Member Since: February 13, 2007 Last Signed In: September 27, 2007 Profile Views: 4200 Blog Views: 82030 Brothers' attorneys face contempt hearing Judge: Brothers deserves to die Jury recommends Brothers should receive the death penalty VERDICT IN DEATH PENALTY No Verdict This Week Jury begins deliberations in Brothers penalty phase Defense attorney finishes closing argument Defense continues closing argument Defense attorney begins his closing argument Prosecutor finishes closing argument February 07 March 07 April 07 May 07 June 07 July 07 August 07 September 07 October 07 November 07 December 07 January 08 February 08 March 08 April 08 May 08 June 08 July 08 
RSS 2.0    |
|
|
Jury recommends Brothers should receive the death penalty
A jury decided Tuesday that Vincent Brothers should receive the death penalty for killing his three children, his wife and his mother in law.
The jury deliberated for 6 hours over three days. They deliberated for about 30 minutes this morning. The judge will have to confirm the sentence. Brothers was found guilty of the five murders on May 15. The judge will review the jury's recommendation on Sept. 27. 283 comments from 54 users
posted by
anonymous
on May 29, 2007 at 08:52 PM
Anon 5:57 What kind of garbage are you spouting. The judged removed a juror for inappropriate behaviour. You are so out of line to suggest that it was anything else. Read the transcript.
posted by
anonymous
on May 29, 2007 at 09:08 PM
beliefs, Steve... :)
Aside from the typo, I agree with what you wrote (which is not always the case). Justice was served. People have a right to their opinions, regardless of what anyone else thinks about them, but they ought to be able to defend those opinions and not be too sensitive if they're going to be posting them here. That's just my two cents. By the way, regarding the anonymous comments, some of us have legitimate reasons for not disclosing our identities. Safety happens to be one of them. Have you people noticed the psychotic ramblings of some on these blogs?!!! Hello!! Sometimes I wonder if 3B patients are contributing. posted by
anonymous
on May 29, 2007 at 09:56 PM
"there are 39 other Counties you could move to anytime." Boy there is definitely an intelligence deficiency in this county. Hmmm.....39 counties? Try again. posted by
sagefever
on May 29, 2007 at 09:57 PM
Steve ,you must not have been around for "the molestation" cases.juries base their opinions on what is presented to them,and some bias must sneak in:look at all these posts.Good lord.Anyway the court has spoken,in death penalty cases is not an appeal a granted? I just pray we got the right guy.Now go find who knifed my friend in The mountains(not you Steve the law)..her family ,her two sons and her friends would like some answers.Her mother went to the police and they said even if you knew who did it,the case is closed,they claim no evidence.She was stabbed gang style in less than 10 min.,I know her ,our motto was "Tell them to look under my finger nails~The s.o.b.'s skin will be there" The door was gang graffiti-ed after her death.She was at her "friends" house a know dealer~he said at the funeral "she was braver than you know",he and his roommate got away scott free~and they found drugs.So I hope you'll forgive me if I am a tad warry about justice in this county~regardless of color.I still think a lifetime of having to wake up and revisit your crime is way worse than "getting the needle".In death penalty case's I think caution is warranted:better a free old man that is released after being proved innocent than a dead man being found innocent.how do you get back from that?
posted by
theColorNine
on May 29, 2007 at 10:13 PM
I agree with you, too, Steve. I also think all the jurors, including the one who was dismissed, are courageous people. For a variety of reasons I don't know that I could have sat on that jury. Not the least of those reasons would be because of the potential of being called names by anonymous cowards who would throw out racial accusations without knowing a thing about me. These jurors gave up months of their lives to hear testimony and see evidence of a very gruesome and emotional nature. They had restrictions put on their daily routines to not converse about this subject with anyone (how many of us have talked to friends or spouses about the case?), nor were they to view or read any news accounts of the case (a pretty difficult thing to do if you want to watch any news at all or pick up the newspaper). I said I thought the dismissed juror was also brave. I feel that way because he revealed the conflict he was experiencing while there was still time to do something about it. He could have just kept his mouth shut and let the case result in a hung jury, causing the county thousands and thousands of dollars to retry the case and putting witnesses and family members through drawn out agony. As Steve pointed out, there have been jurors in the past who have done just such a thing -- they've let their personal agendas override their duties as jurors. When that happens, justice definitely is not served.
