http://enews.earthlink.net/article/top?guid=20070824/46ce57c0_3ca6_1552620070824-1330214760
A convicted sex offender was sentenced to death for kidnapping 9-year-old Lunsford, raping her and burying her alive in his yard. His first confession was thrown out as evidence because Couey did not have a lawyer present. Despite this he incriminated himself other times. Jail workers testified that he repeatedly admitted details of the slaying, insisting he hadn't meant to kill the third-grader but panicked during the police search, investigators found physical evidence including DNA from the girl's blood and Couey's semen on a mattress in his room as well as her fingerprints in a closet. HIs criminal record included 24 burglary arrests, carrying a concealed weapon, and indecent exposure to a 5-year-old girl in 1991. It might be interesting to know how the sequence of these events culminated in this. These same changed laws also affected her brother unintentionally later.
2007-08-24
09:33:57
·
8 answers
·
asked by
Friend
6
in
Politics & Government
➔ Law & Ethics
Perhaps I can't believe this. Where or why did his mind take a twist that this would be okay? I wonder if the punishments or psychiatric treatments contributed in some way, and if so how? I don't believe many people would do something this hideous in life. So why make frivolous reports that falsely increase the numbers to make it seem like YOU or someone else might do this just as easily as this dude did, isn't that propaganda? Why not just say not all of us are this dude, but all of us believe he should be punished, not psychiatrically treated because he thinks it is funny?
2007-08-24
16:22:23 ·
update #1