Darlie Routier - Murdering Mom on Death Row

[Henrik - Sweden]

That's almost exactly my point of view GOB.

For me personally it would also feel easier to distribute harsh punishment if I could feel that society had done everything it possibly could. If someone despite of that chooses a path of criminal actions and harassments against other that finally ends up in murder: Then (s)he has to pay the price for that. The only difference between us I think is that I'm still unwilling to let society kill in such a way even though I sometimes can feel that the offender doesn't deserve to live (What else could a normal person feel in a case like that of Mark Schwab f.e?)

I believe that if you look at the family background for many of this DR inmates you would find a pattern of violence and abuse that goes back for generations. This i also what I had in mind when I talked about breaking the evil circle.

On of my favourite novels is a chronicle of a couple of families in Stockholm through more than 100 years. Most of them are poor but still caring, loving, law-abiding persons who work hard for their daily bread and fosters new generations that continues in the same way. But one family is different. It starts with a young orphan boy who at an early age has to work as a chimney sweap where he is harassed and abused by the older men. He is a weak and scared person who later in life tries to hide and handle that by drinking and harassing new, and younger sweapers. Of course his own family has to live under the harshest of conditions. Despite of this fact most of his children manage to create themselves better lives. But one of the daughters does not completely and so it continues until that day the sweap's great grandson commits an involuntarily manslaughter by killing a young girl while trying to escape the police in a stolen vehicle with alcohol in his blood. But despite this tragic events the message is positive: In every generation most were saved due to help from other relatives, organizations and - in later years - from the society. The author wasn't naive: He knew that probably even with our best effort we can't save 100%; he wrote other books with a similar theme. But that must not stop us from try.

[iamjumbo]

undoubtedly, there are those who are so physically abused that they suffer physiological trauma that results in psychological abnormalities.  of course, what you are describing is legal insanity.  an individual who truly does not comprehend that what they are doing is wrong, is not punished for it.
however, absent the physiological symptoms, the abuse does not in any way mitigate criminal conduct.  with no physical reason for the abherration, it is simply the choice of the individual to be anti social.  the same goes for psychopathy.  it is the individual's decision to behave as such, and there is no environmental cause.

 "of course, what you are describing is legal insanity."

No that was not what I was describing in this post.  

What I was describing is what the legal and psychological advocates use for the mitigating circumstances in cases where they think the penalties are too harsh, such as for the death penalty.

What the experts are describing is the damage to the person's brain.  They are saying that during childhood, this person was so damaged from the physical abuse, that the prefrontal lobes of their brains do not work properly.  Meaning they have lost their physical and mental ability to properly process mental functions that allow their brains to say this is wrong or this is right and I should not do this.  The  portion of their brain that holds their conscience is damaged. They do not process right and wrong as you and I do. That function in them is short circuited if you please.   They are not physically nor mentally able to feel the emotion that you or I would if we hurt or maimed someone.  That does not make them mentally challenged!  I am not saying that. That's a whole other set of issues.

But coupled with the short circuit in their brain's conscience and brutal physical and mental abuse they endured as a child, they become a danger to society.  This is why the advocates plead mitigating circumstances for these murderers.

I am just saying, there are reasons for some of them to be this way.  Do I feel they should totally excused for the crimes they committed?  No, I do not.

Am I saying they should not be executed for their crimes?  No, I did not say that.  Those that are extremently violent and who are a continuing danger to society should be put down.

What I was trying to say, is that children who are in violent homes should be removed for their safety and to prevent this from happening to them.  We who work in the field of domestic violence have long known that children who grow up in violent homes have a bigger propensity to become violent, to become criminals, to wind up in jail, or prison, or become a suicide victim. Or if they are female to learn the role of the victim.

Where to put the abused children is another whole issue that has to be dealt with.  Sometimes the foster homes or the relative's homes they are placed in are just as bad or worse than the environment they came from.