posted by
mattloch
on May 29, 2007 at 10:27 PM
Steve, 25 years would put you here about 1982, right? What year was the "Satanic Abuse Task Force" created? '85ish? Hmmm.....
posted by
anonymous
on May 29, 2007 at 10:34 PM
Well colornine I don't necessarily hold the dismissed juror in as high a regard as you do. As I see it he did not make any revelation in the interest of saving the county anything. According to the transcripts from the hearing he clearly was disrupting the entire process. I am not versed on the law regarding such matters but personally I think that he should be held accountable and made to answer to the legal system.
posted by
anonymous
on May 29, 2007 at 10:40 PM
I read you post Swenson and that was very white of you, yes you have covered many trial so you are well aware that once Black suspect is arrested, the only question is regular or extra crispy and this trail was not different. And since you are such an exert on Kern justice tell us was the last man sentenced to death in Kern Black, who was the judge, and was the composition of the jury similar?
If in your opinion those who disagree with the Klan jury have their head in the sand, you have your head in your asset base. But what the hell, it really does not matter if justice was done, Kern justice was done, and that is what matters. As for the other jurors, they do not need to expose themselves the Klavern appointed mommas will speak for them in the usual fashion we have become accustomed to here in white man's paradise. As for you and the Californian, congratulations, you can take as much credit for the travesty as the Jury and the judge, you had him convicted before the bodies were cool and you made no bones bout it in opinion and articles on the case. Oh and since you are such an expert go back to the Jagels molestation cases, how odd that all the white defendants were exonerated and the Black man the Rev Will Thomas exoneration was not eve considered. You are just as racist as the rest Swenson but that OK, you are a Californian family member. posted by
anonymous
on May 29, 2007 at 10:45 PM
Oh and for the guy who say the Judge was not out of line in guaranteeing a conviction by removing the black juror, he sys read the transcript, what a laugh, the transcript is just another "white" paper to justify his actions, but he is the judge and has the power to do whatever his little heart wants to do, and Bush has a history of doing just that with impunity, get clue Sherlock Tracy.
posted by
anonymous
on May 29, 2007 at 10:52 PM
Anon 10:40 I just wonder how many of these jurors you actually know? How in the world can any semi intelligent person believe that the prosecution was able to stack an entire jury with what you refer to as the Klan. What evidence do you have to support such allegations? Your agenda seems to be to incite racial unrest.
posted by
anonymous
on May 29, 2007 at 11:00 PM
and your agenda appears to be to carry out the usual white wash that Kern not only expects but demands. As with was done with Brothers all you had to do was to look at him to see that he was guilty some said, well with the jurors who came forward all you had to do was see them and hear their excuse for voting with their Bible instead of their head to surmise a Klan mentality.
posted by
anonymous
on May 29, 2007 at 11:06 PM
Why are you blaming the judge for remarks that a juror made. If you really believe that the dismissal of the only black juror guaranteed a wrongful conviction then your anger should be with the juror whose behavior caused the action.
posted by
anonymous
on May 29, 2007 at 11:15 PM
I am not blaming the judge, it was after all as a Kern County Judge to see that the Blackman was convicted and he did his job and well. He was only following th popular views of the community including yours and he did not disappoint you, did he? The juror had no choice, he knew that in Bush;s court he was only window dressing and that his fellow white jurors at some point would trump up some charge to save the judges bacon.The black juror knew the deck was stacked, the only thing he did not know, is when it would happen, but than Blacks are stupid, right?
posted by
anonymous
on May 29, 2007 at 11:20 PM
Don't kid yourself, Bush knows the drill and he doesn't disappoint, look up his recored with Black defendants vs White.
posted by
anonymous
on May 29, 2007 at 11:38 PM
The judge did not convict anyone the jury did. The defense had every opportunity to dispute all the evidence. Of course it is difficult to overcome your client taking the stand and getting caught lying. That alone probably had more to do with sealing a conviction than anything else. As for the black juror, you must know him pretty well otherwise you wouldn't be able to tell us what he knew.
posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 12:11 AM
Anon at 10:40, 10:45, 11:00, 11:15, are you a 6 year old typing these posts? Those are some way stupid posts, as far as grammar and proper English. Do you work for CalTrans?
posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 12:30 AM
Gardina and Bryan proved they could not find their way out of a room full of doors. Vincent was doomed the minute he was assigned these two incompetent goofs. And look at the lame defense investigators they used. (Wallace and Mosley). Sala, Torres, or Humphreys would have lost this trial. But they would have at least "looked" like they knew what they were doing.
posted by
theColorNine
on May 30, 2007 at 12:31 AM
To anonymous posted on May 29, 2007 at 10:40 PM : I got some information for you from a very reliable and knowledgeable source within the criminal justice community. In a nutshell, of the 30 people (all men, btw) convicted of murder and sentenced to death by Kern County juries since the death penalty was reinstated: 17 are white 1 is white/hispanic 7 are hispanic 5 are black
As a percentage of the local population, whites and blacks are both overrepresented in the number of defendents sentenced to death, and hispanics and other minorities are underrepresented. If you want details, you'll have to wait. It's late, and I'm going to bed.
posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 05:39 AM
ColorNine...that won't stop this "victim" from complaining. He/She has to have someone to blame, and we can see whom he has chosen.
posted by
steveeswenson
on May 30, 2007 at 06:45 AM
Sagefever,I was here during the molestation cases in the 1980s. Jurors in those cases returned verdicts based on the evidence presented to them. Some of those cases were overturned on grounds other than whether the evidence was sufficient to convict. Some cases never made it to trial because the district attorney's office knew it could not proceed on how the alleged victims had been rendered unbelievable by their treatment in the system. (Half of the original McCuan defendants never went to or got past the prelim stage). Charges against a black defendant in one of those cases (the Rev. Will Thomas) were reduced to a no jail plea bargain. (It is true another black defendant, Leroy Stowe, was convicted and that conviction was later overturned.) These posts are based on racial issues. The molestation cases were predominently against white people and they involved a whole lot of other circumstances, including investigations that were corrupted by counselors and child advocates who went to a Satanic seminar. The children were questioned so much they became unreliable. No charges were filed against dozens of suspects who were named in the investigative reports. I'm not sure who your friend is. I will be happy to look up the circumstances of the case. E-mail me at sswenson@bakersfield.com I will respond later to the last death penalty case. posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 08:47 AM
Folks; let's face it. We're going to be stuck with Ed in office simply because NO ONE in this town has the nads to run against him. T'would be very interesting to see if bigmouth Crawford doesn't take and run for it.
-CQ posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 08:52 AM
The only thing Crawford wants to run is his mouth. And that's a full time job for him. posted by
steveeswenson
on May 30, 2007 at 08:57 AM
To Anonymous 10:40 p.m.Last death penalty case was against Larry Kusuth Hazlett, who is now 59 years old, convicted of murdering 20-year-old Tana Woolley in her Rosamond apartment at the complex where both lived in 1978. He is black. A DNA match of his semen in her room was a critical piece of evidence in the case. He had denied ever being in her room. Four other women testified in the trial Hazlett raped them. One juror said he wanted a reason not to give Hazlett the death penalty, but there was none provided to overcome the prosecution evidence on the brutality of the crime and the pattern Hazlett showed. The prosecutor was Ed Jagels. The judge was Michael Bush. I don't know the makeup of the jury; didn't seem to be an issue in our coverage. This is how criminals get the death penalty. They commit despicable crimes against innocent people. Of the now 26 people sentenced to death in Kern County,five are black, five are Hispanic and 16 are white. posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 09:12 AM
Now that you have dug what benefits you posit on tell us what the composition o these juries was? When was the last white person sentenced to death? You can cite stats over twenty years when whites held a tremendous advantage in numbers , however in recent times when your numbers have diminished , you seem to get a free pass, or is it that you have stopped committing crimes?
