Is it just me, or is this going to be a really expensive incarceration?

From KELOland.com:
Wednesday, the same jury that found Daphne Wright guilty of murder, spared her life. It took eight hours of deliberation for the jury to come to the decision which was passed down at 8:30 Wednesday night.

Wright will have to spend the rest of her life in prison for the kidnapping, murder, and dismemberment of Darlene VanderGiesen.
So they gave her life in prison based on the information they had at hand. To me, It brings up a few issues of how laws are going to apply for accommodations at the state prison for people with disabilities.

Is passing notes sufficient? Or is our state corrections budget going to have to fund multiple interpreters in the women's prison? Or would it be cheaper to incarcerate her in another state where they've already made such considerations?

She might be paying for her heinous crimes, but with a life sentence, the taxpayers are going to be paying for them for a long, long time.

Comments

Anonymous said…
well, what would you have the state do?
It really frosts me to see the reaction from some people who want to get "tough" on crime, and then whine and complain when the bill comes due.
The easiest thing in the world is for a politician to huff and puff and tell his constituents how tough on crime he can be...just to get elected.
Anything less, and he is accused of "coddling criminals".
Well, wake up: If you choose to get tough on crime, then be prepared to pay the bill. And that means paying for health care, etc.
Anonymous said…
Great idea, Pat. Let's wax her just to save some money.
Anonymous said…
No, let's execute her for her crime. Why should the taxpayers suffer because of what she did? Let's send the bill to the jury.
Anonymous said…
My taxes, my taxes, my taxes, my taxes, my taxes. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me.

Is anyone tired of the crybaby South Dakotans whose sole mission is to complain about how high taxes are?

I mean, for crying out loud, Powers. You have seven kids - which means you'll usher them throgh public school without paying a dime more in taxes than someone who has one kid, or doesn't have any kids at all.

You commute from Pierre to Brookings, which means you use our roads more than the average person.

And, you contribute to the goverment bureaucracy more than anyone I know with your "defend Rounds at all costs" mentality.

Ever point the finger at yourself and say, "I don't have a right to complain, because I'm gaming the system."
jack said…
It is well established that the cost to the state of sentencing someone to death is far more than the cost of imprisoning them for life. The cost of the appeals alone exceeds what it costs to keep a prisoner locked up for life.

A 1993 Duke University study showed that it cost North Carolina $2.16 million per execution more than it would have cost to lock up the criminal for life. A 1995 study in Texas showed the average cost to the state to appeal a death penalty case to be $2,316,655. In Florida, it was shown to be $3.18 million. And in this case, as PP points out, there would be extra costs for interpreters for both her court appointed counsel and in the courtroom.

Regardless as to whether you think the death penalty is just, to argue that it's cheaper to apply the death penalty is not based on the facts.
Anonymous said…
I thought Rounds decided that we can't execute anyone because, in his opinion, our law on executions was unconstitutional (or at least contrary to the Pope's teachings...)

So I guess it only would have worked if he the date of execution was after Rounds left office... or if Pope Benedict changed his mind about whether or not the death penalty is acceptable
Anonymous said…
10:18 - PP only commutes in his gas hog when he can't get that massively subsidized $29 dollar flight he likes to giggle about
Anonymous said…
PP,

Have you discussed this issue with your Priest? I guess that would make you a cafetiera Catholic. I have been told on several occasions that I am not a REAL Catholic because I don't agree with the church 100 percent of the time. I guess you are not a REAL Catholic either.
Anonymous said…
anon 10:13am wrote:
"No, let's execute her for her crime. Why should the taxpayers suffer because of what she did?"

Because that's what the jury said should happen.

I love how you think you can pick and choose when someone should die, totally ignoring our justice system.

Meanwhile, I'm certain you're rabidly pro-life.

What a joke.
PP said…
10:18, Have you ever considered I might pay more in certain taxes because my family consume more of certain things, such as food. Or gas, because I have to have a suburban to ferry my loved ones, as opposed to a toyota corolla.

Regardless, I complain about taxes because in many cases they are high.

In my life, I've often had a business on the side to help pay for my family's expenses. And I can tell you from bitter experience that the self employed get absolutely raped at tax time.

When 1/3 to 1/2 of what you made from your self employed business goes to the taxman, you take notice.

You work, and you scrape, and you invest your blood and sweat into something to get ahead, and here's the hand of government coming to knock you half-ways back for your effort.

I dare you to bring that "crybaby South Dakotans whose sole mission is to complain about how high taxes are" attitude into a small business and tell the owner how they can't object to how their tax money is spent.

(Especially at this time of the year.)
Anonymous said…
Yeah, you pay more taxes, sure - because you consume more food and more gas. Sales and use tax, right.

