home

NY 's Highest Court Says No Death for Wendy's Killer

New York's highest appellate court today upheld a lower court's tossing of the death penalty for John Taylor, the killer of five at a Wendy's restaurant in 2000.

The 4-3 ruling [pdf] by the state’s highest court reinforces its ruling in 2004 that a central provision of the state’s capital punishment law violates the state constitution. It would take action by the Legislature to bring back the death penalty, but Assembly Democrats have shown little inclination to do so.

In 2004, the high court ruled that an instruction judges were legally required to make to jurors in capital cases was unconstitutional. A judge was required to tell jurors that if they could not choose unanimously between a sentence of death and one of life without parole, he or she would impose a sentence that would make the defendant eligible for parole after 20 to 25 years.

Taylor is the last of New York's death row inmates. The state does not now have a death penalty law and it's unlikely the legislature will pass one.

< Judiciary Dems Want Mukasey to Condemn Waterboarding | Move On Joins The FISA Bandwagon >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Phew (3.50 / 2) (#1)
    by HeadScratcher on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 03:18:52 PM EST
    I feel a lot better today knowing that a mass murderer will not be put to death for something he voluntarily decided to do. I hope he has a very productive and worthy life behind bars. Who knows? Maybe one day his sentence will be commuted and he can join the outside world to live his life as he wishes.

    Next time (2.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 03:38:19 PM EST

    If this hair ball goes on to kill again, we can thank the wisdom of the court.

    Stare Decisis affirmed but has justice been done? (none / 0) (#2)
    by Aaron on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 03:30:35 PM EST
    I think I understand the legal principle of stare decisis (to stand by that which is decided) which comes into play in this case, making the decision proper.  But let's not forget that a man who cold-bloodedly executed a number of helpless human beings, slaughtered them like animals without mercy, has himself escaped justice, to some degree.  For if anyone deserves execution, it is cold-blooded murderers such as these.


    Between this decision (none / 0) (#4)
    by scribe on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 04:02:59 PM EST
    and the decision of the Sixth Circuit today to declare 18 USC 2257 facially unconstitutional (warning - 27 page .pdf), I'm feeling a little better about the current state of the justice system in this country.  Two sets of appellate judges actually following precedent without strain, sophistry or partisanship, to reach sensible decisions.

    So, in that regard, I'm sure the wingers will go on another rampage to further f*ck things up.

    Oh, and as to the prior commenters - just because New York can't kill this particular defendant, doesn't mean he's likely to be on a street soon, or even ever.  Ask David Berkowitz- he's still in 30 years after the summer of Sam, and Robert Chambers, already having done 15 years behind bars and likely to spend the rest of his days there, if today's news reports are to be believed.

    Scribe wrote: (none / 0) (#5)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 05:48:36 PM EST
    Ask David Berkowitz- he's still in 30 years after the summer of Sam, and Robert Chambers, already having done 15 years behind bars and likely to spend the rest of his days there, if today's news reports are to be believed.

    Can you tell me how to contact the victims??

    I would like to get their opinion. Especially about how it felt to be slaughtered....

    That is if you and the judges don't mind.

    Wouldn't want to intercede in a love-in.


    Parent

    BS (none / 0) (#6)
    by squeaky on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 09:11:25 PM EST
    Can you tell me how to contact the victims??

    Nice try, ppj. We are all puling out our handkerchiefs because of your hijack non sequitur.

    Parent

    If you want to (none / 0) (#7)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 09:24:17 AM EST
    show sympathy for he killers and not the victims, be my guest.

    Parent
    Would the Chambers example (none / 0) (#8)
    by Deconstructionist on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 09:42:18 AM EST
     not be particularly poorly suited in this context? Rule number 1: think before you write.

     Chambers is an example of a person who spent "only" 15 years behind bars for a murder, was released and then committed more crimes.

      That would seem  entirely to contradict the point you seem to think you were making and would seem to support the arguments of the people you are attempting to undercut.

      I really don't think death penalty opponents need your brand of "help" in these arguments.

    Parent

    Law and Order (none / 0) (#9)
    by eric on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 02:11:32 PM EST
    So are they going to stop threatening people with "the needle" on Law & Order now?

    I remember when they made the change to reflect the change the other way.