The Death Penalty and the CTGOP

"Failure is not an option... if you run away from the fight!"

On Wednesday, the Death Penalty Repeal Bill heads to the Connecticut House of Representatives for a final vote.  Sadly, there isn't much hope that the Bill will be defeated as House Democrats are all to eager to pass what theses sick enemies of civilization call historic legislation.  And of course, Governor Malloy is excited about adding this to his list of accomplishments for his first term of office.

It's twisted to think that we live in a State where elected officials are openly enthusiastic about saving the lives of murderers and murderer-rapists.  And it's worse to see those who pretend to keep watch over so-many Connecticut Churches and Synagogues march and protest in defense of pure evil.   Now, there isn't much we can do about how Democrats plan to vote on Wednesday, or trying to suddenly change the mindset of the left-leaning clergy among us.  I suppose we could call Democrats dirty names, or demand that parishioners abandon certain halls of worship - but none of that would do much good at this late point in the game.

In truth, my outrage can't really be directed against those who play their liberal roles to a perfect tee. Since they were four, these creatures took an an oath of loyalty to protect murderers, advance socialism, and liberalize our society from top to bottom.  They can't help themselves; like zombies - they are lost, soulless creatures who would follow the Devil into Hell without blinking an eye.

My anger lies with those who claim to be on our side - the so-called Connecticut Republican Party from which we've seen little to no public opposition against Death Penalty Repeal. (Of course, they did show up to vote - how quaint).  It's the expectation of many of us real Republicans that its Government's first responsibility to keep us safe from threats foreign and domestic, and to ensure that those guilty of heinous crimes against members of our society face the punishment they deserve - which includes receiving the death penalty in certain cases. If our Republican Leaders refuse to stand up and fight on our behalf to ensure our public safety - who will? 

Where are our principled leaders?  They showed more outrage over the Busway then the potential threat of eight villains be taken off of death row, and the fact that victims of future murderers will never see true justice! 

The simple fact is our alleged-State Republican Chairman, Jerry Labriola, Jr. failed us. He intentionally sat quietly on the sidelines during this critical public debate:  he issued no press releases, no statements of outrage, no rallying call for public activism, nope - all we heard was Labriola's spineless silence.  Even with 62% of the public demanding retention of the Death Penalty, Labriola did nothing.  He did nothing!  Nancy DiNardo must be laughing to know her opposition leader is a wussy; afraid to stand up like a man and represent his own Republican base.  Labriola is the only CTGOP Leader in our Party's history to run-away from a fight - with the public on his side!!  Even the Cowardly Lion would have shown more courage.

Where did it all go so wrong?

Two weeks ago at a Republican Dinner in Bolton, when he was asked why he appears so disengaged on issues of importance; Labriola told the group of Republicans that he cut a deal with legislative leaders that he would remain quiet so as not to appear to be trampling on their agenda in the same manner that his predecessor [Chris Healy] did.  So, my friends, Jerry Labriola is nothing more than a Paper Tiger.  I'm sure that when the Petits where being shut-out from meeting with members of the Democratic caucus, left saddened and teary-eyed, and Labriola said nothing, they must have been impressed to see Labriola take the time to send out a press release asking people to purchase $250 Prescott Bush tickets.  Talk about inappropriate!

The truth is that Jerry Labriola is symbolic of the very problem with the Connecticut Republican Party - pure apathy and surrender.  So we've gone from barely putting up a fight to completely walking away from it - for what? In hopes that we might pick up a few sympathy votes for looking so pathetic on the field of battle?

Look, I don't care what people think about Labriola.  Let McKinney and Cafero pull his strings like the hapless marionette he's become.  Go ahead, Labriola - listen to your advisers who'll tell you this will pass, or that it's not important (just like they did on the Ethics Resolutions).  But there are those of us who aren't going to forgive or forget your act of betrayal.  See, we've been fighting side-by-side with Dr. Petit and Johanna Chapman, and the rest of the Petit family, and all the other good people who have fought hard to see steady prosecution and delivery of a death sentence for Steven Hayes, and Joshua Komisarjevsky.  And we've been fighting like hell to make sure that other families will have the right to the same justice the next time a bunch of thugs break into some poor family's home and .... commit horrific crimes like they did in Cheshire. 

Where the hell were you? 

Begging for money?  Selling tickets?  To what end?  Why would anyone give you a dollar if you won't even bother to stand up and represent their interests or values?

