I think they put it a little more delicately here.
The Sydney Australia newspaper "The Sydney Morning Herald" doesn't mince many words in writing about the lurid Sioux Falls murder trial of Daphne White. Here's the headline:
Deaf black lesbian accused of chainsaw murderRead it all here. Well...... That kind of sums it up, doesn't it? (I think they put it a little more delicately in S. Falls media.)
Comments
I believe that you read it wrong!
To quote paper:
"The trial in South Dakota of a deaf, black lesbian accused of murdering a rival and dismembering her with a chainsaw has shocked the rural midwestern US state."
The word "and" is there. So i read it as murder then dismembered.
I say you are not correct.
"“I don’t think the dismemberment has been proven relevant to any element of the crime,” larson says, continuing his long-running defense argument."
I would say that this would go to show cover-up and knowing of wrong doing???? I would say this is an important factor in the whole thing.
Also,QUESTION: Is it a good idea to debate this since the jury is free to leave to go out in the public?
Don't want to mess up the trial?? I also know that there are other blogs posting on this trial.
Just a thought.
All I read was PP's quoted headline ("Deaf black lesbian accused of chainsaw murder"), which I still maintain is not accurate. This was not a chainsaw murder.
Thought the tought of being killed by a chainsaw is horrible! You would just hope that you wold go into shock fast and pass out.
I agree the paper made the mistake but i guess they wanted to grab attention and i would that they did. THis also does not look good on SD./
I was trying to say "though the thought"
This headline in from another country.
That'll show others contemplating a similar act that South Dakotans simply won't put up with multiple unsavory adjectives and modifying clauses.
You know this could have been your sister or someone you cared deeply for.
Seems to me it would be damn tough to find a jury of her peers for a gay black deaf woman in Sioux Falls!! What are they supposed to do?
If anything, it is making the judge and prosecuters take extra steps to make sure the trial is not perceived as being unfair.
The fast of the matter is that a woman was killed, burned and cut up. I hope they convict the person who committed the crime whoever that person is regardless of race, religion or sexual preference.
By her own choice, Daphne Wright's peers for the purpose of jury service are those people who live in Minnehaha County.
Daphne Wright does not have a right to a jury that is selected based upon their color, their gender, their sexual orientation, or deafness.
She has a right to have a randomly chosen jury venire. She also has a right to have everyone including minorities on that jury venire questioned about their own beliefs and biases, and considered for jury service based upon their answers to questions and chosen or eliminated on that basis alone.
The only exception to that rule, which has always struck me as odd, is that people in a capital case do not have a right to have any "peers" who oppose capital punishment. Although every community has a substantial number of "peers" who are unwilling to impose the death penalty, those people are excluded from capital juries.
So it is that people who express a preference for "an eye for an eye" are able to serve on a capital jury, while those who wish to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" cannot serve as capital case jurors.
As for the national blogs hollering that this murderer cannot get a fair trial because of her quadruple minority status, two things. 1) They're the same people who want society to be color blind and not see the differences in people, and 2) Her quadruple minority status did not prevent her from killing and dicing up another human being. Why should the justice system treat her any differently from anybody else who would choose to carry out such a crime? If those bloggers had their way, this cold-blooded murderer would have to be exonerated for lack of a qualified jury pool. Their arguments are self-defeating. Would they be happy if the prosecution was seeking a life sentence? If it's about finding a jury of quadruple minorities, the answer has to be 'no'.
So that means if I'm found to have killed someone and cut them up with a chainsaw beyond a reasonable doubt, would I have my neighbor put me to death? That's a toughy...
And further that that's the "Golden Rule."
Very tortured logic don't you think?
That is tortured logic. And it's not the golden rule.
Moreover, it's not what we do in South Dakota. Here, when killers really do want to be executed we don't do it - recall the Elija Page story.
Chorus line of rappers in baggy pants with their hats on backward all singing "I'm a Chainsaw Man Searching for a Chainsaw driving ** ".
Co-feature will be a sex education film based on Entertainment tonight video on Anna Nicole Smith's real insemination ordeal."
Summer is almost here if it will just quit snowing and raining.
Why do you apply doing unto others as you'd have done to you to the baby humans?
Ya wanna talk about the Daphne Wright case?