Was Hazlett Black, was they judge Bush, and what was the makeup of the jury were the questions, you answered what you want your groupies to hear, but that is normal. As a white man I can understand why you are an apologist for Kern Justice but what the hell maybe you just hit yourself on the head with one of your golf clubs one too many times. If you are so smart don;t you publish the Bush record Minority vs White, even you would be surprised, nah you are part of the system and would find an excuse. posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 09:20 AM
LadySandee- I am all for the death penalty, but out of curiosity, if "JESUS TAUGHT US TO LOVE THE SINNER NOT THE SIN (MURDER)" how can you justify killing someone jesus taught you to love? Shouldn't you want him to live out his days repenting and accepting jesus into his heart so his eternal soul will be forgiven by the "one true judge?" Unfortunately I was not a juror, so I did not get to see the evidence and I was not there during the murder, therefore I cannot say if I think him guilty or not or deserving of the death penalty.
posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 09:29 AM
LadySandee- If "JESUS TAUGHT US TO LOVE THE SINNER NOT THE SIN (MURDER)" then how can you justify killing someone that jesus taught you to love? I'd figure you'd want him to live out the rest of his days repenting and accepting Jesus into his heart to save his eternal soul from the "one true judge?" Guess not. I suppose it will always be a great mystery to me how the religious chose which situations to appply their "rules" and which to change the interpretation for. Unfortunately, I was not present during the murder, nor was I a juror or privy to the evidence, so I have no idea if he is guilty or deserves the death penalty (which I am for). posted by
Rie
on May 30, 2007 at 09:38 AM
Funny- a whole lot of people are brave enough to give their opinion....but not brave enough to even post a screen name. It totally invalidates whatever they say.
posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 09:50 AM
Rie is just another name for anonymous.
posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 09:53 AM
It doesn't invalidate what we say as anon blogs. You just happen to disagree with what is being said because you are pro Brothers and the facts we present don't fit your fantasy. The way I see it, what difference does it make what I call myself on these blogs. Call me Mark if it makes you feel better. Is your real name Rie? Is that a real photo of you? So who's more honest a phony name and picture or an anonymous post?. P.S. If that is your real photo can you kick me your phone number? posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 09:54 AM
To all who have been freaking out over Lady Sandee's comments,
Cut her some slack.. Geez. Have none of you (again, ONLY speaking to those ranting over her comments) spoken out of emotion and not clarified things in your mind BEFORE speaking (especially while being attacked)? Now, having said that, in regard to the latest comments posted at 9:20am 5/30/07, Vincent Brothers won't be executed tomorrow. He will have plenty of time to repent and come to Christ IF that is what he wants to do. It's not like he won't have time. Let's just bring things back to reality, shall we? And can we please get off Lady Sandee's back now? I wonder... would we be so bold to jump her case if she were Lady Sandee, the Muslim? I doubt it. One more thing..This is for Mr. or Ms. Anon. 9:20am: If we're going to speak in Biblical terms now, let's have a look at Romans 13:1-5, shall we? "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has extablished. The authorities that exist have been established by God. (2) Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. (3) For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. (4) For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an angel of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. (5) Therefore it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience." Vincent Brothers had authorities (via the school system and others, ie parents, etc.) praising him while he was a vice principal (some STILL did praise him even after his conviction), but now that his sins have found him out, he is being punished by another section of the system of authorities (the judicial system). He should be afraid, for they do not bear the sword in vain. I think his alleged attempt to escape proves his is afraid. This isn't another bloodthirsty Christian gleefully watching as a man gets sentenced to death, but one who quietly rejoices that JUSTICE and TRUTH still matter in our society. I honest hope, as Eddie Harper and the rest of the living Harper family hopes that Vincent Brothers WILL truly repent of his sins and come to faith in Jesus Christ-the One and only God-Man who came to Earth to pay the penalty once and for all for all mankind's sins so that we could live for eternity with Him. "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails." I Corinthians 13:4-8 (first part of 8 only) posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 10:00 AM
Hey look honey someone posted some biblical mumbo jumbo.
