Use the death penalty

Upton · #1 (**permalink**) 12-29-2007, 10:23 AM

The murder of this family, children and all, is a textbook example of a case where the death penalty should be used. The two perpetrators of this crime don't deserve to live.

Quote:

Prosecutors outline Carnation slayings, consider death penalty

Story Updated: Dec 28, 2007 at 11:27 PM PST
By KOMO Staff & News Services

Editor's note: The contents of this article are disturbing

SEATTLE (AP) - Prosecutors say they may consider the death penalty in the case against Michele K. Anderson and Joseph Thomas McEnroe, the two accused of killing three generations of the Anderson family.

Anderson and McEnroe were charged Friday with aggravated first-degree murder in the methodical Christmas Eve shooting deaths of her parents, her brother, his wife and their two young children.

"Given the magnitude of this crime, I pledge to give this case serious consideration for application of our state's ultimate penalty," Satterberg said.

Prosecutors have 30 days to decide whether to seek the death penalty.

Judy Anderson was wrapping presents for her family on Christmas Eve, when gunfire erupted in her living room and her own daughter began a bloodbath that left Anderson and five other members of her family dead, prosecutors said Friday.

She ran into the room and saw her daughter's boyfriend shoot her husband of 38 years, Wayne, prosecutors alleged as they filed aggravated first-degree murder charges. Judy started screaming and Joe McEnroe turned his gun on her. She fell to the floor, not yet dead. McEnroe apologized and shot her again, this time in the head, according to a police affidavit.

King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg said long-standing bitterness and a perceived family debt might have been factors, but said he was at a loss to assign a motive to the crime police say McEnroe and Michele Anderson, both 29, have admited committing.

"In the end, what motive could you find that would make sense of the senseless slaying of the Anderson family?" Satterberg said.

Satterberg's account of the crime and a police affidavit lay out a Christmas Eve that exploded in a rain of blood, leaving three generations of a family dead.

"In the span of one hour, the defendants had turned this family's Christmas Eve celebration into a scene of mass murder," Satterberg said as he charged Anderson and McEnroe with the only crime punishable by death in Washington. Satterberg has 30 days to decide whether to seek the death penalty.

After killing her parents, Anderson and McEnroe, dragged the bodies to a shed outside the rural Carnation home and mopped up the blood with towels and carpets, according to court documents. They burned some of the evidence in a backyard fire pit, reloaded their weapons and waited for Michele's brother and his family to arrive.

When Scott Anderson, 32, walked in the door, he spotted his sister with a gun and charged her. Michele Anderson and McEnroe shot him multiple times. Michele then shot her sister-in-law, Erica, 32, who still managed to climb over a couch and call 911.

An operator at the 911 calling center picked up the call but Erica did not speak before McEnroe tore the phone from her hands and destroyed it.

"In this small room, witnessing this horror, was 5-year-old Olivia Anderson and her 3-year-old brother, Nathan," Satterburg said.

Huddling with her children, Erica Anderson pleaded with McEnroe not to shoot her, saying: "You don't have to do this."

McEnroe told her: "Yes, we do,"' and shot her in the head, according to the affidavit.

He then shot 5-year-old Olivia before turning to 3-year-old Nathan, who had picked up the batteries from the cordless phone his mother had used in her futile attempt to call for help.

"McEnroe told detectives that Nathan held the batteries up in one hand and gave '..the look of complete comprehension ... as if he understood." McEnroe than fired on last bullet through Nathan's head, according to the affidavit.

"The evidence will show that McEnroe shot each child in the head from very close range,"

When asked why he shot Erica, Olivia and Nathan, McEnroe told detectives three times: "I didn't want them to turn us in," according to the affidavit.

Michele Anderson told investigators "it was a combination of not wanting them to have to live with the memories and not wanting there to be any witnesses."

Satterberg concluded his narrative:

"On Christmas Day, the Anderson property was silent."

Arraignment for the two was scheduled for Jan. 9.

Michele Anderson told detectives her brother, a carpenter, owed her money she had loaned to him years earlier, and that she was upset with her parents because they did not take her side. Additionally, she said her parents were pressuring her to start paying rent for staying on their property.

"Michele stated that she was tired of everybody stepping on her," the court papers say. "She stated that she was upset with her parents and her brother and that if the problems did not get resolved on Dec. 24, then her intent was definitely to kill everybody."

After the killings, McEnroe and Anderson first drove north toward Canada, then south toward Oregon arriving at neither destination, then decided to go back and pretend to discover the bodies, Satterberg said.

When they arrived Wednesday, investigators were already there. Detectives, curious that neither McEnroe nor Michele Anderson asked what had happened at the bustling crime scene, began questioning them and they eventually confessed, according to the documents.

Prosecutors outline Carnation slayings, consider death penalty | KOMO-TV - Seattle, Washington | News

CrankyYankee · #2 (**permalink**) 12-29-2007, 10:33 AM

I agree....they are the absolute dregs of humanity.....

There are only 2 reasons I would opt for life in prison:

1) The way the death penalty is currently implemented, it would be years and millions of dollars in attorney fees before they were actually executed. Life in prison is less expensive ultimately.

2) Killing, even pieces of shit like these two, is wrong except in self defense.
Locked up forever they are no threat to anyone.

...the last time I got this upset was when that dad shot his own son while target practising...it was an accident. But I was angered beyond belief that the dumbshit could be so careless with his 4 year old son....

If they do get the death penalty, I hope it is applied swiftly...

freedomlover · #3 (**permalink**) 12-29-2007, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrankyYankee

I agree....they are the absolute dregs of humanity.....