On my soapbox:  Either we as a society began to change this trend towards a more and more violent society, where we tolerate and excuse those who are doing the abusing, or we just lay down and let them run over us.  It is up to us to say, NO, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.  WE HAVE ZERO TOLERANCE FOR ABUSE! And make it stick in courts, and the justice system.   But if society wants to continue making criminals at the pace they are going, soon we will be soon be outnumbered by the violent criminal element.

my point was that, the actual inability to know the difference between right and wrong IS legal insanity.  that is the basis for the mcnaughton rule, which should be the only release from culpability for a crime.
as far as the abused women, i have filed over three hundred restraining orders.  at one time years ago, a quarter of all the restraining orders on file had been done by me.  out of that three hundred, over half were back with the punk within three months.  about half of those were back within a month.  i actually had two that were back by the time i got home from filing the papers. 
i have had to go into a house, leaving the gun in the trunk, to make sure the girl was safe while she got her stuff.  half of those were back with the punk within six months.
i know that you will not agree, but, from personal experience, i had to come to the conclusion that, while it is certainly not true in a majority of cases, there are simply women who can't stand to not be abused. 
half of those that do stay gone, pick up with another piece of shyt instead of finding a real man, over, and over, and over.  in one case, i had to get up at three am to drive forty-five miles because the girl was afraid the guy was going to show up.  i sat there for nine hours making sure that he didn't.  a week later, she moved back in with him.
i still play white knight far too often, but the luster is gone from the sword.  it is, for all intents and purposes, always going to be a lost cause

[Granny B]

my point was that, the actual inability to know the difference between right and wrong IS legal insanity.  that is the basis for the mcnaughton rule, which should be the only release from culpability for a crime.
as far as the abused women, i have filed over three hundred restraining orders.  at one time years ago, a quarter of all the restraining orders on file had been done by me.  out of that three hundred, over half were back with the punk within three months.  about half of those were back within a month.  i actually had two that were back by the time i got home from filing the papers. 
i have had to go into a house, leaving the gun in the trunk, to make sure the girl was safe while she got her stuff.  half of those were back with the punk within six months.
i know that you will not agree, but, from personal experience, i had to come to the conclusion that, while it is certainly not true in a majority of cases, there are simply women who can't stand to not be abused. 
half of those that do stay gone, pick up with another piece of shyt instead of finding a real man, over, and over, and over.  in one case, i had to get up at three am to drive forty-five miles because the girl was afraid the guy was going to show up.  i sat there for nine hours making sure that he didn't.  a week later, she moved back in with him.
i still play white knight far too often, but the luster is gone from the sword.  it is, for all intents and purposes, always going to be a lost cause

Iamjumbo, I hear your frustration and sympathize with you on the point of the women going back to the abuser.  I have actually discussed those points elsewhere on this website, explaining why they do so in the topic Domestic Violence, in reply # 7, Why She Stays.  So there is no need for me to repeat any of that post when you can read the reasons there.

We in this field also share the frustrations of helping them get a protective order only to have them back in the abuser's home within days, or standing in front of a judge crying, begging them to void the order.  Again, part of that explanation is in the section Why She Stays. 

I have been operating  a shelter for abused women for 11 years and have worked at this for the past 12 years.  I hear the same things from judges, District Attorneys, ADAs, police officers, deputies, the Sheriff and from the public all this time.  The only thing I can tell you is to refer the woman to the closest domestic violence agency and shelter.  Let them deal with her.  They have a better chance of helping her get free from the abuse than you do, and it will save you hours and days of aggravation and frustration.  They are experienced at telling her the things she needs to hear to help her break free if anyone can.  But even we know that a woman goes back an average of 5 to 7 times before she leaves for good.  All we can do is pave the way for her and let her know we will still be there each she leaves and will still be there to help her that one last time she decides to leave for good.

This can be a dangerous business when dealing with violent abusers.  I had a close call 2 years with one chasing me and his victim 85 MPH down a rural country road, after waiting for an hour and a half for the deputies to show up and help.  This profession is not for the faint of heart or the weak willed, believe me.   That one time I got in trouble I failed my own rules.  I did not call the deputies first and wait on them to meet us there.  I believed the woman when she said she was sure he went to work that day.  He didn't go to work and that's how I put us both in danger.  But for the most part we follow the rules and keep ourselves safe.  And I sure follow it to the letter now.

And as to going to her home to help her retrieve her belongings, we always have several police officers standing by while she does it.  And I stay out of her house, if the abuser is home, even with officers there.  I will not go in at all.

So my unsolicited advice to you, Iamjumbo is to turn it over to the professionals in this field, in the future, and let them handle the situation.