Jump to content

Woman with 72 IQ is executed


divagreen
 Share

Recommended Posts

***Prayer to the gawds of logic...

 

Please forgive any hyperbolic rhetoric that I am about to speak here, and future posts regarding this thread...if it applies...

Please forgive any conflation of topics that do not correlate to an anecdotal analogy...if it applies...

I will endeavor to hold the highest of standards while arguing this case...please forgive me if I don't always measure up...if it applies.

And if any transgressions occur, I solemnly swear to read Alice in Wonderland once again, in order to mainstay my knowledge of what logical fallacies look like.***

 

She knew people would be murdered. She knew the men would kill them. She was ok with it, and she understood that they would die. She does not deserve life.

 

This is a weak argument if taken at a legislative value. She wanted them to die, she understood that they would die, she stood by while they died, ...this is depraved indifference if one wants to dispense with the low IQ and manipulation factor.

 

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and good sex doesn't nesesarrily have anything to do with looks, sometimes kinky is more important than anything else and it did say sex with her and her daughter... kinky is as kinky does

 

True dat...but wouldn't you think that the deciding factor for allowable kink would be held in the hands of the two men who performed? They did have to rise to the occasion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diva, i am quite sure there is no logic in this, all parties would seem to be less that sane by any comparison i can think of. i have never been able to understand the twisted thinking of anyone who would commit violent crimes for any reason. I can only guess at the motivation and the facts are as crazy as the crime, you have to wonder why the men would do it, how sex with mom and daughter figure into it and why all of them thought they could get away with it. insanity is crazy.... B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a weak argument if taken at a legislative value. She wanted them to die, she understood that they would die, she stood by while they died, ...this is depraved indifference if one wants to dispense with the low IQ and manipulation factor.

 

*sighs*

 

Her IQ was at the level of a 14 year old if you can believe the results of those tests to be accurate. Fourteen-year olds understand that it's wrong to take someone's life. They are aware the law is against such a thing.

 

Therefore, I have no sympathy for her. Nor do I like Appeals to Emotion about the "poor, quasi-mentally-retarded lady" who was 'manipulated' into wanting to kill people for money. She was aware that people would die by her hands, albeit indirectly. Execution is just in my opinion.

Edited by A Tripolation
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nor do I like Appeals to Emotion about the "poor, quasi-mentally-retarded lady" who was 'manipulated' into wanting to kill people for money.

 

I am okay with you thinking that if someone wants someone to be murdered and they had knowledge of such ahead of time, they should warrant the death penalty. I am simply grateful that you are the minority.

 

But if you are going to make a case that I am "appealing to emotion" rather than reason, I think that it is only fair that you back it up.

 

I am addressing the fact that a person with a low IQ has limited capability for abstract consequences and has been pre-conditioned to follow those who are of a higher intelligence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We definitely have an (un)resolved system when it comes to criminal punishment. The fact this woman's IQ was less than what we consider normal, is no reason for her not being put to death. A dog that bites is generally put down in like fashion. What bothers me most is that the two who actually did the "killings", (those not on leash) are patrons of Virginia's finest institute. Oops!, Did I say patrons? I meant to say "LIFE" guests. Now, for the actual crime; It's not this gal or those committing the crime doing the most damage, but those issuing punishments mandated by such an obtrusive and delinquent manner.

Edited by rigney
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am okay with you thinking that if someone wants someone to be murdered and they had knowledge of such ahead of time, they should warrant the death penalty. I am simply grateful that you are the minority.

 

You're right. If I knew your family would be murdered and I would get money from it, and I went right along with it without attempting to alert the police, I don't deserve any punishment. I didn't kill your family members. :rolleyes:

 

But if you are going to make a case that I am "appealing to emotion" rather than reason, I think that it is only fair that you back it up.

 

You keep speaking of her "low IQ". Once again, I heard her speak. She was not mentally incompetent. And even if she HAD the 72 IQ the tests claimed she did, she's STILL ABOVE the legal threshold that has been deemed viable by the federal government. Once above a 70, HER IQ IS NO LONGER AN ISSUE. Saying, "Oh, she's too stupid to know what would happen after those two guys killed them", is an Appeal to Emotion.

That's what your entire argument has been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right. If I knew your family would be murdered and I would get money from it, and I went right along with it without attempting to alert the police, I don't deserve any punishment. I didn't kill your family members. :rolleyes:

 

Uhm..with such a tight little knott, that strawman will never lose it's red bandanna. :lol:

 

 

You keep speaking of her "low IQ". Once again, I heard her speak. She was not mentally incompetent. And even if she HAD the 72 IQ the tests claimed she did, she's STILL ABOVE the legal threshold that has been deemed viable by the federal government. Once above a 70, HER IQ IS NO LONGER AN ISSUE. Saying, "Oh, she's too stupid to know what would happen after those two guys killed them", is an Appeal to Emotion.

That's what your entire argument has been.

 

I guess by stating someone is making an appeal to emotion, without ever actually citing proof, constitutes as a legitimate argument which must surely be true. :rolleyes: Considering, "Oh, she's too stupid to know what would happen after those two guys killed them"<---- I never said this.

 

I think that her IQ was an issue in the crime that she was charged with, masterminding; and the admission by one of the killers that they manipulated her into going along with it.

Edited by divagreen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.