bits of hair that were sticking out from under my hat while I walked back to my truck froze. THEY FROZE. I was happy to take a loss and bobtail back down to warmer weather.
I'm against death penalty in general.
I'm for the remainder of his life in prison, he's not exactly an immediate threat to society and has already served a punishment of 24 years ago far.
I feel sympathetic towards the fear he must have being told he's being executed without understanding why
How do u know if its true, most criminals claim the same stuff hes claimimg and hope to get off on a lighter sentence.
Alex Wagstaff what about the fear the officer felt as two bullets passed through his skull? What about the woman, do you think she was scared as she used her body to block the bullet from hitting her child, think she may have been scared? What about the officers family, think they were scared when they opened their front door to see officers standing there with their hats in their hands and tears in their eyes because they had to tell them he had been EXECUTED IN COLD BLOOD by this piece of garbage?
EnerG A stroke causes brain damage that is visible in MRI and CT scans. He's definitely not faking blood clots on his brain..
@@Badgermatt-nc5nr yeah I'm not defending him as a human being, but you also can't say for certain he hadn't spent the time before his dementia regretting that night. Prison can be seen as a punishment to reflect on your actions.
And i still said he should spend life in prison I'm not ignoring what he did. I just disagree with the concept of the death penalty in general
I understand what precedence is but I think that it is crazy that incompetence is a defense against punishment for a crime. It sucks that they were dealt a bad hand but an innumerable amount of people go through life with similar or worse situations without committing crimes. Justice is supposed to be impartial and objective. Weighing mental state when rendering judgement is anything but.
This case is specifically infuriating that they are using that defense because the man, in sound mind and body, murdered that cop in cold blood. His state of mind then or now has no bearing on his victim or his victims loved ones.
It's like a reverse "temporary insanity" thing. No matter what happens, we will definitely see this case affect every future case about competency....
In my opinion this shouldn’t be an argument in the first place, execution is an archaic form of punishment that has no use in society. If one argues that it deters people from killing say for instances a police officer I would say that the death penalty isn’t a deterrent because they would be willing to kill said person with or without the threat of execution hanging over their head. There are plenty of countries where they don’t have execution as a punishment and they don’t have murders running rampant in the streets.
What about resources saved?
I agree, what right do they have to kill someone as well, life in prison is more punishment anyway
@@anushsgk I maybe a little ill informed but i believe it's cheaper to imprison someone for life rather than to execute since you have to go through lengthy legal battles as well as purchasing the narcotics to kill the person
@@anushsgk www.nbcnews.com/id/29552692/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/execute-or-not-question-cost/
@@anushsgk life in prison is cheaper than the death penalty
Morning vids are so nice I left a comment to like it twice
I'm currently in law school and got my undergrad degree in criminal justice and this topic is really important to me. I understand that everyone has differing views on the death penalty in America and I'm not going to try to persuade anyone a certain way. The legal use of competency and insanity in the criminal justice system gets confused by the general public and I kind of see that happening in the comments. Insanity is the state of mind during the time of the crime and not at any point after the crime. Competency can be measured on a linear scale, so a person who is competent when committing the crime can be found to be incompetent after the fact. This is especially important when it comes to the death penalty trial in this case. In Arizona in particular (because I'm most familiar with Arizona law), a lawyer can ask for a Rule 11 evaluation to determine if the defendant is competent. If the defendant is found to be incompetent they cannot be tried because they cannot rationally assist in their own defense. This is where the linear scale for competency comes in, though, because if medication would make a defendant competent again then he will be given the medication and when he is determined to be competent the trial would go forward.
I know here we're talking about after a conviction and not before, but I kind of see it in the same way and don't think that he would understand what is happening and there is no punitive effect if the offender does not remember the crime. I am not trying to sway anyone to my point of view, just wanted to provide some information.
Are you seeking Justice or Revenge?
I think it's revenge. I think that Mr. Madison should be given a life sentence in prison, not the death penalty
I think it's justice, he should be put to death as no one denies that he killed a cop and attempted to kill a mother and child. Regardless of him being competent now, he was fully aware at the time of him committing the crime. Letting this man continue to live on after what he did, especially in his current condition, would be more cruel then ethical, at least in my opinion.
If all it took to not get the death penalty is to fall ill, there would be no death penalty because would would fall ill suddenly once arrested.
@@brandipityha9457 Why IS there a Death Penalty?
@@nturtaneme To kill off the truely evil people of this world, and serve justice to the family or people that were victims. Why should someone that has taken lives, or even life be able to live? At least in this scenario, there are some times where killing someone isnt illegal, or "bad".
If this man had been executed for his (decades ago) crime in a timely manner...this wouldn't be an issue now ...death row show be death ....if we would stop extending the life of a person who did murder ...the victim and the family would also have closure in a timely manner...Currently, the death of this man is a merciful outcome ...
Marcie Willis that’s not how death row goes, though. Which is one of the reasons it’s actually more expensive to be put a person on death row than for them to spend life in prison. Many people on death row spend years and many times DECADES on death row before they are put to death. This is not uncommon.
You know we falsely incarcerate and kill a lot of innocent people, right? DNA evidence has been proving a lot of people innocent lately, after they were jailed on witness testimony and false accusations. But there were plenty of cases where people rotted in prison for doing nothing wrong, or just straight-up got murdered by society ("oopsie!"). The appeals process NEEDS to be this long, ESPECIALLY for death row inmates.
@@lialovesyou1 And many people on death row spend years and even decades there until they are proven innocent, which is why we can't push the process along to a "timely manner".
This is the main reason why I'm against it, it's ridiculously expensive compared to normal incarceration, sometimes innocent people get killed before they're found innocent, and more personally as someone who isn't religious, I don't view it as much of a punishment. If you don't believe in hell, death isn't really an almighty sentence (not to mention many of these people would actually prefer death over incarceration).
there's no such thing as closure. Seeing your family member's murderer being executed won't change their mental state one iota. I honestly hate when people say that
@@CoachDitka we kill way more monsters than innocent people but I agree we should strive for 100% certainty
I think a lot of the people are missing the point that, what is the point of the punishment if he cant even understand what its is or why it is happening? Its hardly a punishment at that point and more just a needless killing.
Idk, its a pretty huge grey area in my eyes.
Just leave him to rot in prison. No one's hands have to be bloodied killing him and he just spends his remaining days locked up.
I feel like people in general in cases like these are out for blood, looking for a feeling of revenge, more than anything
@@Lotuz yeah I'm thinking the same thing
Stephen Ward - No, it is hardly a punishment at this point. Because it is honestly probably a hell of a lot more of a punishment to keep him alive in prison in his condition.
*Note: I am not saying it is humane to kill off anyone who has vascular dementia and multiple strokes. But prisons typically don't have the proper staffing to take care of such patients, and they certainly don't have anything to enrich their lives. Instead you are keeping someone alive just for the sake of keeping them alive.
"what is the point of the punishment if he cant even understand what its is or why it is happening?"
All legal punishments are a form of socially sanctioned revenge. If we don't punish criminals enough we will have more lynchings and other forms of mob rule.
I didn’t get a notification for this video and it’s not showing up in subscription box AND when I go directly to Phil’s channel it doesn’t show up. I found it because it just happened to pop up on my recommended. Anybody else?
For a similar case, look at Ford vs Wainwright...
If you kill someone you are competent to pay for that crime and if that means execution, then so be it. People get old and develope health issues along the way, that doesn't mean that those health issues are a free pass out of your punishment.
This case really shows how stupid calling the death penalty a "punishment" is. Why does it matter if he's competent or not? The ability to understand that what he did was wrong and why he's being executed for it means nothing. Punishments are supposed to correct behavior, that's why it's required that someone understand why they're being punished: So they can know what behavior to correct. In the case of execution though, there is no way to correct your behavior (because you're dead). The death penalty isn't a punishment, it's just pointless revenge / taking out the trash / whatever, and this case really highlights that.
The whole competency requirement in general is misguided.
Forge Ahead
He killed an officer out of cold blood and almost killed an innocent woman. This man, and any like him don't give 2 shits about human life. If they did, this wouldn't have happened!
Keeping him alive is trivial at this point. The bastard deserves the same fate he gave to the people who died doing their duty and were there at the wrong time.
Correct the behavior of a cold blooded murder. One person can change 100s of lives but we will never know because they are dead. One person effects not only person that died but the family, friends.
Hawk Unleashed
Ooh. My bad. Yeah those poor people will never get another chance. Highly tragic.
As a detention deputy I'm torn.
On one end you have to realize how deceitful these inmates can be. They will do whatever it takes to get you to believe they deserve the smallest inch and if you give it to them they will take the mile.
On the other hand I can't help but think that the hopeful goal of incarcerating someone is rehabilitation. If someone bumps there head and forgets the crime and all malicious thoughts he's ever had isn't that the greatest form of rehabilitation?
At the end of the day I'm happy I don't have to make this decision. haha
I wrote a paper on this case this semester! It’s really interesting. Listened to the oral arguments, read the briefs. Interested to see what happens.