And what about our U.S. Senate Candidates, or many of our Congressional Candidates (save John Decker, Mike Clark, and even Lisa Wilson-Foley, the only three who made strong public statements in support of keeping the death penalty) - where the hell were the rest?  I guess simply running for Federal Office, and not helping to speak up in our Chairman's silence?  What the hell kind of Party do we have here?  No passion, no energy, no conviction!   We are a timid shadow of our former selves. What about Tom Foley, the guy who wants to run for Governor in 2014?  Could he be bothered to speak out against this injustice? Nope. Not a word. 

What exactly is this brand of ours that has so many entrenched establishment types so worried is being tarnished by debate, or criticism of so many un-Republican-like candidates in our midst?  Voters are so confused that they no longer even know what we stand for.  Being merely the party of fiscal restraint certainly hasn't given us the mileage to make big gains.

The CTGOP needs a lot less people like the play-it-safe types like John McKinney, Larry Cafero, and Jerry Labriola, and a few more people with guts like many of those in the Tea Party who care enough to speak out when they see something is wrong.  Make fun of them all you like - those few voices are the only ones you ever hear challenge the status quo given this collection of old, tired collaborators that we are stuck with.  Back deal making has been a boon for Democrats for the last 40 years in Connecticut.  

As for Jerry Labriola, Jr. if this is what we can expect, then by all means.. Just Go away, Jerry.  Just please... go away.   Your silence helped breathe life into Steven Hayes and Joshua Komisarjevsky.  Congrats on a job well done.  We want a Chairman who's a reformer, a shaker, and a fearless activist who can lead us forward.  Not someone talking orders from those who have a record of underachievement, and mediocrity. 

Oh, and on Wednesday afternoon, while you're basking in the shadow of our future President Mitt Romney, please make sure you don't forget to brag about how on-top of everything you are.  That's if McKinney and Cafero loosen your leash to allow you to get close to him. But be reminded that just down the street in the Legislative Office Building, our foes are voting to undermine our law enforcement agents, judicial system and our long-standing values.  But you have a back-slapping good time on the podium. Please.

As for Wedneday's Repeal vote, we'll be watching how many Republicans break away from the Party (under George Gallo) and vote with the Democrats (or are AWOL)  just like those who voted for decriminalizing Marijuana, and Malloy's Jobs Bill, and the rest of the onsie, twosie votes that make us all look stupid when it comes to CTGOP brand and consistency.

I AM (disgusted),

THE KING

This original blog entry can be found at http://www.thekingsview.blogspot.com

Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment. This article does not imply endorsement of the candidate mentioned above, nor has this article been solicited for publication by any political candidate, campaign, or PAC.

TRIFECTA: Three Degenerate Bills Pass Committee

The Connecticut LOB is located in
an alternate universe where right is
wrong and wrong is right

Wednesday was a gloomy day for Republicans in Connecticut. And that's putting it mildly.

First, the Judiciary Committee passed H.B. 5389 AN ACT CONCERNING THE PALLIATIVE USE OF MARIJUANA, which The King warned everyone about last month. The Bill easily passed Judiciary by a margin of 35-8 (vote tally here). The real crying shame about the passage of this bill, is that only seven Republicans voted against the measure which clearly shows that Connecticut Republicans continue to suffer from an identity crisis inconsistent with the National Republican Party and its membership.

For the record, the following Republicans voted in favor of passing out marijuana to anyone who can find a burned out, 60s-raised, Tye-died physician willing to produce a doctor's note:

Andrew Roraback, S30
Themis Klarides, T. 114 (CTGOP Party Vice-Chair)
David Labriola, 131
John Kissel, S07
John Hetherington, 125
Christie Carpino, 032 (Sponsor)
Debra Lee Hovey, 112
T.R. Rowe, 123
Robert Sampson, 080

If you see any of the fools above whining about drug problems in schools, drug-related violence, or looking with a blank stare as they try to fathom the ever-increasing issue of substance abuse - then you can remind them about their foolish vote to make marijuana legally more available to Connecticut households. If they try to tell you that there is no connection between their vote, and their contribution to expanding the drug problem in Connecticut, you can tell them to go smoke another doobie, and face the fact that they are compounding the problem, and what's worse - they are sending the wrong message to the youth of Connecticut which is Smoking Pot is OK if you really, really want to. Nice! By the way, the whole medical component of the Marijuana argument is ridiculous cover - and could only have merit back in the 70s when the strength of today's pain medications were a fraction of what's on the market now; plus they're readily available at any CVS in the State providing you have a script.

The eight brave, dissenting voices are:

Paul Doyle, S09 (Democrat)
Al Aldinolfi, 103
Michael McLachlan, S24
Arthur O'Neill, 069
John Shaban, 135
Bill Simanski, 062
Richard Smith, 108
Jason Welch, S31

Note to Themis Klarides: You can forget your aspiriations for RNC Committee Person because the Republican National Committee doesn't do marijuana!


DEATH PENALTY REPEAL

By far the worst vote today came regarding Connecticut Democrats never-ending quest to repeal the Death Penalty under the guise of S.B. 280 AN ACT REVISING THE PENALTY FOR CAPITAL FELONIES. Oddly enough, the passage of the Bill out of the Judiciary Committee comes at a time when a Quinnipiac Poll shows that Connecticut Residents support the Death Penalty by a wide-margin of 67 in favor and only 28 against. The poll actually indicates a new high for Death Penalty support in Connecticut which means that there wasn't a cooling off period as Connecticut Democrats had hoped for post-Komisarjevksy-Hayes verdicts. If anything, the public is more determined then ever to see these two meet their maker for the heinous crimes they committed on the Petit family.

Democrats tend to only care about polling data that favors their barbaric causes, so you can imagine how quickly today's poll was disregarded by liberals sitting on the Committee. The vote tally was a sobering 24 in favor of repeal to 17 against repeal. Even Andrew Roraback, who was clobbered in this blog and has since taken a weekly beating at the hands of his chief rival CT05 Congressional wanna-be Lisa Wilson-Phony (Foley) (a.k.a scarecrow lady), voted against repeal.

I'm not sure whether or not Roraback's early release demands were met, or not but regardless, he voted with his Republican colleagues on what was basically a party-line vote. If he votes the same way when it goes for up a general vote in both chambers then that will effectively end his controversy over the Death Penalty, and close the issue - for it's not what you did last year, it's what you did yesterday.

The concern that has pro-law enforcement/ pro-justice system lawyers and others talking is that if this bill were to be voted on in the General Assembly and passed, then the chances that either sick bastards Joshua Komisarjevsky or Steven Hayes would face the Death Penalty is slim to none. Despite rhetoric by Governor Dannel Malloy and his liberal buddies that, if passed, this Bill wouldn't apply to the Petit murderer's grandfathered sentencing - every activist judge and liberal trial lawyer will be looking for an opportunity to challenge on behalf of Death Row inmates using an Equal Protection Law argument (5th Amendment "due process") to find a way to get Hayes, Komisarjevsky, and anyone else off death row.

Make no mistake, Dannel Malloy said he'd sign a bill to repeal of the death penalty if it came to his desk. Don't think for a minute that the Governor's Office isn't knee deep involved in the whole orchestration of the Democrats legislative agenda. The deal to advance this bill right now and get it passed is no coincidence - with two years left in his term, Governor Malloy is looking to make short work of this item, and praying that the people of Connecticut forget the whole thing by the time 2014 rolls around. Sadly, if the income tax battle taught us anything, it's that the public has a short memory, and moreover tends to become more accepting of bad ideas over time.

Today's real headline should have read: "Connecticut
Democrats take first step to overturn Hayes-Komisarjevsky
sentencing." because that's been their plan all-along.

SAME DAY VOTER REGISTRATION

I also warned you about H.B. 5024 AN ACT CONCERNING VOTING RIGHTS which also passed it's committee 11-4 on a Party Line vote. Without going into too much detail, the level of fraud that municipalities can expect will be unprecedented - mostly favoring Democrat Candidates (which to any genius reading might explain why Dems are head-over-heels in love with the idea, and Republicans are cringing at the very thought - might be something do with how well Democrats have perfected voter fraud over the years, ex. Acorn, or Chicago Style Politics, not sure). And if that wasn't bad enough, the entire cost of administration and hardware for checking for duplicate voter registrations via online computer terminals, and the staff to support this fraudulent bill will be handed down to all 169 towns - which, as we all know, can barely balance their budgets as it is.


So there you have it. Connecticut's Grand Old Party, took a grand old beating today. If you are disgusted, you should be. And I hate to tell you this, but if you look at the docket, you'll find all kinds of expensive and perverse pieces of legislation that will likely be looked at and passed by Connecticut's one party authoritarian structure. It's going to get worse before it gets better, that's if - there's any chance of it ever getting better at all.

Lastly, has anyone seen Democrat State Representative and U.S. Senate hopeful William Tong?  He failed to show up to cast a vote at either the Death Penalty, or the Pro-Marijuana hearings - not that he would have been on the side of the righteous.  Rumor is that Tong was last seen on Dennis House's Face the State show.  If anyone sees Mr. Tong wandering aimlessly in Hartford Keeney Park feeding pigeons, contact Speaker Chris Donovan. 
 

 All Points Bulletin: "Dawg Gone, Tong Gone!"

Have a better day!

I AM

THE KING

This original blog entry can be found at http://www.thekingsview.blogspot.com


Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment.

Sign the Petition: Stop the Repeal of the Death Penalty

Gary "Coleman" Holder-Winfield is a
 big supporter of Hayes and Komisarjesky
 and people just like them

Connecticut Democrats led by the ever-arrogant, racially-motivated State Rep. Gary "Coleman" Holder-Winfield, and ultra-liberal Governor Dannel Malloy are working around the clock to disregard the will of the people of Connecticut and Repeal the Death Penalty.  This is a critical time as the Democrat-controlled Legislature seeks to put a new bill on Governor Malloy's desk during this upcoming legislative session.

Last year, the Repeal of the Death Penalty measure was defeated by a slim majority in the State Senate, 19-17, due in part because two Democrats:  Andrew Maynard of Stonington, and Edith Prague of Columbia broke ranks with their Party after meeting with Dr. William Petit, the sole survivor of the heinous slayings of his wife and two children during the 2007 Cheshire Home Invasion.

Andrew Maynard, now believing that the coast is clear, has committed to voting for the new repeal bill when the measure is reintroduced in 2012. The only reason he didn't support the Repeal Bill he claims was because the vote was "too close to the Komisarjevksy Trial". Republicans residing in the towns of Moosup to Groton and all parts in-between have a new challenge on their hands for the next election cycle - send this yellow coward packing.  I mean this guy doesn't even have the conviction to vote his conscious.  What kind of people would put this weak-minded fool in a leadership position?  If old pal Rob Simmons is looking to be relevant again - then helping to replace Maynard would be good start.

Edith Prague has not yet committed to supporting the new Repeal measure but in private her friends say that she claims she would consider supporting the measure this time around in exchange for a few minor changes.  This is sad if true; last year after voting against the Repeal, her own liberal allies in the Press came after her for saying what everyone in Connecticut was thinking about the murdering-pedophile Joshua Komisarjevsky.  It would be a shame if an outspoken woman like this suddenly supported Repeal for a few lousy political favors.  If Ms. Prague could see the reason to support the Death Penalty for these two SOBs, then what about the endless generations of the same type of evil-doers to come? 

At the end of the day, if both Coward Andrew Maynard and Edith Prague cave to peer pressure and presents, the ballot would move to a 50-50 split allowing Lt. Governor Nancy Wyman the opportunity to cast the deciding vote in favor of  murderers and rapists.  Then Governor Malloy can in turn cite Catholicism for his decision to pen it into law (funny how he doesn't invoke Catholicism as his rational for his supporting votes on other liberal social policy positions).

Despite what liberal activists think, Connecticut trends higher in polls with 67% of residents in favor of the Death Penalty.  Nationally, one Gallup Poll on the issue found that 64% of Americans are in favor of the Death Penalty in cases of murder.  Other polls show a larger majority for support of the Death Penalty for similar and even lesser crimes.

Clever Democrats will try to distance themselves (and their votes) from the convicted Petit Murderers by claiming that that new Repeal Bill would be prospective - meaning that it would not apply to Joshua Komisarjevski and Steven Hayes, but only to future convicted murderer-rapists, et al.  But every drooling anti-death activist, and half-way decent trial attorney knows that the very passage of a new Repeal Bill opens the door wide-open for a special circumstance appeal from which the wacky Jeremiah Donovans of the world will launch their bid to save Death Row inmates. 

Only a fool would believe that the word "prospective" would stop the anti-death penalty hyenas from selling their souls to the devil to get Hayes and Komisarjevsky free from Death Row - a spot that they earned by their own actions, not through the decision of a Jury. 

As this war heats up, there will be a lot of rhetoric flying around from so-called experts who will lie through their teeth about how the Death Penalty isn't a deterrent - trust me, there aren't too many Dead Murderers posing a threat to society these days.  And making sure these two get the injection of death they deserve is a personal passion of mine - moreover, we owe to future generations to make sure that anyone who commits such or even a much lesser set of crimes faces the same lethal punishment. 

Meanwhile join our cause, get involved, make calls to your legislator, and sign the petition:

I'll end this piece by quoting the sister-in-law of one of the victims of the 2007 home invasion, Jennifer-Hawke Petit, who wrote it best:

"The majority of Connecticut citizens are in favor of the death penalty. The death penalty as it stands now is broken and needs to be fixed. It is the only reasonable and just penalty for the most heinous murders. A vote for repeal is a vote for criminals and a vote against victims."
- Johanna Petit Chapman

Darn Right!  So join us!  Don't let twisted people like Gary Coleman Holder-Winfield tell you that you can't have justice, now or in the future. 

I AM

THE KING

This original blog entry can be found at http://www.thekingsview.blogspot.com
Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment.

A Word about today's Komisarjevsky Verdict

It's taken over four long years to finally reach this point. 

I'm pleased with the result of today's verdict; even somewhat surprised that things came out the way they did - handing murderer Joshua Komisarjevsky the death penalty on all six counts seems miraculous - particularly given the extremely stoic, and unemotional nature of this Jury - in comparison to the Steven Hayes Jury.  There were few breakdowns of emotion when they viewed the horrific crime scene photos, and no angry glances over at the Defendant by members of this group of twelve.  Reporters found this Jury hard to read, but not necessarily less engaged than the last. 

The antics of Komisarjevsky's Attorney Jeremiah Donovan didn't help matters.  His endless campaign against Petit Foundation pins diminished his stature in the eyes of the Jurors and the Public.  His multi-baseless attempts at calling for mistrials, and his distasteful and crude comments about the Hawke-Petit Family, and references to their supporters as the Petit Posey has permanently damaged his reputation beyond repair.  He started off on the wrong foot by breaking a court gag order and then trying to bully Judge John Blue which didn't endear him to the Court, or anyone else for that matter.  He ended his tenure by bad-mouthing the Uncle of Komisarjevsky during the post trial press conference - an act of pure stupidity.  Donovan is a broken man, bitter, and alone.  If there was ever a living person who more resembled A Christmas Carol's old Ebenezer Scrooge - it's Jeremiah Donovan.

Critics of the Death Penalty have always made the claim that this trial was really about putting the State on trial. We, who support the Death Penalty couldn't agree more. Every mother and father, sister and brother, aunt and uncle, grandmother and grandfather in Connecticut watched this trial with trepidation and fear. As much as we could, we put ourselves in the shoes of the Petit-Hawke family. We all asked the same question - if this had happened to us, would the system we hold so dear, deliver justice on our behalf?  Would our fellow citizens have the courage to make the right choice for us? For all of us?

The answer is Yes.

And don't think every con and would-be villain didn't take note of the results of these two trials.  Maybe we don't know where the State would draw the line in the sand, but we do know that at least Connecticut isn't a free-pass zone for murderers.  We can thank State Prosecutors Michael Dearington and his assistant Gary Nicholson for that. 

For those of us who've been steadfast supporters of the Petit-Chapman family since 2007, it's been a journey that started with sadness and ends with sadness. To this end critics of the process are correct - handing Hayes and Komisarjevsky the sentence they deserve will not bring Jennifer, Hayley, or Michaela back to life, or patch the pain.  But the decision to execute two evil monsters does bring a sense of closure that we've sought for a long time.  This has always been about justice for the Petits, not blood-thirsty revenge as the simplistic anti-death penalty crowd would have you believe. 

I want to leave you with one final thought.  Sure, the trial is over, and the media circus has headed home for the holidays.  While all of us will gather with friends and family this Christmas - singing carols and opening presents, Dr. William Petit and his family are stuck with the vision of what could have been.  Beyond today's verdict we are still left with an empty pit in our stomachs. This whole four year journey will not be simply shelved and forgotten; we will keep the Petit women in our hearts and minds for decades to come.

I AM

THE KING

This original blog entry can be read at http://www.thekingsview.blogspot.com

This entry will be revised at a future date.

The Correct Verdict: Hayes receives Death

Dr. William Petit: Class Act

thekingsview.blogspot.com

Once in a while the world surprises you.  Monday was one of those days.

Like many of my colleagues, I watched the news reports and read the tweets from the Steven Hayes penalty phase over the past several weeks.   I read and dissected each statement, if not each word tweeted from Room 6A.  At times my blood boiled visualizing the acts of arrogance and terror committed by Hayes and his counterpart Komisarjevsky.   And I was outraged by the ridiculous marathon testimony by the defense's hired gun, professional testifier Dr. Eric Goldsmith.