There are only 2 reasons I would opt for life in prison:

1) The way the death penalty is currently implemented, it would be years and millions of dollars in attorney fees before they were actually executed. Life in prison is less expensive ultimately.

2) Killing, even pieces of shit like these two, is wrong except in self defense.
Locked up forever they are no threat to anyone.

...the last time I got this upset was when that dad shot his own son while target practising...it was an accident. But I was angered beyond belief that the dumbshit could be so careless with his 4 year old son....

If they do get the death penalty, I hope it is applied swiftly...

These people have confessed, there should be no hindrance in a swift execution.

In this country, life in prison does not always equate to life. Though I don't think he will ever get out, Manson would be a prime example. How many times has he come up for parole?

CrankyYankee · #4 (**permalink**) 12-29-2007, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freedomlover

These people have confessed, there should be no hindrance in a swift execution.

In this country, life in prison does not always equate to life. Though I don't think he will ever get out, Manson would be a prime example. How many times has he come up for parole?

They confessed, but it will be their attorneys job to milk the system of as much time & money as possible....

If they took them out tomorrow morning and capped them I would shed not a tear.

But I still don't think the death penalty works, although there have never been two better candidates....

Upton · #5 (**permalink**) 12-29-2007, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrankyYankee

They confessed, but it will be their attorneys job to milk the system of as much time & money as possible....

If they took them out tomorrow morning and capped them I would shed not a tear.

But I still don't think the death penalty works, although there have never been two better candidates....

The standard for applying the death penalty should be, guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt, instead of beyond a reasonable doubt.

These two fit that standard, and considering the details of the crime, they both should be executed.

navyvet50 · #6 (**permalink**) 12-29-2007, 02:13 PM

The death penalty is revenge, not justice. A Christian nation would never approve of government sanctioned Murder. Of course we are a Christian nation in name only, so the Death penalty for every criminal, then they can never commit another crime.

Centurion · #7 (**permalink**) 12-29-2007, 03:03 PM

I don't agree that the death penalty is revenge. Society imposes it, not any individual. When society does that, it constitutes a collective statement that the individual is not within the capability of rehabilitation and if left alive, will be a continuing threat to other human beings.

Life sentences without parole are jokes. In effect, we are turning loose inside our penal systems individuals who have already murdered others, and are now in the position to kill prison guards without having to be concerned about anything else society may impose upon them. This may explain why touchy-feely states that have no death sentence farm out to states that do, prisoners who have been given life sentences without parole. For example, all prisoners from Hawaii do such sentences in Texas. The threat of a death sentence if they kill a prison guard -- or anybody else for that matter -- in that state, provides some moderating influence.

CrankyYankee · #8 (**permalink**) 12-29-2007, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Centurion

I don't agree that the death penalty is revenge. Society imposes it, not any individual. When society does that, it constitutes a collective statement that the individual is not within the capability of rehabilitation and if left alive, will be a continuing threat to other human beings.

Life sentences without parole are jokes. In effect, we are turning loose inside our penal systems individuals who have already murdered others, and are now in the position to kill prison guards without having to be concerned about anything else society may impose upon them. This may explain why touchy-feely states that have no death sentence farm out to states that do, prisoners who have been given life sentences without parole. For example, all prisoners from Hawaii do such sentences in Texas. The threat of a death sentence if they kill a prison guard -- or anybody else for that matter -- in that state, provides some moderating influence.

I understand the argument you are making in the first paragraph, but I have huge reservations.....because of the history behind it....

It does in many ways seem like revenge, but it is more precisely retribution - an earned punishment.

However, it is difficult for me to morally support killing as a punishment for killing....it seems hypocritical to me.

Upton · #9 (**permalink**) 12-29-2007, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrankyYankee

I understand the argument you are making in the first paragraph, but I have huge reservations.....because of the history behind it....

It does in many ways seem like revenge, but it is more precisely retribution - an earned punishment.

However, it is difficult for me to morally support killing as a punishment for killing....it seems hypocritical to me.

According to their own confession, these two shot both the children, in the head, after first allowing them to witness the murder of their parents.

If they don't deserve the death penalty, who does?

They don't deserve to live.

Centurion · #10 (**permalink**) 12-29-2007, 03:36 PM

Frankly, I have reservations too. If both of us didn't, we would be uncivilized. But .... we are dealing with a rapidly changing society that is no longer living with the courtesies and luxuries of a Victorian society, and is in fact becoming barbaric.

Just take street gangs for example. MS-13, Mexican Mafia, Hoovers, Crips, Bloods, United Aryan Brotherhood, New Nazies, etc. ad nauseum; are all inculcated with the idea that the most violent of their members rise to the highest ranks. Not even the Italian mafia were as brutal as providing someone a Columbian necktie. A simply bullet in the melon and burial in a Jersey swamp was good enough for them.

Today, gangbangers roam our streets and pop one another and innocent civilians with impunity, and the younger they do it, the more "respect" they earn.

They know they won't get the death penalty because between the time of their arrest and incarceration, the average Joe Schmuckavelli has already forgotten about the body in the ground, about which the poor, misunderstood, social miscreant is being prosecuted.

Frankly, if we are to keep the death penalty, IMHO they should be made public. After the trial, examination of the DNA, appeals, etc. and everything runs out, the killer should be strapped to a pool and executed by firing squad. It should be televized and although a great many of the soft and fuzzies will become "upset," the lesson will not be lost on all of the barbarians.