Did Aileen Wuornos deserve to be executed?

Cainkane1

Philosopher
Cainkane1
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
9,011
Location
The great American southeast
Aileen Wournos was executed by lethal injection for murdering several men who picked her up hitchhiking. She robbed them and shot them to death.

Ok investigating into her past reveals a life filled with abuse both sexual, physical and mental. Was she mentally competant to even stand trial?

I personally feel she should have been sentenced to life in a mental hospital.
 
Did Aileen Wuornos deserve to be executed?
Click to expand...
Yes. Too many black men are executed today. We need to execute some white women to balance things out.

Ok, sorry, couldn't resist.

Of course, its possible that someone could say she didn't deserve to be executed simply because they oppose the death penalty. However, I'm going to assume that you're saying "did she deserve to be executed, as much as any other serial killer, etc."
Cainkane1 said:
Ok investigating into her past reveals a life filled with abuse both sexual, physical and mental. Was she mentally competant to even stand trial?

I personally feel she should have been sentenced to life in a mental hospital.
Click to expand...

Many serial killers are often the victim of poor upbringing. Should we automatically assume that all serial killers be sentenced to mental hosptitals instead of jail/execution?

I am sure that her past abuse was a factor in her committing those crimes and she wouldn't have done what she did if she had a decent childhood. But the decision to carry on was still hers to make. Other people have gone through similar abuse and have NOT decided to kill people.

By the rules of law, if she knew what she was doing "was wrong", then she was competent to stand trial/be executed. The only ones who would be spared (or committed to mental hospitals) are the ones who clearly do have a medical situation (hearing voices, etc) which makes them unable to understand that taking a life is wrong.
 
No, there is no way she was truly competent to stand trial, in my opinion. A simple video search turns up clips where she is obviously delusional:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFBcjII3QAE

The bottom line is that the state authorities were eager to get it over with, and her compliance with that desire is what allowed it to happen.

By the rules of law, if she knew what she was doing "was wrong", then she was competent to stand trial/be executed. The only ones who would be spared (or committed to mental hospitals) are the ones who clearly do have a medical situation (hearing voices, etc) which makes them unable to understand that taking a life is wrong.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that it is quite that simple.
 
Competency to stand trial is a pretty low bar. As a general rule, you need to be able to understand the proceedings and assist counsel. Being mentally ill, being delusional, being crazy - these do not necessarily mean incompetency to stand trial.


As to the topic - I'm against the death penalty, so I'd say no.
 
Death penalty do not make sense to me. "You kill other people and it is forbidden so we will KILL YOU". Especially in the US you are supposed not to have cruel and unusual punishment, and as far I heard a study, they found out many such injection execution were actually botched and the "victim" wasn't unconscious...

PS: isn't that hear ! Hear ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear,_hear
 
Almo said:
No.

But I don't think anyone deserves execution. The Death Penalty is wrong, period.
Click to expand...
I too think death penalty is totally wrong, for a lot of reasons. But not for the reason that no one at all ever deserves it. I actually think that is one of the weaker arguments against it.
 
I dream of a day when everyone realizes the phrase is "Hear, hear!". As in "Hear what this person is saying!"

"Here, here" makes no sense, unless you're calling your pet dog.
 
The death penalty might deter, but that is controversial and, in any case, more swift and certain punishment would be a greater deterrent than the few who are executed per year.

However, the death penalty might have a value. The value -- again, if there is any -- is that some acts are so horrific that we, as a society, think that nothing less than death would be fitting punishment, that only in this way can we express our disgust and horror of the enormity of the crime.

This is why, for instance, torturing one's victims, raping them, killing the helpless (children, old people), or killing a person designated by society as a keeper of the law (police officers) is considered reason for the death penalty.

Whether this is worth the risk of wrongful execution is another issue. I don't think so. I think the risk is not worth the value. But the assumption that capital punishment is ipso facto wrong -- as opposed to being too risky -- is not true in my view.

As for Ailleen Wournos, I too would tend -- on the whole -- to go with "do not execute" (although she herself apparently wanted to be executed, and perhaps it was more humane, in her specific case, than life in prison). It seems she was truly delusional, from what I know about her case.
 
Aepervius said:
Death penalty do not make sense to me. "You kill other people and it is forbidden so we will KILL YOU".
Click to expand...
I think that argument is flawed...

After all, we take kidnappers and confine them to small rooms for their incarceration. We sometimes take 'thieves' who have tolen money and issue fines against them, taking their money.

If you're going to argue that the death penalty is wrong because it should be wrong for the government to do anything that a private citizen couldn't do, then you'd have to eliminate all sorts of 'punishments'.

(That doesn't necessarily mean that the death penalty is a good thing to have; just that that particular argument is false.)
Especially in the US you are supposed not to have cruel and unusual punishment, and as far I heard a study, they found out many such injection execution were actually botched and the "victim" wasn't unconscious...
Click to expand...

This isn't so much an argument against the death penalty itself, but an argument against the methods or controls used when performing the death penalty.
 
Almo said:
No.

But I don't think anyone deserves execution. The Death Penalty is wrong, period.
Click to expand...

There are some of us who believe that there are individuals who's actions are so horrific, so barbaric, and so contrary to what we would regard as civilized, that those people have forfet their right to live.

However, that doesn't necessarily mean that we support should the death penalty; the chance of executing an innocent man is a risk that is probably too great to justify the death penalty.
 
Aileen Wournos was put on trial for murdering seven men.

She was then convicted for 6 out of 7 of those murders.

The maximum penalty for the crime of murder in Florida is death by lethal injection.

She received the maximum penalty.

Now if we are going to mitigate such cases based upon the criminal's childhood experiences of being abused and abandoned, then we must also examine the criminal's past criminal behavior as well.


Aileen Wuornos' criminal record includes:

  • Armed Robbery
  • Assault
  • Disorderly Conduct
  • Disturbing the Peace
  • Drunk-Driving / DUI
  • Failure to Appear in Court
  • Grand Theft – Automobile
  • Illegal Discharge of a Firearm
  • Illegal Discharge of a Firearm from a Moving Vehicle
  • Illegal Possession of a Firearm
  • Obstruction by False Information
  • Passing Forged Checks
  • Possession of a Concealed Firearm
  • Resisting arrest
Clearly she had contempt for legal authority and indifference to the welfare and safety of others. She was found mentally competent to stand trial, so she was considered "legally sane." She knew what she did and she knew that it was wrong.

But she chose to do it anyway.

Justice was served with her execution.


Next case?
 
Last edited:
Fnord said:
Aileen Wournos was put on trial for murdering seven men.

She was then convicted for 6 out of 7 of those murders.

The maximum penalty for the crime of murder in Florida is death by lethal injection.

She received the maximum penalty.

Justice was served with her execution.


Next case?
Click to expand...

I fully agree with Fnord. Legally she fulfilled all the requirements (and then some) to meet her fate. Morally, it depends on your ethical content. Politically, get out there and fight for what you want.
 
I have to wonder if some of the sympathy she receives is simply because she's a woman. I find it hard to imagine a man convicted of those same crimes would garner similar concerns because of a poor upbringing.
 
No, I've seen that about men as well.

While I am against the death penalty, I'm not sure a bad background is grounds for appeal. I've seen too many people with truly horrific backgrounds who did not rape, murder, and do other heinous acts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom