PDA

View Full Version : Scott Peterson doesn't deserve death



SicN Twisted
12-16-2004, 06:51 PM
If anything, he deserves a pat on the back for assertive himself and standing up to his naggy wife.

Seriously, though, committing one murder (the double murder thing is bullshit, abortion is legal so it's hypocritical) in those circumstances does not justify death, even if the death penalty was justified. He should get 25 to life, with the possibility of parole. Or maybe he could be the leader of a widowers support group.

samr
12-16-2004, 06:52 PM
how far along was his wife?

Linda
12-16-2004, 06:54 PM
I believe that baby was past legal abortion age. I personally don't think he should have gotten the death penalty. I think he should have gotten life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. What he did was so wrong. If he was unhappy in his marriage, he should have just gotten a
divorce. He didn't have to kill Laci and Conner.

SicN Twisted
12-16-2004, 06:56 PM
Why without parole? His crime was insane and obviously showed he had a twisted mind, by it's a case where they should be open to the possibility of reforming.

It's only a double murder because of American religious fundementalists. Conner was not a full human being.

Linda
12-16-2004, 06:58 PM
without parole because I feel he deserves to suffer for what he did. There's no suffering in death, and no suffering if he were to be paroled.

If Laci was over 3 months pregnant, the fetus could no longer be aborted and would be considered a human being. That's the law.

Linda
12-16-2004, 07:03 PM
"Peterson, 27, has not been seen since the morning of Christmas Eve, when her husband, Scott, said he left her at home to travel to Berkeley for a solo fishing trip. He reported her missing that evening when he returned home. Peterson is eight months pregnant."

Laci was 8 months pregnant. Now you can't tell me you really believe that baby was not a full human, or you know nothing about babies at all.

Sexy Panda
12-16-2004, 07:17 PM
Abortion is illegal after 3 months in America? Goddam talk about a crap country.

25 to life with possibility of parole. But I am biased against the death penalty,not being an American.

SicN Twisted
12-16-2004, 07:19 PM
The religious extremists who make the abortion laws consider a late term fetus a human. I, and most rational people, don't.

And why the fuck should someone suffer for a crime? What is this, the middle ages? Vengeance is a silly concept and it's unbelievable that it's actively considered in the 21st century.

Linda
12-16-2004, 07:27 PM
If someone murdered your mother and father in cold blood, would you want them to suffer, or would you prefer they be left to go about their life as usual, like nothing happened?

Mota Boy
12-16-2004, 07:28 PM
Prison should be both a place of reform and a place of punishment. In my opinion, for the act of premeditated murder, of willingly taken another human life, the punishment should be the removal of the possibility of living out any of the remainder of your life a free man/woman.

I think you're getting too caught up in thinking prisons should be based solely around reforming those that have already committed crimes that you forget it's also meant to dissuade those considering committing a criminal act, something that I think removing the future possibility of parole does more effectively than keeping that possibility in place. It may be to a relatively small effect, but if it prevents only a few murders a year, I'd say it's worth it.

leo3375
12-16-2004, 07:44 PM
If I may add my two cents?

I'm a vocal opponent of the death penalty. Not only is it hypocritical, it is not a deterrent as proponents claim, and it's a waste of my tax dollars. It is more costly to the taxpayer (read: you and me) for the government to murder a convict than it is to lock them up and throw away the key.

Granted, what Mr. Peterson did is reprehensible and horrifying but as Gandhi said, "An eye for an eye and the world goes blind."

As for the age of his wife's fetus, it was certainly viable (able to survive outside its mother), ergo it the crime was indeed two counts of murder. In the US, the vast majority of hospitals and abortion providers will not perform an abortion beyond the first trimester except in cases of medical emergencies and possible complications that could kill either the fetus or the mother.

Linda
12-16-2004, 07:47 PM
I'm more inclined to believe it would cost more to feed and clothe him for the next 50 years, then it would to put him to death now, if it's your tax dollars you're worried about.

Sexy Panda
12-16-2004, 07:56 PM
Ok I ask for an explanation as to how that works. How is it that killing someone is more expensive? I've never been able to figure it out.

leo3375
12-16-2004, 07:56 PM
I'm more inclined to believe it would cost more to feed and clothe him for the next 50 years, then it would to put him to death now, if it's your tax dollars you're worried about.

The appeals process, my friend. Pretty much every death sentence is appealed, taking up valuable time in courtrooms and sucking up money to pay for the paperwork and attorney's fees.

Linda
12-16-2004, 08:06 PM
OK, but wouldn't he appeal even if he had gotten 25 to life? And he would be responsible for the attorney fees, wouldn't he? Court costs and paperwork I can understand.

Sexy Panda
12-16-2004, 08:09 PM
There ya go. Although if I believed in the death penalty that probably wouldn't sway me. I'd probably come up with some sort of authoritarian statement like "well we'll just take away the right to appeal".

Well I say if the bastard is going to appeal then all the more reason to kill him. We may as well get our money's worth.

Percentage of death sentences appealed and percentage of non death sentences for murder appealed. Go find data so we can see the difference.

Sic what fantasy land are you living in. The world is not a perfect happy land full of flowers and fairy's. Why wouldn't the desire for vengeance still exist. It's human nature.

If they kill Scott Peterson then he can't be raped by a Tongan man named Betty. Where's the fun in the death penalty.

Mota Boy
12-16-2004, 08:09 PM
...and despite millions of dollars in attorney's fees, and judges time, and paperwork, and years of the process, innocent people still remain convicted. They're basically formalities to make death penalty advocates feel better about their position without effectively weeding out the wrongfully accused. Also, it's more expensive to keep people on death row, and they'll often remain in that more expensive isolation for... I think an average of seven years, but I'm not certain, while the government processes the necessary paperwork to kill 'em.

There are a great number of better reasons to be against the death penalty than simply the cost of the process. However, seeing as many death penalty advocates are conservatives that care more about the government taking their money than other people's lives, it's a fairly effective argument.

Sexy Panda
12-16-2004, 08:27 PM
I don't think it is because they would just say that the system should be streamlined. Do you honestly expect that a death penalty advocate cares enough to not say something like "well forget all that death row crap, they have 6 months to make peace with the lord then it's druggin time".

All of that isn't a case against the death penalty. It's a case against the system in which it is carried out. It's not going to convert people.

And that last statement is bullshit. Death penalty advocates believe in it because they think the person deserves to die. That is what you have to battle if you want to change anything.

Mota Boy
12-16-2004, 08:57 PM
You'd be surprised how many people I've seen reconsider their thinking because they found out that putting someone to death was pricier. Most people haven't had a relative or close friend murder or be murdered, and so, from their perspective, putting someone behind bars for the rest of their life and killing them are roughly equal. The only effect that it has on the outside world is on their pocketbook. Sure, they get riled up about putting specific people to death, such as Timothy McVeigh or Peterson, and their sense of vengance overrides issues of cost in such cases, but in general debates about the death penalty, people base a surprising amount of their beliefs around the cost of killing someone.

I find the certainty of your deep knowledge concerning the mentality of death penalty advocates quite interesting, seeing as you come from a country without a death penalty.

leo3375
12-16-2004, 09:11 PM
Taxpayer expense is not the main reason I'm opposed to the death penalty. The main reason for my opposition is that I find it very hypocritical. How is killing a killer supposed to show that killing people is wrong? It's not like killing this person is going to make your loved one magically come back to life. Many people who have conversed with death-row convicts have reversed their views on such sentences, seeing its hypocrisy and immorality.

Additionally, many people who are slated to be killed by the government turn out to be innocent of the crime for which they were convicted. Unfortunately, evidence of innocence sometimes comes too late.

sKratch
12-16-2004, 09:43 PM
Just wondering, how old are you?

Little_Miss_1565
12-16-2004, 09:44 PM
I agree that he doesn't deserve the death penalty, double-murder and all that. Conner's Law and other laws of that ilk definately rub me the wrong way...but an eight-month fetus is a full-term pregnancy. You can't waltz into even the most liberal abortion clinic eight months along and expect to walk out with a D & C.

Though I once interviewed a woman who ran a clinic, and she said that she considers the whole "life begins at conception" thing to be a bunch of shit because she feels that life begins when that life is wanted. I'm not sure I agree with that 100%, but it says a lot to me.

Sexy Panda
12-16-2004, 09:58 PM
Yeah mota but do you go through the whole thing with them? If you do then fair enough. I have never ever seen anyone do that though.

Dude just because we don't have the death penalty doesn't mean that people don't want it. Granted the fact that we don't have it means that we are less likely to favour it but there are certainly many out there who actively discuss the issue and support the death penalty. Talkback radio is full of people who support it.

Thank god they are the minority.

Mota Boy
12-16-2004, 10:01 PM
Just wondering, how old are you?
Birthday:
August 1, 1981

sKratch
12-16-2004, 10:04 PM
Ah ha, jolly good. Just wanted to be sure he's a taxpayer.

Mota Boy
12-16-2004, 10:10 PM
Yeah mota but do you go through the whole thing with them? If you do then fair enough. I have never ever seen anyone do that though.
"Go through the whole thing with them"? What? Do you mean... do you mean sex? Look, I'm not going to send you videotapes of myself doin' it. You can find stuff like that online rather easily. Pervert.





Seriously though, I really don't know what you're talking about. Do you mean have a long, drawn out discussion in which, at the end, they agree with me? I've actually said that to people and had them say "Really? If that's true then I change my mind." Or at the very least it's caused a number of people I've spoken to to reevaluate their stance on the issue. Almost nobody changes their position on an subject like that overnight, but I've seen a great many people pause to reevaluate their support of the death penalty after learning of its cost.

Sexy Panda
12-16-2004, 11:33 PM
You're a dirty dirty man, and I like it.

Nah I meant the why. It just seems to me that the reason why is a reason to be against the death penalty in it's current form. It just doesn't feel strong enough for me as a reason against the death penalty in general.

If it works for you then excellent and I stand corrected.

Kitten
12-16-2004, 11:43 PM
Was it spur of the moment or was it premeditated?

SicN Twisted
12-17-2004, 12:04 AM
Why do you think prison should be about punishment? We're living in an advanced time where practicality should overrule emotions. Retribution is based entirely on emotions. Fuck, I hate it whenever right and wrong is brought up in a courthouse. Prison should be about detaining people who disturb and endanger society, not punishing them for doing something wrong. Punishment as an obscure quite archaic concept which I don't think has a place in this world anymore.

Sexy Panda
12-17-2004, 12:08 AM
Yes but your views are not the views of others. A large chunk of the world thinks that it does have a place in the world. It's prevelance in modern society precludes it being considered archaic, except of course in your own advanced moral viewpoint. Talk from one or the other but be honest about it.

RXP
12-17-2004, 01:46 AM
Prison is a lot worse than death.

SicN Twisted
12-17-2004, 10:08 AM
Prisons are going more towards rehibilitation and less towards punishment all over the world. The United States has the most punitory prison system in the west.

Betty
12-17-2004, 11:34 AM
I thought part of the idea of making it a "punishment" was more for it to be a deterrent to other criminals? That was the comment right? It really makes no difference if they are being punished, or simply isolated from the rest of society. However, if it manages to decrease the amount of criminals, that does make a difference.

Also, I'm not really strongly for or against it, but if the death penalty was around, and much easier to go through with, would that not be more of a deterrent than prison? Or no? Even though prison can be arguably worse, I think a lot of people would be more deterred by the death penalty (if it actually happened in a relatively short period of time).

Finally, really good movie about the death penalty: The Life of David Gale.

leo3375
12-17-2004, 02:53 PM
Ah ha, jolly good. Just wanted to be sure he's a taxpayer.

I'm a girl. I have a job, so I pay my taxes. Thankfully I live in a state that doesn't have the death penalty.

Interesting fact: Crimes rates are lower in the 9 states that don't have the death penalty than in the states that do have it.

SicN Twisted
12-17-2004, 03:07 PM
Well, punishment is not a proven deterent. I don't think it could possibly be one, since most murders occur spur of the moment and are driven by instincts, not reasoning. Countries with more liberal jail systems do not have more crime, they have less crime.

offsprung
12-17-2004, 03:13 PM
he'd end up dead in prison anyway. plus, he'll want the death penalty after he finds out first handedly what the guys do to each other in prison.

Mota Boy
12-17-2004, 03:18 PM
Interesting fact: Crimes rates are lower in the 9 states that don't have the death penalty than in the states that do have it.
Probably has more to do with the relationship between wealth and socially liberal values than anything. I don't think the presence or absense of a death penalty effects criminal mentality.

Sic, as Betty pointed out, you misread my post. I didn't once mention a need for retribution. I think punishment should be a prohibitive measure. I'm not too certain about recidivism rates for murderers, but I think that if they're significantly more likely to kill again it's another excellent reason that the possibility for parole should be removed. I'm of the opinion that the prevention of future murders should be the paramount goal of the justice system in dealing with this type of crime.

Also, another recent, high-profile crime (http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/17/missouri.fetus/index.html) puts an interesting twist on the second part of the topic.

Betty
12-17-2004, 04:59 PM
I don't really know how much of a deterrent it would be... since I guess I don't really think like a criminal. I don't murder cause I don't think it would be right, not because I'm scared of getting caught. However, I would be deterred from say, excess speeding, for fear of getting a ticket... even though I don't think it's oh so wrong or something.

The amount of crime is not necessarily connected to the justice system, at least entirely. Like, if anyone who committed a crime was instantly shot, there would probably be less crime, I would assume. Not that it is a good system to adopt.

I agree that most murders aren't really conducted sanely. But some are. And also, there are other crimes as well that could be "punished". For example: rape, drunk driving (possibly leading to manslaughter), theft, etc.

SicN Twisted
12-17-2004, 06:08 PM
I just think there are more humane, productive ways then punishment to deal with these products. Lifting the social taboo on sex and openly educating people about it to approach for freely I think would definately decrease rape. Better economic conditions would also decrease rape. I'm not sure, that's just a theory, but rape is one of the least premeditated crimes ever. Most rapists don't know when shaving in the morning that they're going to commit rape later that day - fuck, some rapists don't even know that what they're doing is rape because they're dilusional and think that screaming "no, stop" is a girl's way of being kinky. Murder especially isn't deterable, cause the great majority of murders are not premeditated. As for drunk driving - rediculous restrictions on alcohol in general make people have less of an understanding about the dangers of drunk driving. If you're taught that smoking marijuana will destroy your life, drinking moderate amounts of alcohol is dangerous and must be resisted, and then that drunk driving is dangerous in the same breath, how can you possibly expect to understand anything truthfully. I'd also say, lower the drinking age, raise the driving age.

The whole point is, punishment is not a proven deterent.

Betty
12-17-2004, 06:33 PM
I believe in general that making subjects such as drinking and sex less taboo would probably alleviate some of our problems.

I don't think raising the driving age is good, even though a lot of teenage drivers are crazy... that's what ridiculously high insurance is for. But really, driving at 17 was one of the best things in my life, it helped a lot with becoming responsible and independent (e.g. driving to work, to do errands, etc.) Lowering the drinking age, I agree with, but I guess the issue should be approached more openly and responsibly. Teens usually just go crazy when they drink because they're not used to it.

Anyway, I know that punishment is not proven as a deterrent, but I certainly would not eliminate it as a possibility. I am personally pretty deterred by most forms of punishment...

I agree that trying to fix crime based on the justice system however is not really a solution to the underlying problems. I guess the thing is that sometimes the underlying problems are really, really hard to fix.

Nina
12-18-2004, 05:18 AM
-----

never, ever, EVER should he be killed by death penalty.
he is obviously insane, no sane person kills anybody, let
alone a pregnant woman.
if he dies, if anybody after him gets punished by the
government in THAT way, i'll hate the american government
forever. i'm afraid that this will most likely happen.

fuck.

Kitten
12-18-2004, 08:23 AM
-----

never, ever, EVER should he be killed by death penalty.
he is obviously insane, no sane person kills anybody, let
alone a pregnant woman.
if he dies, if anybody after him gets punished by the
government in THAT way, i'll hate the american government
forever. i'm afraid that this will most likely happen.

fuck.

Just because someone murders another person, doesn't mean they are insane. Death penalty is obviously not an effective deterant to prevent murder. It seems pretty a pretty bad crime, especially when a 8 month pregnant woman is murdered, but emotions aside, he was not a serial killer.
The fact that she was pregnant is really no factor, just an emotional rock in the head that they could use to soften up the jurors.
The guy deserves life in prison, without parole. That way he can write a book about why he did it.

Nina
12-18-2004, 09:26 AM
Just because someone murders another person, doesn't mean they are insane.

to me it does. thats what my reply was about. your
opinion is not a fact.

and to the rest of your reply: i am against death
penalty in general. and i wrote that in another
topic. i just didnt want to repeat myself. i did not
mean that the fact he murdered a woman who is
pregnant makes it worse. i just consider it horrible,
and not like an act of a human with sense. thats
all.

Moose
12-18-2004, 09:37 AM
the only reason i was surprised they gave him death is because there was no physical evidence found such as a weapon...it was basically a timing with a bad alibi thing...some people think the mob killed the wrong woman and let this guy take the fall...but he probably did it.

Kitten
12-19-2004, 01:34 AM
the only reason i was surprised they gave him death is because there was no physical evidence found such as a weapon...it was basically a timing with a bad alibi thing...some people think the mob killed the wrong woman and let this guy take the fall...but he probably did it.

Though the evidence is largely circumstantional, it is very damning none the less.
He was with her the night she disappeared, according to reports he was cheating on her, and when exactly did he report her missing?

RXP
12-19-2004, 02:18 AM
Everyone's conception os justice, fairness what people deserve is different. What's to say your view is any more correct that the states? What's to say that death is awesome or bad? If you believe in afterlife death can be a release, you can do all your reforming up there, surely?

It is of my view the only bad thing death causes is on the people we leave behind. Because after that there's nothing. You can't miss nothing. It's just nothing. The ideal way for me to die would be some anurism (sp) that just takes you when you don't expect it. Of course this would be worst for my family and friends. But best for me.

It all depends on your subjective views. What you deem is justice, what you deem is more nobale: reformation or punishment. Utiliatarianism would use the happiness argument, if society is happier when this cunt is put down it's doable, infact, it demands to be done for the 'greater good'. And society may just be happier. If the guy is insane I say put him down because that's the kinda person I am. It's like the woman who cut out the baby from a pregnant woman, an act of insanity. If science can't cure it put them down. It's for their own good. But again this is my viewpoint of what's good and what's bad. There is nothing out there in the universe that defines this shit.

Gah this is a gay account of this topc please cf Ronald Dorwkin for his interesting views in his works on exactly what justice/fairness is. Right now reading "Law's empire" which is kinad turning me on because the whole argument i used above he attempts to refute but I don't exactly get it so will have to give it another read.

Sexy Panda
12-19-2004, 04:23 AM
to me it does. thats what my reply was about. your
opinion is not a fact.

Just because to you it does make sense doesn't mean the rest of us shouldn't think that it's fucking stupid. You are skewering the definition of sanity to suit your own little catch phrase. It doesn't work like that.

Hey Nina, I hardly see you around on the board so I thought this is a good oppurtunity to say hi.

Nina
12-19-2004, 04:39 AM
okay, look. my reply was about my opinion, obviously.
i never quoted anybody and told them that they are
wrong. the other person, though (forgot his name) did,
and that bothered me. and i said it. as simple as that.
neither mine, nor his opinion is a fact. booh.
and hi. :)

Paint_It_Black
12-19-2004, 05:17 AM
I just read all this and am now too fucking lazy to seriously comment. I agree with some people, and think some people are fucking idiots. Some things really don't change.

Kitten
12-19-2004, 05:54 AM
okay, look. my reply was about my opinion, obviously.
i never quoted anybody and told them that they are
wrong. the other person, though (forgot his name) did,
and that bothered me. and i said it. as simple as that.
neither mine, nor his opinion is a fact. booh.
and hi. :)

I wasn't saying you were wrong, I was stating my own opinion on what you said, thus the quotes. And unless I got a sex change in the last few hours that no one told me about I am female.

RXP
12-19-2004, 07:51 AM
I just read all this and am now too fucking lazy to seriously comment. I agree with some people, and think some people are fucking idiots. Some things really don't change.

Ha your back.

Paint_It_Black
12-19-2004, 08:20 AM
That's the closest thing to a warm welcome I'm likely to get, so thanks RXP!

Not sure if I'm staying or not, but I just got a new computer so at least I have the choice.

nieh
12-19-2004, 08:40 AM
The religious extremists who make the abortion laws consider a late term fetus a human. I, and most rational people, don't.

actually most people I'm familiar with, DO consider it a human. More than 95% of babies that are born at least 32 weeks (8 months) into the pregnancy will survive. Basically, if they ripped the baby out of the mom before the guy killed her, it probably would have survived. There have been children born 24 weeks into pregnancy that have survived.

That being said, I'm generally against the death penalty, so I don't think this guy should get it either.

Moose
12-19-2004, 09:19 AM
to me it does. thats what my reply was about. your
opinion is not a fact.



neither is yours...see how that works there?

SicN Twisted
12-19-2004, 09:25 AM
It doesn't make them insane, Nina. Any human is capable of committing a murder under certain circumstances, including you. Not that anyone would do what Scott did, but out of spur of the moment desperation, you could kill someone.

Moose
12-19-2004, 09:32 AM
The mind is naturally violent.

my friend replied: well, the mind can love as well.

therefore we both agreed:

The mind is naturally emotional.


but mine sounds cooler.

plus it is naturally violent...its just whether or not we act in violence or not.

SicN Twisted
12-19-2004, 10:35 AM
Anyone has the potential to commit a murder. Most convicted murderers aren't violent psychopaths - they're just everyday people who happened upon bad circumstance.

sKratch
12-19-2004, 11:18 AM
Apparently, war/violence is built into our genetics so that we can spread our [survival of the] "fittest" genes. Anyways, nieh is rather correct. Recently some crazy lady went to a woman's house who was 8 months pregnant, choked her, and stole the baby from her womb. It survived.

Nina
12-19-2004, 11:44 AM
Moose, you're not capable of reading properly it seems.

Kitten, i am sorry :/ i have no idea who you are, see. forgive
me that i thought you were male. and i misunderstood
you, i guess. i thought you quoted me and told me that
i am wrong, thats how i took it, as there was no paragraph
between what you said to my quote and the rest of your
reply.

and well...
it is about keeping that ability to kill under control. and to
me, a person who cannot do that, is not sane anymore.

wheelchairman
12-19-2004, 11:59 AM
and well...
it is about keeping that ability to kill under control. and to
me, a person who cannot do that, is not sane anymore.
A good example of this in Fight Club. Y'all (who've seen it) remember when Tyler Durden tells the Fight Club to pick fights with random people and lose. Well the hard part seemed to be actually starting the fight, since people went out of their way to avoid a fight.

monchery
05-03-2005, 08:07 PM
:eek: I think scott peterson deserves to die,because what he did is inhuman and he dosen't deserve the right to choose to live or to die .and anyone that thinks that he deserves a second change,well those persons need to die with him too :mad: so i hope that hes time to die will come soon that he can go to hell and burn like a bitch .and everyone that is on hes side,are mentally sick

The Goth Guy
05-03-2005, 08:57 PM
Dude I understand prison is bullshit I went there once (long story) but Scott did kill his wife and baby thats just fucked up man I would NEVER ever wanna hurt anything that loved me or that I loved its just wrong.

Not Ozymandias
05-03-2005, 09:50 PM
The same justice system that allows O.J. to golf every day has no business deciding who lives and who dies.

panzor41
05-04-2005, 04:33 AM
This may sound ignorant but....i think anyone how kills another human being isnt human...possibly an animal.....they should pay with their own lives being taken away.

0r4ng3
05-04-2005, 02:04 PM
This may sound ignorant but....i think anyone how kills another human being isnt human...possibly an animal.....they should pay with their own lives being taken away.
Yes, but if they are indeed an animal, they wouldnt know what hit them when they are executed. Someone said this before, but if you kill a criminal, you really only hurt their loved ones (if they still have any). Some criminals want to die, and execution is just helping them along.

panzor41
05-08-2005, 08:34 AM
good point.......^

RXP
05-08-2005, 10:53 AM
The same justice system that allows O.J. to golf every day has no business deciding who lives and who dies.

Ignorance is bliss.

Little_Miss_1565
05-08-2005, 11:20 AM
The same justice system that allows O.J. to golf every day has no business deciding who lives and who dies.

Fucking werd.

RXP
05-08-2005, 11:33 AM
That's just ludacrus. In the thousands of decided cases there are bound to be anomalies. To brush off a whole judicial system because of one case is stupid as the Sens drafting Daigle.

wheelchairman
05-08-2005, 04:25 PM
Anomaly? This is the American judicial system we're talking about R, not England's, not the EU's, not the Haag, this judicial really is extraordinary in it's worthlessness as a legal entity. I mean there is a law making god the source of justice up for debate now.