Based on the testimony provided, I was convinced that Steven Hayes made a conscious and independent decision to do what he did - commit heinous acts of rape, torture, and murder.  That being the clear case, without hesitation I believed that Hayes absolutely deserved the death penalty.

But would this jury actually have the courage hand down a verdict of Death? 

Honestly, I had my doubts.  Everyone knows that Connecticut is a notoriously liberal State full of so-called intellectual thinkers who are often so philosophical that they lose sight of the plot.  It probably also didn't help that just days before deliberations began, Connecticut residents elected a new anti-death penalty Democrat to the Governorship who's made public commitments to sign a bill to do away with capital punishment.

Then came the knocks at the door.  And the chicken-scratch notes, including one which appeared to illustrate a hung jury, followed by the question - what are the next steps? My heart sank.  And not just for me, but for Dr. William Petit and his family.

Then on Monday afternoon, we got word that the jury had come to a verdict.  I stared at my computer monitor - banging the refresh key over and over and over again - praying, hoping, and waiting.  And then... one by one, on all six counts, Hayes was given Death.   I felt both joy and relief.  And in strange way - happiness for the Petit-Hawke family.

Typical disappointment from the Courant

It didn't take long for the Hartford Courant editorial board to take its usual left wing position on the Hayes verdict.  In their November 9th editorial "Death penalty serves no purpose", they attempted - rather poorly -  to rationalize their anti-death penalty position.

First, they start from the interesting premise that "it is wrong to take a life except in self-defense."  A curious position to take since this trial is about three innocent women who's lives were certainly not taken by an act of self-defense, but out of lust for murder, and in attempt to dispose of the witnesses to their crimes. 

Second, this whole argument about whether it is right for the State (or Government) to take a life is faulty from the start.  All Governments make policy decisions which both directly and indirectly result in the act of taking lives, this is most evident with acts of war. Only a fool with both eyes closed wouldn't recognize that utilizing armed forces and military machines in either a defensive or offensive action results in death by the hundreds - and its all state authorized, if not outright mandated by Congress and President.

Moreover, the Government extends permission to the armed forces to interrogate, try, and execute active military combatants for certain crimes.  Just because the executions are carried out by men in a military uniform doesn't remove the accountability of the civilian leaders and legislators who provide the oversight and funding to carry out justice.

The idea that the State has no right to authorize murder is so broad a statement that its impossible to realistically defend.  Would the editors at the Courant believe American actions in World War I, and in World War II were unnecessary, illegal, and immoral?  Certainly not all actions taken by the Allies were defensive in either of the World Wars.  But they may have been necessary to end the conflict, and save American lives.

Third, how ironic is it to see liberals bring up the argument that its too expensive to seek and carry-out the death penalty?  This is one of the few scenarios, given progressives usual nature to find a million reasons to spend like thieves, where they champion the desire to "save the taxpayer" money.   If the system is too expensive, then perhaps they can find ways to reduce their own fees around the process and procedures that they've created.

Forth, let's remember that it was the State that pushed to seek the death penalty under the provisions established under Connecticut Statutes.  And, it was the State that urged and convinced Dr. Petit to agree with the decision to seek the death penalty.  A decision not taken lightly.  We seem to forget that he death penalty is within the extent of the law.  It exists not out of barbarity, or as some deem it - the natural human desire for revenge and bloodlust, but as a long established punishment under the law for vile acts of murder.

In their final analysis the Courant argues "if he is crazy... than he'd be unfairly executed."  Well, we already know from the testimony that he was quite aware of his action and in complete control of himself.  Even if he did feel betrayed by Jennifer Petit because she told the bank teller that she and her family were being held prisoner and robbed, and he killed her out of rage, that doesn't justify insanity - nor should it save him from lethal injection.

The editors at the Courant don't want to see the rationale for holding Hayes accountable and putting him to death.  They can't bring themselves to understand the pain caused to the Petit-Hawke family, and the community at large.  It's so much easier for liberals to not have to make the tough decision and  just send him away to a life of television, air conditioning, three square meals a day, and recreational activities like taking classes to pass the time - none of which seems like much of a punishment to me. After a while, he'd become accustomed to his living situation and adapt to the reality. 

The death penalty is the ultimate punishment for heinous crimes like the one's Steven Hayes and Joshua Komisarjevsky committed.  If the editors at the Courant really want to make sure "he is never heard from again", then rest-assured, after a period of appeal as mandated by Connecticut law, he'll have a period to reflect on his crimes in a lonely cell on death row.  And then he'll lose the gift of live that he took from innocents, and squandered himself.