In the case of school taxes, I don't have any kids in school, but I'll bet I pay more than you do - because I live in a higher growth area where property valuations are growing very fast.

The other day you griped about Jerstad's stance on repealing sales tax on food, saying that two people who consume equal amounts of food should pay the same taxes, regardless of what they can afford.

Well, here you're saying, even though you get far more "goods" from the school system, you should pay just as much as someone who doesn't get any "goods" from the school system.

You seem to be arguing in a cirle.

Way to shift the debate to more crybaby mentality, by the way, by bringing in your small business argument.

I have a question, though.

So, you're saying business taxes are high. I thought our business taxes were low - that's what Rounds keeps cheering. We keep getting ranked as a great place to do business because the taxes are so low, right?

I wonder.
Anonymous said…
And is this why you also defend tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent? Who pays that bill, Pat?

Oh, yeah! It's you. The little business guy who pays half his income in taxes. You're helping the fat cats buy their new Lexxus with the tax cut dividends. Keep voting Republican, Pat, and keep shoveling out your money to keep the fat cats riding in style!
Anonymous said…
As a former state employee who spent a year working at the SDWP I am laughing my ass off. Wright is going to have a wonderful life there, probably better than she did on the outside. She will be free to walk the grounds, join committees, attend school, social activites and church, maybe even get her own office, etc.... (lifers are walking all over SDWP and don't you doubt it). The prisoners have more rights than the employees there and the sympathetic ear of the wishy washy administration. Is this going to be an expensive incarceration???---You bet!
Anonymous said…
If the jury couldn't justify the death penalty for this heinous crime, then I guess we are stuck with supporting Ms. Wright for the rest of her life. But I don't see where that entitles her to any more benefits than any of the other people in jail. She can write and she can read I assume. Give her a pencil and paper. Teach her to read lips and then talk real slow to her so she can understand. Good grief, other than being deaf, she has no other disabilities, does she? Why should she get any extra privileges or interpreters etc? And no, I'm not making light of people with disabilities, but deafness does not equate to paraplegia or blindness in requiring special accomodations. If it is a little inconvenient for her, then so be it; at least she is alive, breathing, and in one piece, which is more than can be said for her victim.
Anonymous said…
I would like to call all of your attention to the story in today's Argus Leader.

Pay particular attention to what the victim's parents said. They are at "peace".

http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070419/NEWS/704190339

For those of you who are worried about the expense to the taxpayers, I assure you that we would still be paying the cost of incarcerating her for years plus the cost of appeals.

We do live in the United States of America and everybody has a right to due process. We ought to believe that the punishment should fit the crime. The jury believed that life in prision was the appropriate punishment. This is the greatest country in the world and these are the rules we live by.

For those of you who think we should just execute everybody, why don't you move to a country with an oppressive dictator. Perhaps you would prefer to live by those rules.
Anonymous said…
The Corrections Department should give Wright a good 25 years of hard labor.

Send her with a work detail out to the hills to thin out the trees and help with the pine beetle problem. We know she can use a chainsaw. Won't need to buy her any earplugs to use with the chainsaw either. And put her on the men's crew. That's real punishment!
Anonymous said…
Conservatives are really interesting people.
Just last week many conservatives were foaming at the mouth about a prosecutor in North Carolina who abused his office in the Duke Rape Case. The points being made is that the rule of law wasn't followed and the boys were denied due process. In this case due process was followed, the accused had her day in court, was judged by a jury of her peers and that jury followed the rule of law and sentenced her to life in prison.
I would think that the conservatives would be happy about the result. Or do you just like following the rule of law when the accused look like you.
greatplains said…
"And I can tell you from bitter experience that the self employed get absolutely raped at tax time."

And I can tell you from bitter experience that paying high taxes is absolutely no comparison to being raped. For God’s sake, PP, find another analogy. This one is horrendous.
Anonymous said…
2:41. From time to time it becmes painfully obvious why PP would never require people to use their own names on his blog. This person is one sick puppy, deeply in need of therapy. Obviously, PP doesn't want to assume the responsibility.
Anonymous said…
I have NOT read all the comments BUT, i have to comment on schools and people being taxed.
Let's see are those who say they have no children it would be better to not educate them. Have uneducated people running around, no doctors' to care for you and other people, etc? Then look at how many jails and prisons we will have that all will be paying for. Besides all those who are uneducated we will be paying for. They won't be able to read a box at some fast food place to know the difference between hambers and fries alone how to cook and serve them.
Anonymous said…
Those "fat cat's" as you call them pay most of the taxes anyway. Yep, they have deductions just like any other business.

Sure the tax code is a mess and could be better I agree. Some of those tax cuts help employers have employees just like you, if you happen to work.