posted by
esdras
on May 30, 2007 at 10:07 AM
One step closer to a warm place he belongs in, "Hell"
posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 10:21 AM
Esdras,
Check your Bible (if you own one, if not, borrow one), because, we ALL belong there: ..."for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God"... Romans 3:23 And.. "For the wages of sin is death," Thankfully, there's MORE: .."but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." Romans 6:23 (split up a bit there...) So you see, unless you're sinless (HA!), you (like me, too) deserved death (hell, separation from God), just like Vincent Brothers. (God doesn't rate sin. There are no categories, so whether you've told a lie or murdered 5 family members, sin is sin and worthy of death: total separation from God.) Thankfully, God made a way for all of us to come to him for forgiveness: His Son, Jesus. That's the good news! :) Round up the kids. There's more mumbo jumbo! Yahoo!!! posted by
sagefever
on May 30, 2007 at 10:24 AM
Steve ~that is what i said~the base their opinion on what is presented~no argument there.I worked with the Grandmother in the McCuan case,she was a nice woman,unfortunately she did go to trial~her life was ruined.I worked with her at a hospital,if you think you've heard ridiculous slander on these blogs,she was tried and fried by some staff~and I agree with you on that also,black vs black crime is hardly racist,but I also understand how many of these folks actually know someone of another race let alone interact with them or have any empathy..I know I would hold that job very seriously ~remember my blog?Some posts here are the things that scare me,granted those things that are said here, would not be uttered in a jury room~but if they are in a persons mind...Again I hope justice is served..I vote for life behind bars.I will email you with the info~Thanks Steve,the poor Mom is beside herself.She is a strong Christian but..well you can imagine.
posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 10:42 AM
Brothers gives a day-by-day account. - posted Tuesday April 24, 2007 at 02:49 p.m., (In April Archives) . Vincent Brothers testifies on Friday July 4, he woke up at about 6:30 a.m. or 7:00 a.m. He spoke with his Mother & sister & neice about 9:00 a.m. He called for his wife on the Cellular telephone. On Friday he had his cellular telephone. He kept the phone with him that weekend. That afternoon, he placed a call on his cellular telephone to his wife. She was fussing with Marquis because he had taken the cordless phone & had put it inside of a shoe. Joanie said she would more than likely be going out of town to visit relatives. In: Brothers Discusses Crash in Ohio. - posted Tuesday April 24, 2007 at 03:41 p.m. After Vincent Brothers left the house on July 6, 2003, (same day of bicycle incident), he saw the rental car in front of Melvin Brother's house. He called the wrong # first calling the principal. He called home to P Street, but nobody would answer.
posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 10:46 AM
"the poor Mom is beside herself" I know the answers to these questions already but I will just present the questions. Where is Brother's father? Did he know his father? Did Brothers have a role model in the home showing him how to be a father? Was he ever a father, (or a husband) to any family he started? Brothers was one of nine children in his household-How many of those children have found themselves on the wrong side of the law?- I won't go further but for the people who claim to "know" someone do you really know their history- where they are from. This is a sad story all around. posted by
sagefever
on May 30, 2007 at 10:52 AM
Oh youwhooo~ that statement was about another case not the Brothers trial..try to read and retain,,,
posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 10:54 AM
my bad
posted by
LadySandee
on May 30, 2007 at 11:05 AM
Thx to all who have "defended" my comments- To Timec--no I am not ashamed to call myself a Christian-nor am I a hypocrite. I can't help but wonder if it were YOUR family members laying 6 ft underground, would you not want justice?? My being a Christian has nothing to do with my feelings on the Death penality, and I'm sure I don't stand alone. IF ( and I say IF ) that is wrong in Gods eyes--well I'm not perfect BUT forgiven. I sin and fall short everyday and will do so as long as I am in the flesh. It seems to me that so many of the comments on this case have turned into personal attacks instead of the the "subject". Re/ The Victims..... posted by
jfrancais
on May 30, 2007 at 11:22 AM
Does justice equal killing (executing) someone else for those that are already dead? I lost my uncle at the hands of another man (a couple blocks from the Harper Murders, actually) but I think jail time and forgiveness will do. I guess the whole idea of how we define justice is open to interpretation.