The Courant is right about one thing - killing Hayes won't bring full closure.  As Dr. Petit said in his post-penalty phase press conference, "[The idea of closure is was created by imbeciles... there will always be a hole in my heart and in my soul"].  Well said, and all of us will sleep a little better knowing that Steven Hayes is no longer with us, and facing the music - where ever that may be.

In closing, may God Bless the Petit-Hawke family, and all those who have stood by them in support of Jennifer, Haley and Michela.  We will never let their memory fade.

Twitter and the Steven Hayes trial



Twitter Bird



While most of the country has been focused on the upcoming mid-term elections, many of us here in Connecticut have divided our time between politics and -- the Steven Hayes trial. Since that horrible day in 2007 when two souless creeps broke into the Petit home and committed henious crimes against Dr. Petit, his wife, and children, all of us have attempted to imagine the horror happening to us, and recognizing that it could happen to any of us, at any time. Admittedly, since the news of the tragedy, we've all become a little more cautious about personal security, and far more protective of our loved ones.

It's been three long years since Hayes and Komisarjevsky murdered the Petit women, and yet it seems like yesterday. The media still uses the same mug shot of Hayes when they report on the story. He appears like a clueless, bald-headed freak - and in truth, I'm sick of his face. We all are.

Connecticut doesn't allow television cameras, or electronic recording equipment in its courtrooms, so we are stuck with artist sketches - some very good, and some very cartoonish. But surprisingly, the courtroom does allow ipads, cell phones (on silent), and computers. Which has permitted those watching the proceedings to tweet - sometimes word for word, what witnesses are saying. And of course, we also get observer's color commentary on everything from facial expressions of the jury, to one reporter referring to another as the moocher reporter.

So, over the past month, I've been glued to my Droid, reading all the court activity via Twitter - while on the road, at work, and even at the gym. While we rely on 140 character rapid-fire reports from neutral eyewitnesses (mostly journalists), we in reality - are thinking, feeling, and monitoring the proceedings through the eyes of Dr. William Petit and the Hawke family. Every word, quote, and observation is carefully measured by those of us out in the global, virtual peanut gallery.

Twitter is a marvelous tool. It's so unlike the medium of television, and radio - where you tune in and take what's dished out by the press in a one-way format. Twitter allows us to interact with reporters and observers, real time, as they report proceedings. And sometimes, we outsiders pipe in with color commentary of our own.

While some reporters, like George Colli, sort of get into the whole interactive format of the medium - often asking people what they think and provoking dialogue, I'm sure some reporters dislike the idea of being on a level playing field with a hundred amateur voices. I've been fortunate enough to have sone incredible interaction with not only reporters, many people who feel strongly about the trial (including some close friends of the family). And I do admit, not all the commentary I've seen is in good taste, and some of the retweeting by individuals becomes a little tiresome. Do we really need a nonstop echo?

In some ways a lot of this is probably not healthy. And I mean the obsession of wanting to constantly stay connected, and wanting to read every #Hayes tweet, and feeling the need to join in the conversation, or even vent. Then again, the interaction with paid journalists, lawyers, and Twitter Nation is almost a sort of group therapy.

When witnesses told of the extreme horror and detail of events of that night, we shared in the pain with reporters. And when Steven Hayes was found guilty, we read it on Twitter and jumped for joy in celebration. When we saw the rediculous boastful journal entries by Joshua Komisarjevsky, we became angry, and when we heard Hayes whining about the size of his cell, and wanting to commit suicide, we all wondered-- why stop the sick SOB?

As we continue with the sentencing phase of this trial, its good to know we have a place to interact with Petit-Hawke family supporters. I'm glad I can add my voice to the dozens of people online who hope and pray that justice is served, and Hayes and Komisarjevsky will be no more.

Connecticut Gubernatorial Race and the Death Penalty

There was jubilation last week when twelve Connecticut jurors found villain Steven Hayes guilty on 16 of 17 counts for his involvement in the 2007 Chesire Home Invasion which included the brutal rape, kidnapping, and murder of the Petit women. In every niche that contained an internet connection, we followed the case via Twitter for nearly two and a half weeks, as journalists from local and national networks tweeted the minute by minute testimony, body language, and reactions from the proceedings in a way that allowed us to see and feel what was happening in the courtroom. When the jury cried, we cried, and when the verdicts were read – we cheered. And darn it, we cheered loudly!