Yep, Small Businesses need the same deductions to create the very businesses that help provide the services I feel safe to say we all use in one form or another.

Just a few thougths.
PP said…
2:41 - I'm dumping that because you're trying to intimate that our state's prison system and guards would actually do something like that.

They get paid little for a thankless job, and that's completely inappropriate.
Anonymous said…
Hi very decent of you, PP. Leaving the rest of the back-story information out to dry, by the way. Such is the nature of your gutlles,clannish, fascist blog. You reap what you sow, you jack-booted nazi little pricks.
Anonymous said…
If you don't want high grocery bills and taxes on those groceries, or gas don't have a herd of kids.

Isn't that the conservative personal responsibility mantra?

If you can't afford them, don't have them and stop whining about it.
Anonymous said…
This is what happens when PP gropes wildly for something to post (i.e. complain) about, doesn't think it through very well, and then whiffs on a couple of the slams.

I honestly think the majority of the self-inflicted PP-bashing that seems so prevalent these days is delivered by Republicans. Pat just likes to think he's the target of a vast left-wing conspiracy.

Sheesh. For somebody SO much on the public dole some people might think PP could be viewed as just a wee bit hypocritical.
PP said…
Somehow, the criticism isn't very stinging coming from an anonymous computer refurbisher/disposer.
Anonymous said…
To ALL POSTERS:

I do not believe that PP said she should have been put to death.
I believe you are reading something into his caption and post that isn't there. Maybe, just maybe, he had something else in mind.
People should never assume. Did any of you happen to ask this of PP?
I do note that it did get most of you worked up.
Anonymous said…
9:06

You miss the purpose most people visit this blog. It's to mock PP, or to laugh at PP being mocked. Doesn't matter what his point is.
Anonymous said…
Well, I'm not here to mock PP. Now and then he makes sense. Sometimes he is so Republican-correct he drifts off the deep end however.

A single murder case, especially one with gruesome details, is not a good basis for a general policy.

Execution allows no room for error. It is irreversible. Courts, lawyers, judges, juries, make mistakes. Society gains nothing from a death penalty that can't be obtained with a life sentence.

I don't understand conservatives who rant and rave about big brother government and then want to give that same government life and death powers and the right to intrude on deeply personal matters.

Thomas Sowell who I don't usually agree a bit with, happens to be a Black who sees the problem that the Duke prosecution has for everybody black, white, yellow, whatever. Too much power in the hands of prosecutors can easily drift into the area of harassment under color of authority. That is a threat to Blacks, Whites and the poor of any color or religion.

It really makes more sense for Blacks and Whites to be outraged about the Duke prosecution than it does to feign shock and alarm about one idiot Imus saying stupid things also said by foul-mouthed Black rappers.

Oh well, back to your usually scheduled pogram.
Anonymous said…
This is a perfect example of why liberals are a waste of air. They would scream wildly to overturn the death penalty, when now this trial once again proves that we really don't have one in SD. If ever someone deserved it, Wright did, but no....just like pp said, the taxpayers will feed her forever.
Anonymous said…
Says 9:16, as he takes a moment away from surfing the amputee porn websites.
Anonymous said…
2:41 here. You have truly crossed the line of political correctness in removing that post, PP. You know you'd be dishing out the attaboys if some guard shot an escaped prisoner.
Anonymous said…
11:12 p I believe you are out of line.

Those inmates who are serious threats DO NOT participate in outdoor activities and to said they do is off the wall.

Trusttees are the only ones allowed from what I have known. THen they also have to prove they can be trusted.

Maybe some fact checking would be in order.
Anonymous said…
9:16 and 10:13

Getting a life would be something to consider for yourself or your selfs.
Anonymous said…
You'd better get YOUR facts straight---Lifers do get outdoor recreation on the grounds. Why do they come in all hot and sweaty and sunburned then? Have you seen it with your own eyes? I have, I've been there. Don't fool yourself into thinking any different. As for trustworthy trustees? How do you think the illegal contraband is smuggled in?
Anonymous said…
5:22, i was talking about those who are in prison being allowed to work out in society = trustees.
I know those in the "pen" get to go outdoors whithin a confined space even the rapist, those who murder, and etc, those DO NOT = trustees.
Anonymous said…
For those people who claim that it is so expensive to carry out the death sentence because of the appeals tend to neglect to realize one important detail. Lifers are also appealing their decisions all the time. It is terribly expensive in either case. The only winners in either situation are the defense attorneys.

Popular posts from this blog

Breaking News: After the television commercial salvo fired at them, Vote Yes For Life Fires back.

Heidepreim: Republicans are the party of hate

The Day in politics - October 24th