posted by
LadySandee
on May 30, 2007 at 11:31 AM
A "PS" I was looking at the Poll results for "Should Brothers get death penalty"... So far 562 said yes-109 said no- and 61 said not sure....I would be curious to know how many of the YES votes are us "Hypocrite Christains".......?????????????????? posted by
jfrancais
on May 30, 2007 at 11:35 AM
...so more yes votes confirms your religious beliefs and values?
posted by
randomfactor
on May 30, 2007 at 11:38 AM
LadySandee, I would guess that *MOST* of the "yes" votes are from hypocrite Christians. It's the nature of the (organized) religion.
posted by
antiextremism
on May 30, 2007 at 11:52 AM
And I would have to say that Random is invoking Jesus just to demonstrate that most Christians hardly follow Christ's teachings. That should be pretty obvious. When you purport to be a Christian, you must make sure that the only quote you give is actually by Him, and not by his less forgiving Father. Although I do think Jehovah has mellowed with time, that usually happens after you have a kid. Unless you're a sociopath like Vincent Brothers. posted by
LadySandee
on May 30, 2007 at 11:54 AM
To jfrancais--I am sorry about your uncle..and yes defining justice is open to interpretation. We are many people with different opinions and interpretations. When innocent childern are killed , it , ( in my simple opinion ) is much more a horrendous act. NOT that any murder isn't horrendous in itself. And I'll be honest--if I lost a child so viciously.. well...being human who knows (?)...And if that statement makes me a hypocrite--so be it..
posted by
jfrancais
on May 30, 2007 at 11:55 AM
Random- Are you saying that popular opinion as well as faith play a part in organized religion? posted by
randomfactor
on May 30, 2007 at 11:57 AM
I'm saying that far too few Christians have the guts to follow His example. Organized Christianity has largely reduced "morality" to "what goes where in sex."
posted by
LadySandee
on May 30, 2007 at 11:59 AM
Well Random-- I hate to disappoint you BUT I am NOT in an "organized religion"........ I am but a sinner SAVED by the grace and Mercy of God. posted by
Rie
on May 30, 2007 at 12:01 PM
To anonymous- er one of you...yep, real picture and real name...actually maRIE but thats just silly stuff. I will never believe he could do this- and if you knew him, you wouldnt either-He was and is a calm, rational...but definitely human person. I hope this whole thing gets worked out.Now...I've said my piece and counted to 3...over and out on this topic.As for the phone number? sure...it's 833-975
posted by
anonymous
on May 30, 2007 at 12:02 PM
The term "bring to justice" in Webster's dictionary states, "to cause (a wrongdoer) to be tried in court and duly punished". That's the justice I was referring to.
Certain crimes in the state of California carry a death penalty if one is convicted of committing them. Vincent Brothers has been convicted of 5 of them. In the opinion of 12 jurors, he deserves that sentence. It's not just one person's opinion and it's not as if they just decided on a whim that he should get this. He EARNED it. Nobody put him in that position. He got there by himself. Regarding your uncle, I am sorry for your loss.. I can't begin to know what you and your family have gone through. Perhaps what we all think of "justice" is open for interpretation. Here's the deal, though, in California at least, the interpretation is left for the courts to decide and one of our courts decided that death would be the proper justice for Vincent Brothers' crimes. I still believe that there are simply some crimes that mandate that we not allow such a person to continue to live on this planet after what they've committed against another human being-much less five human beings. Although prison is by no means a playground, there are far too many benefits to prisoners when compared to their deceased victims: They breathe. Their victims don't. They can laugh. Their victims can't. They can have visitors. Their victims' families can never see their loved ones again (apart from pictures and videos) this side of Heaven. They may marry and possibly have children again (even while behind bars!). Their victims can't. They get their meals, healthcare, education, etc. paid for by the government. Their victims' families PAY for all of this through their taxes. The list goes on.. This kind of justice (life without parole) just doesn't seem very "just" to the victims' families when you look at it this way, does it? Any way one looks at this situation, it is terribly unfortunate. That's why we have laws against murder. It's obviously NOT good. It's destructive and its ramifications are immense. I mean, even Vincent Brothers' family (the part still living) is suffering because of this. He chose very poorly to say the least. His actions have destroyed two families; both his own. One can only pray that he will take a long, hard look at himself and realize his desperate need for Jesus. |