But the verdict is only a chapter in a long ongoing saga; there is much more to come. On October 18th the jury will reconvene to start the penalty phase of the Hayes trial - which includes the possible decision to put Hayes to death for his heinous crimes. I make no bones about this one; I strongly believe that Hayes should die by lethal injection. While Connecticut has only executed 127 people since 1639, I have no problem making Steven Hayes number 128, and his buddy - Joshua Komisarjevsky number 129.

Connecticut, as we all know, is a very blue state where Democrats outnumber Republicans by a 20% margin, but notwithstanding steady voter loyalty to the Democrat Party and its principles, Connecticut residents also support the death penalty by a 2-1 margin, perhaps more. One can argue that this is a paradox of sorts given that Republicans tend to support Capital Punishment while Democrats are usually soft on crime and criminals – and champion theories of experimental reform and reduced punishment. Yet this particular crime has struck such a chord with people that it’s served as a reminder as to why the Death Penalty exists. These horrid crimes were committed against women and children in a shocking manner that I won’t go into here.

Last year the heavily Connecticut State Legislature sent a bill to end the Death Penalty to Governor Jodi Rell (R) which she promptly vetoed citing that some crimes are heinous enough to warrant Capital Punishment. The bill to abolish the death penalty passed the Connecticut House by a frightening 90 to 56 margin, but passed the State Senate by a tight 19 to 17 margin. If for no other reason, we were lucky to have Governor Rell in that position to stop the liberal’s mad proposition.

But liberals are a like a mutating virus – relentless, and hard to kill. And this issue is figuring front and center as a part of this year’s Gubernatorial Race. Democrat Dan Malloy has already vowed to push for removal of the death penalty, while Republican Tom Foley has voiced support for the continuing the Death Penalty. The clear evidence of these positions has been confirmed during their last two debates between the hopefuls. If being a career politician, and big Government, tax and spend policies weren’t enough to disqualify Malloy, then his decision to embark on a crusade to remove the death penalty (against the will of the people) certainly is. And despite the evidence of the certainly of guilt by Steven Hayes (admitted), Malloy is unmoved by the details and horror while bragging that he’s been some big time prosecutor. Well, maybe not so big time after all, it appears.

The two groups that tend to be activists for death penalty abolishment are left wing liberals, and religious fanatics who misrepresent Biblical teaching to support their point of view. In fairness, Christ said nothing for or against capital punishment which was certainly far more prevalent during His time than in ours. Christ could have easily spoken out on the matter if he felt strongly about it as he often did with other cultural topics. In Roman times even thieves suffered crucifixion, an act that often resulted in death. In Matthew 22:21, Christ said, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s." Christ could have referenced the 12 commandments, or any decree He wished, and instead directed followers to simply follow the law – regardless of its mandates.

History shows us that Democrats have led us into war more often than Republicans. The result of declaring and enacting war is the obvious legal mandate permitted to soldiers to burn homes, destroy property, take hostages, injure and kill the enemy. Liberals use the argument that the state has no right to condemn and put someone to death; however, when it comes to war – which results in murder on a massive scale, they forget this argument all together. So it’s clear that the state does have a right to mandate death after all; and any argument contrary to this is to ignore the obvious. In fact, taking it a step further – war often kills more than enemy combatants – often innocent persons are killed, as a result of combat. And my argument at present is to find fault with acts of war, but rather to expose the inconsistency in the argument that the State doesn’t have a right to condemn men to death. Military tribunals are also empowered by the State, and are further evidence of precedence where the State can sentence men to death.

And for those who argue that the Death Penalty isn’t a deterrent, I challenge them to provide evidence of how a crime was committed by the condemned after they were permanently removed from society via execution. Capital Punishment is both a punishment and a deterrent.

This week we will hear that Hayes’ defense attorneys will try a new tactic to help him escape the ultimate punishment. They will claim that pursuing the death penalty costs the State of Connecticut $3.1 million dollars and that the State can’t afford the cost of the process. Of course, the cost of the trial has nothing to do with the guilt of the villain, or morality of the punishment, and is nothing more than a shady backdoor approach to find a way to allow Hayes to escape absolute justice. If the process created by the State is too expensive, than it is up to the State to find a way to reduce the cost rather than abandon the process, and let murderers, rapists, and villains avoid the will of the people.

Leading up to Election Day, Connecticut residents have a lot to think about in light of how their Government has functioned, and what they can expect from those balloting for election. But one thing is clear, if you believe that people like Steven Hayes deserve Capital Punishment for heinous crimes they commit – like those on the poor Petit family, then don’t consider Dan Malloy. If you want justice for criminals – support Tom Foley. Connecticut, the choice is yours.